Now tell me what is the state of your spirit when driving each of these?
I just thought, I would ask this to see if the driving of the Porche is way
more elevating than the Vanagon or there is not such a great difference or
it is just a different feeling.
Zoltan
----- Original Message -----
From: "Tom LaLanne" <lalanne@IX.NETCOM.COM>
To: <vanagon@GERRY.VANAGON.COM>
Sent: Thursday, September 11, 2003 12:24 AM
Subject: Manual or AT?

    I bought an AT, not because I really wanted one, but because the van I
found  was otherwise perfect.  I was looking for a clean Westy with a
near-dead engine (I knew I wanted to install a Subaru engine).   My concern
about an AT was that it robbed power from an already under-powered vehicle.
However, my research revealed that the AT in the vanagon is probably a
stronger and  superior transmission to the manual.
    I have to say that the van I bought drove like a motor boat with a
trolling motor.  I have no experience with driving manual vanagons, so I
have no point of comparison.  I don't know whether my van was so slow
because of the AT, or because the engine was dead, or both.  But it didn't
cause me problems for long.  Shortly after buying the van I dropped it off
for an engine transplant.  I picked it up 6 weeks later with new life.  My
pre-purchase and pre-transplant concerns are no longer valid.  The van now
drives like a real car.  I can drive uphill on the freeway, and pass other
cars (many of who have been shocked).  It can actually go 90 on Hwy 5 like
all of the other speed demons.
    All of that aside, I have found that I really appreciate the AT for
everyday driving.  As a starting point, the vanagon is not a performance
car, no matter what kind of engine it has.  The manual trans has no
significant advantage over an AT unless one is seeking high performance.  My
daily driver (was) (is) a Porsche.  I didn't think I would ever admit that I
would prefer driving an AT to a manual, but I have to admit that do.