

| Subject: | Re: AT v.s. Manual |
| From: | Maureen Stretch |
| Date: | Wed, 3 Dec 1997 09:37:54 -0500 |
Mine�s auto, too, and it seems to have no trouble getting to 65,75 and 80 on the highway without effort. I don�t know if it is because I am so happy to have the Westy or not, but even when I am going 35 or 40, it feels like I am speeding along. :) My other car� 89 Acura Integra �has a 5-speed stick, so I am used to driving a manual. While I would have welcomed a stick shift in a Vanagon if only to get a Westy, I am delighted with the automatic. Maureen >>> i'd pick an auto over a manual Vanagon anyday... the hassles are less..... >>> if i want to go 100mph, I'll drive my other car... ;<P* >>Hey! What's this about a Vanagon auto being slow? My Westy auto will >>do 80+ (85?) without a tail wind or a truck! You think a stick goes >>faster? > >Here,here! I was thinking the same thing... What is this myth about autos >being >slower than sticks. I've driven both and would venture a 1/4 mile drag >between >anybody's stock stick van against my '86 GL auto. ...mine will 0-60 (at >Dallas, >TX altitude and around 60F) in a fraction of a tick over 17sec.. Anybody else >checked this on their van? As far as top end I know I can run mine right into >red line if I dont take my foot out. At 5200RPMs Im moving at about 93MPH. > >Of course I cant be sure of exactly how fast I was going as at that speed >in a >Vanagon I am too busy just then to look down at the speedo... yee-ha! =8-0 > >These are not blistering fast numbers but even classic sports cars are not >necessarily muscle cars. Just fun to drive! > >Dont Beat on yur van :) >Eric Small >Dallas, TX > Maureen Stretch Natick, Mass. 91 Vanagon GL Westy �Johann�
Have something to add on this topic today? Revive this thread in the forum »