[ghporter]

Originally Posted by suvsr4terrorists

No offense, but I've never needed a manual to tell me that.

Of course not; you got some practice and had an ear for the engine. The OP's "dad" seems to have had neither. Lacking knowledge and practice, knowing what the manufacturer says about when to shift is important. It helps the tone deaf, the "sheltered" who never rode in a car with a standard transmission, and those of us who want to try to do things "the right way" (at least while we're learning).

[pooka]

yeah, there's a difference, but as I said..

"The difference is becoming negligible."

Not to say it's nonexistent. Transmissions will continue to evolve and I can see the traditional "stick" being replaced. As much as humans love to fight, resistance is futile. A computer controlled transmission will soon take the lead.

[Kevin]

1 sec in the quarter mile is a big deal.

I know people that spend THOUSANDS of dollars to gain FRACTIONS of a second.

[jcadam]

Originally Posted by SimeyTheLimey

So is walking.

You know, I have heard all the arguments, and I really don't care. A car is a convenience. I see no reason in 2005 to be changing gears manually, except on a sports car. I'm not a racing driver, I'm a commuter. I don't care about saving .001 cents a mile, and I don't care if it is .01 seconds faster on a 0-60 course. I don't drive that way. I drive in traffic, and a clutch in traffic is a pain.

In addition, having taken a car out on the skid pan I know that manual transmissions in an emergency are more distracting than they are worth. You are safer with an automatic, and a heck of a lot more comfortable. Now, you may feel differently. Maybe you like old fashioned technology that requires you to use two extra limbs while driving (which also takes one of them off the steering wheel where it belongs). Fine, that's up to you. But spare me the myths.

distracting you say? I drive a stick shift everyday. I don't think about shifting, engaging/disengaging the clutch, etc. I don't have to think about it. It just happens. You know, muscle memory and all. If I were still learning to drive a manual, yea, it would be a problem in an emergency.

Now, on the infrequent occasions when I climb into the driver's seat of an automatic, I find myself reaching for the stick that isn't there, and putting my left foot down, often hitting the wider-than-normal brake pedal they put in auto-shifters. Now that's distracting.

[pooka]

Oh for ****'s sake. I'm not talking about the xTrEmE SPOILER crowd who dump xTrEmE amounts of cash on econo-boxes to get 1/10 sec quicker times in the Taco Bell parking lot. I'm talking about the technology in general. How far it has come and the fact that the performance gap is getting smaller. The tech will only get better, the gap will become nonexistent, and soon it will go beyond what a human is capable of. Seems to be the trend..

[SimeyTheLimey]

Originally Posted by jcadam

distracting you say? I drive a stick shift everyday. I don't think about shifting, engaging/disengaging the clutch, etc. I don't have to think about it. It just happens. You know, muscle memory and all. If I were still learning to drive a manual, yea, it would be a problem in an emergency.

Now, on the infrequent occasions when I climb into the driver's seat of an automatic, I find myself reaching for the stick that isn't there, and putting my left foot down, often hitting the wider-than-normal brake pedal they put in auto-shifters. Now that's distracting.

I know about muscle memory. I also know what I experienced on the skid pan in ATED school back when I was the 1AD CG's driver, probably back when you were in junior high. Shifting is one extra thing to do, and when you are doing several things all at once in a very short time span, such as in an emergency, the fewer things you have to do the better. And the more time your hands spend on the wheel the better. That's the reason why racing cars put their manual shifters on the wheel, not where regular cars put them.

For example, suppose you are going into a skid. If you have to change gear, that means one of your hands is off the steering wheel. The way to recover from a high-speed rear-wheel skid is to throw the wheel full lock in the opposite direction of the skid, and then full lock back again. That's a lot of wheel turning. It's a lot easier if you have both hands on the wheel. It's also safer because when you are sliding sideways, the wheel can be grabbed from your hands if you don't have both hands on it.

