Rowing through the gears...with a paddle

The past several new cars that I've driven recently have had shiftable automatic transmissions. I'm quite used to this of course, since I almost always drive in manual mode in my R32. But the three recent cars I've driven have all had interesting variations on the theme that help to differentiate the driving experience between brands. I'd like to take a moment to weigh the pros and cons of each approach, so maybe you can benefit from my experience if this is something you really care about.

I'll start, of course, with Volkswagen's DSG. The transmission comes with an automatic shift gate with the manual mode selected by pushing the shifter to the right. This, I believe, is the most common execution for a shiftable manual, and it's shared with VW's regular 6-speed slushbox. One difference is the shape of the shifter. Most of VW's automatics come with a T-shaped shifter that is fairly common, and easy to use for the common task of shifting back and forth between park, drive and reverse (much of which requires holding down the release button).

Where this shape is not so satisfying is during manual shifting, where those of us accustomed to manual transmissions like to use a similar grip on a manumatic stalk. For this reason, VW provides a ball-shaped shifter on its sportier DSG applications, including the GTI and R32. I'm a fan.

Next we come to the paddles. I'm quite fond of how VW executes its shift paddles. They're fixed to the back of the steering wheel, with an exposed bit that's labeled + or -. This label even lights up at night. Very classy. This execution has also proven very useful during track work, as the paddles will always be at the tips of your fingers during corners, assuming your hands are still at the 9 and 3 positions. For most turns in which you'd need to shift, your hands should still be there, because they'd be fast sweepers. For tighter turns, if you find yourself needing to shift in the middle, it's probably because you missed a downshift as you were braking before the turn started. In that case, you can always fall back on the shift lever, but it may even make you a better driver to learn this lesson.

This execution is in stark contrast to that of another twin clutch gearbox on the market, Mitsubishi's SST. Mitsubishi has made absolutely certain that everyone knows that their shift paddles are made from magnesium (BMW on the other hand uses magnesium for an actual benefit, that of reduced engine weight). But it is the mounting of these paddles that makes Mitsu's execution really unique. They're affixed to the steering column, meaning they don't move with the wheel. Some people prefer this, but in some spirited driving I did in a Lancer Ralliart yesterday, I firmly established my preference for wheel mounted paddles.

The one area where I do prefer Mitsubishi's layout is the shift lever. It actually looks and feels like a true stickshift lever, and its shift layout is opposite to that of the VW. To engage manual mode, you pull it to the left, so it's closer at hand, and you pull it back to upshift and push forward to downshift. To some this is counterintuitive, but to a true stickshift driver, this is exactly how it should be, mimicking the way a direct throw backward in a manual is always a higher gear.

BMW also agrees in this regard, as they've been laying out their manumatics this way for years. Where BMW falls flat is in their steering wheel paddles. The Bavarians believe that you should be able to upshift or downshift with either hand, and it's a solid idea, until you come upon their solution for this. Each paddle in a Bimmer can be pulled with the fingers (for an upshift) or pushed with the thumb (for a downshift). While this does feel inherently intuitive, especially as it matches up with the shift lever, its downfall is in the thumb activation. When your hands are in a natural driving position, a yank on a paddle is natural and easily executed. But as I found in the X6 I drove yesterday, the downshift was another story, especially during spirited driving. The thumb extension felt strained and awkward, twisting my wrists into unnatural positions. You may think this is nitpicky and stupid, and I'll admit that I'm the prince of piddling pet peeves, but it did make me feel less in control and legitimately reduced my enjoyment of the drive.

I also got to drive the new Cadillac CTS-V. Fantastic car, but its shift setup was not ideal. Not only was the shifter laid out with forward upshifts, but the paddles were not visible behind the wheel. They were basically just buttons on the backs of the wheel spokes, and if you weren't feeling around for them, you wouldn't know they're there. They also offer less surface area than other paddles, making them less accessible.

I think the variety of executions throughout the industry makes for interesting reinforcement of brand character. Mitsubishi's setup reflects the raw nature of its performance cars, whereas VW executes the system in a highly refined way. But some systems just work better than others, and clearly my ideal setup for a shiftable automatic would be the VW paddles with the Mitsubishi lever. Manufacturers take note!

The Alphabet Soup Crucible

BMW just lost its lawsuit seeking to enjoin Infiniti from using the standalone letter "M" in marketing for its models, based on the rationale that Infiniti's marketing of its M35/45 dilutes the Motorsports brand at BMW (responsible for the M3, etc.).

When I first read the following on MotiveMagazine.com, I was about to write a scathing critique of BMW:

"Several months after BMW won an injunction against Nissan to prevent the Infiniti brand from badging its cars as 'M', Motor Authority is reporting that a Canadian court has ruled in the latter's favor. BMW had argued that Infiniti was peddling "inferior and more modestly priced" cars and was tarnishing the prestige of its M brand."

But after following this dead link to the Motor Authority website, and then manually searching out the real story (here, by the way), the tune changed. The fact is, this was a gross oversimplification by Motive, which really missed the point of the suit. Badging is not the issue. BMW was fine with the names M30, M35 and M45, as Infiniti has used thus far. The issue was the way Infiniti was advertising the cars, with the solitary letter M, which could be argued lends ambiguity to the message, creating the possibility of confusion with BMW's M division.

I was checking out Motive at the behest of AutoBlog, which proffered it as a new alternative to the more traditionally focused mainline print and online mags, like Car and Driver and Winding Road. This site is aimed at the tech-savvy young-un like myself, who, in AutoBlog's words, "doesn't seem to need the page turning (virtual or not)."

Well, interesting idea, but if in actuality it's run by a bunch of slackers who don't bother to actually read the stories they purport to summarize, then I say, "No, thanks."

Okay, back to the real story. While I think there is legitimate complexity to be considered in this suit, I'm still glad that BMW lost. Had they prevailed, it might have opened the door for infighting among industry players over similar model names. Sure, it might be idiotic for a brand like Lincoln to name a sedan the LS and a crossover the MKX, since this does create some confusion. But it should be up to the industry to police itself on these matters, especially since the party that often ends up "injured" by this foolishness is the unestablished brand that shot itself in the foot in the first place.

Does BMW realistically think that those pining for an M5 would have second thoughts because Infiniti has worn out the letter on its more pedestrian mid-sized sedan? To suggest that a company can lay claim to a letter is as absurd a notion as me trying to buy the rights to...a letter! At the moment, I really can't think of a better example than this.

Sure, if Infiniti made a deliberate attempt to hijack BMW's brand equity, naming one of it's products...I don't know...the M3, this complaint would be supportable in a court of law. But as it stands, BMW's claim needs more evidence that there is demonstrable benefit or harm to one party, and that just isn't forthcoming.