According to the poll here most of the buyers will be buying the 5 speed version. I think I read somewhere that more than 50% of the TC cars built will be automatic version, I do not know if this is correct or not. If someone has official numbers that would be nice. I looked at my local inventory of XA and XB and all the cars are automatics!! Is everyone buying the 5 speed scions and leaving the automatics on the lots?

Just from people I know I would say that about 80% prefer automatics then manual. Most people now are taught to drive on automatics and never learned how to drive a manual. So the demand for automatics are much higher.

Thats what I thought but why are so many people on this forum driving the 5 speed? It seems like 80% of the people on these forums drive 5 speed.

The people on This Forum are NOT the ONLY one's buying Scions you know!!
haha
And who cares if they are making a lot of auto's, just don't get it.
Scion has to make both parties happy :P

Well it was mentioned in another thread that statistics can be misleading. . . this is a prime example. Where did you get the poll results? From the poll at SL? Well think about the type of people who are members here. . . enthusiasts. We are all, for the most part, car nuts. Most car nuts, as you know, want to squeeze every drop of performance out of their cars. And because of that, it skews the numbers. In reality, the general public tends to want automatics. Even tho most guys will never admit it, most of them end up buying auto anyway (not that there's anything wrong with that). Hahaha. . . I opted for the manual and it should be here within a matter of days. :wink:

The answer to this question is very very simple:

A salesman can switch a "manual" buyer into an automatic much more easily than a salesman can switch an "automatic" buyer into a 5-speed. Some people just flat never learned to drive a stick!

George

america is lazy!

but seriously, we learned a little bit about surveys and sample size and all that stuff in psyc. as has already been mentioned, the majority of people who frequent car boards are enthusiasts and people lurking for answers and nothing more. a more accurate representation of the percentage of people who prefer auto would be random selections from a phone book. that way people who arent car enthusiasts have just as good a chance as car entusiasts of stating their opinion.

if you wanted to gauge the whole US, you would have to get phone books from all the major cities or a different method because some cities are known for car stuff and may have a stronger concentration of car people then normal cities. a good example of this is Daytona, Detroit or Indianapolis.

keep in mind that not everyone has internet... some people can still not afford it so online surveys instantly become lob sided much like the pre-election phone surveys of back in the day when a lot of people could not afford phones.

damn.... i need to stop learning so damned much :-\

I've been driving a stick for the past 10 years... My mind wants another 5 speed but my knees want the automatic... Traffic in the city is not pleasant ...

Now I can use my hands for more important things like talking on the phone,eating drinking and flipping off the other drivers telling me I shouldn't do such things...

And some people know how to drive a stick but prefer an automatic.
:wink:

And the enthusiast angle is right, this site draws only a portion of overall owners. Most Scions I see on the road are stock or close to it. I rarely see something modded, but if you look thru the registry here, you'll see moreee modded Scions than not, I bet.

WHAT??? People with no internet??? Blasphemy.

I can drive 5-spd ...but i opted to get an Automatic cuz it's my daily driver..and i work far from home... shifting gears on the 405 during rush hour for over an hour is not fun...not to mention...very draining. I love my A/T... i can eat, hold my gf hands, and just relax while driving... it's a luxury of its own. That's y pay more for the A/T.

I love 5 speeds....ive had some 5 speeds in the past, my motorcycle is a six speed, ive always loved to shift....but, i commute to school and drive way to much (about 150 miles a day) That would equal out to tons of shifting...yeah, its alittle more powerful, but the lazyiness that i have aquired through my teenage years has taken over me. The auto is just easier...plus it gives me a hand to play some PS2 while im driving lol!!!!

I think no matter which way you go auto or manny, they are both really fun to drive. I drove both and if you can drive and hold out for manual than do it, it is worth it but, there is much joy driving the auto (xB) in my experience, I love it.

--- and I totally agree with you on this George... :wink:
Al.Truistic
aB
The answer to this question is very very simple:
A salesman can switch a "manual" buyer into an automatic much more easily than a salesman can switch an "automatic" buyer into a 5-speed...George

Yep, I think America just might be lazy.

A friend of mine who was a foreign exchange student from Italy said she never drove an automatic before coming to the states.

I'd guess over 90% will be automatic. It is still a Toyota after all...