Now, granted, that's a maneuver that most drivers aren't trained to do. The school I was in had a special machine to throw you into that skid. And the same goes for the things I learned in that school like J Turns, bootlegs, half-bootlegs, and the like. I wouldn't need to know how to do those now either and after twelve years, I am not sure I could do any of them properly first time any more. Nevertheless, the principle stands, and it is interesting to me that the German ex-chief of police who taught me those techniques swore that automatics are safer. He wasn't the kind of person to show off or make statements to show his prowess. He just had a hell of a lot of experience.

Unfortunately, that is what motivates a lot of people with less experience than him to come to their opinions on this. It's not macho to say that having a machine do part of the driving is in fact safer than doing it all yourself, but it happens to be true. You think it's all automatic reflex action on your part and that you can handle anything, but that is only because you normally only encounter routine driving conditions. When you encounter something that isn't routine, such as an emergency, you discover that your routines aren't enough. That's why the Army put me through that school. It didn't just teach us how to handle a car in situations that most people would never encounter, but most importantly it showed us that a lot of our complacent assumptions about our driving were wrong. I thought like you that I could handle any situation in a manual. All us young and cocky general's drivers and personal security team members found out otherwise. When enough was thrown at us, we stalled.

Besides, there is still the PITA factor. I live in a highly congested area. It's a pain in the butt to spend 50% of the time on the road with the clutch in. Automatics simply make sense for real life driving.

[Kevin]

Originally Posted by pooka

Oh for ****'s sake. I'm not talking about the xTrEmE SPOILER crowd who dump xTrEmE amounts of cash on econo-boxes to get 1/10 sec quicker times in the Taco Bell parking lot. I'm talking about the technology in general. How far it has come and the fact that the performance gap is getting smaller. The tech will only get better, the gap will become nonexistent, and soon it will go beyond what a human is capable of. Seems to be the trend..

I am not talking about those people either.


1 sec faster = 10 car lengths ahead.

That is quite a bit.

[macroy]

Originally Posted by pooka

yeah, there's a difference, but as I said..

"The difference is becoming negligible."

Not to say it's nonexistent. Transmissions will continue to evolve and I can see the traditional "stick" being replaced. As much as humans love to fight, resistance is futile. A computer controlled transmission will soon take the lead.

It already has to some degree. As I mentioned before - BMW, Toyota, Ferrari and others have incorporated the sequential transmissions into their production cars. In fact, the M5 and M6 will not be offered in manual over in Europe - only in SMG (this was actually true for US too until folks here balked at the idea). And I can understand - while the computer can depress the clutch, change gears, and engage the clutch way faster than the human (milliseconds), some just prefer the thrill of shifting themselves.

[suvsr4terrorists]

Originally Posted by pooka

The difference is becoming negligible. Nissan's 350z with 6MT is a few milliseconds faster 0-60 than the manual-matic.

Yet teh manual still gets better MPG.

And the F360 Spider I walk past every week on my way to the office most certainly doesn't have a "stick".

It has paddle shifters behind the steering wheel..... which means it's a manual transmission with electronic shifting.... what's your point?

[suvsr4terrorists]

Originally Posted by SimeyTheLimey

No, I don't care about it. That's not how I drive.

Fine with me if you don't care, grandma. But even if you don't give a ****, you shouldn't say "I don't see how anyone could ever want a manual it's like going back to fred flinstone" or something along those lines when you have read the benefits of a manual= more control, better performance, and better MPG.

- Rob

[SimeyTheLimey]

Originally Posted by suvsr4terrorists

Fine with me if you don't care, grandma. But even if you don't give a ****, you shouldn't say "I don't see how anyone could ever want a manual it's like going back to fred flinstone" or something along those lines when you have read the benefits of a manual= more control, better performance, and better MPG.

- Rob

These days the "benefits" are extremely marginal and mostly theoretical. They are mainly of interest to 21 year old posers who think they are special because they learned to drive five years ago.

[docbud]

Originally Posted by jcadam

distracting you say? I drive a stick shift everyday. I don't think about shifting, engaging/disengaging the clutch, etc. I don't have to think about it. It just happens. You know, muscle memory and all. If I were still learning to drive a manual, yea, it would be a problem in an emergency.

