Save the manuals?

[Crash Bandicoot]

All for it but making cars is expensive and if the market doesn’t exist manuals will cease to exist. My preference for them falls into 3 categories. Love them for ultra cheap cars (mostly because you can eek out every drop of fuel and most manuals will outlast the car). Love them for light weight sports cars (e.g. Miata, Lotus and the like) because those aren’t about speed but engagement and it’s nice to shake hands with the car you’re flying through the twisties with. Love them for cheap “dumb” muscle cars like Challenger where it’s all about the engine note, the ludicrous acceleration and simplicity . For high powered euro stuff, >500hp mid engined space ships, and sedans like the M5 or RS6 give me a dual clutch any day. Faster on the track and more manageable with commuting.

 

[skyactiv]

There is approximately a 5% "take rate" when manuals are even offered on new cars. Just about all the reasons for owning one has been negated by today's modern transmissions.

Good riddance.

My wife had to go to an Audi dealer in Cleveland to find a new A4 Quattro with a stick. She vows to keep that car as long as she can.

 

[khittner1]

I learned to drive on MTs, and still own and drive a Dodge pickup ('95 Dakota) with a manual transmission. I've at least tried to teach my 20-something sons to drive the truck, but even though they can sort of do so, they have no interest. Someone called the MT the "millenial anti-theft system", and that pretty much nails it.

 

[CKN]

My wife had to go to an Audi dealer in Cleveland to find a new A4 Quattro with a stick. She vows to keep that car as long as she can.

Not trying to be sarcastic at all-but buying a Audi and vowing to keep it a long time is not a good strategy-due to the economics of both parts and service. A Mazda, Toyota,etc. (if a manual is even offered) would be a better choice IMHO.

 

[ecotourist]

I suspect the manual transmission/automatic transmission question has a lot to do with the price of fuel.

Small vehicles with small engines and manual transmissions (which make the most of a small engine) are found in high fuel cost countries. A few years ago we rented a car in France (a high fuel cost country). We had specified that we wanted a Renault Megane with a diesel engine and a manual transmission - we were going to be doing a lot of driving and we knew that fuel is expensive there.

When we got to the auto rental office, the agent said they didn't have a Renault Megane diesel with a manual transmission but they did have a Renault Megane with a gasoline engine and automatic transmission. That would have been a much more expensive vehicle to drive there, but what choice did we have? So we agreed.

But that car had a defective door lock mechanism so we wouldn't take it. "Would you take a diesel?" the agent sighed, effectively admitting he had had a Renault Megane diesel with a manual transmission all along.

It seems gasoline automatic cars are for tourists who don't know any better. And they keep their diesel manuals for local customers who know what fuel costs. That diesel got really good mileage and diesel fuel was much cheaper. That gasoline automatic would have increased our already significant fuel costs by at least a third.

 

[bdcardinal]

I drive my Mustang to work almost every day and very rarely do I wish I had an automatic. Now I did drive my truck today, hadn't driven it in a few weeks and I didn't wish it was a manual.

 

[Cdn17Sport6MT]

All for it but making cars is expensive and if the market doesn’t exist manuals will cease to exist. My preference for them falls into 3 categories. Love them for ultra cheap cars (mostly because you can eek out every drop of fuel and most manuals will outlast the car). Love them for light weight sports cars (e.g. Miata, Lotus and the like) because those aren’t about speed but engagement and it’s nice to shake hands with the car you’re flying through the twisties with. Love them for cheap “dumb” muscle cars like Challenger where it’s all about the engine note, the ludicrous acceleration and simplicity . For high powered euro stuff, >500hp mid engined space ships, and sedans like the M5 or RS6 give me a dual clutch any day. Faster on the track and more manageable with commuting.

I personally believe if smoothness and ultimate acceleration is what you want, then a well-considered conventional automatic transmission... like a ZF8 speed is really good. I WANT to like a DCT... but I do not think they have longevity, yet, because if you tend to downshift a lot, particularly at higher speeds, though they perfectly match gears-to-roadspeed - they most decidedly do NOT (internally) double de-clutch (doubleclutch). As such, they can be absolutely brutal on the synchro's. The robotized downshifts are lightning-quick and they REALLY make the synchro's work. With my 6MT in my Mazda6 - I always double-declutch down; much slower, to be sure, but absolutely "mechanically-sympathetic".

I WOULD consider a car with a DCT if I drove it from day-one. I would NOT be a "downshift-artist" with it.

In my stable of cars, I need an A/T car, for sure, and I would be lost without an MT car. I am almost 62 years old and I have liked MT's from 'way before I could get a license.

 

[nascarnation]

Back in the early 1980s, the US Army decided to go with automatics in all their vehicles because few recruits knew how to drive manuals and it wasn't a productive use of training hours teaching them how.

 

[ecotourist]

With my 6MT in my Mazda6 - I always double-declutch down; much slower, to be sure, but absolutely "mechanically-sympathetic".

