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
Automotive News & Views The Future Of The Manual Transmission
5809 messages, Last post on Dec 03, 2009 at 12:30 PM
You are in the Automotive News & Views Forum. Your Hosts are steve_ & claires
|
|
|---|---|
|
Replying to: boaz47 (Sep 28, 2008 3:39 pm) While I can afford to buy gasoline until it gets much more expensive than it is now (and have, in England), I'm not interested in throwing money away. This appears to be a concept you find difficult to understand, but if I can get 28.1 mpg in car B vs. 20.3 in car A, that's a good thing. Now car C (2 or 2.5 litre TDI diesel w/ a six-speed) that delivers 40.2 mpg is what I'd really like, if I could buy one in North America. The California greenies have made extremely efficient diesels (that have been available in Europe for a decade or so) nearly impossible to acquire on this continent. Go figure.
|
|
|
Replying to: cdnpinhead (Sep 28, 2008 4:36 pm) I can't seem to find a quick link comparing emissions between the US and the EU. |
|
|
|
|
that you're one of neencanpoops that likes to text-message while he drives? Is that what's setting you off like this, the fact that I called it on all of those who text while driving? Yikes, boaz47, it's simple. Do you read my posts? I said I have bought a '08 Lancer GTS with a CVT automatic. Not a 5-speed manual that gets better ghastly mileage, that I originally set out to buy in my Lancer GTS. Still with me? Yes, a CVT automatic with paddle shifters. Because ghastly mileage doesn't rule my concerns. Got It yet? Hope so.  Not the more gas-economical 5-speed stick. And I mentioned that I feel that driving as much as I feel like is OK with me, as long as we pay for the ghastly we use, and not steal it. Still following along? Notice that I said I bought the less-economical choice for trannies in my Lancer GTS? And I agree that one should feel free to use ghastly as they need for long trips if they want? Notice a pattern here? What is sticking the wrong way in your craw? If you're intent on rattling my chain you're gonna have to start making sense, cause it doesn't seem to be workin'. And I look at my driver's information center to see my current ghastly mileage because I can and I find it interesting what know where it stands. Do I hang on that information like pollsters wanting to know who's out ahead in the Gallup Poll now, McCain or Obama? Nope, I don't. Sheesh, using your logic, boaz47, you would also feel like a person who drives a Hummer or a large GM pick-em-up truck also doesn't care to know how many miles are on his Hummer's engine overall? Using fuel up like Dennis Rodman applies tattoos and not wanting to know how many tats overall he has on his body? Why, that's un-American! I want to know because it seems everyone in America since the Pinto and Vega days wants to know how much fuel they're using. And, once again, it's cheaper to fly on a jet somewhere than it is to drive. Most people aren't gonna drive long distances for fun and travel on the road, like we used to. This whole thing has been automatically stifled by the dorky futures-traders and the greedy oil barons(right guys, you really do need to be charging over $3.00/gallon still, I know, to recoup exploration costs for the masses  ). So, no worrying about it, there's automatic safeguards in place. And, yes, boaz47, I still feel like it's OK to go on long driving trips on vacation if we feel like it. It's a privilege of ours. like getting our driver's license. Until a politico lashes out at us all and mandates a limit on individual fuel use, we're free to ride. I'm gonna put some Foghat Live II on the platter and go see the Grand Canyon, then head up north to my homeland, and see my relatives in Seattle. Go for it!  Just kidding...I'll probably fly over there.  Because I can. Rock on!
|
|
|
Replying to: iluvmysephia1 (Sep 28, 2008 5:46 pm) As long as you see both types of useage as a right you are consistent. And as long as you conceed that if you can use as much fuel as you like there is nothing wrong with everyone jumping in their Hummer to commute. While your post was a slight back pedal earlier it sounded like you were in total agreement with cdnpinhead when he said: Well, I do weekend drives several times a year and often extend business trips a day or two on one end or the other, just "to burn gas for two or three days, just because". . . I like to. And, yeah, I can. Anyone who doesn't like it can stuff it. That sounds just a bit feckless to me but I am trying not to judge. And I won't be texting in my car till they have a voice command for texting. The only thing I was pointing out was some have suggested that manuals had a major fuel useage advantage and I had to question how that was relevant to anyone who drove as far and as often as they felt like? |
|
|
Replying to: boaz47 (Sep 29, 2008 11:27 am) Voice commands for texting? Wouldn't it just be easier to make a phone call? 
