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
5807 messages, Last post on Nov 26, 2009 at 7:20 AM
You are in the Automotive News & Views Forum. Your Hosts are steve_ & claires
|
Replying to: tallman1 (Oct 14, 2008 9:49 am) My mom has bad knees (arthritis) so we had to get her an auto. It's much easier for her. No contest, to be honest.
|
|
|
Replying to: ateixeira (Oct 14, 2008 10:49 am) 
|
|
|
I agree that the manual has some advantages. But, it also depends on what kind of traffic you drive in. Is it leteral, mile after mile, stop/go? And up hill? Or is it generally moving at various speeds, with an occasional brief stop dead? And then some creeping? Mine is usually moving with sluggish pockets, some creeping, and a little bit of true stop/go. as noted, knowing how to drive a stick matters. No keeping the clutch held in. Either in gear or in neutral. saves wear on the left leg, and the clutch! Theoretically a manumatic can do the same thing, but I like the manual because you can keep it in a lower gear for cut/thrust driving. Plus, on the flats, you can rest both feet. The big problem with an AT is the damn creep. If you don't keep enough pressure on the brake, you bump into the guy in front of you. At least with a stick, it only moves when I tell it too! Even more than on the highway, I really prefer the stick for city driving. No getting caught in the wrong gear when ou have to punch it to get into a hole in traffic. So, IMO, the AT is simpler, but the stick gives you more control. and the E39 cupholders are a joke. That alone might be enough to get me to pass on one!
|
|
|
Replying to: tallman1 (Oct 14, 2008 11:31 am)  I have the opposite of what you would expect - my city commuter is a manual (93 Miata) and my weekend/trip family car is an auto (07 Sienna), mostly because that's the only way they come. Early Caravans came with manuals, though I'm sure they were rare. You can still get a Mazda5 with a manual, if that counts.
|
|
|
Replying to: ateixeira (Oct 14, 2008 12:22 pm) LOL! |
|
|
Replying to: stickguy (Oct 14, 2008 12:08 pm) I submit that LA may be the car capital city in the world or at least the US. No scientific proof of that but by numbers of cars and registered drivers, any many unregistered, it seems like it. Commuting is exactly stop and go. During the heavy rush hours it is nothing but stop and go. You can't let the clutch out and let it move along at whatever speed you can idle because 40 feet ahead they come to a complete stop and they stay that was for two to three minutes. Then they might move for 100 yards only to come to a complete stop again. If you happen to be unlucky enough to take the 405 north out of LA you have a very long uphill grade to add to your driving pleasure plus the stop and go. But the one comment I do agree with is that more and more kids are not being taught to drive a manual so the demand will decrease as they get into the market. If 90+ percent of the mom and dads drive automatics now why would we expect more manuals in the future? So if you are a mega car company like Toyota why wouldn't you offer a Yaris 5 door hatch as a commuter with an automatic standard? If you are a bean counter the question answers itself. And in this economy who else will people listen to? |
|
|
Replying to: boaz47 (Oct 14, 2008 2:15 pm) And, as someone brought up, I don't have to ride the brake during traffic like with an automatic. Most brake pedals are also far stiffer and tiring to press than your typical clutch.
|
|
|
Replying to: plekto (Oct 14, 2008 3:17 pm) With such a description of the advantages of a manual in heavy traffic you have to wonder why 9 out of 10 of the people driving next to you decided to spend the extra money on an Automatic? I have been on the 91 when it took more than an hour to gt from the 710 to the 605 I know traffic was at a stop more than every mile or so. But then I have never had a power brake unit that was harder to depress than a clutch. At least not one than had to move as far. The consumers seem to know what they want and if it were an election it would be a landslide. Do you ever wonder why manuals are in the minority? And lazy doesn't cut it because you don't get any exercise driving a car. |
|
|
|
| I come from the old school and have had manual transmissions in most of my cars and as a collector have owned more than I can remember, With a manual transmission I feel like part of the car but cars with an automatic just feels mushy and I have to use my brakes more in traffic. I think the reason most cars in the US have automatics is that a lot of people just can't drive a standard shift. One of my reasons for wanting manuals in my cars is when its to either replace clutch&p/p or rebuild a manual transmission,synchro's,bearings and gaskets can be done cheap and by most any mechanic BUT when its time to rebuild an automatic things are much different, My wife had a Nissan Pulsar Turbo that the automatic was needing help so I called a really good friend that ran a transmission shop to rebuild it.After trying to send me somewhere else I ask why he didn't want my business he said he didn't want to make me mad -long story short he said it would be 3k or more and then I understood.The car went away... | |
|
Replying to: plekto (Oct 14, 2008 3:17 pm) 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