I don't know about the rest of the country, but here in the Central Atlantic Region, we're getting a 50-50 split for the first batch. The mucky-mucks at Toyota will see how fast each type sells and alter the orders accordingly.

When a car like this comes out, the enthusiasts are normally the first to buy them. Enthusiasts generally prefer stick shifts. I suspect we'll eventually back down to a 80/20 split in favor of automatics. Like it or not, that really is the demand.

Off-topic posts have been moved to the Off Topic Cafe under the subject "TokyoRaver's girlfriend"

George

More notes about automatics:

Automatic transmissions have been improving steadily, and the introduction of electronic control systems have brought them close to even with manual gearboxes.

The early automatics, such as the GM 2-speed Powerglide, were horribly inefficient and any vehicle equipped with them took a big hit in both performance and fuel economy. This was unacceptable in those parts of the world with expensive fuel, which is why automatics are relatively rare in Europe. In the US, fuel was cheap and engines were huge, so automatics proliferated here.

Sporting drivers also shunned the automatics, since vehicles of that time relied on engine braking to supplant the barely-adequate service brakes. Also, the automatics had a severe time-lag for downshifts as they were operated by a combination of vacuum signals and hydraulics. Sporting drivers were not willing to wait the half-second for a downshift, and then have the downshift occur with a sudden burst of torque that upset the car's handling.

Automatics have slowly worked their way into racing, starting with the automatic Chaparels in the '60s. These allowed the driver to use his left foot for braking, improving lap times by eliminating the delay between the gas and the brake. Modern racing transmissions are a combination of automatic and manual technologies, allowing shifts without pushing a clutch pedal.

On the street, modern cars have excellent brakes, so drivers no longer have to rely on engine braking as they have in the past. With multi-speed lockup automatics, many cars are acheiving greater fuel economy with the automatic than with the manual. Automatic transmission reliability has also been improving, removing another objection to their use.

Early automobiles had several controls that would mystify gen-Y drivers. There used to be levers than controlled spark and fuel mixture, along with that curious crank that started the engine. Each of these controls were obsoleted by automatic control technology, and soon the shift lever and clutch will follow them into the museums.

But not quite yet. I like the stick on my xB, and my wife insisted upon it!

George

very cool. Makes me feel like buying an auto won't be the death of me. I could do a manual for the weekend, but not sitting in traffic every day.

According to the poll here most of the buyers will be buying the 5 speed version. I think I read somewhere that more than 50% of the TC cars built will be automatic version, I do not know if this is correct or not. If someone has official numbers that would be nice. I looked at my local inventory of XA and XB and all the cars are automatics!! Is everyone buying the 5 speed scions and leaving the automatics on the lots?

From the discussions I've had with our inventory guy, the Denver Region (AZ,CO,NM,NV,UT) will be allocated a crop of tCs that is 55% MT and 45% AT. I don't know about other regions but I assume the distribution will be somewhat comprable.

Casey

Yep, I think America just might be lazy.

A friend of mine who was a foreign exchange student from Italy said she never drove an automatic before coming to the states.

I think you are wrong in that statement. The reason why Manual transmissions are mostly used in foreign countries is because like here the Auto trannys are more expensive...allot more than they are here VS the manual tranny's..... Atleast they are in South America....

Also as to why the allocation's from Scion Corp are geared towards Auto's more than Manual is because they based their production statistics on the Toyota Brand..(Duhh) and if you see the ratio between the Auto and Manual cars being sold by Toyota you will see that the Auto's win.....Atleast this is what the Regional Scion Guy for the NY metro area mentioned to a few us during a Scion event....Anyone agrees with me?

Just my 2 cents!

Yep, I think America just might be lazy.

A friend of mine who was a foreign exchange student from Italy said she never drove an automatic before coming to the states.

Yeah, one of my best friends is French and comes to visit for a month or so every year...I let her drive my New Beetle last year and it was the first time she had ever been in a car with an AT. She said that in Europe, the only people with ATs are the handicapped. So we now have a joke that most Americans are handicapped :lol:

But over there everything's different, including their streets, parking, gas prices, etc...

