Is the manual transmission dying?

[rpn453]

Originally Posted By: Popinski
I'm glad that BMW is still selling a lot of their manual cars, especially the M cars. Audi too.


Us Saskatchewan boys are doing our part to support them! Two special-order B8 S4s with manuals have been purchased by my good buddies within the last two years! In both cases, there was a new MT S4 on the lot - excessively optioned for one, very basic for the other - but they chose to just order them exactly as they wanted and wait.

 

[rationull]

Originally Posted By: css9450

Read some of the automotive forums populated mainly by teenagers. Once they graduate from their mom's old automatic Camry into whichever Neon SRT4, Subaru STI, Civic Si, or Cobalt SS their forum is based on, and you WILL see this attitude.


Clearly. Taken in that context I agree, but I was thinking mainly of the BITOG crowd.


Originally Posted By: SteveSRT8
And he's right. Many on this site have extolled the superior skills required to drive a stick.

Ludicrous to us older drivers, we were raised on manual shift. I'm glad you like the experience, I'd have to agree as the baddest hoss in my stable is a six speed.


I guess I'm just not seeing it. Admittedly I haven't done a detailed survey searching these kinds of posts out. In a thread like this it just seems like a straw man to me.

This it in addition to the fact that the argument is framed (here and in the previous recent MT related thread) as an attack against defenders of synchronized MTs for "chest thumping", but is ironically preceded by a statements about how the poster learned on "real" MTs, and followed by the statement that "even my wife" drives a current MT. The whole thing reads like it's intended to distance those who support modern, synchronized MTs from those who know how to drive "real" MTs. That's the closest thing to chest thumping I've read in this thread.

I digress, though. This is not intended to be an attack so I hope it's not read that way. Just gets tiresome.

The MT does seem to be declining in many segments, and IMO part of the reason is that people are not learning as much these days. As fdcg27 mentioned, it is a *different* skillset that must be acquired and many are apparently apathetic or unable to acquire those skills. It's only fair for those passionate about "niche" to bring up the virtues of that niche. This applies to MTs just as readily as it applies to conventional oil, "simple cars" and to Crown Vics, to name a few other hotbutton issues full of "chest thumping" on BITOG

 

[rationull]

Originally Posted By: exranger06
Oh look, it's the 1,546 thread on BITOG of people complaining manual transmissions aren't available anymore.

I think we should create another forum section just for this topic so you guys don't keep cluttering up the Auto General Topics forum.


LOL! I agree. We should add a forum for this next to the CVPI forum. I think the section should be titled "Get off my lawn"

 

[rpn453]

Originally Posted By: rpn453
. . . It took him a few years and about 150k miles to take out 5th gear on his NV5600 . . .


I got some numbers mixed up in my head there. He was only at about 110k miles when that happened.

 

[Boatowner]

How about the fact that manuals get stolen less often?

 

[CarbonSteel]

Originally Posted By: IndyIan
Originally Posted By: 2010_FX4
Unless something has changed in the recent past, (at least for trucks) automatics have higher towing capacities than manuals.

Any idea why this is? Are they just worried about dummies burning the clutch on the boat ramp? Or just want to sell the automatic?
I tow a wee bit more than the Tracker is rated for and its only really possible with a manual. I can figure out how much HP is required to maintain speed, then I pick a gear that will allow the engine to provide it. Simple, with no torque converter slip or hunting for gears everytime the throttle twitches....

I guess at some point the automatics are getting smarter and will hold gears and lock the TC in every gear, but its still not as good as a driver who can see the road ahead.

I am stating that based on the owner's manual specifications that I have had from GM (1991-5.7L; Manual, 1992-7.4L; Manual, 1993-7.4L; Automatic, 2003-5.3L; Automatic), Dodge (1996-5.9L; Automatic), and Ford (1999-5.4L; Automatic, 2010-5.4L; Automatic) trucks that I have owned. In every case, automatics have a higher towing capacity. I will opine that a manual transmission loses a bit of momentum at each shift (disengaging the drive train) whereas an automatic continues without losing any momentum. In addition, the automatic probably places less thrust load on the rear axle, thus the drivetrain of an automatic sees less "shock", and lasts longer under a load thereby allowing the towing capacity to be increased.

