The Future Of The Manual Transmission

andys120

to the list of cars that get better gas mileage with a twin-clutch than w a manual.

Per MotiveMag.com:

If you're all about 0-60 numbers, Porsche has a way to knock that time down by two tenths, to 4.9 seconds, but you'll have to sacrifice a pedal. Thanks to a launch control program and quicker shifts, the Cayman's dual-clutch transmission is able to make more from the same output curves. Not only that, it returns higher fuel-economy numbers. If you can stomach the idea of a two-pedal Porsche being the better car, PDK is a truly rewarding transmission.

ruking1

Ok sports fans, we are pushing FOUR ( 4), out of 500 odd models !!! Since this is a European model, it may/not hit the US market as described.

iluvmysephia1

I not only enjoy my Guess Who, Foghat, Tragically Hip and Drive-By Trucker CD's but, and it's a big butt, with an automatic CVT tranny in my '08 Mitsubishi Lancer GTS, I can switch those babies out while driving! Imagine that!

I am real strongly considering purchasing The Guess Who's 'Live at the Paramount', recorded live from Seattle's Paramount Theater in 1972. I had the LP album back in the 70's but have since gotten rid of that record, still the memory of the great music on it has never left my soul.

Hey, listen up. Test for ya'll here. How many of you reading this tread religiously put on your blinker to signal your intention to change lanes? I'm talking on the freeway, any bi-way or highway, and in town. I am going to to throw in parking lots here as well. Tell the truth! 50% of the time you do signal your intention to change lanes, well before you move your car in to that lane you're Jones-ing to move in to.

Who signals 99.65% of the time? 100%? No way! :surprise:

I've noticed since about the 1990's, esp. late in the 1990's, that Americans, driving stick or automatic(I know this because it's so prevalent, it must include both types), no longer feel like it's necessary to signal their intention to change lanes. Do they figure that since they did such a good job of leaving you room on the road that they don't have to?

If a tree falls in the Olympic National Park rain forest and nobody is around to hear it fall to the forest floor, does it technically still make a sound? I want everyone to put on their best Dennis Rodman thinking caps for this one, it's too important to shun here.

ruking1

Yours might be a good post for "Inconsiderate Drivers". (share your stories)

shipo

I see that you subscribe to the "When you cannot rise to the challenge, obfuscate" school of thought. :P

FWIW, I signal 100% of the time and I drive a stick. The only time I ever had a problem doing that was in London years ago when I rented a Fiat that required the left hand to both shift the gears and actuate the turn signals. The location of the turn signal lever on that car qualifies as an "Epic Fail", IMHO.

Best regards,
Shipo

ruking1

I actually learned using the old hand signals with a blinker "back up". Kinda of a Scotch neat with club soda chaser. I learned also with manual transmission and on the "Streets of San Francisco." So yes for these .02 cents signal use approaches 99%. Cool was parallel parking on a steep hill (up or down or perpendicular to the hill) with a manual transmission, not touching either the curb (sans the ever so correctly mandatory curbing of the front-closes to the curb, curbing) front or rear car bumpers with app 4 to 10 in of space front and rear. Another was NOT making the folks that had to stop for you to park.... WAIT a long time.

San Francisco also has a few 33% graded hill (anyone can verify this) that I periodically parked on.

kyfdx

Old BMWs all have the turn-signal stalk on the right side...

I never noticed an issue with it, though...

shipo

I suppose I would find it easier to drive a manual transmission left-hand-drive car with the turn signal stalk on the right side of the wheel than the reverse. Why? Well, probably because I've been driving the left-hand-drive version of manual transmission cars for some 35 years and that incident in London that I posted about was my first attempt to drive a right-hand-drive car, regardless of transmission type.

Best regards,
Shipo

xwesx

100% signal use here, too, including those areas where I am all by my lonesome. It is a matter of habit, so not thinking about it means the signals are used all the time. I never found transmission type to have an bearing on my tendency to signal. Why would it, especially with *most* vehicles requiring the use of separate hands for the operation of a shifter and the signal stalk?

stever

Filbert and 22nd both have a 31.5% grade. link

I'd wear out my hand brake in a few days in San Fran.

ruking1

There you go! I told ya it was verifiable!!

