I guess Michael Schumacher isn't an "enthusiast" by your definition. I'm sure your wife loves your NASCAR posters in your living room. (How any so-called "race car driver" can be considered as such with a 4-speed transmission is a topic for another debate.)

I'm sick of these ridiculous comments. Ignorance isn't always bliss. Unless you're driving a vintage Shelby Cobra (and/or something similar), you have no business criticizing others in regards to transmissions and which type defines being an "enthusiast". If you enjoy driving a traditional single-clutch, manual transmission, then so be it. (I do, too, just not as much as the thrill of the immediacy of shifts and increased levels of speed achieved only by use of a dual clutch transmission.) But, at least get your facts straight. It's a dual-clutch transmission, not a "dual auto-clutch" transmission. It can automatically shift gears if selected, however, it's far from being a traditional "auto" with a torque converter as you suggest. Mastering manually selecting shift points should still yield the quickest lap (albeit, not much quicker.) Does this make you less of an "enthusiast"? Your dad might claim that not cranking it to start makes you less involved with the auto. Yes, I'm now suggesting you're that old, "Remember when...?" guy. Sad.

Do you have AC in your auto? Then you're not an "enthusiast". (Weight gains, draw on power, etc.) Do you have a radio? Then you're not an "enthusiast". (Weight, inability to hear the engine to match shifts, etc.) Do you have a tachometer? Then you're not an "enthusiast". ("Real enthusiasts" shift by sound and don't use technological to surreptitiously aid their driving performance, based upon your definition.) Traction control, ABS brakes, aerodynamic enhancements, anything stickier than wood for tires...ad nauseum means you're not an "enthusiast" by your definition. Lastly, is your auto fuel injected? Cheater! A true "enthusiast" knows how to massage their carb for the perfect performance settings based upon elevation, weather, etc. Shame on you for not knowing this!

Why has this new technology been welcomed with such disdain by the older generations? The advent of ABS brakes I believe to be the closest technological advancement, yet this tech was welcomed. I guess safety is more important than health. (There isn't a manual transmission auto in the world that can better a dual-clutch transmission in fuel efficiency. Period. It's absolutely impossible, unless geared/used improperly.)

I so happen to be old enough to appreciate how to heel-and-toe (the first 2 cars I raced had manual transmissions). However, I'm young enough to appreciate the immense technological progress and elevated speed dual-clutch transmissions allow for. Unless you have driven one on a track (I'm assuming you haven't, judging by your ridiculously ignorant comments), any judgements passed are laughable at best. Your comments on what everyday life was like without electricity might be more insightful. (Who am I kidding? You probably typed your comments from the front, air-conditioned seat of your Lexus on your iPad, since you are speaking to your wife on your iPhone connected via Bluetooth. Seriously. I am.;))

PS- Your shifting from "1 ->3->6" still isn't as efficient as a dual-clutch transmission due to lost inertia resulting from your perilously slow shifts. (Can you match 2 milliseconds? If so, Schumacher is your redheaded step-child.) Think instantaneous. This results in very little forward momentum lost. Also, it doesn't make your passengers sick, "bog down" the engine, etc, all while allowing you to listen to that wonderful $3K stereo system we all know you have. Also, since you enjoy driving your car so much, I'm sure you won't mind having to park your own car at your country club (don't even try to act like you don't have a membership if you're driving a $100K+ auto!), since the pimple-faced valet attendant won't even know what a manual transmission is in a few years.