I'm sure she's gonna be happy to see that I have a 5-speed again this August.

well, people from Asia always drive manual
it is true that driving manual is fun, but to me it's really depending on the car
sport car - manual
family car - auto

it will be funny if you have 350z, s2000, wrx, sti, evo 8 with auto tranmission

Midwest region is to be 70% auto and 30% manual. Toyota will play with it after 6months or so of sales.

Yep, I think America just might be lazy.

A friend of mine who was a foreign exchange student from Italy said she never drove an automatic before coming to the states.

Yeah, one of my best friends is French and comes to visit for a month or so every year...I let her drive my New Beetle last year and it was the first time she had ever been in a car with an AT. She said that in Europe, the only people with ATs are the handicapped. So we now have a joke that most Americans are handicapped :lol:

But over there everything's different, including their streets, parking, gas prices, etc...

I'm sure she's gonna be happy to see that I have a 5-speed again this August.

Actually... people from Asia...think cars with A/T is a luxury option...that exists only on more expensive vehicles. Hence..we pay abit more for the A/T. It is a convenience and a luxury not to be taken for granted.

Actually... people from Asia...think cars with A/T is a luxury option...that exists only on more expensive vehicles. Hence..we pay abit more for the A/T. It is a convenience and a luxury not to be taken for granted.

Isn't the bB only available with an automatic in Japan?

Here are the exact numbers for the Central Atlantic Region (CAT).

For the May order, there were 164 manuals and 164 automatics. Of those, 33 of each came with side air bags. For the June order, there will be 347 automatics (52 with side bags) and 232 manuals (28 with side bags). The May orders will be here between June 23 and the end of June. The June order will be the end of June through mid to late July.

So, for the dealers in the CAT region which encompases VA, MD, PA, WV and DE, the first order was 50/50 and the second is 60/40 with an automatic bias. I hope this helps. I have color breakdowns if anybody is interested.

Yep, I think America just might be lazy.

A friend of mine who was a foreign exchange student from Italy said she never drove an automatic before coming to the states.

People used to buy manuals for performance, drivability and ECONOMY. Today's automatics (see Scion xB) offer good drivability and GREAT economy. This leaves performance as the last standing reason for make manuals. That and they're cheaper!

Hasta! :wink:

People in other countries drive a greater percentage of manuals because they can't get their licences from a Cracker Jack box, unlike the US. You don't need to have any skill what-so-ever to get licenced here, and the automatic phenomena is just an byproduct of that. We live in the land of big bumpers and major crash testing because it's just assumed that everyone is a total idiot when it comes to driving. We'd rather dumb our machines down than learn to operate them more effectively.

Traffic getting worse = more automatics. All of my friends are shifting to automatics here in Atlanta because of the traffic. I haven't owned a manumatic, but that seems like a nice comprimise if you aren't racing. Too bad automatics generaly have a "softer" gear ratio.

In a more general conversaiton, car 5/6 speed standard H transmissions are ineffecient in their design. Having to cross the gate for each gear shift makes powershifting difficult thus driving in traffic is more difficult (and shifting is slower). If it worked more like a motorcycles 1 down/5 up you can practically drive without using a clutch (although I still clutch when stopping or hard slow downs). You can powershift in a car, but it is a lot more difficult. With motorcycles just hit the start button, slack the throttle, or shift on the rev limiter hit and a clutchless shift is done without any additional strain on the transmission.

In a more general conversaiton, car 5/6 speed standard H transmissions are ineffecient in their design. Having to cross the gate for each gear shift makes powershifting difficult thus driving in traffic is more difficult (and shifting is slower). If it worked more like a motorcycles 1 down/5 up you can practically drive without using a clutch (although I still clutch when stopping or hard slow downs). You can powershift in a car, but it is a lot more difficult. With motorcycles just hit the start button, slack the throttle, or shift on the rev limiter hit and a clutchless shift is done without any additional strain on the transmission.
What are you talking about? It's possible to shift just about any manual transmission far faster than any automatic that comes out of the factory. Secondly, they are almost always more efficent in their design than an automatic. With a manual, when the clutch is engaged the engine is directly coupled to the wheels. In an automatic, you've got the torque converter ____ing away power, at least until it locks up at some point (depending on the transmission).