Now, on the infrequent occasions when I climb into the driver's seat of an automatic, I find myself reaching for the stick that isn't there, and putting my left foot down, often hitting the wider-than-normal brake pedal they put in auto-shifters. Now that's distracting.

You took the words right out of my mouth.

(edit to add: I've been driving sticks for 25 years}
doc

[Doofy]

Originally Posted by macroy

In fact, the M5 and M6 will not be offered in manual over in Europe - only in SMG (this was actually true for US too until folks here balked at the idea).

Tell me you're not being serious? The M5 won't be getting a proper manual box? BMW have lost it big time.

[Troll]

Originally Posted by SimeyTheLimey

For example, suppose you are going into a skid. If you have to change gear, that means one of your hands is off the steering wheel. The way to recover from a high-speed rear-wheel skid is to throw the wheel full lock in the opposite direction of the skid, and then full lock back again. That's a lot of wheel turning. It's a lot easier if you have both hands on the wheel. It's also safer because when you are sliding sideways, the wheel can be grabbed from your hands if you don't have both hands on it.

I somehow doubt that the Army taught you to change gears in a skid! They probably taught you never to change gears in any serious corner let alone a skid. I've done a number of advanced courses including the BMW advanced driver course where you learn techniques for both automatics and manuals. NEVER have I heard anyone suggest that you change gears in a skid!! In the situation you are talking about, the last thing you would ever do is change gears (or let the car change gears for you)! Not even Michael Schumacher could handle a car that changes gears mid-skid. You never touch the gears when the car is skidding.

Your example perfectly illustrates the problem with an automatic. It deals only with a rear wheel drive car, so let's stick to that example. I've driven a BMW 5 Series in both manual and auto guise on a slalom course on a skid pan and here's what happens when you get into a skid (with traction systems off). You're powered up in 3rd gear and turning when you hit water and lose the back end, the first thing that happens is that the revs shoot up because the wheels are spinning. If you're close to the redline or your reactions are not that great or the automatic gearbox is in an economy mode, the gearbox can easily change up to 4th because the wheels are suddenly spinning faster. That change of gears shifts the weight of the car, it changes the balance and it requires an adjustment to the accelerator position because 80% throttle in 4th makes the car behave differently to 80% throttle in 3rd. Most beginners will spin 9 times out of 10 at this point.

If you don't spin, then you do your countersteering and the back end comes back into line only now the wheels are spinning way too slowly for the gearbox, so it changes back to 3rd which was the correct gear to start with. Again, the weight distribution changes and you need to adjust the accelerator position. In an automatic, it's very difficult to use the accelerator to control the car because if you're not careful with your movements, you can provoke a change of gears. As soon as it starts skidding, you have to back off the accelerator and keep the gearbox from shifting by maintaining constant revs. That's not an easy technique to learn.

In a manual, you're in the correct gear throughout the manouevre. You keep your hands on the wheel and control the car with the throttle and countersteer. Only once it's pointing in the right direction do you even consider changing gears. That applies on the track too. If it were possible to change gears in a skid without losing control, Michael Schumacher would be doing it! Controlling a manual in this situation is easier for a beginner.

Of course, today most cars (in Europe anyway) have traction control systems that use the brakes to bring the car back into line. The automatic gearboxes are often wired to those systems so that if they sense a skid, the gearbox is prevented from changing gears. With traction control on, the BMW's I drove on their advanced course didn't change gears when they were skidding, but everyone who drove them on the slalom course was significantly slower through the course than with a manual which shows how much more control they had with a manual.

But for me, what's far more important is the passive safety. People are still cleverer than automatic gearboxes. An automatic gearbox can't see how far you still have to go to pass the truck. It can't see that you're about to pull out to overtake. It can't see that you're going down a steep hill. For me, systems like the Selespeed, DSG or Tiptronic are the best compromise because you have the best of both worlds. I would agree with you when it comes to city driving. An automatic gearbox is much nicer to have in that situation, but if you're going on the highway or you're doing any serious speeds, a manual is going to be safer.

