The Future Of The Manual Transmission

ruking1

Right. Practically speaking the MB's used to have 25 to 1 compression ratio's. This of course produced the so called "marbles in a can" characteristic diesel sound. I am sure it was a love/hate, etc., relationship.

So the oem's have responded. So for example, the 2003 Jetta TDI 1.9 T has a 19 to 1 compression ratio. You almost have to listening and know the diesel sound to really (differentiate) know anymore.

Mr_Shiftright

It takes some getting used to, the combo of a diesel engine and a manual transmission. You should really be shifting a bit differently than if you had a gas engine.

If the mazda's high compression creates more low end torque, then that, mated to a manual transmission, would be a good thing.

shipo

I don't understand the analogy. FWIW, there are a number of diesel engines in the works which feature relatively low compression ratios in the 14.0:1 range; the most interesting one is the new Chrysler motor which can be fueled with Ethanol, Gasoline, Diesel, and pretty much anything else.

The thing about a lower mechanical compression ratio is that the manufacturer can then boost the motor even higher (thus producing even more power) without reaching certain mechanical limits (i.e. clearances and mechanical stresses).

ruking1

Absolutely and positively. It might seem a bit difficult, but actually once you know what you are looking for, it is pretty seamless. We run a (nervous nellie, aka rev happy) Honda Civic right along side a 1.9 TDI.

For "OUR" roads and freeway systems, there is literally nothing better than the turbo diesels and mated to a 5/6 speed manual transmission/s.

This is NOT to imply that I am unhappy with the Civic.

lemmer

I was just going by the EPA website. These are the revised numbers, but even the old numbers weren't quite 21/26. I might have picked the wrong car though.

BMW - EPA

benjaminh

according to C&D:

2012 Mazda 5 Sport Manual - Short Take Road Test
Lord Vader, your mini-minivan has arrived.

BY JUSTIN BERKOWITZ, PHOTOGRAPHY BY PATRICK M. HOEY
May 2011


VEHICLE TYPE: front-engine, front-wheel-drive, 6-passenger, 5-door van

PRICE AS TESTED: $20,040 (base price: $19,990)

ENGINE TYPE: DOHC 16-valve inline-4, aluminum block and head, port fuel injection

Displacement: 152 cu in, 2488 cc
Power (SAE net): 157 hp @ 6000 rpm
Torque (SAE net): 163 lb-ft @ 4000 rpm

TRANSMISSION: 6-speed manual

DIMENSIONS:
Wheelbase: 108.3 in Length: 180.5 in
Width: 68.9 in Height: 63.6 in
Curb weight: 3393 lb

C/D TEST RESULTS:
Zero to 60 mph: 8.3 sec
Zero to 100 mph: 23.7 sec
Street start, 5–60 mph: 8.6 sec
Standing ¼-mile: 16.5 sec @ 85 mph
Top speed (governor limited): 124 mph
Braking, 70–0 mph: 186 ft
Roadholding, 300-ft-dia skidpad: 0.78 g

FUEL ECONOMY:
EPA city/highway driving: 21/28 mpg
C/D observed: 22 mpg

Shell

The stick-shifted Mazda 5 tested here isn’t dripping in evil black paint, it’s not especially powerful, and it doesn’t turn asphalt into pudding with its tremendous power. We still feel justified in calling it Lord Vader’s van, though, as long as we’re speaking Dutch, in which vader simply means “father.” What we mean is that the Mazda 5 with a six-speed manual transmission is the ultimate dad van.

More Power, More Ratios, More Refinement

A manual transmission goes a long way to ease the sting of what is, simply put, a dorky family vehicle. But dorks and nondorks alike will find much to appreciate about the 5. Although the 2.5-liter four’s 157 hp and 163 lb-ft are something to brag about only to friends who are still piddling around in Lancia Appias, when paired with the six-speed manual transmission, they proved enough for an 8.3-second run to 60 mph. That’s a significant improvement of 0.7 second over the time we got with an autobox-equipped 5.
original

Pulling off that 8.3-second sprint required an abusive launch that netted a bit of torque steer (surprising from a vehicle with only 163 lb-ft) and an immoderate amount of wheelspin....

benjaminh

was something like 13 seconds, I recently heard from someone who owned one way back then. I rode in one of those and it seemed much faster than that! I guess it was the noise?? But also a VW Bus probably took at least 20 seconds at that time, and so everything was slower.

But it's amazing that a Mazda5 will be the pants off of a sports car from the 60s.

Mr_Shiftright

Well my point was that 14:1 is quite unusual for a gas engine and is rather ho-hum at best for a diesel engine, so why did they even bother to compare it to diesel engines? It's a rather meaningless stretch to puff up the accomplishment further than it actually warrants. Diesel engines need high compression because that's their ignition system---its very apples and oranges and sounds mostly like PR clutter to me.

shipo

More and more I think you'll find newer diesel designs will be sporting compression ratios of 15.0:1 and under. Why? NOx and soot abatement. Simply put, diesels which run at lower compression ratios generate far less of those two environmental "No-Nos".