As for "powershifting", in a car that refers to staying on the throttle while you shift. This tends to destroy transmissions in a short amount of time, and no one drives like this everyday. Even using this technique, you'd still disengage the clutch between shifts. With an auotmatic, your foot may be on the "accelerator", but you don't have 100% control over the throttle and what it's doing. You can make a suggestion by pushing down on the pedal. Once a shift occurs, you lose control of the throttle and the car takes over.

A motorcycle is a different beast than a car. Trying to operate the transmissions in a similar manner will result in problems, specifically in the car.

What are you talking about?

I was not refering to manual versus auto. I was refering to the various manual setups that have been around in cars. Crossing the gate shifting gears in the standard H just isn't as effecient as a drop lever shift or manual paddle shift.


It's possible to shift just about any manual transmission far faster than any automatic that comes out of the factory. Secondly, they are almost always more efficent in their design than an automatic. With a manual, when the clutch is engaged the engine is directly coupled to the wheels. In an automatic, you've got the torque converter ____ing away power, at least until it locks up at some point (depending on the transmission).

Don't tell Ferrari that... their new automanuals if you will shift like a manual but do it faster than any human can. They believe there is a future for computer controlled shifting. I would be inclined to agree since a well built computer system could easily out-shift 99% of the drivers out of the box and could be tweaked or even learn to improve shifts. Then a driver would be completely focused on the line.


As for "powershifting", in a car that refers to staying on the throttle while you shift. This tends to destroy transmissions in a short amount of time, and no one drives like this everyday. Even using this technique, you'd still disengage the clutch between shifts.

In my vocabulary powershifting simply refers to clutchless shifting. One way is a constant accel and then pop the gear. Yes, this does cause damage. Another way is to cause the transmission to slack (such as decel), shift, accel. If you do this perfectly, no damage is done to the tranny. Problem is most people can't do it well even after practice and often converting the tran to shorter throws and practicing yields a better payoff. I drove a manual truck for several months with a practically unusable clutch. Transmission is still going stong years later.


A motorcycle is a different beast than a car. Trying to operate the transmissions in a similar manner will result in problems, specifically in the car.

not advocating doing so. just making a point that other manual transmission designs can and do have advantages.

Don't tell Ferrari that... their new automanuals if you will shift like a manual but do it faster than any human can. They believe there is a future for computer controlled shifting. I would be inclined to agree since a well built computer system could easily out-shift 99% of the drivers out of the box and could be tweaked or even learn to improve shifts. Then a driver would be completely focused on the line.
Ferrari's "automatic" is really a manual. It has a clutch, not a torque converter. It controls the shifts, but they are passing through a transmission that has more in common with a manual than an automatic. Think auto-manual, not manu-matic.

In my vocabulary powershifting simply refers to clutchless shifting. One way is a constant accel and then pop the gear. Yes, this does cause damage. Another way is to cause the transmission to slack (such as decel), shift, accel. If you do this perfectly, no damage is done to the tranny. Problem is most people can't do it well even after practice and often converting the tran to shorter throws and practicing yields a better payoff. I drove a manual truck for several months with a practically unusable clutch. Transmission is still going stong years later.
If a clutch is slipping while engaged, why would disengaging it be a problem? Also, how is making sure the engine's RPM doesn't match the transmission's going to help it last longer? Are you sure you aren't talking about rev-matching instead?

Ferrari's "automatic" is really a manual. It has a clutch, not a torque converter. It controls the shifts, but they are passing through a transmission that has more in common with a manual than an automatic. Think auto-manual, not manu-matic.

That is why I called it an automanual. Don't tell Ferrari that... their new automanuals. Personally, I believe it is the future. Imagine a shifting system tied to the geometry of the car itself. Clutching, shifting, turning, excellerating out of a corner all done with total precision. We are still a long way away, but as mountain riding motorcycle freak I can definately imagine the day. Course by that time an efficient CVT might be around making all this moot.


If a clutch is slipping while engaged, why would disengaging it be a problem?

Disengaging isn't the problem, crossing an inordinate amount of space is. Everytime you shift in a standard H you cross the gate. Simply meaning the throws are longer than they could be. There are many reasons including people are used to them, they are a simple sturdy design, and mis-shifting is more difficult. However, they are not the most effecient manual clutching system around.