[jebjeb]

There is a lot of great info in this thread but also a lot of generalisations.

My major point is that there is no right or wrong transmission. Some people will never own anything but a manual (stick shift) where as others would not touch one and always go for an auto (of some description). As long as they offer the choice it is fine.

The problem is when a manufacturer does not offer the choice. Many have given examples and mine is quick relevant to me as I have just bought one. AMG (official tuners of Mercedes Benz) does not offer their cars with a manual. They only come with autos. This may put some people off immediately.

I have always been a manual kind of guy because my experience of autos is very similar, I imagine, to many other manual lovers/auto haters here. That is of automatic transmissions in cheap cars or from the 80's and 90's. My first experience of a great auto was in my Dad's VW Touarag. It has a great 6speed auto with a nice enough manual mode, quick and smooth shifting as well as downshifts (with a blip of the throttle) while braking.

My other experiences have been in Merc's new 7 speed (!) auto in the new SLK which is a superb 'box and of course my C32 AMG Merc which has a 5 speed box. See my thread about my C32 for more info but the 'box in this is sweet. Obviously not as involving as a manual but drives as good as one. The torque converter hooks up very quickly.

Someone gave an example of overtaking. In a manual you you can downshift before you make the overtaking manoeuvre and it will be much more responsive and smoother. The person was accurate about the problems with an auto but this only applies to old or crappy auto transmissions. In a car with a "manual" over ride auto (tiptronic, speedshift, speedtronic etc), one can shift the 'box down a gear or two and it will be in a lower gear read for you to plant the throttle and overtake. My Speedshift box in the Merc has a mode where you hold the stick to the left for a second or so and it will downshift to the perfect gear for overtaking from your current speed. All you do is put your foot down and it goes, no waiting for the kick down to happen.

Another generalisation being made; if a car has shift buttons/paddles on the steering wheel, this does not mean it has a robotisied manual/sequential manual gear box (Selespeed, Ferrari F1 gearbox, DSG). Many autos also have buttons/paddles on the wheel but still have a torque converter gear box (most famously, Porsche's Tiptronic).

I drove an Audi TT 3.2 with a DSG box a month or so ago. DSG is the future of robotisied manual gearboxes. Where as the normal robotisised manuals (like Selespeed and Ferrari/Masarati F1) are quite jerky on the upshift and not very nice around town (Have driven an Alfa Selespeed [though it was not very good] but unfortunately not a Ferrari F1 ), the DSG is extremely good. For those of you that don't know too much about it, DSG is a normal manual gearbox which is controlled hydraulically and primarily, has two clutches. Say you are accelerating in 2nd gear. The DSG with have one clutch engaged with 2nd gear but then the computer will know that you are accelerating and guesses that you will next change into 3rd gear. It will have 3rd gear ready but the 2nd clutch (which is hooked up to the guessed gear) will not be engaged. When you shift (Paddles or stick) the 1st clutch with disengage and basically at the same time the the 2nd clutch will engage performing a seamless upshift.

For downshifting, the engaged clutch will disengage immediately, the throttle will blip to match the revs and the 2nd clutch will engage smoothly. It is a fantastic system and everyone should read more about it as I am sure it is explained better elsewhere.

So my opinion is this;
- I love manual gear boxes for there control and driver involvement
- Newer automatics are very, very good and anyone that hasn't driven one should go and take a decent car with a good modern sporty auto box for a drive
- Most robotisied manuals still have a long way to go with smoothness and usability, except for DSG which is very nearly there.
- People should use whatever type of gearbox they want

Jeb

[SimeyTheLimey]

Originally Posted by Troll

I somehow doubt that the Army taught you to change gears in a skid!

