Date:         Thu, 11 Sep 2003 13:26:59 -0600
Reply-To:     Eric and Marica <eric.clarke@SHAW.CA>
Sender:       Vanagon Mailing List <vanagon@gerry.vanagon.com>
From:         Eric and Marica <eric.clarke@SHAW.CA>
Subject:      Re: Manual or AT?
In-Reply-To:  <D7CCB974-E487-11D7-883B-00039398EEBC@mac.com>
Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii

Puh-lease!!

I've lived in the coldest parts of Canada all my (now seemingly
pathetic) life (Winnipeg, Saskatoon, Edmonton, and remote bits of the
NWT) and have never had issues with either AT or manual because of the
cold.  I'm curious as to what you drive that wouldn't operate in the
cold?

I prefer my AT 80 Westie over a manual because it's less to think about
/ manage in city driving. Also, as a Southpaw coffee addict, I don't
like to have both my hands required to drive.  My AT gets manually
downshifted to 2 very often and to 1 once in a while (we did the
Coquihalla last week coming home from Vancouver and it was first gear
and 40 kph - but 'ol Rusty made it!)

- Eric
'80 Westie 'Rusty'

-----Original Message-----
From: Vanagon Mailing List [mailto:vanagon@gerry.vanagon.com] On Behalf
Of Kim Brennan
Sent: Thursday, September 11, 2003 12:44 PM
To: vanagon@GERRY.VANAGON.COM
Subject: Re: Manual or AT?


In Sunny California this is probably true enough. In the snowy north
(and east), a manual transmission is superior to an
automatic...especially if you already know how to drive in snow and ice.

My automatic cars are essentially inoperable during the frozen days of
winter.


On Thursday, September 11, 2003, at 03:24  AM, Tom LaLanne wrote:

>  The manual trans has no significant advantage over an AT unless one
> is seeking high performance.