Did you recently take on (or consider) a loan of 84 months or longer on a car purchase?
A reporter would like to speak with you about your experience; please reach out to PR@Edmunds.com by 7/22 for details.
Options

The Future Of The Manual Transmission

1146147149151152205

Comments

  • shiposhipo Member Posts: 9,148
    Hmmm, that's funny, I've always thought FWD and a stick was one of the best combination when it comes to climbing a slippery steep slope; of course that presumes you're proceeding up the hill backwards. :)
  • eliaselias Member Posts: 2,209
    hey, stickshift GMs are fine . I have two fine GM M6 cars now, one RWD and one FWD. :)

    I bet there are very few cars (or trucks) available with AWD or 4WD and stickshift.
    The USA VW TDI geeks are always begging for AWD & stickshift VW TDI for USA, but it never happens..

    I think dodge fullsize 4WD pickups are available with stickshift, including their diesel pickup truck!

    Sara - enjoy that new darth-vader-looking acura stickshift! Speaking of Benz unreliability, I had Y2K Benz E series wagon bought new. it drove 100k miles rather comfortably but for the first 20k especially, it was the least reliable new vehicle I've ever owned - by far - out of more than 25 cars - including 6 Z28s. (4 of the Z28s with stickshift, 2 with slushbox).
  • wwestwwest Member Posts: 10,706
    "...it is much easier to drive safely with FWD versus RWD..."

    Simple logic (simpleton logic) should tell you that can NEVER be the case.

    Asking only the front 2 tire's contact patch to support both drive traction and lateral control traction simply does not add up, does not compute
  • wwestwwest Member Posts: 10,706
    "..I prefer AWD, then RWD, then FWD,...."

    There are more implementations of "AWD" in the market today than one would at first believe. It doesn't stop with F/awd or R/awd, there is also the of matter of the type of coupling between the primary drive, driven, wheels and the secondary drive wheels.

    Some, mostly F/awd, are simple "one-wheel" drive vehicles with the only "enforcement" of AWD functionality being POST loss of traction, wheelspin/slip detection, on the primary, front, drive wheels.

    But trying to keep the subject at hand in mind....most modern day driver licensees have not enough real world experience that they can be trusted with a FWD vehicle equipped with a manual transmission, FAR too dicey for the untrained/inexperienced on a slippery roadbed.
  • plektoplekto Member Posts: 3,738
    The issue is that FWD plus manual results in a very poor car for driving in any sort of spirited manner. It's fine for for getting around town, but that's about it. Unless that car is very light, that is. As in 2500lbs or so. At nearly 4000lbs for some of these sedans, with a driver in them and a tank of gas/tc (ie - wet weight vs dry), FWD is going to cause problems that will remind you of a big 70s muscle car once you hit winding roads.

    As for safety, it's a mixed bag. FWD is good unless you're out of revs and/or torque(mile tall gearing that takes forever to rev, like in a Camry). Then you can't accelerate you way out of trouble. Also, FWD going *down* a slippery hill is a disaster waiting to happen unless the driver knows exactly what to do. Doubly so with manual as you have compression braking, all of your braking power, steering, and most of your traction on the same set of wheels.

    FWD is not a panacea, sorry to say.

    RWD isn't either, of course.(though you don't hear about many BMWs and Mercedes doing poorly in snow over in Europe) But at least with RWD you can have proper fun with the car the rest of the year.

    And, no, I can't stand the TSX. Partly because of the decision Honda makes to force automatic on you if you want the real engine, and partly, because they could have followed Toyota's lead easily and made it RWD like the IS250. As underwhelming as it is, it's a good car with manual. A bit heavy, but far better than the TSX to actually drive.
  • shiposhipo Member Posts: 9,148
    Just because you don't believe it doesn't mean it's not true.

    Like I've said several times I prefer RWD for all driving conditions, that said, I also have to admit that it is easier to drive a FWD car through winter conditions than a RWD car (although the RWD car is more fun).
  • dudleyrdudleyr Member Posts: 3,469
    Why compression braking in fwd stick going downhill any worse than an automatic? At least with the stick you can keep the car in a high gear to minimize compression braking or push in the clutch to eliminate it.