I taught my wife to double-declutch to save on wear on the synchros in the winter. I notice that she now does it all year round.

For general driving I try to make my shifts as smooth as possible. The accurate term for these shifts is "wishing" the transmission into the next gear. Many years ago (in the 1960s probably) I read that limousine drivers for royalty would put a bottle on the floor and practice driving until the bottle wouldn't roll - perhaps an apocryphal story but it gives you the right image of what smooth means. And these guys were driving fast too.

I do run my vehicles up near red line from time to time, because I think it's good for them, but that's another department.

 

[rekit]

Something I had not thought of until I read a post on here about a WRX and hanging rpms. I guess most modern vehicles don't drop to idle for emission purposes, and ruins the manual shift experience.

 

[ecotourist]

Something I had not thought of until I read a post on here about a WRX and hanging rpms. I guess most modern vehicles don't drop to idle for emission purposes, and ruins the manual shift experience.

My BMW supposedly does that too, but I haven't noticed any decrement in shifting. There's a way to defeat it but I've never seen any need.

 

[Crash Bandicoot]

I personally believe if smoothness and ultimate acceleration is what you want, then a well-considered conventional automatic transmission... like a ZF8 speed is really good. I WANT to like a DCT... but I do not think they have longevity, yet, because if you tend to downshift a lot, particularly at higher speeds, though they perfectly match gears-to-roadspeed - they most decidedly do NOT (internally) double de-clutch (doubleclutch). As such, they can be absolutely brutal on the synchro's. The robotized downshifts are lightning-quick and they REALLY make the synchro's work. With my 6MT in my Mazda6 - I always double-declutch down; much slower, to be sure, but absolutely "mechanically-sympathetic".

I WOULD consider a car with a DCT if I drove it from day-one. I would NOT be a "downshift-artist" with it.

In my stable of cars, I need an A/T car, for sure, and I would be lost without an MT car. I am almost 62 years old and I have liked MT's from 'way before I could get a license.

You’re right I like the smooth torque converter auto in my truck I guess I was thinking as an enthusiasts car. I can’t see myself every doing anything more than leasing a low displacement high powered euro power sedan so I couldn’t care less about gearbox reliability to me those cars are like Range Rover/Land Rover products, lease cars only.

 

[ARCOgraphite]

Not trying to be sarcastic at all-but buying a Audi and vowing to keep it a long time is not a good strategy-due to the economics of both parts and service. A Mazda, Toyota,etc. (if a manual is even offered) would be a better choice IMHO.

Our Toyota 2005 Rav4 only lasted three years/ 58K miles with everthing major failing on it. And that was a Japanese built car.
Mazda has always been a third tier Japanese car manufacturer. Own one and you will see their flaws become apparent..

Ah, to be back in the mid sixties with GREAT american full size cars.

I do agree with your the Audi statement. Just by a good, long service contract - you'll need it.
Same with Bavarian Motoren Werke with exploding, poorly designed parts.

 

[CKN]

Our Toyota 2005 Rav4 only lasted three years/ 58K miles with everthing major failing on it. And that was a Japanese built car.
Mazda has always been a third tier Japanese car manufacturer. Own one and you will see their flaws become apparent..

Ah, to be back in the mid sixties with GREAT american full size cars.

I do agree with your the Audi statement. Just by a good, long service contract - you'll need it.
Same with Bavarian Motoren Werke with exploding, poorly designed parts.

While I respect your post comparing something made (by anybody) 15 years ago compared what is being made today is not a fair comparison. Most on here-including myself would disagree on Mazda, they are built great and are a cut above the other Japanese manufacturers especially in chassis dynamics.

 

[ARCOgraphite]

While I respect your post comparing something made (by anybody) 15 years ago compared what is being made today is not a fair comparison. Most on here-including myself would disagree on Mazda, they are built great and are a cut above the other Japanese manufacturers especially in chassis dynamics.

Rode in the back of my SIL new CX5. It was terrible. A few weeks before I rode in the back of of a Kia Sportage.
Very pleasant.
I've owned a few Mazda including a Mazda 6, Protege a couple Miata.
Agree on the good chassis dynamics (except a mid 90's miata I owned - terrible!)
Everything else was a failure waiting to happen.
Like the Mazda 6 split its intake "hose" made out of rubber in a cold winter. This on a 1 year old car.
Poor materials. It was due to engine torquing pulling on the hose.

But, I hate most all cars except My 1967 Chevelle SS 396 and my 65 Buick and my 1981 S10 v6.

My Wife's 1996 Subaru Impreza wagon with the 2.2L was a great car killed by a Box truck rear ending it.
If I was driving it it likely would have not had that accident. pull away if someone is about to rear end you!