As a matter of fact, they did. In a J turn you stop, quickly back up and throw the car into a reverse 180 degree skid. Half way through you change from reverse to drive so that when you have completed the skid you are moving forward in gear. In a manual transmission, you put it directly into second, again, while you are sliding. But in a manual it is quite hard to do because of the amount of wheel turning involved to put it into the skid, and because when you reengage gear it is very easy to stall. This maneuver is used to get away from an ambush, so stalling generally means getting killed.

In other skids, you often just dump the clutch rather than risk stalling. For example, in a bootleg, or a half-bootleg. The other name for a bootleg is a handbrake turn. A half-bootleg is used to block a road when you are the chase vehicle in a motorcade. You pull out in front of the principal, put yourself into a 90 degree skid, and come to a halt. Then you start shooting until you die.

OK, they didn't just teach us that kind of extreme stuff. Most of the school was just an advanced safety school. What you described above sounds like the technique they taught us to handle half-on, half off the road when you go into a skid on a curve. You are right, it takes a lot of practice to adjust the throttle during the maneuver. But I don't think it is particularly harder in an automatic. I've done it for real in snowstorms in both manual and automatic cars. In fact, it saved me from an accident once in a snowstorm in Germany. It's the same whether you are in a manual or an automatic -- if you know what you are doing.

The skid exercise I was referring to was the one where you drive over a panel in the ground that kicks your rear wheels to the side. It puts you into an uncontollable skid and it is a much more extreme example than the one you are describing. It's basically a maneuver disigned to simulate something that generally happens when you hydroplane at high speed, such as on a highway, or when you hit an object or are hit by a car that puts you into a high speed skid. Most people will lose control and go into a complete 360 or more degree skid in those situations. That's why you prevent it by immediately turning the wheels to full lock, and then immediately all the way back again. It's very counterintuitive, but it works.

During the skid when you are performing the full-lock wheel turns, you will lose speed. When (hopefully) you regain control, you will need to select a lower gear than the one you were in when you entered the skid. Otherwise you will stall. So yes, you do have to change gears. It's after most of the wheel-turning, but still when you are in the danger zone. It's definitely better to have both hands on the steering wheel at that time.

The practical upshot is that I saw that a very experienced set of drivers on a closed course where they knew exactly what was coming stalled the engine frequently in the manual transmission cars, never in the automatics. A driver in a real world incident is even more likely to do so because the driver won't be anticipating the emergency. Stalling in an emergency is a bad thing. You lose the power to the wheels, your power steering, and your power brakes, and consequently, a lot of the control of the vehicle. An automatic won't risk this as much, and thus is safer.

[macroy]

A great piece on clutchless manuals:

http://www.autozine.org/technical_sc...ear_manual.htm

DSG = 8 millisecond minimum shift time!!!!??!

[Troll]

Originally Posted by SimeyTheLimey

As a matter of fact, they did. In a J turn you stop, quickly back up and throw the car into a reverse 180 degree skid.

Yeah, okay. If you're showing off to your buddies or involved in a high-speed chase, you might do those kinds of moves. Not many of us are ever going to do that.

Originally Posted by SimeyTheLimey

That's why you prevent it by immediately turning the wheels to full lock, and then immediately all the way back again. It's very counterintuitive, but it works.

I've never understood why people think this is counter-intuitive. If you've oversteered yourself into a skid, it seems entirely intuitive to me to back off the steering by turning into the skid. I found driving a front wheel drive car through a skid much more counter-intuitive.

Originally Posted by SimeyTheLimey

During the skid when you are performing the full-lock wheel turns, you will lose speed. When (hopefully) you regain control, you will need to select a lower gear

Agree with you there. It's not during the skid that you change though; it's once you have got the car under control.

A car is never going to stall while it's skidding. The flywheel can spin the wheels when there's no resistance from the tyres. It's not going to stall until it's pretty much stopped. Even in 4th gear, a manual will only stall when it's stopped.

In a real world situation, if the car stalls at the end of the skid, that's not normally a huge problem. It just means you can't race away from the skid. Most normal people are in no state to speed away after losing control of a car anyway. Sure, it's dangerous if the car is stalled in the middle of the road, but you can stall an automatic too. In fact, there's another example of why an auto is dangerous. You can't push start and automatic.