    Since I use my brakes to stop not engine compression I have never had any kind of issue in any conditions going down hill with fwd and a stick.

    And please - the weight transfer to the rear wheels while going up hill is negligible compared to the weight of the engine over the drive wheels. FWD will get up a steep slippery hill better than RWD.

    And for starting up on a steep slippery hill - there is a lever between the seats called the emergency brake.
  • ruking1ruking1 Member Posts: 19,826
    edited August 2011
    To me, the heart of the matter is really the drive and weight distribution 60/40 app of a FWD vs (the so called ideal) 51/49 of a RWD (static). The key to either is really between the head sets, both to maximize each's potential and minimize each's disadvantages. On a turbo diesel 4 cylinder (TDI) with a 5 speed (newer ones have 6 speed) manual engine braking is minimized through the drive by wire system. To some, that is a bad thing to having to get used to. It was designed that way for a few reasons.
  • robr2robr2 Member Posts: 8,805
    edited August 2011
    ...when did so many posters here become professional driving instructors????
  • colin_lcolin_l Member Posts: 591
    edited August 2011
    Wwest was on apparently vacation and/or ignoring this thread. He came back and people can't help but respond.

    It happens a lot. :sick:
  • ruking1ruking1 Member Posts: 19,826
    edited August 2011
    ..."The issue is that FWD plus manual results in a very poor car for driving in any sort of spirited manner"...

    I think there are too many real life examples that shoot holes in that (/his) hypothesis.

    Another is if the hypothesis is true, this should post negatively on the NHTSA's safety issues, nary a word, let alone categories. Indeed one can query the system to see if they have even tested this and in what manner. The macro position is that the accident and fatalities are at the absolute lowest since they have been recording these things. nhtsa.gov
  • robr2robr2 Member Posts: 8,805
    Wwest was on apparently vacation and/or ignoring this thread. He came back and people can't help but respond.

    It happens a lot.


    LOL - people must learn restraint...
  • Mr_ShiftrightMr_Shiftright Member Posts: 64,481
    Uphill in a FWD -- having had both Saab turbos and now a Mini Cooper S, and living in the San Francisco area---I'd have to say that in a hard rain, going up those steep hills with a FWD car is no fun--or worse yet, having to STOP on those steep slopes and then get rolling again. You have to really watch the pressure on the throttle, especially on "peppy" FWD cars.

    and modulating the clutch is tricky, too.

    As for snow, I'd prefer the FWD car to be an automatic going uphill and a stickshift on the way down.

    Of course, on actual ice, nothing will save you---not even octo-drive. Well maybe tank treads. I haven't driven a tank, but I did drive armored personnel carriers, and with automatic and all wheel drive, they were pretty good going up, or down, and knocking down small trees. You can't do that real well with FWD. :P
  • ruking1ruking1 Member Posts: 19,826
    OMG, we are also ignoring the rear engine rear wheel drive transmission. I actually learned to drive stick shift ON the streets of San Francisco and in the above.
  • Mr_ShiftrightMr_Shiftright Member Posts: 64,481
    And we are also ignoring the front-engine/rear transmission configuration, like my old Porsche 928. THAT car didn't even know there *were* hills in San Francisco.

    I had a Porsche 356 while living in Colorado, and going downhill on snow and ice was freakin' scary, let me tell you. Once the rear end kicked out, it was all over...there was no going back...oh, wait, "going back" was exactly what happened, as in backwards. Fortunately, those cars rarely started on snowy days, so I am alive today thanks to choke-less dual carburetors.

    I learned to drive stickshift in New York City, where "kill or be killed" motivated me to never dawdle in traffic. As a kid, I went 44 mph down every street. :P Now of course you can't do that, as NYC has become a crowded theme park.

    I used to love downshifting into 2nd gear in the Queens Midtown Tunnel just so I could hear the engine's roar off the walls. We also did a lot of drag racing on Woodhaven Blvd. near Rockaway Beach, where the city kids would meet the Queens thugs for "best 2 out of 3". Now I think it's mostly drive-by shootings. :P
  • srs_49srs_49 Member Posts: 1,394
    The way I've heard it explained (simplistically) is this:

    FWD cars (in general) understeer.

