Want My A4

Well, actually a skilled stick shift driver does NOT have to stop and think at all....it just happens. It is a skill as well as an aquired taste. I wonder if all the time that an auto saves in shifting will be worth the $$$$$$$ that a auto rebuild will cost down the road vs a new clutch/pressure plate and t/o bearing?
The new autos can shift quicker and more dependably but not by that much. I certainly did not mean to insult any triptronic or CVT owners. The poster above that made reference to wooden wheels and 8 tracks, hand cranks and carbs and outhouses needs to take a quilude. Driving a car should be fun....automatics are not yet fun for me. 35 plus years driving a stick and I'm not done yet. (The wife too!)
True story here: '06 Vette w/6sp stick at America's tire on the rack, shop tech (in his mid 20's) tries to get it off the lift when the work is done...custom shift **** does not have the shift pattern on it as stock **** does....he walks into waiting room to have the owner drive car off the rack...the owner (a woman in her mid 50's) drives it off without any problem. I watched this happen myself. It's called hand eye (or foot) coordination.

Hobbes

Echoed. An experienced manual driver doesn't have to think about what to do with the gears, he just does it automatically. I've driven manuals my entire driving life (25+ years) and would never get an automatic unless I had no choice. A manual tranny makes driving more involving and more fun IMO.

My wife has always had automatics and I find driving them to be much less satisfying. I guess if I spent every day in extensive heavy traffic I would consider an AT, but 99% of the time I am so glad to have a manual.

I just bought a 2009 A5 with a manual tranny a couple of days ago (haven't picked it up yet). I had planned on getting one in 2010 and getting Euro Delivery, but when I found out I couldn't get a MT in 2010 I rushed to get one of the remaining 2009s. I wish Audi wasn't phasing out the manual in the U.S.

Dubliner

There is a tendency to think the world is now automatic but there are many countries that have more manuals. Where I grew up in Dublin, Ireland for instance, one of the 3 main Audi dealers that my mother uses sells less than 15% automatic, and, as I am told reliably, if you get a loaner it HAS TO BE a manual- they have NO AUTO transmission loaners!
With auto you have the added cost of transmission replacement in the future, more costly than clutch,
Dubliner

Hobbes

There is also a weight penalty with the automatic.

zznalg

By your -compromised- reasoning, anything new that has been adopted by the masses would be superior to that which came before. Microwaved food would be tastier than meals cooked with heat. Preservatives, growth hormones and modified corn starch would produce higher quality and more advanced products. Vinyl music would have lower fidelity than MP3s. Adaptive cruise control would be better than non-adaptive -in contrast to simply paying attention. Shabby new home construction would be far superior to the use of quality materials and technical expertise. Mortgage-based derivative trading would be an excellent way to generate wealth. "Enjoy your microwaved frozen dinner listening to low-fidelity music in your poorly built and foreclosed upon home....".

Want My A4

Nail Hammer DONE! Well said!

mart242

Am I the only one that finds the argument about a manual being more fuel efficient silly? They test the fuel consumptions at a ridiculous 90km/h 50/mph in unrealistic condition (ie: shifting at 1200rpm, ..). Who does that? no one. On a car like the A4, you buy it with a manual transmission because it's more fun to drive. Hell, if I'd have to pay extra to get manual (instead of tiptronic) and it would cost more to repair, I'd still do it.

Tiptronic is for those who like to pretend that they drive manual... DSG is another story but I've never tried it. Then again, you don't get the satisfaction of shifting and making a perfect turn. Sure, it's faster but who cares if you're 1/10 of a second faster, I'm not racing when I go to work! I want to enjoy driving and I simply can't do that without a clutch. I get bored to death

scottacus

This argument is ridiculous. MT and AT appeal to different people (at least in the US). Neither is better or worse, they just fill different needs. Outside the world of car forums most people are clearly willing to compromise a bit on gas mileage and/or performance if necessary to not have to shift their own gears. (Or they just never learned how to use an MT and don't want to learn on a new car, I suppose.)

Back to the original question. The Avant is already a very small-volume car. I read that Audi expects to sell a total of around 4000 per year in the US. With volume that low, they can't afford to bring more than one drivetrain configuration to the US, as each configuration has to be EPA certified (for MPG figures) every year at Audi's expense. So they bring over the one that has the broadest appeal (2.0TQ with tip). If the take rate on MTs is 10% and only 400 MT Avants would be sold per year, no one would be willing to pay the premium Audi would need to charge to recoup the EPA certification cost.

chairlift

I'm sure there are 400 people in the entire US that are willing to purchase a Manual Avant for the extra cash, there's probably 100 people on here alone that would

Mitch105

Talk about some who doesn't get! I was a BMW owner and still am a BMW enthusiast. However, I also love my Audi. But, the one thing you do see here more of a casual car-type personal that fancys themselves an enthusiast, but really just got rich enough to get out of their old Toyota....BMW guys are the real deal...