I've done some track racing and lost control of a car or two in my life. Also aquaplaned once at 130km/h in an old Golf and lost it completely. In all of those situations, despite not having a clue what had happened during the incident, I found myself sitting wth the clutch in and the engine idling. It's not something you have to think about. On the skid pan, not one person on any of the courses I've ever done could get around a track or through a slalom course faster in an automatic than they could in manual.

than the one you were in when you entered the skid. Otherwise you will stall. So yes, you do have to change gears. It's after most of the wheel-turning, but still when you are in the danger zone. It's definitely better to have both hands on the steering wheel at that time.

The practical upshot is that I saw that a very experienced set of drivers on a closed course where they knew exactly what was coming stalled the engine frequently in the manual transmission cars, never in the automatics. A driver in a real world incident is even more likely to do so because the driver won't be anticipating the emergency. Stalling in an emergency is a bad thing. You lose the power to the wheels, your power steering, and your power brakes, and consequently, a lot of the control of the vehicle. An automatic won't risk this as much, and thus is safer.[/QUOTE]

[SimeyTheLimey]

Originally Posted by Troll

I've never understood why people think this is counter-intuitive. If you've oversteered yourself into a skid, it seems entirely intuitive to me to back off the steering by turning into the skid. I found driving a front wheel drive car through a skid much more counter-intuitive.

It's not the steering into the skid that is counter-intuitive. It's the part where you immediately crank the wheel all the way to full lock just as you are beginning to enter into the skid. You don't think you need to go that far, but in fact, you do in order to catch the car before it goes out of control.

Our normal instincts are to steer reactively, not in anticipation and it is also counterintuitiuve to turn the wheel that far when you are moving at speed. You want to wait to see how much steering you need and make a less extreme correction. But if you do that, the skid will pass the point of no return faster than you can control it.

That's why they teach you to react automatically with a drill. Don't try to drive it out, just react with the drill. Go hell-for-leather with a full lock from the beginning cranking that wheel over just as fast as you can, and then crank it back again, and keep doing that until you have the fish-tailing under control to the point where you can use less extreme countersteering. It really does work, but even with this technique, you have to be damned quick. It's a two hands thing.

[pooka]

Originally Posted by jebjeb

Another generalisation being made; if a car has shift buttons/paddles on the steering wheel, this does not mean it has a robotisied manual/sequential manual gear box (Selespeed, Ferrari F1 gearbox, DSG).

I realize this. My point wasn't that "no stick==automatic" but that transmissions were in fact evolving and that new technologies will more than likely replace/enhance human control. That is all. Now everyone can continue with the debate.

Some guys like to grip and work stick.

Some prefer that someone/something does it for them.

[Troll]

Originally Posted by SimeyTheLimey

It's not the steering into the skid that is counter-intuitive. It's the part where you immediately crank the wheel all the way to full lock just as you are beginning to enter into the skid. You don't think you need to go that far, but in fact, you do in order to catch the car before it goes out of control.

Ah. Yes, I think that is pretty counter-intuitive although I've never had training to simulate someone trying to run me off the road. In the situations I've been in, small corrections are normally enough to catch the car. Obviously, the quicker you catch it, the less correction you need. Rarely have I ever need full opposite lock. Of course, in the situations you're talking about, where the back of the car is pushed sideways suddenly, full opposite lock is the only thing that might save you. In my experience, most people are going to lose the car as a result of over-correcting rather than not applying enough opposite lock the first time round but again that's in a situation where they lose control of the car without being pushed. So many times, I've seen people counter the initial slide only to put it into a spin in the other direction.

In Europe, most cars are front wheel drive anyway so the whole opposite lock thing is only really relevant if you get hid in the back from the side. If you think manual boxes are outdated, I'm sure you're against RWD right?