|
|
|
Replying to: kyfdx (Sep 29, 2008 11:40 am) Not at all. Unlike a kid who sends text messages just to kill time we adults text because you can't always get the person you want to get in touch with at the time you need to. So you type a text and send it and whenever that person is available the message goes through. You only need a few seconds to either send or receive a text so if you are going in or out or an area with questionable reception it still works. An example: You know of an accident on the 101N, Hollywood freeway in Downtown LA. You get home and it is 3:30 PM. You know you have a friend that will be leaving work at 4 PM and he gets no reception in his building or area during the day. You can wait till 4 and try to catch them before they get in the car and tell them to take another route or you can send a text and it will be delivered as soon as that friend walks out into an area where he gets even one bar. It is a great tool when used properly. I use it most when I have friends over seas. I can text them even if it is midnight where they are. They will receive it when they get up and only pay the texting charge as opposed to 10 buck a minute to talk. And no I don't try to text while driving. |
|
|
Replying to: boaz47 (Sep 29, 2008 11:27 am) Well it might come down to how painful the choice made was, or it might come down to best value. So, for instance, I insist on wearing Levi 501 jeans, however I also will try to buy them at the best possible price, or, I enjoy driving down to Cape May, and have not changed how often I do so, however $2.00 a gallon is still different from $4.00. I'm lucky (or foolish) enough that my choices are not proscribed. In my case, economy was not a factor with this particular manual tranny, though it might be with another vehicle, bought for another purpose.
|
|
|
Replying to: ny540i6 (Sep 29, 2008 1:37 pm) In addition it is inconsistent to complain about SUVs and Full size pickup trucks with their automatic transmissions being "un-necessary and wasteful if you indeed believed we had a right to drive just for the pleasure of driving and because we as individuals can afford it. My origional contention was that the weekend family drive has fallen out of favor due to the cost of fuel and how using fuel just because has become politically incorrect. I just wonder if the post that included the idea that they drove as many miles as they wanted and burning just as much fuel as they wanted could be supported as being responsible in view of how much foreign oil we import today? I wonder how such a philosophy would apply if every driver felt the same? But I should appoligise to cdnpinhead and Iluve for injecting this into this topic. The future of the manual will be effected by the type of vehicles we will have offered to us far more than what we might prefer. As an example if Nippon wanted the new 5 door Yaris he has posted about in the small car forum his only option is a automatic. Toyota doesn't seem to feel a manual is necessary at this time for this car. |
|
|
Replying to: boaz47 (Sep 29, 2008 3:27 pm) My origional contention was that the weekend family drive has fallen out of favor due to the cost of fuel and how using fuel just because has become politically incorrect. I just wonder if the post that included the idea that they drove as many miles as they wanted and burning just as much fuel as they wanted could be supported as being responsible in view of how much foreign oil we import today? I wonder how such a philosophy would apply if every driver felt the same? As much as it pains me to say this I must agree with you.... There is often an inherent hypocrisy in attempting to balance the enjoyment of an activity with the social responsibility... and there is also a blindness when I sit in my overpowered V8 car and scoff at the guy driving the V8 pickup because the bed is so clean... I do believe that a shift is happening, slowed somewhat by the retreat (temporary?) in the price of gas. My concern though, is that much of the shift has been for economic, rather than "societal good" reasons; we care about "foreign oil" because it is expensive, and because "they" could always jack the price, we care about more economical vehicles because they are cheaper to run, not because we REALLY believe the planet is in peril etc.
|
|
|
Replying to: ny540i6 (Sep 29, 2008 4:17 pm) I also want 30 MPG city, 80 MPG Hwy. '87 Mustang If this guy can do it, why can't any of the global manufactures??? I know it's a stretch but I am sure we are advanced enough to get this done. Regards, OW
|
|
You are here:
Forums
Automotive News & Views The Future Of The Manual Transmission
New? Join Now!
Forum Tools
Search Forums
Browse by Vehicle
Browse by Board
Browse by Topic
Today's Chats