Also, how is making sure the engine's RPM doesn't match the transmission's going to help it last longer? Are you sure you aren't talking about rev-matching instead?

This is crossing into a double clutching conversation, but basically by speeding up then slacking off just a bit you are relieving the pressure allowing a seamless disengage followed by a shift if done properly that will match the RPMs of the gear you are going too. This is basically what a clutch does all without engaging the clutch. The advantage (as many racing motorcyclists found) is a very fast shift. The downsides are you can damage the dog teeth which of course stripped would stop the switching of gears completely.

This is all a general discussion and there are many points here that would need further definition to be completely accurate, but I am only going for the jist of things.

Ferrari's "automatic" is really a manual. It has a clutch, not a torque converter. It controls the shifts, but they are passing through a transmission that has more in common with a manual than an automatic. Think auto-manual, not manu-matic.

If the driver has to push a pedel and move a lever to shift, it is manual. If the car does it for the driver, it's an automatic. The actual mechanisms involved are irrelevent.

You can also have in-between systems that shift manually, but don't have a clutch. Porsche's tiptronic shifter is one example, as is VW's automatic stick shift from the '60s. The earlier electromechanical systems weren't all that good, but with rapid computer controls, automatic gearboxes can shift better than any human.

We are right on the break-over point now, with excellent automatic transmissions available on expensive cars. Economy cars haven't got the better technology yet, so you can get a bit better performance and economy by shifting for yourself.

George

If the driver has to push a pedel and move a lever to shift, it is manual. If the car does it for the driver, it's an automatic. The actual mechanisms involved are irrelevent.

You can also have in-between systems that shift manually, but don't have a clutch. Porsche's tiptronic shifter is one example, as is VW's automatic stick shift from the '60s. The earlier electromechanical systems weren't all that good, but with rapid computer controls, automatic gearboxes can shift better than any human.

I consider anything you have to shift a manual which pretty much means a tiptronic is an automatic even though you can shift it like a manual. So I would agree with your statement as a reasonable defining measure between an auto and a manual. Course it would be difficult to see it any other way I suppose.


We are right on the break-over point now, with excellent automatic transmissions available on expensive cars. Economy cars haven't got the better technology yet, so you can get a bit better performance and economy by shifting for yourself.

Like I said earlier, it wouldn't surprise me if CVTs become the defacto standard in the future. It is just hard to beat a car that is in the right drive ratio all the time. Then again it could end up like the rotory or the american turbo diesel (which hopefully will come back to us if we ever clean up our diesel).

hold on honld on, I've kept quiet until now because you two both make good points, but I have to emphasize there IS a significant difference between a "manu-matic" and a "auto-manual." You were saying that it doesn't matter if it operates electronically or hydrolically.
OK, a manu-matic is what the generic +/- shifter you see in almost every car nowadays, from mini-vans to Porsche's. They have no increased efficiency over a regular automatic, and are proven to be slower in acceleration if the manual mode is chosen.
An auto-manual is a regular manual transmission, operated by hydrolics, which is mechanically identical to a regular manual transmission, with a few extra parts added, these have shown increased efficiency as shifts are faster. And these cars are usually designed to be left in "manual" mode.

Ok the prime advantage of a manual or auto-manual is that it weighs less. Yes weight is very important. . . because the transmission spins! Rotational inertia plays a major role in efficiency(hence why it is stupid to have huge rims for performance sake). An automatic has more parts(planetary gears and the like) which increase rotational inertia and can sap more than twice the hp/torque of a manual transmission(one that employs a clutch hydroliclly or manually).
Number 2: a torque convertor is an inefficient means of transferring energy-- it is not directly connected to the wheels, and it builds up a LOT of heat. . . every try touching one? True, most Torque convertors can lock up once they get to speed, but it ineffecient nonetheless
Number 3: durability: because of the many parts, an automatic tends to break down more, and upon break down is much more difficult to fix.

