No manual X1's for 2013

[formula M]

Well folks... guess the "rumors" were false and that there will be no manual X1's imported to the United States next year.

I was holding out, to see if the rumor came to fruition, or if the X1 was getting a diesel... but neither are happening on that platform anytime soon. So there goes my hopes of leasing (which I never do) an X1, until the M2 came out in 2015.


Sadly, it seems that BMW just doesn't respect certain demographics (ie: Americans) enough.

[Red Bread]

While I'm in the same camp as you, I think the sad truth is that as Americans, we may say things that we don't actually back up with money. Take the E91 for example, sales numbers for manuals were under 200 every model year. It's no wonder we only get an automatic F31. Efficiency is also starting to severely impact the decision to provide a much less efficient manual in a fleet that has to meet minimum mileage stats.

I like the X1, but am holding out for a sportier car to put my money on. I'd love an M2 GC, but suspect that's ages away, if it happens at all. I don't care for the F30 driving characteristics at all though, which doesn't bode well for future BMW sedans. I'm left hoping the next STI or the S3 sedan are more interesting.

[formula M]

Why do you feel automatics are more fuel efficient than manuals?

No computer can anticipate my needs, thus I can extract the exact performance, or fuel economy I want.. when I want. Long overpasses in neautral rolling for a mile while idle (ie: in neautral)..? BMW's tranny's is still engaged, lagging me with their auto, etc..


I might just pick up a BRZ (etc) and trash it for 2~3 years. At least it is purchasable... unlike BMW's disrespectful pseudo floorplan which is all smoke & mirrors and nothing of substance.

[dchao]

You can always specify the paddle shifter.

[IanH]

So you mean to tell me that if they would put a coast paddle with the up and down shifters, then there would be no other reason to have a manual other than the habit of driving one? yeah.

[Red Bread]

Originally Posted by formula M

Why do you feel automatics are more fuel efficient than manuals?

Look at just about any modern car's EPA numbers. Not the most accurate thing, but I would bet that if you drove the same speeds in either version of most modern cars, the auto would beat the manual.

The 335i is listed as 20/30 for a six speed manual and the auto is 23/33. Not insignificant. The 991 is a smaller difference at 19/27 for the 7 speed manual vs 20/27 for the 7 speed DSG, but it's still a difference. The Boxster S is a bigger difference at 20/28 for the six speed manual and 21/30 for the seven speed DSG.

My wife's last two six speed autos do disengage the lock up when coasting, they shift at under 2k in just about every situation, something that nearly all manual drivers tend to avoid, and the torque converter extracts more performance from low rpm than a manual would. With extra gears and a higher overdrive, they're more efficient than manuals. Even the 991 can't match the DSG with the same number of gears.

It's also easier to program for more efficiency with an auto/dsg for things like start/stop since the computer can control all of the variables and doesn't have some yahoo doing random clutch engagements, etc.

I'm not arguing for autos, I still greatly prefer a manual and won't be ordering an F31 for myself because I can't get one with a less efficient, more entertaining gearbox.

[formula M]

Originally Posted by Red Bread

Look at just about any modern car's EPA numbers. Not the most accurate thing, but I would bet that if you drove the same speeds in either version of most modern cars, the auto would beat the manual.

The 335i is listed as 20/30 for a six speed manual and the auto is 23/33. Not insignificant. The 991 is a smaller difference at 19/27 for the 7 speed manual vs 20/27 for the 7 speed DSG, but it's still a difference. The Boxster S is a bigger difference at 20/28 for the six speed manual and 21/30 for the seven speed DSG.

My wife's last two six speed autos do disengage the lock up when coasting, they shift at under 2k in just about every situation, something that nearly all manual drivers tend to avoid, and the torque converter extracts more performance from low rpm than a manual would. With extra gears and a higher overdrive, they're more efficient than manuals. Even the 991 can't match the DSG with the same number of gears.

It's also easier to program for more efficiency with an auto/dsg for things like start/stop since the computer can control all of the variables and doesn't have some yahoo doing random clutch engagements, etc.

I'm not arguing for autos, I still greatly prefer a manual and won't be ordering an F31 for myself because I can't get one with a less efficient, more entertaining gearbox.

I understand what you are saying, but all-of-that^ is for average drivers, who are not 100% focused on driving, when driving.

No software can look ahead 400 feet at traffic, or precognate road elevations, etc.


MPG's are an average.. manuals can easily exceed and automatic on fuel efficiency. Granted, a tranny can moAr easily be fitted with KERS, etc.. all wraped up in a little box.

By why even look at, consider, or buy a vehicle that is not enjoyable to be in..? (ie: auto). Don't care if an X1 was given to me.. I would drive it to the dealer and trade it in for something I can commune with. (ie: a manual)

[nospam]

Subaru should have what you seek. There is just not a big market for manual SAVs/wagons here in US. F30/F32 is a different story.

[Grovsnus]

Originally Posted by formula M

I understand what you are saying, but all-of-that^ is for average drivers, who are not 100% focused on driving, when driving.

There's another word for those: Customers.

There are lots of things that enthusiasts want that they don't get, because they're just a small market segment. I'd also like a tough rack-and-pinion steering, harder suspension and softer 16" wheels with lots of sidewall (rolling resistance be damned) and a straight eight without turbo. But the majority of paying customers don't want that, and I have to accept that they greatly influence what I can buy.

[Red Bread]

Originally Posted by formula M

No software can look ahead 400 feet at traffic, or precognate road elevations, etc.


MPG's are an average.. manuals can easily exceed and automatic on fuel efficiency.

I'll say it again, technology is a bitch. The 8s boxes are outweighing your cited benefits, and even someone like Fernando Alonso, or Al Gore, isn't going to beat the mileage of a modern auto with a manual.

If you want to talk about which is more fun, more engaging, more like the 1950's or more elitist, manuals win nearly all of those things, but if you want to talk about which is more efficient, boring automatics are going to win, no matter the driver.

The simple fact is that if you live in the US and you want a five door, rwd automobile with three pedals, your current choices are actually just a single choice. Get a CTS-V wagon. BMW has nothing for you.

[Iniquity]

Originally Posted by formula M

I understand what you are saying, but all-of-that^ is for average drivers, who are not 100% focused on driving, when driving.

No software can look ahead 400 feet at traffic, or precognate road elevations, etc.


MPG's are an average.. manuals can easily exceed and automatic on fuel efficiency. Granted, a tranny can moAr easily be fitted with KERS, etc.. all wraped up in a little box.

By why even look at, consider, or buy a vehicle that is not enjoyable to be in..? (ie: auto). Don't care if an X1 was given to me.. I would drive it to the dealer and trade it in for something I can commune with. (ie: a manual)

The efficiency is a problem of physics, not driver style. Automatics have the added torque converter that is essentially a fluid interface, resulting in both slip and high fluid friction losses. The modern automatic behaves more like a "manual" except that the clutch is computer controlled.

[formula M]

Originally Posted by Iniquity

The efficiency is a problem of physics, not driver style. Automatics have the added torque converter that is essentially a fluid interface, resulting in both slip and high fluid friction losses. The modern automatic behaves more like a "manual" except that the clutch is computer controlled.

..?

How a clutch engages, has no bearing upon my argument of a clutch knowing what I want? A clutch doesn't know I've crested a hill... where-as I do..

I can draw u a diagram of a modern dual-clutch/pdk from memory. "How" isn't involved here..