    RWD cars (in general), tend to oversteer.

    For the average (or below average) driver, in most conditions, habing the car understeer is generally thought of to be a better situation (plowing into a turn, for instance) that oversteer (having the backend come around).
  • wwestwwest Member Posts: 10,706
    "...accident and fatalities are at the absolute lowest..."

    Attributable in no small part, beginning at about the turn of the century, to FWD and F/awd TRAC systems that INSTANTLY dethrottles the engine upon detection of wheelspin/slip on the primary, FRONT, drive wheels.

    VSC, same time period, to prevent/abate the inadvertent(***) tendancy for FWD PLOWING/understearing didn't hurt the statistics either.

    Overall safety improvement, given the current dominance of FWD, compariable to ABS back when it became common.

    *** Unlike RWD or R/awd the FWD/F/awd driver is generally not the causative factor, DIRECT causative factor, for encountering plowing/understearing.
  • wwestwwest Member Posts: 10,706
    In a RWD or R/awd having the back end come around is ALWAYS the driver's fault, too much HP for conditions. Not the case, generally, with FWD plowing/understearing.
  • wwestwwest Member Posts: 10,706
    edited August 2011
    "....weight transfer...up hill...is negligilbe..."

    In that case the next time I need to move a piano upstairs you get to lift/carry the back.
  • wwestwwest Member Posts: 10,706
    "..Porsche 356...downhill on snow and ice...Once the rear end kicked out.."

    With a 356, or 911, or older VW bug, having the rear end "kick out", the driver would be at fault, TOTALLY so, in any conditions. Rear engine rear drive, possibly the SAFEST overall vehicle configuration there is.

    Most of us rear engine rear drive stick shift owners, quickly learn to make use, defly so, of rear engine compression "drag" to keep the behind "behind" in the conditions you describe.
  • shiposhipo Member Posts: 9,148
    "In a RWD or R/awd having the back end come around is ALWAYS the driver's fault, too much HP for conditions. Not the case, generally, with FWD plowing/understearing [sic]."

    I see, and given that understeer is generally a result of too much speed for the conditions/curve, how is that not the driver's fault?

    Like it or don't, regardless of which end of a car loses traction in a turn/curve, it is virtually always the driver's fault.
  • dudleyrdudleyr Member Posts: 3,469
    FWD understeers under power. Take your foot off of the gas and the front will tuck back in line. Makes it very easy to drive fast. Just do the intuitive thing (foot off of the gas) when you start to feel the car plow/push/understeer.
  • shiposhipo Member Posts: 9,148
    "Most of us rear engine rear drive stick shift owners, quickly learn to make use, defly so, of rear engine compression "drag" to keep the behind "behind" in the conditions you describe."

    Clearly you have no concept of how dangerous such a technique is while driving in slippery conditions. Introduce enough drag and that rear-engined RWD car will snap around faster than pretty much any driver can correct for.
  • ruking1ruking1 Member Posts: 19,826
    edited August 2011
    I think wwest is making the cases for us. In that sense he agrees with us. In the Porsche 911 unless one has a death wish, one learns REAL fast ones mortality in this vehicle.
  • qbrozenqbrozen Member Posts: 33,733
    edited August 2011
    I think there are too many real life examples that shoot holes in that (/his) hypothesis.

    Oh, you mean like this list of cars I beat this past weekend in my 3100-lb FWD stock vehicle at the autoX? ;)

    2007 Volkswagen GTI 39.931
    2008 Subaru WRX STI 40.078
    2011 Subaru Rex 40.491
    1995 Mazda Miata 40.536
    Crossfire 41.000
    Nissan GTR 41.126
    1989 Porsche 911 41.222
    2005 Ford Mustang GT 41.408
    2011 Subaru WRX 41.451
    2007 Ford Shelby GT 41.482
    370Z 41.521
    1991 Toyota MR2 42.185
    2008 Pontiac G8 GT 42.453
    1991 Toyota MR2 44.023
    STI 44.826
    2008 Subaru Impreza 2.5i 45.040
    1992 Chevrolet Camaro 45.057
    2003 Ford Mustang 45.492
    1989 Toyota MR2 45.971
    1988 Pontiac Trans Am/GTA 46.009
    1989 Mazda RX7 46.620
    RX8 48.554
    1999 Ford Mustang 50.862
    2008 Subaru Impreza 2.5i 51.892