A manu-matic is still an automatic, just electronically controlled
An auto-manual is a manual, with the ability to be controlled electronicly
Only high end cars have auto-manuals, such as BMW M3 SMG, Ferrari, and handful of others

Unfortunately the technology is too expensive and probably will not become very cheap either, so it is unlikely to see mass production, however manu-matics are in favor, as they pretend to be manuals. Although there are major disadvantages to this set up, they aren't as great as in the past, however saying that they are equal is just not true. . . there is a ton of data that says otherwise. They are closeR, but not equal and can never be equal (differences are a result of physics of design, not of technology). But nowadays, the difference is small enough and automatic's are durable enough to be bought over manuals for the added convenience of not having to shift, and that is why there are more of them. . . not because they are equal, but because they are close enough that people don't care about the difference.

i think people are still buying automatics for a few reasons (xb is more of a cruiser than a performance car, adapts easier to jdm mods since bb's are auto in japan). it's just my 2 cents...

hold on honld on, I've kept quiet until now because you two both make good points, but I have to emphasize there IS a significant difference between a "manu-matic" and a "auto-manual." You were saying that it doesn't matter if it operates electronically or hydrolically.
OK, a manu-matic is what the generic +/- shifter you see in almost every car nowadays, from mini-vans to Porsche's. They have no increased efficiency over a regular automatic, and are proven to be slower in acceleration if the manual mode is chosen.

The true main difference between what most consider a manu-matic and an automanual is the existance of a torque converter. Automanual's don't have one and manumatics do. This is a broad brush, but if you want to get to the nitty gritty this is the best way to technically seperate the two.


An auto-manual is a regular manual transmission, operated by hydrolics, which is mechanically identical to a regular manual transmission, with a few extra parts added, these have shown increased efficiency as shifts are faster. And these cars are usually designed to be left in "manual" mode.

Ok the prime advantage of a manual or auto-manual is that it weighs less. Yes weight is very important. . . because the transmission spins! Rotational inertia plays a major role in efficiency(hence why it is stupid to have huge rims for performance sake). An automatic has more parts(planetary gears and the like) which increase rotational inertia and can sap more than twice the hp/torque of a manual transmission(one that employs a clutch hydroliclly or manually).

How the actuator that shifts is for the most part is irrelevant when discussing the difference. A computer operated electronic clutch and an electronic actuator that doesn't have a torque converter (I don't think there is one at least that I know of) would still be an automanual. Hydrololics are just the mechanism not a defining measure IMO.


Number 2: a torque convertor is an inefficient means of transferring energy-- it is not directly connected to the wheels, and it builds up a LOT of heat. . . every try touching one? True, most Torque convertors can lock up once they get to speed, but it ineffecient nonetheless

I don't think anyone here would argue that statement.


Number 3: durability: because of the many parts, an automatic tends to break down more, and upon break down is much more difficult to fix.

True as well, but poor shifting or extreme shifting can cause a manual to wear out much faster. Also, clutches in a manual are not as durable as todays automatic systems. If you consider having to replace clutch parts part of the transmission (I can go either way on this), then a manual isn't as reliable as an automatic. However, on the whole the transmission in a auto should and probably will go long before a manual... clutch aside.


Unfortunately the technology is too expensive and probably will not become very cheap either, so it is unlikely to see mass production, however manu-matics are in favor, as they pretend to be manuals. Although there are major disadvantages to this set up, they aren't as great as in the past, however saying that they are equal is just not true. . . there is a ton of data that says otherwise. They are closeR, but not equal and can never be equal (differences are a result of physics of design, not of technology). But nowadays, the difference is small enough and automatic's are durable enough to be bought over manuals for the added convenience of not having to shift, and that is why there are more of them. . . not because they are equal, but because they are close enough that people don't care about the difference.
I don't think anyone was trying to bill them as being equal. I think the other guy was just wanting to clear up what the difference between a manual and an automatic was to the driver. I was agreeing with the fact that anything that HAS to be shifted (can't be driven in an automatic mode) regardless of how the tran does what it does is reasonable to be considered a manual and anything that can be driven in auto mode without the driver needing to shift could be called an automatic. This may not be true from a transmission point of view, but I think most would consider this a reasonable statement. Besides, I don't know of any automanuals that can be driven like an automatic or any manumatics that don't have a full auto mode. Sure as I say that, there is some manumatic car that does.