I had to "dive" in the bushes once on my 2001 Stratus R/T when a car was coming over a hill at high sped into the setting sun.
I call that move, "Exit, Stage Right!" Thank you, Snagglepuss !
He rear ended a old Saab 99 hatchback in front of me - with those honeycomb bumpers- and accordioned that Saab up to the back seat pushing it into a ditch 200 feet away. Me, I got some shrubbery in the grill area.

But I digress. I'm sure the Mazda are right in there competing with Honda and Toyota.
You pick you poison.

- Ken

 

[wagsrk08]

Learned a MT in my 1970 Maverick with 3 on the tree! Have owned many since and currently my 2012 Tacoma is a MT. Still like an AT for heavy stop & go traffic. Back in 2002 went to Europe with a group of 50 co-workers and we were issued 6 Mercedes-Benz vans as our transportation vehicles. All were MT with the shifter located on center of the dash! Less than 10 of us knew how to drive them so I was pretty much a driver that trip and saw all the cool sites on our free time. I hear the younger in-experienced car thieves don't know how to drive them these days either.......

 

[tbm5690]

My next vehicle might be an Accord with the 2.0T and manual. One of the few remaining every-day drivers with a stick...I miss it and don't ever drive in stop-and-go, and I'm willing to wager that they will be utterly non-existent in mainstream cars in 10 years or less.

 

[TiGeo]

One of the issues I see with the "save the manuals" crew is this - unless you are going to go out and buy new cars with manuals, how do you expect manufacturers to continue to make them? Most folks buying manuals are driving older cars and tend to hang onto them (just my observation) which perpetuates this issue of manufacturers not wanting to continue to make them. Same issue in the "wagons for lyfe" community. "We want manual station wagons" then doesn't buy the ones available so they get rid of them and then they lose their minds. Can't have your cake and eat it too.

 

[edyvw]

One of the issues I see with the "save the manuals" crew is this - unless you are going to go out and buy new cars with manuals, how do you expect manufacturers to continue to make them? Most folks buying manuals are driving older cars and tend to hang onto them (just my observation) which perpetuates this issue of manufacturers not wanting to continue to make them. Same issue in the "wagons for lyfe" community. "We want manual station wagons" then doesn't buy the ones available so they get rid of them and then they lose their minds. Can't have your cake and eat it too.

Companies always have vehicles that they do not make money on. Vehicles do not serve as money making machines but image, perceptions machine which drives sale of other models as customers think they are getting piece of action in that more civilized, family oriented model.
Hyundai offered G70 with manual, and they were blunt that manual is there just as marketing. However, them offering good driving vehicle with RWD and manual draw attention on Hyundai big time.

 

[IndyFan]

I was so glad Jeep offered the manual in the newest version of the Wrangler. I have heard from FCA sources that the Wrangler's sales of manual transmissions is actually about 25%, which is huge in today's world. That would put them at 60k per year or so. Not a bad number.

I thought about the auto in my newest Jeep for a minute and my wife set me straight. "It isn't a Jeep if it doesn't have a manual transmission," she proclaimed. The 8 speed auto is VERY good. But the 6 speed manual is one of the best I've owned.

Here's what I've had with manuals: 1984 Chevette, 1986 Firebird, 1993 Jeep YJ Wrangler, 2006 Pontiac Solstice, 2008 Jeep JK Wrangler, and 2018 Jeep JL Wrangler. The Solstice probably had the best feel to both the clutch and shifter, but the Wrangler JL is pretty close. It is certainly the smoothest and quietest.

My Dad had Chevy Vegas, 2 Chevettes (including a 1982 diesel that got 60mpg), a 1980 Pontiac Phoenix with an Iron Duke that got 40mpg highway, and a late 80's Chevy S10.

When Motor Trend tested the new JL Wrangler with a pre-production unit in New Zealand, they stalled it quite a bit and blamed the clutch. I made a funny little YouTube video when I got my new one, which was one of the first few off the production line and poked them for it a little bit. (It is good natured and not malicious). A writer from Forbes.com wrote an article about the new Wrangler and interviewed me. He put a link to the video in there and the MT guys actually watched it. I said they were all millenials used to autos and paddle shifters and that they'd forgotten how to drive manuals. In an interview, someone asked an MT writer if he saw my video and he said yes. He laughed and said there was some truth to it. Lol!

Btw, the Jeep has 40k miles on it now, including quite a bit of off-roading and towing of a fishing boat. The clutch feels just like it did when new. Perfect. I've never stalled it, btw. My wife did, though. She tried to start out not knowing she was in 3rd gear and smoked the heck out of it. Ugggh. But it survived. My son has done some of his learning to drive a manual on it, too. He finds it easier than the 2008 JK.

Note: At about 700 miles, I put replaced the 33" tires with 35's, effectively making the final drive (4.10 gearing) taller. Still no stalling. And I've long ago disabled the Start/Stop. I hate it, and believe it puts unnecessary wear on the starter and engine. At the time I made the video, the Jeep only had just over 100 miles on it. I didn't really know how much I'd come to hate Start/Stop.