C&D review of the VW Golf R: "The manual loses to the automatic Golf R against the stopwatch. The 0.7-second deficit from zero to 60 mph, which takes 5.2 seconds, is almost fully attributable to the two shifts required to reach 60"
http://www.caranddriver.com/volkswagen/golf-r#eztoc8578403_0...
I couldn't find a manual Mercedes on their website, Skoda isn't for sale here, and I couldn't find 0-60 numbers on VW's website so I quoted an automotive review instead.
The general consensus I've seen is that automatic transmission cars are faster than manual transmission cars 0-60.
The Golf R isn't really a fair comparison as it's a dual clutch, not a traditional automatic, and more importantly, it gets a (quite aggressive) launch control while the manual doesn't.
My argument was that machines can do simple things better than humans, the Golf R automatic transmission is a machine that does shifting better than a human, and you are complaining that the comparison is unfair because the machine is too good at what it does?!?
Just did a quick check on Mercedes' German website, tried to find some models that are still offered with manuals, and got this:
B160d - faster with automatic
B180 - faster with automatic
B200 - faster with automatic
C180 - slower with automatic
C200 - faster with automatic
C220d - faster with automatic
CLA180d - same
CLA180 - faster with automatic
CLA200 - faster with automatic
E200 - faster with automatic
I'm sorry, but you are wrong for at least one of the manufacturers you listed. I only found one Mercedes model where they reported a slower 0-100km/h time for the version with the automatic transmission.
I'm pretty sure the numbers for the other manufacturers are similar. Automatic transmissions have simply surpassed manuals. Yay, technology!