Update: I just looked at Mazda's write-up on their new SkyActiv-D engine for the first time, and guess what? Yup, you guessed it; a compression ratio of 14.0:1. Go figure.

Edit: Forgot to mention that, given my druthers, I'd opt for a diesel with a low mechanical compression ratio and a high boost limit versus the other way around. Why? The lower compression ratio engine will be able to generate a significantly greater amout of power for any given displacement.

qbrozen

If you "get" 22/28 in a BMW rated at 16/24, presumably you would "get" 30/33 or some similar in a Miata. My math might be off, but the point stands.

I can't agree. I've found consistencies with real-world vs EPA only within a manufacturer. For example, I could exceed EPA highway in 2 Hondas, in 2 Nissans, and in 2 BMWs I've owned. I was always 2 mpg below EPA highway in 2 Chryslers and 2 Mazdas.

I would say it had to do with automatic vs manual, but 1 of those bimmers and 1 of the hondas were autos.

So for me, personally, I need to look at which manufacturer I'm dealing with and adjust accordingly.

shipo

Interesting; every car I've had, including 2 VWs, 2 BMWs, 4 Chryslers, and 2 Mazdas were able to comfortably exceed the EPA estimates for both city and highway.

Mr_Shiftright

I generally beat EPA, too. I think it's how you drive.

shipo

Of course there are also times when I don't get even remotely close to the EPA estimates. :P

skibry1

I concur,but my problem is shifting when the red needle is straight up! Can you
say spirited stirring? But when my wife is aboard I can meet or exceed the EPA
ratings. Yes,she keeps my "speed demon" in check.

shipo

It's pretty amazing how having our "better half" in the right seat improves fuel economy. In my case this extends to the "moms" as well; if my mother is in the right seat, my fuel economy doesn't improve at all, but if my MIL is in the right seat, my fuel economy pretty much matches what happens when Mrs. Shipo sits over there. I'm sure there's a scientific explanation to all of this, but I don't have the time or the inclination to figure it all out. :P

lemmer

We are probably closer to agreement than you think.

My point was just that you can't compare an EPA rating in one car to your personal experience in a different car. Now, if one goes on a site that collects real world mileage experience and it shows that Miatas and 5-series get similar mileage, then we have something to talk about.

I do have some anecdotal evidence to add to that. In a mix of city traffic and two lane back roads, I've been averaging between 26 and 27 MPG in my Miata. On the same route, my old '98 BMW 323 got about 21-22. Both cars are 5-speed manuals.

My Lexus gets a tad over 17 MPG. Ugh.

xwesx

I beat the estimates on average as well, but I don't think that says much with the new "revised" system, which seems to be set to make people feel better about their tank-to-tank economy rather than their average economy. An individual tank is rather insignificant (unless it is an indicator of typical driving habits!).

Living in such a cold climate, I take a massive economy hit in the winter that affects my overall averages. The combined estimate on my Forester is 22 - I have averaged 23.4 (calculated) after 27,000 miles. The Escort's EPA combined is 28; mine is just under 31. I strongly suspect that each of those numbers would be at least 1 mpg better in a temperate climate. I will say, however, that these cars, with manual transmissions, do fare better in winter driving than their automatic counterparts! :shades:

Mr_Shiftright

Not always...a few weeks ago I was in San Fran with the GF. I came off Lombard St., saw a slot to the right of a tour bus, downshifted, punched it, boost came up fast, made my away along 100 ft of stopped traffic, made the light at Van Ness, hung a sharp right, then hopped to the left lane while feathering the gas, punched it, passed about 15 cars, then swung into the left turn lane at Broadway, downshifted, made THAT, dodged to the right of a beer truck, punched it, swung a hard right on Polk, punched it, then a hard left onto Pacific and slipped right into a parking space---all in about 3 minutes.

My GF turned to me...my head started to recoil like a turtle into a shell...and she said:

"Man, that was some sexy driving!"

lemmer

Change "girlfriend" to "wife" and the story would change dramatically.

Mr_Shiftright

So I've heard...

xwesx

Hahaha, nice reply by lemmer. I was trying to figure out an appropriate way of wording that exact response.

Mr_Shiftright

Like most 12 year olds, I wanted to be an astronaut and a jungle explorer and a race car driver, but I never woke up each morning yearning to be married, for some reason.

volkov

I strongly suspect that each of those numbers would be at least 1 mpg better in a temperate climate.

