Driving a stick -- interesting but highly obsolete

[KrisZ]

Originally Posted By: SteveSRT8
geez, where do you buy tires?

My car wears 275/40/20 and I typically pay about 180 bucks for a really nice hi performance tire. I can buy cheapos for about 150 each.

And brakes are automated. Ever hear of 'brake assist'? How about ABS?

As for brake pricing, it can be ridiculous at the stealerships. My car can cost well over a grand (1500.00+) for all 4 rotors and pads installed. Yet decent pads are 100 bucks for all 4 wheels online, and I bought brand new Mopar slotted rotors for 80 bucks each.



Boy, way to miss my argument, I guess clutch jobs can only be done by the dealer; you can't shop around for better deals.

My point wasn't about how much exactly it costs to service specific things on a car, my point was that many people see the cost of clutch replacement as something they rather avoid (at least that’s the argument, even tossed in this thread), meanwhile they are OK with other parts of the car that cost AROUND the same as the clutch replacement and can wear out much faster than the clutch.

 

[brianl703]

My old car is still rolling with 230K on the original clutch.

 

[meep]

my hard-driven 2.2L legacy made it to 106,000 on the original clutch.

I've sold 2 mid-age vehicles, an accord, a crv, and one older volvo when the AT's started developing symptoms that I couldn't resolve after lifelong upkeep. Clutch, even dealer cost at 1k, was better than eating 3-4k on a car that was already pretty worn. so we kept driving the MT subaru, but ditched the entire AT vehicles while looking at their age/value in the face of a new trans.

 

[M1Accord]

Many Corvette are now equipped with an auto. All Vettes at my local dealership are auto.

 

[Challenger71]

It all comes down to personal taste and experiences in life. For me, after dealing with a blown out patella and having to wear a tibia cast on my left leg made driving a manual a nightmarish event for daily driving. Ever since that time I've switched to auto and have never been disappointed with the decision. There is fun to have with an auto and it may require some modification or clever thinking but from my purview it is just as fun as a standard. Newer cars come with an auto-stick and I'd opt for that feature without question. Also, as you get older you become much less interested in rowing when the transmission tells you to. It becomes more enjoyable when you are in control of the transmission shifts...full auto for when you dont feel like driving spirited or semi-manual without clutch action for times when you do. Either way driving for me is'nt considered a chore for me anymore.

 

[Vizzy]

Originally Posted By: BobFout
There is no replacement for actually being in control of the powerplant and vehcile. *I* choose the gear, *I* choose when to shift.

No frappa-moche-latte-burger-makeup-cellphone with a manual.
\


Not only that...

Manuals are

1) Cheaper to buy
2) MUCH cheaper to maintain
3) Have a longer life
4) Have less issues in general compared to slush boxes of ANY kind.

The only reason WHY automatics are so popular in the USA is because the marketing hacks can easily convince gulliable US consumers to accept almost anything whether it is rational or not. Fortunately the RoW isn't that dull!

 

[Ausfahrt]

Originally Posted By: M1Accord
Many Corvette are now equipped with an auto. All Vettes at my local dealership are auto.


That is a shame and a travesty.

 

[mpvue]

Originally Posted By: M1Accord
Many Corvette are now equipped with an auto. All Vettes at my local dealership are auto.

that is common and has been for quite a long time. try to find a 4 speed C3 for the late 70s, early 80s. most all are auto. most C4's I've seen also are auto (didn't help that the so-called 4+3 manual had durability issues)
the typical corvette buyer is 45-65 and doesn't want to bother w/ a clutch, he's all about the image.
also, many higher performance cars have very good automatics that handle the higher horsepower quite well, allowing the inexperienced driver to avoid wrecking the thing.

 

[Ausfahrt]

Originally Posted By: mpvue
Originally Posted By: M1Accord
Many Corvette are now equipped with an auto. All Vettes at my local dealership are auto.

that is common and has been for quite a long time. try to find a 4 speed C3 for the late 70s, early 80s. most all are auto. most C4's I've seen also are auto (didn't help that the so-called 4+3 manual had durability issues)
the typical corvette buyer is 45-65 and doesn't want to bother w/ a clutch, he's all about the image.
also, many higher performance cars have very good automatics that handle the higher horsepower quite well, allowing the inexperienced driver to avoid wrecking the thing.



You're right. The manufacturers are "dumbing down" their cars so that they can sell them to the American public that likes to mash the gas pedal when the road straightens out.

 

[weebl]

Jumping in a little later here. Several years ago, when our second child was due and we were planning on possibly having more kids and the ability to haul their friends and cousins around with them, and be able to tow a tent trailer, my wife and I decided to join the minivan crowd. It's not as bad to drive around as some would have it, but it is different than driving a car (especially one that's engaging to drive). Slushbox is the only option for minivans (in fact, seems to be for most vehicles, except for either some sporty models, econoboxes or niche vehicles).