[SimeyTheLimey]

Originally Posted by Troll

Ah. Yes, I think that is pretty counter-intuitive although I've never had training to simulate someone trying to run me off the road. In the situations I've been in, small corrections are normally enough to catch the car. Obviously, the quicker you catch it, the less correction you need. Rarely have I ever need full opposite lock. Of course, in the situations you're talking about, where the back of the car is pushed sideways suddenly, full opposite lock is the only thing that might save you. In my experience, most people are going to lose the car as a result of over-correcting rather than not applying enough opposite lock the first time round but again that's in a situation where they lose control of the car without being pushed. So many times, I've seen people counter the initial slide only to put it into a spin in the other direction.

In Europe, most cars are front wheel drive anyway so the whole opposite lock thing is only really relevant if you get hid in the back from the side. If you think manual boxes are outdated, I'm sure you're against RWD right?

This particular technique wasn't especially directed against being run off the road. I suppose it might work if someone tried to kip you, but that wasn't really the point. It was just designed to simulate and number of situations where you get a rear wheel skid. The school I went to gave that part of the course to their civilian students. Here is the web site for the school that taught us. We basically got the regular civilian Sicherheitstraining plus a little extra that they only teach government employees.

You are right that the technique I described can put you into a slide in the opposite direction. That's part of the training too. All you do is the same thing in reverse. It's easier to do than to describe. I don't think that particular technique depends on whether the car is front or rear wheel drive. I did it with large rear wheel drive cars, and a smaller front wheel drive car (an Audi 80). The technique is the same.

I personally prefer rear wheel drive to front wheel drive, unless you give me four wheel drive like my partner's A6 Quattro. Rear wheel drive cars have steering with a wider range. Otherwise, it is mostly just because I am used to rear wheel drive cars.

[Kevin]

Originally Posted by suvsr4terrorists

Fine with me if you don't care, grandma. But even if you don't give a ****, you shouldn't say "I don't see how anyone could ever want a manual it's like going back to fred flinstone" or something along those lines when you have read the benefits of a manual= more control, better performance, and better MPG.

- Rob

Correct. I think some people just don't understand the attraction to a manual gear box.

[suvsr4terrorists]

Boobies.

[Kevin]

[Fyre4ce]

Originally Posted by SimeyTheLimey

I learned to drive with a manual, but I don't think I'd ever go back. Unless you are a racing driver, manual transmission makes as much sense to me as a manual choke. There is no reason on a modern car why the driver should be worrying about mechanical functions under the hood. It's an automobile, not an engineer's project. Next we'll be going back to manually advancing the spark.

Interestingly, European cars generally came with manual chokes a couple of decades after ordinary American cars came equipped with automatic ones. I heard the same justifications well into the 1980s about how manual chokes were superior to automatic, when in reality the cars being sold simply had stripped down specifications to keep the cost down. It's amazing how people will accept inferior technology if you convince them that wrestling with it makes them somehow smarter. But I suppose, that's how Norton makes its fortune with Microsoft products.

Manual transmissions:

-are lighter
-are more efficient
-are less expensive to buy
-are less expensive to own
-give better gas mileage

than automatics. That's why they're superior. I also happen to think they are more fun to drive, but that's just me.

Modern engines with electronic fuel injection do not have chokes.

[sek929]

Originally Posted by strictlyplaid

Okay. Go you.

Though Ca$h can be a bit harsh, slowing down with the engine is an awful idea. Brakes were invented for stopping the car and are a HELL of a lot cheaper to replace than the clutch/tranny.

Slowing down to the appropriate speed to be in for that gear is fine since the clutch is already engaged but simply downshifting to slow down is stupid, a combonation of slight braking and feathering the clutch slighty is a far better approach.

[SimeyTheLimey]

Originally Posted by Fyre4ce

Manual transmissions:

-are lighter
-are more efficient
-are less expensive to buy
-are less expensive to own
-give better gas mileage

than automatics. That's why they're superior. I also happen to think they are more fun to drive, but that's just me.

Modern engines with electronic fuel injection do not have chokes.

Obviously modern engines with fuel injection don't have chokes. Did you think you were pointing out something I didn't know?

