VitB6

I was just wondering what other cars that have an automatic and a MT availability, have worse gas mileage with the manual. I know it has to do with the gearing ratios and such but it is common knowledge that MT's should have better gas mileage than automatics.

Considering the extraordinarily high options pricing and the terrible choice of packages in addition to not being able to get some options (BT, heated seats) as a standalone, without spending thousands of dollars. I just can't get it out of my head that Lexus messed with the gearing ratios on purpose so the MT gets worse MPG just so people won't be able to use gas consumption as a reason to get the MT over the auto. So again Lexus is steering people towards their higher priced based car.

So does anyone know what other MT's get worse MPG than the auto counterparts?

XeroK00L

I don't know of any, but keep in mind that Lexus did not "mess with the gearing ratios" because they wanted to worsen the MPG. They did this because they knew most people choosing a manual in a luxury car are enthusiasts to begin with. Those people care more about performance than fuel economy. While the IS250 AT may require 7.9 secs to get from 0 to 60mph, the IS250 MT, whose acceleration times have not been announced or tested yet, may very well post a sub-7-sec 0-60 time, making it accelerate on par with if not better than the IS300 5-Speed it replaces, not to mention that its fuel economy of 20/29 is STILL a good improvement over the IS300 5-Speed's 18/25.

VitB6

I wouldn't be quick to roll your eyes, I can't name another vehicle whoe MT gets lower MPG than their auto. If anyone knows of any then I would love to know which one. Coincidence that the 250 is the ONLY one? I'm not so sure.

This is where your defense flies out the window. What performance? 8 sec to 60 isn't performance, which is exactly the reason why the MPG should be higher than the auto.

That seems like a very optimistic viewpoint there. We all know that this isn't true. People have driven both the 250 and the 350 already. Sub 7 second to 60 is a pipedream.


Doesn't anyone else want to know why the MPG is lower for the MT when compared to the AT?

XeroK00L

I rolled my eyes not because I don't know of any other that does this, but because it's obvious why Lexus "messed with the gearing ratios" in the first place. Your first post made it sound like Lexus messed with the gearing ratios just so that they can make more profit by turning people to the higher-priced automatics.

"I just can't get it out of my head that Lexus messed with the gearing ratios on purpose so the MT gets worse MPG just so people won't be able to use gas consumption as a reason to get the MT over the auto. So again Lexus is steering people towards their higher priced based car," said you.

Also, there a first for everything. Just because no one thought about "messing with the gearing ratios" specifically for the manual versions before doesn't mean Lexus can't be the first to do it now.Who ever told you the IS250 MT takes 8 secs to get from 0 to 60mph? ALL the press releases and training kits so far have only disclosed the 0-60 times for the automatic versions--7.9 secs for the IS250 AT and 8.3 secs for the IS250 AWD.If you think a set of overall 15% more aggressive gearing ratios AND a manual transmission versus a automatic one won't result in a MUCH FASTER acceleration 0-60 time, perhaps you're the one who's pipe-dreaming.I guess it's already too obvious to everybody else.

VitB6

Ok you can stop attacking me at any time and try to have a civil discussion, otherwise just don't respond to me. Now with that out of the way:

I know that is why you rolled your eyes and hence the reason I responded to it. I don't think it is out of line that it can't be a reason. It is called marketing. There are 2 reasons why people get a MT:

1) they think a MT is more fun to drive. i agree.
2) some just want the gas mileage.

By decreasing the MPG in the MT they essentially steer those that are in the #2 category to a higher priced vehicle without "selling" them on the AT.

Why would they do it? This is the ONLY car know to man that the MT get worse gas mileage thant the AT. Why? You say performance but yet you have no proof. And since when is teh Lexus IS 250 the only 'performance' car? There are other performance cars (Vette's, Porsche etc..) that come in both MT and AT and the MT ALWAYS get way better MPG. You arguement holds no water and makes absolutely no sense.

XeroK00L

Haha ok sorry for the eyes rolling and harsh tones. I just didn't like conspiracy theories when they don't make any sense.You've stated the reason yourself--MT is more fun to drive. Lexus recognizes this and thought, "well, if we simply swap the auto tranny with a manual, it'll do at best 7.6 secs--that's not very fun." So they adjusted the gearing ratios accordingly to make the MT a properly FUN car. They also recognize that people who can afford a $30k+ FUN car will not care about fuel economy nearly as much as those who buy a manual ECHO vs. an automatic one. Do you honestly think people who bought IS300 5-Speed's did because they got better fuel economy?From your experience a 1-sec difference will never happen of course because there had never been any other car that did this aggressive gearing ratios for the manual thing before. And why do I need any proof? It's simply common sense and basic physics laws that aggressive ratios always result in better accelerations. You have no proof that the IS250 will not be a 0-60-in-sub-7-sec car either. I'm estimating the time based on the hard specs we've read so far. It may not be accurate but it should be close and an educated guess.

VitB6

Well I hope you are right. If the 250 gets to be a sub 7 second car then that will be a supreme relief to a lot of people. I'm not holding my breath because I don't think it will happen, but I hope you are right.

spwolf

um, eh, how about one of the reasons is that it is one of the best automatics transmissions in the world plus it is an 6 speed? It is even lighter than MT car!

TheRupp

E39 BMW 540i
Audi S4
Lambo Gallardo
Hyundai Tiburon
Nissan Altima 3.5 SE
Mercedes-Benz C230 Komp.
Ford 500 (Auto gets better MPG than CVT, only Ford could manage that )
Ferrari 575M

It's not very common, but it's becoming more and more common these days. I think it's due to closer gear ratios that leave the engine at higher RPM's in the gears

biker

TSX, new Civic and probably quite a few future cars have EPA MT numbers that are worse than AT.

The thing is those are EPA numbers. In real life, it is very unlikely than an MT car will have lower milage numbers than an AT especially in city driving. I think this will become real obvious for the IS250. There seems to be a trend to have the MT version of a car geared much more aggresively than its AT counterpart. Most makers assume folks buying an MT car want that kind of gearing and are willing to give up some gas milage in return for performance.

The gas milage savings on the hwy can only be increased so much by gearing. There's an RPM point below which cars actually start getting worse milage (engine starts getting bogged down).