V2 CTS-V Can I live with an autotragic?

Discuss, please....

Big power can cover up lots of problems. An auto tragic sucking power out of the drivetrain isn't as big a deal when you have that much.

You can live with it.

I test drove one before I bought my 6spd. I did not like it.

It'd be fine with me. It's not a sports car, it's a big, fast luxo-cruiser. Besides, GM automatics are usually pretty good.

I find it funny that gm did an about face on the transmission on these things. First gen the 6speed was the only trans you could have. Now the only one you can have is a stinking automatic. Got a question, what trans is gm putting in these things now? Im assuming its not the old 4l80?

Probably the 6L80.

Me, I think a fat lazy huge power everywhere engine is wasted on a manual trans. You spend as much time between gears as you do accelerating, unless you bangshift each and every time, which is no good unless you are a transmission-change enthusiast. Automatics will deliver the power with much more decorum.

I mean, the point of having a silly fat powerband is so you don't have to shift so much, right?

(Also: clutch R&R in a first gen V sucks. A lot. And that is with a lift. I have huge respect for anyone who has tackled that job with nothing more than a set of jackstands, a set of tools, and the grim determination to see the job through.)

I drove a 2014 CTS-V built by RPM Motorsports for fast mile events that had an automatic. It was just fine that way. I think I'd prefer the automatic to a manual the way that thing put out power.

American autos have been questionable feeling at best imo. I csnt imagine gm has really gotten their E36 M3 together for this one.

If the auto has a decent gear spread, it's programmed stupidly and is ok with you telling it how to behave at times, it should be alright.

The only way to know for sure is to try one out, of course.

Once you get enough power, a stick really doesn't seem necessary to me. I drove a ZL-1 Camaro with the auto and the trans was pretty responsive and did what you wanted it too, shifted real firm too. At no point of driving that car did I ever think "Boy, this thing would be better with a stick". Same with driving my buddy's cammed 455 H.O. swapped '69 Firebird

It seems to me that the lower the RPM the engine likes to be in and the wider the powerband, the less it seems the engine really needs a manual transmission. The torque converter doesn't seem to sap as much throttle response, and you feel less likely to second-guess the transmission's shift logic.

I had a slightly cammed LS1 '04 GTO 6spd and rarely used anything but 2nd, 4th and 6th in daily driving. You dont need the control over the trans like you would in a 1.6 early miata.

To me it was unpleasant. The transmission didn't seem to know what gear it wanted when slowing and then getting back on the gas with any authority. It was fine from a stop, and fine driven gently, but a lot of the joy for me driving is coming into some sort of corner one the brakes and then rolling back into the throttle, even and 40% Street speeds, and the V I drove was bad at that.
My Mercedes with similar power and an auto is brilliant and I wouldn't hesitate to recommend it to someone who doesn't like autos, but I genuinely didn't like that combination in the V2 sedan I drove.

mazdeuce wrote: To me it was unpleasant. The transmission didn't seem to know what gear it wanted when slowing and then getting back on the gas with any authority. It was fine from a stop, and fine driven gently, but a lot of the joy for me driving is coming into some sort of corner one the brakes and then rolling back into the throttle, even and 40% Street speeds, and the V I drove was bad at that. My Mercedes with similar power and an auto is brilliant and I wouldn't hesitate to recommend it to someone who doesn't like autos, but I genuinely didn't like that combination in the V2 sedan I drove.

When driving hard, I usually force the trans to avoid that scenario by limiting the highest gear it can use (to avoid it upshifting a couple gears when you let off and then having to downshift when you get back on the throttle). So it gets treated like a slightly intelligent manual with a torque converter.

I will say that the one I drove had a different shifting pattern. I didn't go full HOON! mode with it, since I was driving what was for all intents and purposes a 100k car that I didn't own, but I didn't find any fault with it.

Plus, the seats were about as comfortable as my dad's recliner. At that level of comfort and power, I'm willing to overlook many faults, if I could find them.

chiodos wrote: I find it funny that gm did an about face on the transmission on these things. First gen the 6speed was the only trans you could have. Now the only one you can have is a stinking automatic.

Somewhat reminiscent of what Ford did with the original Taurus SHO, if you're old enough to remember those. Initially offered in '89 with only a 5-speed manual, they figured they could sell more units if they offered an automatic, which they did shortly thereafter. Problem was, in addition to all the faults of a slushbox, it was overwhelmed by the engine, and produced lots of grumpy owners. Dunno if that's the case with the GM unit.

The manual was gone with only the slushbox available by '96.

I test drove a 2nd gen V with an auto. Seemed pretty decent to me, but I was overwhelmed by how much power it had and how fast it got up to 100 (salesman was game) when I punched it, so I might have overlooked flaws that would irritate long term.

Harvey wrote: I test drove a 2nd gen V with an auto. Seemed pretty decent to me, but I was overwhelmed by how much power it had and how fast it got up to 100 (salesman was game) when I punched it, so I might have overlooked flaws that would irritate long term.

That can be a real thing. I had a Mustang 5.0 which was dead reliable... but had an absolutely soul-sucking stick transmission. What could have been fond memories are always tainted by that terrible tranny. So yeah, little things can fester into real annoyances.

Thanks for the replies!

To add more moving parts to the equation:

I'm currently driving a 2005 V with 170,000 miles. I love the car, but I'm considering bailing and going for a V2 before I hit the 200k mark.

I put 25,000 miles a year on a car, so rather than shopping for a "creampuff" low-mile car, I'm looking for something with higher mileage. Unfortunately, most of the V2's I've been looking at over the last year are the former. This one has been on CL for a couple months. Reputable dealer. Price is right. Color is (kind of) right. Carfax looks good. Debating on jumping on it or waiting another few months and seeing if anything else worth looking at pops up. I had my heart set on a wagon, but the "wagon tax" is so high, I can't reasonably justify it right now.

http://atlanta.craigslist.org/atl/ctd/5562812559.html

I REALLY love the manual in my V1. I live in north georgia, and take the "back roads" every chance I get. My big concern is the thing being a "shift-a-saurus" mid-turn on a sweeper; not knowing what gear it wants to be in. Maybe that's a silly thing to be concerned with, and maybe I'm silly for holding out for a manual. I don't want to go kick tires on the thing if I'm not serious about it, and there's not a great spot (that I'm aware of) near the dealer to drive it at 8/10ths.

I really love the manual in the V2. I also wish I could have afforded the wagon. I may have kept it longer if I could have. Cars are only overwhelming with power for awhile.