At the time we made the move, I had a slushbox Protege, and my wife had a TDI Golf with manual. I never had the opportunity to learn stick to that point, but always wanted to. We decided on keeping the Golf, and so for me to be able to drive around, I had to learn fast.

With my wife teaching me, it was a nightmare. She was jumping down my throat at all my beginner mis-steps since this was her baby I was learning on. Eventually, we got her grandfather, a retired trucker, to take me out and teach me. With both his on the road instruction, and me learning the mechanics behind how a manual works, I learned in no time flat.

After getting past the learning curve, I found myself really enjoying driving manual, even if stuck in traffic. I had an extra degree of control I never did with automatics - remaining in lower gears as I work through curves or know I'll need the oomph of a lower gear in the city, not unncessarily downshifting, and most importantly, being forced to really feel the road surface condition and watch traffic so that I can choose the best gear. Definitely it improves safety and reduces driver inattention.

Now, as we've been without or Golf for a while (it sacrificed itself for our lives), and only driving around the slushbox van, I find myself pining to drive a manual again. We even began towing recently, and I found myself wanting a manual for yet another reason - on slight inclines at highway speed, the torque converter wants to unlock if I leave it in drive. To prevent the fluid overheating, I'm watching for this constantly, and shifting it into 4th so that it will be locked up in that gear (this tranny locks up in 3rd, 4th or 5th). With a manual, that isn't an issue - direct connection between the engine and tranny, and I'd have picked a gear to match the speed, load, traffic and conditions.

When my kids are old enough to learn to drive, provided I can still find a vehicle with a manual transmission, I will make sure they learn to drive one (and of course learn to change their own oil and other basic maintenance).

 

[LS2JSTS]

Originally Posted By: mpvue
Originally Posted By: M1Accord
Many Corvette are now equipped with an auto. All Vettes at my local dealership are auto.

that is common and has been for quite a long time. try to find a 4 speed C3 for the late 70s, early 80s. most all are auto. most C4's I've seen also are auto (didn't help that the so-called 4+3 manual had durability issues)
the typical corvette buyer is 45-65 and doesn't want to bother w/ a clutch, he's all about the image.
also, many higher performance cars have very good automatics that handle the higher horsepower quite well, allowing the inexperienced driver to avoid wrecking the thing.


The statistics I've seen indicate the typical Corvette buyer is a woman.

 

[wander2039]

Originally Posted By: Vizzy

Manuals are

1) Cheaper to buy
2) MUCH cheaper to maintain
3) Have a longer life
4) Have less issues in general compared to slush boxes of ANY kind.

The only reason WHY automatics are so popular in the USA is because the marketing hacks can easily convince gulliable US consumers to accept almost anything whether it is rational or not. Fortunately the RoW isn't that dull!


Never had a issue with any auto trans but have had to replace more than one clutch. Cheaper to buy yes but I bet to the next three auto and manuals are dead even.

As for myself I'll stick to auto's but I may try to con my old Festiva from my dad. It's a 5 speed. For my small commute it would work fine and the wife can drive the auto Festiva which would also serve as the family vehicle.

 

[Spyder7]

I learned how to drive the stick the hard way: after getting my license I interviewed for a job as a pizza delivery guy. The manager mentioned that the two cars they used (Geo Metros) were both sticks. At that point I'd only ever driven a slush box. He then asked if I knew how to drive a stick shift, and I naturally answered "of course." The next afternoon I got a call letting me know I was hired and asking if I could start that same afternoon. My answer? "Of course." I then had 5 minutes worth of over the phone instruction on how to drive it from a friend of mine.

By the end of that shift I knew how to drive a stick. After a week it was second nature. When I bought my first car it too was a manual.

Rest is history.

-Spyder

 

[rjundi]

I love driving manual transmissions if the vehicle is somewhat interesting to drive. My wife thankfully feels the same way.

In boring vehicles like Camry's and twins, pickup trucks, minivans, and non performance SUV's I don't mind automatics. I just view them as appliances then that you point and shoot.

 

[d00df00d]

The closest I've ever come to tolerating an automatic transmission was, ironically, in an E46 BMW 330i sedan (no sport package). Definitely the best automatic I've ever driven, next to the one in my Dad's 128i of course. The thing is, the 128i always left me pining for a clutch in a way that the 330i didn't. Not entirely sure why that is. Maybe because the 3 was less exciting overall...