Also explains why I didn't say 100%. 33% for conversational purposes is as you say 31.5%

Happiness is a slight 4 wheel drift going down on (the six linked turns) Lombard Street !!! (aka crooked street)

andys120

I sometimes signal my turn when pulling out of my own driveway. Every time I do it I think "that was dumb" but the habit is pretty deeply ingrained. My Dad told me long ago that the worst thing you can do while driving is something the other guy doesn't expect.

xwesx

Yeah, my wife will often signal a right turn when she is in a right-turn-only lane that merges onto another road. It always cracks me up, as she is obviously swinging a right being in that lane, but I suppose it is better to use it frivolously (i.e., "master of the obvious" scenarios) once in a while than not use it when it is actually needed.

This morning, there was a driver just ahead of me who signaled left, then shifted from the right lane to the left. That was good, but then the vehicle proceeded down the road another two miles with the left turn signal continually blinking. That sure is annoying....

nippononly

does the one have to do with the other? Was iluv seriously suggesting that manual drivers use their signals less because they need one hand to shift the gears? LOL!

Clearly one of his hands is in full-time use loading and unloading the CD changer, so maybe we should assume he is signal-challenged too! :-P

steve: SF is nowhere near as difficult as those numbers seem to suggest, to drive around with a stick shift. I do use the hand brake for starts-from-stop at a few of the steepest intersections though.

stever

I was thinking more in terms of trying to parallel park on some of those streets. I'm pretty good, but it's still rare that I can get in a slot in one shot.

ruking1

LOL ! People getting their licenses sweat straight in and/ out ANGLE parking.

iluvmysephia1

I wasn't inferring that manual drivers skip the signal changing, just wanting to reiterate how much I love my 2008 Mitsubishi Lancer GTS in Rally Red, CVT, Sun and Sound package and no stick shift to keep track of.

Soon to have 4 Pirelli P-Zero Nero M+S Pinna's as well. That happens this Fri., Dec.19th, 2008, in Tucson.

Just wanted to get a "feel" for y'all's awareness of this phenomenon going on, to slowly drift in front of another driver without signaling lane-change intention. Is it not wanting you to speed up and take their newly-found spot, a "fear-factor" thing? Or is it a "my rig's faster than your rig" type of a game? Curious, is all. :confuse:

shipo

Just wanted to get a "feel" for y'all's awareness of this phenomenon going on, to slowly drift in front of another driver without signaling lane-change intention.

Sounds like a classic case of an automatic transmission driver being bored to sleep by his or her boring ride. :P

ruking1

Indeed. When I am a passenger, I find it more than easy to click off to sleep. I really use the so called procedure/mechanics of driving to aid in staying awake.

boaz47

I don't see a big difference in the ability to sleep or stay awake. I can't ever remember falling asleep when driving in town. On the highway I have had to pull over because I got tired and my eyes felt heavy and like you I can sleep if someone else is driving almost at will. My wife is 180 degrees out from me. On a trip she can stay awake in the passenger seat as long as I can drive. But if I try to let her drive she can't make it 30 minutes before she wakes me up.

However the point is most of us aren't shifting on a long road anyway. The American consumer is far more interested in a good entertainment system and cup holders to keep them interested than three pedals and a stick.

To be honest not many of us miss having to learn the art of modulating the brake pedal to keep from locking the wheels up. We are perfectly happy to allow ABS to do it for us. We are more than willing to let traction control help us drive in the snow and wet and after 2010-2011 skid control will become a mandated safety feature on all new cars. (at least that is the rumor) We live with what they offer us and most don't miss the old method much. This forum only proves there are a few that it means a lot to but I don't know if those few have the ability to influence the majority.

Nissan who uses the "shift perspective" as part of their add campane dropped the manual in the Maxima, never offered it in the Murano, not listed in the 2009 Pathfinder, naturally not offered in the Armanda or Quest, never came in the Rogue. Well I could go on and on but everyone knows these things. The future of the manual will be predicated on the increase in hybrids and the preferences of the majority of consumers. Unless someone wants to move to Europe to avoid what is happening here.

ruking1

It is good to get other data points on the addressed issue.

..."However the point is most of us aren't shifting on a long road anyway."...