OK, I just got off the phone with my dealer...out of 4 people who put in deposits (all manual, BTW), the car they are getting is an automatic. At first, the dealer was going to have me wait till the next shipment...wrong answer...after I informed her (not a threat because I am serious) that I would just take the deposit and leave, she said that she would see the allocation on Thursday for what is at port and try to do a swap. Unfortunately, I guess I picked one of the worst combinations (Black Sand Pearl - 5 Speed) so it is unlikely that I would be able to get that car when I need it...

Oh well, I knew a deposits have many shortcomes but I figured at least that the first shipment would include a lot more cars then this...I'm not getting an automatic though. Life lesson learned, next time I will listen to the people here about deposits...

It seems the demand for manuals is greater than the supply. I was looking at the XA and XB and every single one was automatic!! Even all the corollas were automatic. I guess when they get a manual in it sells like hotcakes.

like some one said before...Americans are LAZY!!!

You generally want to wait a few cycles from the production line anyway. It usually takes several runs to fix most of the line problems. Getting one of the first runs off of a new line and a new design is hardly ever a good thing.

OK, I just got off the phone with my dealer...out of 4 people who put in deposits (all manual, BTW), the car they are getting is an automatic.

You're saying that the dealer is taking deposits, promising manual transmission vehicles, while knowing that no manuals are in their allocation? If so, grab that check and run while you still can!

At first, the dealer was going to have me wait till the next shipment...wrong answer...after I informed her (not a threat because I am serious) that I would just take the deposit and leave, she said that she would see the allocation on Thursday for what is at port and try to do a swap. Unfortunately, I guess I picked one of the worst combinations (Black Sand Pearl - 5 Speed) so it is unlikely that I would be able to get that car when I need it...

I don't believe them when they say "worst combination". When I was looking for a white 5-speed that was the "rare combination". Others have been told that the camo is the rare one. It seems that whatever the customer wants that the dealer doesn't have is so rare as to be unobtainable. Honda dealers tried to play this color/equipment tap-dance with me, which is why I have a Scion.

Oh well, I knew a deposits have many shortcomes but I figured at least that the first shipment would include a lot more cars then this...I'm not getting an automatic though. Life lesson learned, next time I will listen to the people here about deposits...

Yes, now that they have a piece of you they are less motivated to obtain the vehicle you want. They are counting on wearing you down into accepting a vehicle that they have.

Call around, find a dealer who can provide what you want, and keep that checkbook in your pocket until you see the hardware!

BTW, women in America generally prefer autos over manuals which may be one very good reason. Another is that a large percent of city drivers buy autos over manuals.

IMO, people who are anticipating this car are more likely enthusiasts so the initial demand would seem logical to be for manuals. However, I bet autos sell just as well over the sales year.

IMO, people who are anticipating this car are more likely enthusiasts so the initial demand would seem logical to be for manuals. However, I bet autos sell just as well over the sales year.

I understand about the enthusiast angle & all...but if preferences for deposits were taken over a month ago and so many are manual transmission then why are so many automatics being sent in the first batch? To me, if you are sending in a preference buy order then I was under the impression that they would look over the preference sheets from all dealers and then ship what was represented by the deposits already put down. I know that many people here were saying that there wouldn't be a demand large enough for a deposit but I am getting a different perspective...from the dealers I am calling, they all have several deposits but are still receiving cars not matching the deposits. They aren't TRAC models (demos) so that leaves me wondering why anyone would take a deposit anyway if they knew that they couldn't choose anything for the first allocation...

Anyway, if they have a Flint Mica, Silver, or Black Sand Pearl manual in the allocation then I will take it. Otherwise, I will just get a refund on the deposit...I really want a tC but another month of waiting during the prime summer months (and my 1 week summer vacation) is a little too much to ask. Hopefully though, things will work out :).

I understand about the enthusiast angle & all...but if preferences for deposits were taken over a month ago and so many are manual transmission then why are so many automatics being sent in the first batch? To me, if you are sending in a preference buy order then I was under the impression that they would look over the preference sheets from all dealers and then ship what was represented by the deposits already put down.


Sheer speculation would be that the line produced a certain percent of autos and a certain percent of manuals. I doubt they took deposits then figured out the production values for the line. They probably knew before they took dollar one how many of each would roll off. Your dealer probably just wasn't one of the dealers to get a manual in the first batch.

This is TOTAL speculation however. I have nothing but an uneducated guess to back this up.