 

[mpvue]

Originally Posted By: weebl
Slushbox is the only option for minivans (in fact, seems to be for most vehicles, except for either some sporty models, econoboxes or niche vehicles)...
when my kids are old enough to learn to drive, provided I can still find a vehicle with a manual transmission, I will make sure they learn to drive one (and of course learn to change their own oil and other basic maintenance).


that's why we got our mazda5. in some areas no one knows what it is, but it is available w/ a stick. I believe it's the only 6 passenger manual trans car in the US market.
we love it and I'm going to keep it as long as possible.

 

[ffracer]

Originally Posted By: oldmaninsc
Originally Posted By: Tornado Red
Originally Posted By: PeteTheFarmer
Originally Posted By: M1Accord
the technology is truly obsolete.

The physics still favors a mechanical clutch over a fluid coupling. The laws of physics are never obsolete.


Exactly right.


Well that may be, but a search of epa estimates might surprise you.
I used my wife's 2005 Camry for example. The 5 speed automatic get an estimated 31 highway. Anyone care to guess what the manual gets?


Anyone?


30 highway. Both 21 in the city.

(Off topic)In reality neither one of these numbers are accurate for us. When my wife drove it 12 miles each way to work all city driving, she got about 16-17 mpg (slightly less than my Grand Marquis.) On the freeway the Camry will hit 32 - 34.
One of my daughters is now driving this car to college - about 35 miles each way, about 60 percent city, 40 percent freeway. Over the last 3 months she has average between 26 - 27 mpg. This is filling up at the same gas station and even the same pump 99 percent of the time.

The old epa estimates for this car was 24/34 automatic, 24/33 for the manual. This is for the 2.4 L engine.
On the other hand, a 2005 Corolla w/ manual does 2 MPG BETTER than an automatic, of course realizing that the manual is a 5 speed, the automatic is a 4 speed.

I understand why some people like a manual transmission. Been there - done that. My point is that the blanket statement of "a manual transmission gets you better MPG" is not necessarily true anymore.


...and what is the 0-60 time vs. the mpg. There's your fuel savings. The EPA numbers should be posted with the acceleration numbers. If you took the manual and put in lazier gears, it would get even better.

The automatic gets what it gets, because of the lock-up top gear and slower performance. It is physics.

Car makers do the same thing in primarily manual markets to boost up the mpg vs. the sport model. The Chevrolet Cobalt XFE manual is a prime example.

 

[ffracer]

Originally Posted By: d00df00d
Originally Posted By: ffracer
CVTs aren't used in pro racing for the following reasons - outside of regulations:
1. They aren't as efficient in coupling vs. a clutch, especially on the high end - this alone kills it
2. The seamless shift concept has been done with software with clutches, so CVTs lose its only benefit
3. CVTs are not reliable with high torque applications

1. Really? It's just gears on the inside, same as any other transmission.

2. Eliminating shift time and drivetrain shock are only a small part of a CVT's benefit. The biggest benefit of a CVT is that it allows the engine to run in a narrower range of RPMs. Besides the obvious benefit of always running at peak power, this means the engine can be further optimized for that RPM range and produce a lot more power.

3. Not all race cars are high torque. Don't F1 cars produce something like 300 lb-ft?


1. Not all CVTs are the same. The Prius is all gears because it is a planetary gear set, but is effectively a CVT. This is reliable, but lossy at top end. The belt driven CVTs are not reliable for very high torque or very high rpms that are changing quickly or slip (going off road) in F1 or the like.

We have CVTs in road racing (F500)and they are fast, but again not optimal and are class spec'd to use parts from snowmobiles.

No road based car in SCCA uses CVTs or automatics even if they are available - they are slower overall.

2. When the power band is narrow, these work when the operating use is narrow and basically "locked" at peak rpm. However, in Formula 1 and sports cars, this is rarely the case, due to the wide rpm ranges, plus a driver needs to be able to have direct drive to control the rotation of the car at the limit.

3. Every race team in the world has tried literally everything and CVTs don't come out ahead. They were banned like 4wd, because of the sound, but also it to cut costs for a dead end technology. You can read about it in Racecar Engineering magazine among many others.

Even the automatic transmission used in the 1960s Chapparal Can-Am was a lossy device, because they needed the driver use the third pedal to control the movable (gasp!) rear wing!

 

[SteveSRT8]

Luckily for us we don't live on a race course.

But I do attend track events all over the country and my Slushbox has defended its honor quite well against some very expensive manual transmission cars.

I have a stick in my 'weekender' and wouldn't trade it for the world, but this issue is being painted as very black and white and it's actually infinite shades of grey!

 

[d00df00d]

That reminds me, I have to ask: Why do we still have the notion that manual transmission cars are faster at the track? It may have been true at one time, but I'm pretty sure that time has clearly passed.

Has it not been long enough or something?