Thanks to City Ford I test drove both. I currently have 3 modified turbo manual cars (far quicker than the Ford), but was really interested in trying the auto. I found the manual fairly easy to drive, the clutch no where near as heavy as the press have made out. My initial impression was that the gearbox was very notchy, but after a longish test drive I got used to it. My wife also drives a manual turbo, and I don't think she'd have a problem with it. I could live with it without a problem. The good torque of the 4 litre does make it easier to drive than say a 2 litre turbo. As for the auto, I found it a novelty, and did like the way it holds gear. After a while I got a bit sick of it, and just left it in drive. But I knew that I could always go back to manual mode if I felt like it. I'd go for the auto if I was driving mostly in traffic or pulling a boat. I have not seen fuel consumption figures for both options, but maybe some members can reply.... and consumption normally does vary greatly depending on driving style and traffic conditions. 0 to 100kph times are good in the manual for a stock car, at around 6 secs, but this a bit flattering as this is still just in second gear just before the change to 3rd. I've not seen back to back performance tests between the manual and auto, and would like to see figures. Maybe Ford or someone can supply something. As for modifications, it currently is an unknown how the manual gearbox will handle mods, but generally most gearbox failures occur after some abuse, rather than ultimate power. It may eventuate that the auto may be a better choice with a modified car, where power is upped to over 300kw. For many buyers the Ford will be their first turbo car, and they will probably chose an auto. The real enthusiest will almost always chose a manual. In a stock car my preference is to chose the manual, but it not an easy decision, nor as clear cut as I would have expected.