However, I could working on a doctorate in bovine scatological hyperphasia regarding my thoughts...you will have to decide.

 

[morris]

its realy sad that chrysler did make good trans at one time, but would not later.

 

[rpn453]

Originally Posted By: 2010_FX4
I am stating that based on the owner's manual specifications that I have had from GM (1991-5.7L; Manual, 1992-7.4L; Manual, 1993-7.4L; Automatic, 2003-5.3L; Automatic), Dodge (1996-5.9L; Automatic), and Ford (1999-5.4L; Automatic, 2010-5.4L; Automatic) trucks that I have owned. In every case, automatics have a higher towing capacity. I will opine that a manual transmission loses a bit of momentum at each shift (disengaging the drive train) whereas an automatic continues without losing any momentum. In addition, the automatic probably places less thrust load on the rear axle, thus the drivetrain of an automatic sees less "shock", and lasts longer under a load thereby allowing the towing capacity to be increased.


The automatics may be more heavy-duty in some of those cases, or the manufacturers may just be over-compensating for a rev-limited clutch drop at maximum rear GAWR with a fully loaded trailer. When my buddy (different one) bought a Dodge 2500 in '03, he got the de-tuned Cummins with the NV4500. The engine was limited to about 235hp for that transmission. It was extra to get the 300hp/NV5600 combination at the time, even though you could get the extra power with the automatic. It was well known on the diesel forums that the automatic was too fragile to add much power while the NV4500 could fairly reliably handle 500hp yet, strangely, it was the NV4500 combination that was de-tuned.

There's no inherent advantage in capacity or durability. It all depends on how it's designed and built. My other buddy did have the damaged automatic built up by a performance shop and it has had no problem with the approximately 600hp/1200lb-ft that it has since been subjected to. The engine was the bottleneck after that; he melted the pistons shortly after fixing the transmission.

I think it is possible for a manual driver to be harder on a manual than a modern automatic that disallows neutral drops and goes into limp mode if it's overheating. But I think a manual driver can also be much easier on the drivetrain than with an automatic if he shifts smoothly and doesn't abuse it.

 

[TFB1]

The manual transmission has been slowly withering since Ford & Chevy started installing the first automatics in 1950 & 1951...

Will it ever completely die??? Probably not in any of our lifetimes(surely not mine)...

 

[kschachn]

I (more or less) taught my two teenage daughters to drive a manual transmission and it wasn't easy. My goal was to make it so they could drive any of our cars in a pinch, but as far as I know they have never driven the manuals except during "training".

Like was mentioned it takes a different mindset. My approach was that it is all about energy management, you have to think what is up ahead and how much energy are you going to need - like at a turn or stop, or getting on the freeway. You can't just mash down on the accelerator nor can you hit the brakes and then jump on the gas - you have to think about what gear you are in now and where are the RPMs and what are you going to need up ahead.

All in all maybe that wasn't the best approach because it never seemed to really sink in. Driving a manual transmission car is much more interactive than an automatic and I guess some people aren't interested in being that involved in the driving experience.

 

[kschachn]

This is also true for most manufacturers. Oh sure you can get the base version but forget about the second or third tier of trim. Once in a great while they have a "sport" version with a manual but not often.

Originally Posted By: sciphi

The issue is that many makers put the manual onto the base car, and then do not allow any options to be added to the MT version.

 

[rpn453]

Originally Posted By: fdcg27
Short answer, yes.
There is a feeling among the uninitiated that it's hard to drive a stick, and that they're awful in traffic.
While its really isn't hard, and you just use a different technique in traffic with a stick than most do with an automatic, a majority of drivers under fifty or so have never driven a car with three pedals, and therefore have no concept of how engaging and entertaining it is.
A pity for those of us who really enjoy and prefer a stick to an automatic, since demand, measured in sales volume, determines availability.