    By the way, in the spirit of the thread, we typically have over 100 participants in each autoX. I'd say only half of those are consistently there every event. And out of all participants, manual trans cars are easily 95% of them. I think that's a pretty strong case for manual trans cars sticking around.

    '11 GMC Sierra 1500; '98 Alfa 156 2.0TS; '08 Maser QP; '67 Coronet R/T; '13 Fiat 500c; '20 S90 T6; '22 MB Sprinter 2500 4x4 diesel; '97 Suzuki R Wagon; '96 Opel Astra; '11 Mini Cooper S

  • plektoplekto Member Posts: 3,738
    ..."The issue is that FWD plus manual results in a very poor car for driving in any sort of spirited manner"...


    I think there are too many real life examples that shoot holes in that (/his) hypothesis.


    And all of them involve very light little cars. As I stated, the real issue is that once you approach 4000lbs, the fact that you have an extra 600-800lbs in the front results in massive over-steer, and very heavy steering (unless of course they over-amp it to the point where they remove all feel/make it drive-by-wire steering)

    Everyone always talks about how FWD is great for climbing hills, but last I checked, what goes up must also come down. I suppose everyone just forgets about that? Putting the majority of the braking power, the steering, the acceleration, and the weight on one set of wheels is a bad idea. If you do anything wrong, you're over. Just check for videos of people sliding down hills in the winter. There's too many to possibly watch. Now, I suppose computers can help some, but it's really not a proper way to design a car. It shouldn't need a dozen computers and safety systems to keep it on the road.

    Now, I suppose there are a couple of rare 50/50 weight distribution FWD cars, but most are so heavy up front that the rear end is pretty much just along for the ride. And if they were 50/50 and FWD, the advantage going up hills would disappear.
  • qbrozenqbrozen Member Posts: 33,733
    edited August 2011
    And all of them involve very light little cars.

    Look above your post. Thanks.

    I'd also like to add that I am far from the fastest FWD car there.

    '11 GMC Sierra 1500; '98 Alfa 156 2.0TS; '08 Maser QP; '67 Coronet R/T; '13 Fiat 500c; '20 S90 T6; '22 MB Sprinter 2500 4x4 diesel; '97 Suzuki R Wagon; '96 Opel Astra; '11 Mini Cooper S

  • ruking1ruking1 Member Posts: 19,826
    Well ah yes, while I didn''t know you went a racin ;)
  • andys120andys120 Member Posts: 23,669
    edited August 2011
    I have a theory.... just a theory, but it's backed up by real world experience. Small FWD cars like Minis and GTIs are fun to drive, especially with a manual becuase there isn't so much weight to transfer when braking or turning but once you get much larger than a Golf the fun goes away because there's so much understeer and weight transfer it discourages anything but sedate driving.

    That's my theory and I'm sticking to it until someone can show me a largish FWD-er that's really fun on a twisty road.

    2001 BMW 330ci/E46, 2008 BMW 335i conv/E93

  • qbrozenqbrozen Member Posts: 33,733
    Oh, I'd probably agree. But most cars over 3300 lbs aren't much fun, IMHO. I mean, to a degree, you'll have some fun in ... oh, let's say a G35X (which i've autoX'd), but if you try to get serious about going fast, you find out that weight is the enemy no matter what wheels are being driven.

    There are some exotics and supercars that are the exception, but obviously it costs ALOT of money and ALOT of power to make a heavy car fun.

    I plan on taking my 540i to the autoX at some point this year. Will it be fun? probably. Will it be AS FUN as my GTI? Probably not. I can guarantee it won't be as fast.