As for your quote, IF most of the commute is on roads where one does NOT shift, a lot of the "advantages" of the automatic transmission are lost. Indeed a few of the below advantages signal clearly we are not serious about incremental fuel savings. ( this issue addressed in a prior post)

Indeed on properly geared manuals:

1. the highway MPG is far better. (as well as city and combined)
2. carries less equipment weight
3.. less parasitic loss (hp/torque)
4. far better control (nuances to even better mpg
5. better mpg
6. tire wear is less
7. much lower cost (-1,099.00 on a vehicle I am currently considering)
8. much cheaper to repair when it goes south.

So as a graphic example, if I were a pizza del/courier driver in NYC (come on guys & gals, I am not excluding your local snafu) , AUTOMATIC would be my choice.

andys120

6. tire wear is less

Explain please! :confuse:

ruking1

WHY? I have noticed this anecdotally over 4/6 cars over time. I have a lot of hunches that it is the product of a lot of very small advantages; but nothing succeeds like a side by side test, which I or many folks who actually do side by side testing for that matter have done.

So for example I have 112,000 miles on oem (crappy tire model) on a manual transmission. To make an A/B comparison, it would be good to have access to a automatic and see if it also got at least 112,000 miles.

andys120

to "burn rubber" with a stick than with an A/T. I have done it accidentally w a manual, never w a juice box.

I can't imagine getting anything like 112K out of a set of tires, nor would I want to. They'd have to be those hard-wearing, greasy tread types like my buddy had on his Wrangler-- 76K out of one set (A/T).

As w gas mileage, I'm sure that tire wear more a function of how you drive than what you drive . Jeremy Clarkson once got better mileage from a BMW M3 on a closed course than from a Prius by driving conservatively.

ruking1

I can wear out YOUR set of tires in less than a sitting with either a manual or auto. Your point being?

But if you are admitting you don't have a clue as to how to get 112,000 miles, a two finger salute for admitting that. If you know how and do not want to, for sure they are YOUR nickels.

stever

I think the point is that a tire that lasts 112,000 in normal service isn't worth having. I have a set of high treadwear tires on the van and I won't try that again. They are lousy in the rain and worse on snow.

ruking1

A good reason for a second set of rims?? (tires of course, if I have to spell that out?)

Two things are commonly known (among other things):

1. dry grip is best for more worn tires

2. wet/rain and snow grip is best for new to like new tires

stever

I take the Outback in the snow. But a softer all season would get me around in the van ok, and next time I'll go that way, even if they wear out at 40k or so.

Oh, I sold the studs and rims and put all season's on the OB and they are fine for going up to the ski hill (the road may be snow packed but it's well maintained).

xwesx

Steve, I had a set of Goodyear Tripletreads on my 1996 Outback. These tires have an 80,000 mile treadwear warranty which, with that car, means they would last about three years before scheduled replacement (~70-75K miles). They were the best all-season tire I ever experienced on ice or snow. They were fantastic. I had no inclination at all to "upgrade" to a dedicated winter tire even though I drive at least 6 months of the year on snow and ice.

In stark contrast, the studded tires I have for my van, which are a cheap Sam's Club knockoff that came with the vehicle ("Snowtrekker"), are pathetic.

stever

I went with Avid T4s on the Outback 15,000 miles ago. Just came down from the hill and they only lost traction in a couple of bad spots. I don't know if the van will get new shoes before we retire it.

I passed a Miata that was going up the hill an hour ago just as it started snowing again. Not sure if it was a stick or not though. Got me wondering if I would have stuck a MT in second and wound down the hill (I put the OB in D3 for several miles).

I can't remember back to my 5 speed Tercel/Anchorage days too well, but it seems like I spent a lot of time in 3rd when cruising around on the snowpacked roads in town.

andys120

I think the point is that a tire that lasts 112,000 in normal service isn't worth having. I have a set of high treadwear tires on the van and I won't try that again. They are lousy in the rain and worse on sno

Amen, that was precisely my point. Another would be that somewhere around 30K or so tires tend to get "lumpy" and out of round so they are unpleasant to drive with. You do know that rubber detriorates with age and use? Because of this any tire more that four or five years old can be considered questionable, sidewalls become porous and the possibility of tread separation can increase.

I admit that I am hard on tires but I do maintain them, wth regular checks on pressures, rotations and visual inspections.

xwesx

I do not tend to alter my shifting habits too much between winter and summer other than making most of my starts in 2nd gear rather than first with the Escort, as it has less of a tendency to spin its wheels with the higher-gear start.