Must be more than that, my computer display and calculated FE have both improved by over 12% now the good weather is back.
I use one of the tripmeters to log long term and set it for winter when I put on the snows and change when the summer rubber gets put back on. The combination of winter gas, cold weather and squishy tires really adds up. The difference for my wife's Prius is over 20%.

stever

Akio Toyoda Shows off 2012 Toyota Camry, Manual Transmission Rumored Dead (Straightline)

andys120

It's no great loss. MTs are for people who like driving, Camrys are for people who think a car is an appliance.

shipo

Isn't a stick in a Camry kind of like a sofa with a gas pedal?

stever

I dunno - I enjoyed rowing my Tercel, and it was closer to a VW Bug than a 3 Series.

dudleyr

Self fulfilling prophesy. The stick was so hard to get that it guaranteed they would not sell very many. I tried to get an LE with an MT but none within 1,000 miles and I looked for a year. There was the odd standard model and there were several SE models, but they always had the sunroof package. Toyota claims that their options packages are more flexible than Honda, but they only make a few combinations despite what the brochure implies.

I wound up with the Accord (which I preferred, but the nearest dealer was 180 miles away and warranty work is a pain). Sure the Camry is not sporty, but I will take a Camry with a stick over a 5 series with an automatic any day.

BTW I read the take rate for the stick is about half on the Fiat 500. Not bad.

I fear the Accord will be next. They have already cut the stick off of the higher models alienating half the stick drivers. ( would love an SE with leather and a stick). The resultant slower sales of stick will help them justify cutting it in a few years. Looks like a Passat diesel may be my next vehicle - of course they just dropped the wagon.

I struggle with the taste of US car buyers. Normally I would say to each his own, but people making stupid decisions (big SUV over a wagon etc.) effect what is available for me to purchase.

shipo

Sure the Camry is not sporty, but I will take a Camry with a stick over a 5 series with an automatic any day.

Ouch! I'm thinking I'd rather have a clapped out old Rambler with a "Three on the Tree" before I'd have either of the above.

xwesx

Most likely, but I like to be conservative when I estimate!

Between summer and winter, yes, there is a huge difference in economy. I record all my fills and have a pivot table set up that summarizes by month, but I haven't gone through it to look at the difference between the warmest six versus the coldest, or, for an even starker contrast, the three most extreme of each.

I was simply thinking about fuel economy in terms of climate, though. In temperate regions, the cold is not nearly as long or as sustained, but there are still moments of cold and "winter blend" fuel is used, so there is an economy hit (even if not as pronounced).

Even in Prince George, I doubt the hit is as severe as it would be in Whitehorse or Fairbanks. I could be wrong, though!

A friend of mine with a Prius ("older" one at this point; '06 perhaps?) said her economy is 30-35 in the winter and 50-55 in the summer. What is that, about 40% or so? I don't think my gas engines are quite that different, probably more in the order of 25%, but they don't have as much rotational resistance in the winter as a hybrid (nor a huge, cold, battery bank!).

volkov

Does she use a block heater? That has a big impact on any FE but even bigger for the hybrid which will keep running the ICE just to reach optimal temps for emissions. We have my wife's on a timer even inside the garage, and I have repeatedly plugged her in at the parking lot when I arrive at work to find that she didn't. (we work at the same site one day a week)
I have always wondered why they don't offer a warming blanket for the traction battery in the Prius or other EV's. A friend's EV Ranger conversion will go 75 miles in Summer no problem, but won't even start up if left out at -30. It has become a 3 season vehicle as a result. A second plug in battery warmer would fix that.

BTW I mispoke just pulling the 20% figure. She consumed about 6-7l/100km in winter and 5l/100 in summer. That's more like a 30% swing depending on which denominator you use.

volkov

I was thinking too that there is an uncontrolled variable in all this. I drive like grannie on frozen road surfaces for those winter months. The happy pedal in the WRX gets much more exercise once dry roads are the norm. I wonder what my Summer FE would be if I always drove with the cliched egg on the brake or accelerator.

xwesx

Hahah; I don't know either, but I'm sure it would be noticeable! :shades:

xwesx

I'm really not sure. I have to imagine that she does, since it starts for her every day! If temps drop lower than -30F, it can be questionable whether the car will even start if it has not been heated for an hour or so in advance. Does the Prius use a CVT or a torque converter? ATF gets pretty gummy at low temps, so autos around here generally have at least a block, oil, and transmission pan heater on them. Many folks also use battery pads or blankets, but those are totally unnecessary unless one's battery is not up to the task.