    '11 GMC Sierra 1500; '98 Alfa 156 2.0TS; '08 Maser QP; '67 Coronet R/T; '13 Fiat 500c; '20 S90 T6; '22 MB Sprinter 2500 4x4 diesel; '97 Suzuki R Wagon; '96 Opel Astra; '11 Mini Cooper S

  • plektoplekto Member Posts: 3,738
    Naturally, anything on a track isn't true on normal roads. My cousin can beat most of the people he races against. But then again, he has a 700HP Mustang with about 20-30K in custom work done to it.
  • xwesxxwesx Member Posts: 17,678
    Oh, I don't know... Lay some snow and ice on that road and I can have a whole lot of fun in any configuration of car. I think the fun lies more in pushing the machine to its limits (for the conditions) than the absolute speed involved in doing so.
    2018 Subaru Crosstrek, 2014 Audi Q7 TDI, 2013 Subaru Forester, 2013 Ford F250 Lariat D, 1976 Ford F250, 1969 Chevrolet C20, 1969 Ford Econoline 100
  • plektoplekto Member Posts: 3,738
    But with the TSX and similar cars, the limit of the machine is often barely above the posted speed on most mountain roads. It feels (to me at least) like you're bludgeoning your way through the road as opposed to zipping down it.
  • qbrozenqbrozen Member Posts: 33,733
    edited August 2011
    The issue is that FWD plus manual results in a very poor car for driving in any sort of spirited manner.
    .....
    Naturally, anything on a track isn't true on normal roads.

    Take off the blinders and make up your mind, will ya? Certainly, autoX is a "sort of spirited manner." If you want to hold on to your personal bias that has no basis in the real world, that is certainly your privelege, but don't expect others who know better and have more experience to follow you down that path.

    '11 GMC Sierra 1500; '98 Alfa 156 2.0TS; '08 Maser QP; '67 Coronet R/T; '13 Fiat 500c; '20 S90 T6; '22 MB Sprinter 2500 4x4 diesel; '97 Suzuki R Wagon; '96 Opel Astra; '11 Mini Cooper S

  • shiposhipo Member Posts: 9,148
    "But with the TSX and similar cars, the limit of the machine is often barely above the posted speed on most mountain roads. It feels (to me at least) like you're bludgeoning your way through the road as opposed to zipping down it."

    Seriously? Granted I've never driven a TSX in any form but it must not handle anywhere near as well as it looks like it should. I mean geez, I don't even remotely have to flog our bone-stock four-thousand pound FWD minivans to exceed the posted limit in the mountains; does the TSX handle that poorly? :P

    Of course, even without ever having driven a TSX, we all know it is more than capable of running rings around any two-ton minivan ever to turn a wheel. :shades:
  • lemmerlemmer Member Posts: 2,689
    I had a 1995 300ZX and a 1996 Acura Integra at the same time (both manuals). Try as I might, even with the extra grip and power of the Z, I could never go faster down my favorite curvy road any faster than in the Integra.

    In any case, blanket statements made about FWD seem kind of silly to me.
  • shiposhipo Member Posts: 9,148
    Two comments:

    1) I have no problem believing a 1996 Integra could dust a 1995 300ZX in the curvies.

    2) IIRC, the 1995 300ZX had more than a passing resemblance to a bloated pig (especially compared to my business partner's old Datsun 260Z).
  • lemmerlemmer Member Posts: 2,689
    I loved that Z. Maybe it was a little tubby, but it was a incredible compared to the prior generation 300ZX. And it didnt feel heavy from behind the wheel.
  • xwesxxwesx Member Posts: 17,678
    I think the feel depends on how the situation is approached. If one is expecting the vehicle to compare to a MINI, bludgeoning might be an apt description. I prefer to get a feel for the vehicle I'm driving, then exploit its own set of strengths.