I think you either have to be dedicated to the concept and benefits of a manual transmission or have been simply stuck with one for awhile in order to even get to the point where you're completely comfortable with it.

I didn't know how to drive a manual properly when I got my Mazda3 in '04, but most automatics weren't very good at that time so it seemed like the best option. It was considerably faster, cheaper, and more fuel efficient than the optional 4-speed slushbox. But it took quite a while before I no longer felt clumsy operating it, and it was frustrating that entire time. With those gaps closing and few manual options, why would anyone who isn't already at the point where they enjoy it want one? They'd have to take someone's word that it will eventually become enjoyable. But that's not even true for everyone. Many people simply don't care either way once they're good at it, and many dislike it.

Someday, fully-automated cars will be common and us old Luddites will be among a minority who actually still want to operate the car ourselves. The younger generation will have never driven a car - many will have never seen anyone drive a car except on television - and they won't understand why anyone would want to do that when a computer can do it as well.

But we're still at the point where very few cars have automatics that can outperform a manual under a skilled driver, and those that can still have questionable reliability and often poor operation in certain city driving situations. So manuals aren't truly obsolete yet.

 

[Jarlaxle]

Originally Posted By: rpn453
Originally Posted By: IndyIan
Originally Posted By: 2010_FX4
Unless something has changed in the recent past, (at least for trucks) automatics have higher towing capacities than manuals.

Any idea why this is? Are they just worried about dummies burning the clutch on the boat ramp? Or just want to sell the automatic?


I'm surprised to hear this. Is this for smaller trucks? Not too many full size trucks have been available with manual transmissions lately. Dodge is the only one left, and they give the same towing capacities regardless of transmission. I don't know about the newer 6-speed Dodge automatics, but the 4-speeds from the mid-2000s were far less durable than the manuals. My buddy destroyed one of those 4-speeds in a single weekend while only chipped up to about 400hp/800ft-lb. It took him a few years and about 150k miles to take out 5th gear on his NV5600; the rest of the tranny still worked. That thing put out 500hp/1000ft-lb and saw heavy towing (12,000lb across the BC Rockies) and lots of 4WD clutch drops during drag racing. It's still on the original clutch.

On the other hand, my 5-speed '98 Pathfinder was only rated for 3500lb while the auto allowed 5000lb. In that case, the automatic must have been a beefier design than the manual.


Like many light-duty trucks (including Cherokees), the combination of a tall first gear and a marginal clutch (and the desire to avoid warranty claims from people that just don't know how to drive) limited the tow ratings. The Cherokee might have had the largest drop: 4.0/automatics are rated for 5000lbs, 4.0/5-speeds for only 2000. The 5-speeds coming with 3.07 gears (autos had 3.54's) probably contributed, in that case.

 

[CarbonSteel]

Originally Posted By: Jarlaxle
Like many light-duty trucks (including Cherokees), the combination of a tall first gear and a marginal clutch (and the desire to avoid warranty claims from people that just don't know how to drive) limited the tow ratings. The Cherokee might have had the largest drop: 4.0/automatics are rated for 5000lbs, 4.0/5-speeds for only 2000. The 5-speeds coming with 3.07 gears (autos had 3.54's) probably contributed, in that case.

I know for the 1992 and 1993 Chevrolet C3500s that I owned the 1992 had a 7.4L/5 Speed/4.10 axle and the 1993 had a 7.4L/4L80E Automatic/4.10 axle. The towing capacity on the 1993 was >2000 pounds more (despite the fact the 1992 was a regular cab and the 1993 was an extended cab). But, that was long ago and far away and the 1992 was my last manual transmission truck (but there were 2 C4 Corvettes with ZF 6 speeds that I wish I would have kept).

 

[IndyIan]

Originally Posted By: 2010_FX4
Originally Posted By: IndyIan
Originally Posted By: 2010_FX4
Unless something has changed in the recent past, (at least for trucks) automatics have higher towing capacities than manuals.