I have not been stuck with it yet, though a couple weekends ago, after about a 6" snowfall, it took me about 20 minutes to get up my driveway. I felt like I was high-marking rather than simply trying to park my car. I made it though. Good ol' stubborn perseverance. My neighbors (at least the ones who don't know me very well) probably thought I was drunk.

boaz47

Up until last April I spent 19 years living in the mountains. I am a bit of a after market car nut and have always put new rims and tires on my cars even before the stock ones wore out. One year I decided to ditch my low profile tires on both my cars. The PT was dropped 2.5 inches in the front and 3 inches in the back with a heavy duty sway bar and new blisten gas shocks. The Focus was only lowered with new springs and shocks by about an inch. K&Ns and cold air for both. Both had been running 45 series low profile tires. Never lasted me two seasons either car. I decide on "conti'" high mileage road tires that were supposed to get 80k miles a set. I realize mountain driving will wear tires out faster than freeway driving but I never expected to get 80k out of those tires. They did last a lot longer than I thought they would but I simply couldn't stand driving them after 50k miles. It was like driving on marbles and my corner speed had to be decreased a lot just to make me feel better. I went back to Sticky BFGs or Falkons.

But as a side note my old Subaru was a tire eater. 30k and they were done, rotated every 3000 miles and it didn't help. I used to blame it on the high stance compared to the Focus and that Turbo. But next to my Sammy it was the best snow car I have ever had.

andys120

But as a side note my old Subaru was a tire eater. 30k and they were done, rotated every 3000 miles and it didn't help. I used to blame it on the high stance compared to the Focus and that Turbo

The AWD is probably the biggest culprit, I got less than 20K running sticky Goodyear F1s on a '98 Audi A4 Avant Quattro/2.8 (194 HP).

kyfdx

But as a side note my old Subaru was a tire eater. 30k and they were done

Hmmm... I'm about 5500 miles into a 30K mile lease on my Subaru, and I hate the stock Bridgestones... Maybe I should go get a set of Nokian WRs now, and put these tires back on at lease end? If I have to buy a set at lease end, why not buy a set that I like, now?

boaz47

Good idea. Very few things can make as big a difference as tires.

kyfdx

I'm in the same camp with a lot of you.... If a tire lasts 80K miles, I'll probably hate it.. maybe right away, and certainly by the 30K mark..

I really liked the Nokians that I had on my CR-V, but they were around $500/set, on the car, the Subaru has an even larger size.... That's a lot of money for only 19 more months..

ateixeira

I sold my Forester with nearly 80k miles on it and it was only on the 2nd set of tires. I wouldn't call that a tire eater.

And I agree with you, I was ready to replace that 2nd set of tires long before the tread was all gone.

nippononly

Here's the first instance I have seen of a volume automaker talking about introducing a dual-clutch automatic into a small, entry-level model:

Ford announces new dual-clutch transmission

Looking to wring as much fuel economy as possible out of its upcoming new small cars--we’re talking the Fiesta and the Focus here--Ford will equip them with a new six-speed, dry-plate, dual-clutch transmission, called PowerShift.

.....This means that Ford’s new transmission is lighter--30 pounds less than the four-speed automatic in the current Focus, Ford says--and doesn’t require a torque converter or hydraulic pump.....

.....The transmission will also shift into neutral when the car is decelerating to boost fuel economy, and it will have hill-holding technology to prevent that little backward roll that manual-transmission drivers get used to.

http://www.autoweek.com/article/20090121/FREE/901219993

So the manual's remaining days in small econocars may be more limited than I thought, although I'm sure these models will initially continue to offer a manual as the standard transmission, and the crucial piece of information will be the PRICE of the dual-clutch option. If it is $1500 extra in this price-conscious segment of the market, that could put a heavy damper on the number of takers.

ruking1

Indeed. I see it more as an option that a higher percentage might step into/up to given the three choices manual/automatic/DSG.

I have been breaking in 2009 Jetta TDI (W/ DSG transmission). It was a 1,000 option. It is truly a hoot for fast shifting or pretty seamless if you want to push it in D and then.... drive. If you plan to keep the car any length of time, it is more than a 1,000 dollar leap. Who really knows the out of warranty repair costs? Don't forget the 40,000 miles DSG fluid and filter interval.