    I used to own a 1998 Dodge Grand Caravan, as did Shipo (referenced above). While that could be described as anything other than "sporty," I could still toss the old girl around when I wanted to just by knowing how it would respond to my input.
    2018 Subaru Crosstrek, 2014 Audi Q7 TDI, 2013 Subaru Forester, 2013 Ford F250 Lariat D, 1976 Ford F250, 1969 Chevrolet C20, 1969 Ford Econoline 100
  • shiposhipo Member Posts: 9,148
    edited August 2011
    Geez, small world; our first (of three) minivans was a 1998 DGC Sport (with the 3.8). After I taught our son how to drive a stick he decided he enjoyed driving a car with three pedals under the dash so much that he asked me if there was anyway to replace the Automatic transmission in his van with a 5-Speed. Yeah, that's my boy. :shades:
  • xwesxxwesx Member Posts: 17,678
    Hahaha; it is times like these when I think we need a "like" button on this forum. :D
    2018 Subaru Crosstrek, 2014 Audi Q7 TDI, 2013 Subaru Forester, 2013 Ford F250 Lariat D, 1976 Ford F250, 1969 Chevrolet C20, 1969 Ford Econoline 100
  • plektoplekto Member Posts: 3,738
    Seriously? Granted I've never driven a TSX in any form but it must not handle anywhere near as well as it looks like it should.

    It will go faster, but it feels a lot like trying to do the same thing in, say, a Buick. The front is knumb, oversteer is unavoidable, and the suspension loves to hop out from under you when the weight swings the other way after a hard corner.

    The TSX is actually the current Accord in Japan and sold with a markup for the U.S. market as an Acura. It's simply not the same as, say, a BMW 1 series. And heaven help you if you compare a FWD sedan like that to a car like the RX-8. (which technically is also a sedan). The weight distribution is the main problem. And they simply didn't need to make it FWD as it makes it feel like a typical 25K sedan instead of a cheap alternative to a luxury sports sedan. (which unfortunately, is how Honda is marketing it...)
  • Mr_ShiftrightMr_Shiftright Member Posts: 64,481
    Well having the back end of a Porsche 356 come around on you while going downhill on a snowy mountain road IS the driver's fault in the sense that he got into the car in the first place.

    There *is* actually large FWD car that is totally fun to drive...the Alfa Romeo 164LS.
  • andys120andys120 Member Posts: 23,669

    There *is* actually large FWD car that is totally fun to drive...the Alfa Romeo 164LS.


    Not withstanding that it is no longer made I have my doubts based on a great deal of mileage behind the wheel of it's cousin the Saab 9000 Turbo. Remember I specifically said "fun to drive on a twisty road."

    I'll be a lot more excited about Alfa's return to America if they bring in some reasonably priced RWD cars.

    2001 BMW 330ci/E46, 2008 BMW 335i conv/E93

  • Mr_ShiftrightMr_Shiftright Member Posts: 64,481
    edited August 2011
    The Saab was a couch compared to it. it had the Alfa 3.0 V-6 and was much better balanced I thought.
  • wwestwwest Member Posts: 10,706
    So, I toss a drag anchor, empty bucket, into the water behind my boat, at what/which point does the laws of physics change and the rear of my boat tries to get into the lead...?

    And you say I have no concept...

    Your description is, however, perfectly adequate for a FWD vehicle.
  • wwestwwest Member Posts: 10,706
    edited August 2011
    Obviously you haven't driven a newer Porsche, 996 or 997, say. I don't know how they have managed to tame the beast, the tail out issue, but quite obviously they have.

    And that's with PSM off.
  • wwestwwest Member Posts: 10,706
    "...that's a pretty strong case for manual cars sticking around..."

    Sorry, but no.

    They're just simply are not enough autoX events, nor drivers with interest in same, to overcome the "numbers" on the other side. Manuals, pure manuals, will be sticking around but only as a "boutique" class.

    Also, how many practice runs would YOU need in the RWD of your choice in order to come out just as close to the top as you did with your FWD...?
  • ruking1ruking1 Member Posts: 19,826
    edited August 2011
    Well that was about then, but now the 2009 /2010 Porsche 911 Carrera's. They seemed to have tamed the beast. Probably the neatest thing is it has GOBS more hp and torque. Got to love the 6 speed manual transmission.
  • Mr_ShiftrightMr_Shiftright Member Posts: 64,481
    You have to be a really REALLY bad driver to screw up in a new Porsche. However, I still believe that the talent is out there. :P
Sign In or Register to comment.