Hi guys,

I'm a new member and I recently bought a silver Omega 2.5 V6 CD. I am soooo pleased with it. I think it's so comfortable and very fast in sports mode!!!

I have to drive an auto as I've only got the one hand and when I talk to peopl about how fast it is my beautiful Omega gets put down 'cos it's not a manual'. I'm getting a bit fed up with this as I think it's very fast.

So I want to know (out of pure interest) that if you had the fastest accelerating road car with the highest top speed (which I belive to be the Bugatti Veyron) would it make a difference if it was auto or manual??? I had a quick look at autotrader and the only Veyron is automatic so what's the deal with this whole manual is better thing????

ps I love this site and any help I need is always there. Oh and I know I only have a baby 2.5 but she's in mint condition and I'd love to show her off. Do Omega owners have meets near or in Northampton????

Cheers guys 

Hello Steve,
Automatics are naturally slower, and that doesn't take into account dsg gearboxes.
You're 2.5 will be pretty rapid, but being an auto it will be slower than the manual equivalent. If you have two Omega's, with eactly the same engine and bodystyle the manual would be faster.
For example, the 2.6 manual saloon has a top speed of 142 mph, and a 0-60 of 8.5. Whereas the automatic version with same engine has a top speed of 139 mph and a 0-60 of 9.0. So it is slower, but not by much.
Regarding something like the the Veyron, I don't think it would make much difference, there's just so much power there.
I think it's more noticeable on vehicles with less BHP where you have to use most, if not all of the power from time to time.

Just out of interest, does anyone know the top speed of a 3.0 auto saloon?

Is it much slower than the 3.2?

In the real world, autos are usually first away at the traffic light prix. On paper a manual is quicker but those figures are obtained by dropping the clutch at optimum revs and power shifting through the gears without lifting off. Not the way most people drive their own car!
By contrast, anyone can match the road test figures with an auto - just floor it.
As for winding roads, the sports button on my newish astra 1.8 auto holds gears until the redline and changes down itself when the revs drop, selecting and holding the right gear ready for the maximum acceleration when needed, allowing anybody to drive like Lewis Hamilton.
I feel that a lot of anti-auto rhetoric is spoken by people who have never driven a powerful auto long term and feel that having  to change gear hundreds of times a day is worthwhile for the bragging rights. IMHO a large car should be automatic, it is so much more relaxing to drive and the kickdown means safe and speedy overtaking.

Steve Webb wrote on 18. Dec 2009 at 12:20:

In real world conditions acceleration times become the same because of clutch delay on manuals as most people will not make totally flat out changes in their manual cars out of respect for their car and a desire not to detonate their clutches or hit the rev limit when they miss a gear whereas an auto will just keep going flat without lifting off the throttle and the changes are without the declutch delay.
An auto held in gear manually is easily a match through the twisty bits for a normal manual without the irritating delay of having to push that left pedal down... and allows you to use your left foot bracing or braking 

3.2 shows in excess of 160mph but think tyre growth is having an effect.

Don't forget performance can be different even with the same engine size. We had two Sierra's at a place i worked at, both identical in every way, same spec, same year even the same colour, but one was a lot quicker than the other.

So what is, at the end of the day, the conclusion of this auto-vs-manual debate??

I put the question forwards a couple of days ago, after seeing the stupidly cheap prices late-plate 3.2 elite (with all the toys, leather and colour telly) go for.

Was contemplating chopping in my stupidly-quick 3.2 manual in for an Auto elite with all the gizmo's.

Heard some arguments for, some against.

But, the reason why (I think!) I've decided to keep the manual is that - even though 90% of the time I drive very economically, and get up to 38mpg, the other 10% of the time I can cane it silly, and return what an auto will do on average,.

Yes, I would have loved a CID.  But, if I can get some cream leather fitted to me ex-plod mobile, I'll be a happy chappy.

I think, at the end of the day, it's each to their own?