Any idea why this is? Are they just worried about dummies burning the clutch on the boat ramp? Or just want to sell the automatic?
I tow a wee bit more than the Tracker is rated for and its only really possible with a manual. I can figure out how much HP is required to maintain speed, then I pick a gear that will allow the engine to provide it. Simple, with no torque converter slip or hunting for gears everytime the throttle twitches....

I guess at some point the automatics are getting smarter and will hold gears and lock the TC in every gear, but its still not as good as a driver who can see the road ahead.

I am stating that based on the owner's manual specifications that I have had from GM (1991-5.7L; Manual, 1992-7.4L; Manual, 1993-7.4L; Automatic, 2003-5.3L; Automatic), Dodge (1996-5.9L; Automatic), and Ford (1999-5.4L; Automatic, 2010-5.4L; Automatic) trucks that I have owned. In every case, automatics have a higher towing capacity. I will opine that a manual transmission loses a bit of momentum at each shift (disengaging the drive train) whereas an automatic continues without losing any momentum. In addition, the automatic probably places less thrust load on the rear axle, thus the drivetrain of an automatic sees less "shock", and lasts longer under a load thereby allowing the towing capacity to be increased.

However, I could working on a doctorate in bovine scatological hyperphasia regarding my thoughts...you will have to decide.

I guess the potential for shock loading could be a problem. I don't shock the krhap out of my driveline with or without a trailer but I have driven with some people that do, and I guess for a manufacturer it could be a warranty issue.
I was also reading that manual trans are about 95-98% efficient so it can't be a heat issue as the hypoid rear diffs are like 90% efficient and they have less fluid and surface area than a manual trans so they would overheat before the manual trans would.
I guess having a tall first gear could be a problem but any truck or SUV I've been in with a manual usually has a very short 1st gear, plus a 4x4 has low range for stuff like a boat ramp.
Also a manual is easy to engine brake with as well, so it would be easier on the brakes on a long downhill grade.

 

[TFB1]

Originally Posted By: kschachn
I (more or less) taught my two teenage daughters to drive a manual transmission and it wasn't easy. My goal was to make it so they could drive any of our cars in a pinch, but as far as I know they have never driven the manuals except during "training".

I did same except the older daughter actually bought a stick Mustang for her second car(the first one I gave her was automatic)... After approx seven years she bought a 5speed T-Bird Turbo Coupe, sold that probably 10 years ago and has driven automatics since her husband sold his stick Ranger...

The younger daughter's first car was the same one as the older daughter but it had a different owner for about 15 months between them... With all the little things fixed and a fresh paint job of a different color, no one knew it was the same car... After a year or so I bought second 5-speed Mustang and taught her to drive it, she kept that one five or six years and sold it when her husband bought a new automatic Saturn cause he couldn't drive the Mustang...

 

[morris]

to:TFB1 you need to read about the first automatic trans. it was NOT ford or chevy. you kids are really sometime.

 

[TFB1]

Originally Posted By: morris
to:TFB1 you need to read about the first automatic trans. it was NOT ford or chevy. you kids are really sometime.

Originally Posted By: TFB1
The manual transmission has been slowly withering since Ford & Chevy started installing the first automatics in 1950 & 1951...

The message in my post was the LOW priced models now had a automatic, Cadillac, Olds, etc had automatics several years prior...

 

[PeteTheFarmer]

Dying but not dead. There remains a small percentage of people who stay with manuals for fun, cost, durability or some other reason. That won't completely disappear any time soon.

 

[sciphi]

Originally Posted By: kschachn
This is also true for most manufacturers. Oh sure you can get the base version but forget about the second or third tier of trim. Once in a great while they have a "sport" version with a manual but not often.

Originally Posted By: sciphi

The issue is that many makers put the manual onto the base car, and then do not allow any options to be added to the MT version.


For whatever reason the bean-counters allowed a manual transmission in my Cruze Eco. The car is a mid-level trim with the uprated engine, and I picked it off the lot. I'm glad that however it came about, it did, and that I was in the right place at the right time to snap it up.