I do plug in my vehicles (block & oil pan heaters on both) if temps are below zero (F) - most of the time anyway. I sure don't appreciate the -22F limit on the temp gauges that are installed on Subaru's and Toyota's. We spend a large chunk of winter below that mark!

volkov

CVT but I don't remember the exact mechanical interface to integrate the electric motor and the ICE to the final drive shaft. Different hybrids use different approaches.

stever

warming blanket for the traction battery

Looks like that would be easy to kludge up and you could even power it with one of those flexible solar panels fixed to the roof with magnets when you aren't parked in the garage.

andys120

Sure the Camry is not sporty, but I will take a Camry with a stick over a 5 series with an automatic any day.

I forget who said this originally but it so happens that I drive a Five series Automatic (2000 528iA) and I 'd rather drive it than any large FWD sedan even if I could still drive a stick. I bought mine used so it cost about the same as a new loaded Camry but I never even considered one.

Rear Wheel Drive Rules!

xwesx

Great idea, except that winter time in the far north is not known for its excess of sunlight.... :P

benjaminh

Here's a quick game that will reveal how much those of us who love manuals have already lost this war. List a car line that used to have a manual option 5 years ago that now does not.

I'll start.

The base model Acura TL used to come with a very nice 6 speed manual. Now it's gone on the base model. No way to get it for love or money.

shipo

Back at'cha; how about cars that now offer a manual that didn't five years ago?

I'll start:

2011 Buick Regal

stever

Bah, four hours should be plenty. And park under a streetlamp.

Beats lighting a charcoal fire under the car (don't miss that, lol).:shades:

Mr_Shiftright

A 5 series BMW with an automatic is a better marriage IMO--it's a tight, sporty transmission and befits a large sedan's demeanor. I'd imagine a stickshift 5 series sedan would be hard to resell, too. Most price guides give that a value deduct of $750 to $1000.

benjaminh

Shipo: Really? A Regal with a manual? How is it?

Sounds nice.

benjaminh

But doesn't an auto cost something like 1k extra on a BMW anyway? Seems like an even trade to me...

shipo

You know that I've owned a 5-Series with a stick and that it isn't possible to disagree with you on this count any more than I do. :shades:

My 5er with a stick was simply the easiest, best balanced, and most enjoyable car to drive of any vehicle I've ever strapped on short of a late 1980s RX-7. Like it or don't, believe it or not, a new 535i 6-Speed manual is an absolute dream to drive.

shipo

I'm not able to say first-hand regarding the Regal, but from what I've heard, it's pretty nice; I'd certainly prefer it over a Camry (with or without a stick). :shades:

iluvmysephia1

Like it or don't, believe it or not, a new 535i 6-Speed manual is an absolute dream to drive.

Another poster on here probably hit the nail on the head with me. If I actually took a German car out and test drove one I'd probably quit criticizing them all the time. Took a drive in a friend's 2001 VW Jetta this weekend and it's 5-speed shifted very well and the car was quiet on the freeway, too. A nice car, though somewhat cramped feeling. Oh well, it is a compact car, what do I expect, eh?

Our 2008 Mitsubishi Lancer GTS compact would probably feel cramped to passengers, too. Doesn't diminish my love for it, though.

I gotta go standard tranny next rig and stick to my guns this time. Demand a stick. We are so retarded in this country...on the phone they said my Lancer would be a 5-speed stick. When I got to the Mitsubishi dealer, the car was gorgeous in their showroom but it was an automatic CVT! What the? The kid working sales for them doesn't know the difference between a stick and an automatic...and he was drawing a paycheck from Avondale Mitsubishi in Avondale, Arizona. Am I missing something or is that retarded to high heaven, folks? :sick:

lemmer

I've owned two manual transmissioned 3-series and driven quite a few others. My thought is always the same - why can't a $40k BMW have a manual transmission and clutch that is as good as that of a Honda Civic? I think rubbery is the best description of a BMW manual. The M cars do seem to be a bit better than the others.

colin_l

I've driven my mother's 2006 Civic a lot and the clutch and shift linkage is nothing to write home about. The clutch is extremely soft and has a narrow engagement range fairly close to the floor. The shift linkage isn't real sloppy, but I'd say it is average at best. The lever placement is a bit weird, pretty far forward but not truly on the dashboard.

Conversely my 1995 BMW M3 had a fantastic clutch. It was relatively firm, but not like a V8 Mustang/Camaro. It had a longer, easy to feel engagement range. And the shift linkage of the 5 speed ZF was like magic. It could effortlessly and precisely go into any gear at any speed with no slop.

qbrozen

I've driven a number of manuals, of course, but nothing i've had can compete with the overall shifting package of my GTI. The clutch is quite light, but I like that. The throws could stand to be a bit shorter, but I don't believe the engagement of the gears could be any more solid or precise.

Switching from the 540, which shifts like a truck, to the GTI is always a shock and takes me a 3-4 runs through the gears to readjust. The MR2 is definitely closer to the GTI in shifting ease. I'd probably rank that as #3 behind the 350Z.