By all accounts, in Europe, (DSG has been available there for quite some time) after they have gotten the bugs out, the DSG is very reliable. Since VW no longer offers an automatic in that model (Jetta) it was either DSG / 6 speed manual (my personal choice) or no VW at all, which would have been fine with me. However combined with the turbo diesel and the fact it is for drivers who do not drive manuals well... well...........

lilengineerboy

The PowerShift is replacing the automatic, not the manual. The automatic/manual is a relatively hefty cost hit over the manual, but supposedly it shouldn't be more than a traditional automatic.
The issue is Ford can't get around the ineffieciency of a traditional slushbox, so getting rid of it is the only way they could come up with to meet fuel economy targets. A variant of this trans has been used in Europe for a while (I think Volvo's have it).
It sounds like its full of mechanisms to move gears and lock and unlock the clutch. I don't see how its cheaper/lighter than a CVT in this segment.

nippononly

I doubt that it IS cheaper or lighter than a CVT, but I see the eventual future of automated manuals like this one as supplanting the manual and becoming the standard transmission, IF they can get the cost down comparable to that of a manual transmission.

Notice I capitalized the IF, it is indeed a big one. But I am thinking 20-40 years out, the automated manual may have a shot. People in general don't seem to like CVTs, although in entry-level cars like the Fiesta it is the most logical choice for the manufacturer, for an automatic: cheap, light, fuel economic. Which begs the question, why didn't Ford opt for a CVT instead? I just don't think they are popular and Ford knows that, and an automated manual provides a very good alternative to a slushbox auto.

ruking1

I would say you are hitting the main issue on point BEYOND a doubt. Automatics no matter what ilk are costlier to: 1. buy 2. run 3. maintain, 4. repair 5. contribute to a "throw away mentality" 6. cost more in natural resources.

It is almost the height of hypocrisy to go so called "green" and not as a min, offer -to require the manual transmission option.

A good illustration is the 04 Civic automatic transmission @ say 38 mpg, 39 mpg, 42 mpg (EPA states 1 mpg more for manual transmission to a range of say +3 mpg of say 42 mpg) over say 10 years and 150,000 miles (@ 12,000 to 15,000 miles average per year). It yields 3947,3846,3571 gals of use, respectively. Over the normal 10 year life span that can be as much as 15,792 miles EXTRA in fuel saved or almost 11% more miles. At todays prices of 2 per gal, it is simple to calculate that automatic transmissionchoice can cost @ least 752 dollars more.

stever

"Hey, hotshoe. Think you're good at matching revs when you're downshifting? The 2009 Nissan 370Z's SynchroRev Match can do it better."

Nissan 370Z's SynchroRev Match Heals Ham-Hands, Two Left Feet (none of which would apply to the posters in this topic).

ruking1

So natch, who on the Edmunds.com staff got to test it side by side against a 6 speed manual?

tallman1

It's got an on/off switch so no need to do a side by side.

ruking1

I take the reply as... NO.

tallman1

:confuse:

p0926

I read several reviews lately for sporty cars that when mentioning the transmission, state that said car has an automatic transmission with a manual shift option (these are always models without a true manual option). Of course my initial reaction is DUH!, all autos can be shifted manually :P However, it seems to be an attempt to imply that the car can be shifted just like a manual. I suppose that the masses who have never bothered to learn how to drive a manual may actually believe that Naturally, the cognoscenti knows better :shades:

bvdj84

Well one time I accidentally put my automatic transmission into 3rd, and had left it there. I was in town, didn't really get up to speed, but noticed it felt more torquier. I was like wow! It felt great! I glanced down at my shift lever, and realized I had put it into 3rd. The RPM's were up higher, naturally. I like that. I have an 08 Pontiac G6, 4cyl, and I really do not like the transmission in the car. It has a 4spd gearing.
I wish it had the power and better programmed transmission like the 08 Jetta I have.

However with 12,000 miles on it, it does feel much better than it did when I first got it.
It was quite harsh in shifting. But, even now it shifts up and down so much, it gets so annoying!! :mad: Especially when I am at lower speeds, it cannot seems to pick a gear and stay there. It might be the fact that it only has 4 gears to choose from. Hello? Seriously GM. The 09 G6 has a 6spd auto, with a manual mode option. I would be curious as to how that feels.

The whole paddleshifting option is really taking off.