Edmunds.com | Inside Line | Auto Observer Your Account | Help | Directory
You are here:
![[F]](http://a332.g.akamai.net/f/332/936/12h/www.edmunds.com/media/townhall/webxicons/site.gif){kind=small}
Forums
SUVs Honda CR-V 2001 - 2006 Honda CR-Vs
16152 messages, Last post on Nov 23, 2009 at 9:50 AM
You are in the Honda CR-V Forum. Your Hosts are steve_ & tidester
|
|
|---|---|
|
Replying to: drive62 (Jun 21, 2006 6:58 am) Following the same logic, we can say that since 60% of the US population is overweight, does that mean that being fat is the norm? Since majority of the US population has no clue about money and is in debt up to their ears, is that the norm? While the rule of majority seems to be what we have in this country, sometime the un-educated, or ill-educated majority does not know what is right and what is wrong. Like my dad has been saying for years: "If everyone else jumped off the bridge, would you too?" |
|
|
Replying to: drive62 (Jun 21, 2006 6:58 am) Manual trannies are cheaper, quicker, more fuel efficient, and more durable. All 4 of those things are important to me. That's a lot to give up. Oh, and you can jump start 'em.  Automatics are easier to use, but that's about it. Technology has narrowed the gap, but they are still not up to par. DSG is compelling, but that's very expensive, and with twin clutches I'd hate to see what that would cost to fix. Tone dialing is better than rotary in just about every way, there was no real trade-off. Power steering? For track cars, actually, yes! In fact NA Miatas without power steering are actually sought after for that reason. Also, hydraulic systems use up a lot of power, hence we see the new electronic power steering systems taking over that technology, especially as fuel economy becomes more important. Like I said, bad examples... -juice |
|
|
Replying to: ateixeira (Jun 20, 2006 11:04 am) |
|
|
Replying to: ateixeira (Jun 21, 2006 9:34 am) You mean push start them right? Manual trannies are cheaper, quicker, more fuel efficient, and more durable. Not necessarily. Since autos represent the bulk of the business, it's probably more expensive to design and manufacture sticks when it's all said and done. Further, since EPA testing has to be done for each engine/transmission combo and sticks represent about 5% of all sales, that cost has to be spread amongst fewer units. As for efficiency, most autos now equal or exceed their manual siblings. Durability - most autos go forever now. Quicker - if you know how to drive a manual it is. The only thing the stick has over the auto is driver participation. Soon I expect we'll be paying extra for that particular excitement. Don't get me wrong - I'm a manual lover. But we're a dying breed.
|
|
|
Replying to: ateixeira (Jun 20, 2006 11:04 am) |
|
|
|
|
Replying to: robr2 (Jun 21, 2006 1:29 pm) Not necessarily. Since autos represent the bulk of the business, it's probably more expensive to design and manufacture sticks when it's all said and done. Further, since EPA testing has to be done for each engine/transmission combo and sticks represent about 5% of all sales, that cost has to be spread amongst fewer units. As for efficiency, most autos now equal or exceed their manual siblings. Durability - most autos go forever now. Quicker - if you know how to drive a manual it is. The only thing the stick has over the auto is driver participation. Soon I expect we'll be paying extra for that particular excitement. Don't get me wrong - I'm a manual lover. But we're a dying breed. You are forgetting that it is the US phenomenon. The rest of the world still gets stick. So, the R&D costs are not the case here. And the 5% figure is for the US sales. The rest of the world is about 80-90% mauals. I never understood why manifacturers charge more for auto's. It is more of "because we can" logic. Either tranny costs money to make, but I am glad that most still charge extra for auto. Except Acura/Honda, they offer TSX with manual or auto at the same price. In fact, in order to get a manual CR-V you have to take the higher EX trim, over the lower cost LX. So, manual in the CR-V is the performance option, not the low cost option. Autos achieve similar fuel economy through taller final drive, which even further inhibits excintg perfomance that a Honda engine offers. If an auto and manual had the same gear ratios and same final drive, auto would be 20-30% less efficient. As far as paying more for stick, Corvette comes standard with auto, manual is an $800 option. Sad, sad, sad.
|
|
|
Yeah, I was disappointed that Mazda didn't offer a stick. I mean, the Speed6 even has a 6 speed, so you know it's right on their parts shelf. Come to think of it, the Speed6 *only* comes in a stick shift! rob: yes, I meant push start. Automatics have narrowed the gap, but I'd rather replace a clutch vs. having to rebuild an automatic, it's about 1/10th the cost. And in acceleration autos fall way behind, unless you're talking about DSG. -juice |
|
|
Replying to: blueiedgod (Jun 22, 2006 4:14 am) 
|
|
You are here:
Forums
SUVs Honda CR-V 2001 - 2006 Honda CR-Vs
New? Join Now!
Forum Tools
Search Forums
Browse by Vehicle
2010 Honda CR-V
Browse by Board
Browse by Topic
Today's Chats
