Lexus IS Forum banner
1 - 20 of 24 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
16 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
hi..
im a noob bout this stuff
but is there much difference in performance between the is300 5 speed or the e shift???
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
1,875 Posts
the 5-sp is prob about .3-.6sec. faster depends on shifting

all in all the e-shift isnt that much slower than the manual
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,013 Posts
But manuals can't take as much power as Autos.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
385 Posts
5-sp

0-60: 7.1 s
1/4 mile: 15.4 s

E-Shift

0-60: 7.5 s
1/4 mile: 15.7 s

Those seem to be the avg times from magazines, I know some owners are capable of lower times.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,099 Posts
What kind of performance difference are you asking about, absolute or perceived? I would not buy an IS300 with an automatic. The manual transmission model has a completely different feel to me. Is it quicker? A little, but I don't even care.

If you have to ask, just buy the automatic. But, only a test drive of both will let know you if one model has any clear advantages to you.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
385 Posts
HoustonLex said:
not sure about the magazines...


15.2 1/4 mile for the manual, 15.9 1/4 mile for the autos is what I saw on the track
I don't think the difference is that big, at least not from my friend's uncle's 5-sp. Quicker off the line obviously, but not really anywhere else.
 

·
Moderator
Joined
·
8,849 Posts
MPG performance of the manual will be better... much better. :lol:
Manual also gives more control, especially if the rear end starts to loose it.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
15,540 Posts
JPis300 said:
HoustonLex said:
not sure about the magazines...


15.2 1/4 mile for the manual, 15.9 1/4 mile for the autos is what I saw on the track
I don't think the difference is that big, at least not from my friend's uncle's 5-sp. Quicker off the line obviously, but not really anywhere else.
Well, maybe with the same driver the diff wouldnt be that bad... but thats what happened that night... and this was with 4 different IS's, 2 stick, 2 auto....


Also, keep in mind that is just ONE of many real world times... the time that is probably most important is the rolling start.

Like when you need to pass another car. With the auto you have to wait for the downshift that could take up to a second to happen... with the standard, your already in the lower gear, so the acceleration difference will be much more apparant.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,043 Posts
Well, considering the fact that i have had both. The auto can't compare to the manual. The manual is MUCH quicker, it has better 1st and 2nd gearing, and the just has no control compared to a REAL manual. If you know how to drive WELL, you can pull a quarter mile of lower than 15 with a 0-60 MPH of about 6.4 or better.

But seriously, if you want my honest opinion, dont go with the automatic. I am giving my opinion based on experience.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,579 Posts
vlad_a said:
MPG performance of the manual will be better... much better. :lol:
Manual also gives more control, especially if the rear end starts to loose it.

I think the lack of VSC on the manual flies in the face of your last statement. More succinctly: You are full of it!

Nobody reacts faster than that electronic band-aid that is VSC.
 

·
Moderator
Joined
·
8,849 Posts
CRB said:
I think the lack of VSC on the manual flies in the face of your last statement. More succinctly: You are full of it!

Nobody reacts faster that the electronic band-aid that is VSC.
Quite the contrary. Manual does not need the VSC as much as the e-shift. There are 2 sides to a coin. :roll: Which one of us is full of it?

Do you know the differences between handling in manual and e-shift?
I put quite a few miles on both. I know exactly what e-shift feels like sliding 60MPH on ice. Sorry, no VSC for 2001 model.

Now, what happens if the wheels go loose?
How does it differ in both?

Sure, traction control this, VSC that. Unfortunately, the more sprited drivers do not appreciate the traction control cutting the throttle and engaging brakes while cornering.

If you trully believe VSC and e-shift handle better than manual, I suggest you get a reality check.

P.S.
Taking control away from the driver is not the same as having more control.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
15,540 Posts
CRB said:
vlad_a said:
MPG performance of the manual will be better... much better. :lol:
Manual also gives more control, especially if the rear end starts to loose it.

I think the lack of VSC on the manual flies in the face of your last statement. More succinctly: You are full of it!

Nobody reacts faster that the electronic band-aid that is VSC.

the back end should have never broke loose if the car had VSC....
 

·
Moderator
Joined
·
8,849 Posts
HoustonLex said:
the back end should have never broke loose if the car had VSC....
Right, it magically puts traction between ice and wheels.

I agree that e-shift needs VSC because it is very hard to regain control.
Manual, due to its nature, does not need such as much.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,043 Posts
Again, speaking from experience of owning both...

The E-shift barely gives the driver control when the rear end breaks loose. A prime example of this was set for me last year when someone decided to clip the rear end of my car and put it into a slide on a freeway interchange. As much as i tried to regain control by turning track off and using the gate to put the car into a lower gear, the car did not give me the feedback i wanted. Although i did correct alot of slide by countersteering and giving power to the rear wheels for traction, it didnt help, i had no control.

NOW, with a manual IS300, this would have been a whole different story. I only have 1200 miles in 2 weeks of owner ship of the MT, but ive been driving the hell out of the last 500 miles. I purposely knock the rear end loose to see how much more predictable the regaining of control would be, and it was a night and day difference. Having a clutch pedal and a shifter than shifts into the gear that the DRIVER wants plays a big role.

Other manual owners... Am i wrong?? Anyone in my opinion who thinks that the auto has more driver control than an automatic, like Vlad-a said, needs to have thier head examined.

Also, i wanted to add one thing, dont compare an automatic with NO LSD compared to a car WITH LSD (just in case you were). LSD totally changes the behavior of this car and how it will react.

More manual owners shed more light on this. Maybe i am wrong... Although i know i am not.
 

·
Moderator
Joined
·
8,849 Posts
No, you're absolutely right.

A couple points
My auto did have LSD (Special Order), which helps, but auto is an auto.

When you loose rear end, what you need is neutral handling. I crashed my car once because I was locked in "2" (thought it was "3) and the rear end gave out (Trac-OFF). In this case, car needs to up-shift and gas pedal slightly released. I learned that and later was able to avoid what could possibly be a very severe accident.
With manual, it is a simple matter of pushing the clutch in, which disconnects the drivetrain, allowing all 4 wheels to turn with the speed of car, providing the needed conditions to regain control by counter-steering.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,043 Posts
yea my auto IS300 also had an LSD by special order.
But thing i am noticing is that the LSD on the manual seems to be more agressive. It works alot better than the one on the auto.
 

·
Moderator
Joined
·
8,849 Posts
As far as I know, both Auto and Manual LSDs are the same.
 
1 - 20 of 24 Posts
Top