I'm just pointing out that up to the day chokes became obsolescent I heard (in England) the same arguments why manual chokes were better than automatic chokes that had long been standard in the US. The received opinion was that they were better, more fuel efficient, less expensive to buy, less expensive to own, and lighter. The same reasons you give for driving a manual. Of course, in reality it was just that ordinary European cars of the 1970s and 80s were relatively underequipped relative to US cars which for had automatic chokes for at least 20 years. I just find it amusing that people will accept inferior technology if they are told they are better than others who use it. Xenophobia and self-esteem trumps logic.

In fact, what should be fairly obvious to all is that modern cars are not optimized to be as light as possible, nor as efficient as possible, nor as cheap as possible, nor as fuel efficient as possible. These are things that are compromised in favor of comfort. And since most people like their cars comfortable, they want the equipment that makes them comfortable. That's why they have all those heavy, non-fuel efficient accessories like air conditioning, automatic climate controls, stereos, power seats, power windows and sunroofs, and so on. I'm not convinced that suddenly everyone is a purist on this one issue. I think that people who like to think of themselves as being purists drive manuals it just makes you feel better than others. It's an entirely psychological rationalization. And perhaps one I understand as a former manual transmission zealot myself.

Anyhoo, I drove manuals for years before I ever owned an automatic. I gave them up not only because I discovered that automatics are a lot more capable than popular wisdom accepts, but also because where I drive manual transmission is a pain in the neck. Manuals are fun on a racetrack, but don't suit the way I actually drive my car day-to-day in a congested area. I think that is why most people prefer automatics. It's not because they are bad drivers or somehow lacking your superior wisdom. It's because they drive for convenience, not for an ego boost.

[Link]

Heh, I like driving the automatic just fine, unless I was on some boring strip of freeway and there wasn't a car for miles, or I wanted a race car -- naah an automatic will do fine!

Then again, I suppose I've got it all wrong.. I couldn't give a crap where my car was made (as long as it seems well built for me), or what badge was on the front; Since I have to go to SF every now and then, and it's busy enough out here, I'm not one to drive a stick, though I could probably do it with little trouble (my dad taught me how back in the good ole days)... just not my kinda thing ya know?

I don't give a crap about cruise control or butt warmers, just show me a car with AC/power locks (gosh I hate those cars where you have to unlock all the doors manually), and MAAYBE power windows (not a big deal really).. and I'll be cool with it A friend of mine is a real car-feature-dork, he bitches/gripes about climate control and all those funky buzzwords lol...

Safety features = good.. in case of one of those days when someone does something stupid (or I do something stupid), don't catch it, or can't escape it. Damn. After having seen many car accidents though, I'm not really one for "I know what I'm doing" style driving.. If you want to do 85 in the fast lane and wizz between cars and stop lights to get there 5 seconds later, go right ahead.

I'd love to find some kinda school out here that gave ya some practice with these really crazy fields/tests though, it's always good learning new things.

[Kvasir]

Umm, just to chime in - am I a superb driver, no, not necessarily (although I think I have pretty good behind-the-wheel skills). I have 26yrs of driving under my belt (9 owned cars, at least over 3/4million road miles), without so much as a traffic ticket (okay - one, gliding through a stoplight, in a , literally, 2 stoplight town). I currently own a 1999 Chev. Cavalier, 5-Speed manual (only one of my cars was an automatic, and I dumped it as soon as I could afford something with a stick).

For me, it's just about the joy/fun of driving (and I often drive 500+ mile trips, several times a year, and I do love driving an automobile - I'm one of these who hates being a passenger, with a passion - give me the wheel!). Automatic trannies are just boring to drive. I love manual shift transmissions - they are just so much more enjoyable to drive. And I know I'm good with it.

I'll never buy an automatic (and I've been stuck in traffic on the Jersey Turnpike, parked on the cross-Bronx expressway, watching the clouds float by in Seattle) - manual tranny for me all the way - it's the only way to drive.