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.
A reporter would like to speak with you about your experience; please reach out to PR@Edmunds.com by 7/22 for details.
Options
Comments
So the great irony of it all ---the people who generally like stickshifts the most also generally do not drive for economy.
that's why I always said that every new car should have a rating on the window sticker that says:
"This vehicle has a FUN FACTOR of .94" :P
It was $800 for a clutch last time I had one put in. Compare that to $3500-$4000 for even something as mundane as a Camry, and you're just never going to beat the frugality of a manual.
As for the calculation, that was simply mpg to mpg and extra cost for the gas, assuming that the automatic actually DID get 5mpg better. You'll never break even on an automatic over a manual just like how you won't break even on a Prius versus a Corolla. That 4-6K premium is a lifetime of gas and then some. Given that the best automatics essentially equal the MPG of a manual in real-world driving, which is quite a feat, you're hundreds in the hole and thousands more by the time you finally get rid of it.
On a Corolla, for instance, the automatic is $830 extra. That's obviously at or below cost, because the cheapest that a mechanic can buy a brand new one is almost three times that much money. Before they add their mark-up.
actually, that kind of proves the point. I am well aware of what a replacement AT costs (I do own 2 V6 Hondas!), but have no clue what a replacement MT costs (I have one of them also) since it will never be relevant.
2020 Acura RDX tech SH-AWD, 2023 Maverick hybrid Lariat luxury package.
Labor is labor, and it takes a good 10 hours to dig a clutch out of a Camry and put it all back together again.
The dealer pays nothing close to that, and BMW manufacturing pays nothing close to what it charges the dealer. BMW buys them by the 1000's.
I can assure you that, if I contact GE and tell them I wish to buy 250,000 microwave ovens a year I will pay nothing like what I will pay or a single oven at Walmart.
I understand the point you're attempting to make, but your example using the Corolla transmission is truly comparing apples to oranges.
Buying a Corolla 1 part at the time would increase the cost of the car a factor of 20+ fold. And, that doesn't even include the assembly costs.
As for the Prius example, I think you're spot-on. As FE continues to improve on traditional drivetrain setups and gain on hybrid setups, it's making hybrids look less and less attractive, or cost effective...
The latest I was reading about just this morning was the new 500 Abarth, which I guess is about three months out from coming to market. 5 speed manual only, with a 160 hp turbo 1.4. The funny thing is, it only is expected to make 27/32 mpg, and that is MORE than the European model due to the addition of the Fiat multi-air valve system in the North American model.
Of course, being a sport model few will care very much about the mileage, but it's significantly less than Mini makes in the Cooper S, with the same power and slightly more weight (and a sixth gear - it is a shame how many manuals are still coming to market with only five forward speeds, as we move into the age of 8-speed automatics in many models and 6-speed autos in even the cheapest most mundane models).
Whether I'm buying a sport model or a commute car, I still won't buy an automatic, period. Not even in consideration. In another ten years, who knows? Maybe I will be more amenable to slushboxes and rolling-couchlike driving experiences when I am in my 50s......and then of course, the time (and the price of gas) may come when I become a lot more interested in hybrids or electric cars, enough to put up with the most awful of all automatics: the CVT.
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
The problem is, of course, that RWD manual equipped cars are getting hard to find. Oddly enough, though, if you are looking at the total picture like this, the European makers are actually competitive in the long run. Yes, repairs on that 3 series might run you more money, but if you have one with manual, it essentially evens out as there's little to break in the drive-train, and if it does, it's simple as pie to fix.
People ask me for recommendations all the time and are surprised when I mention early 2000s BMWs and Mercedes with manual and zero options/base trim as good choices. They are very good cars if you remove the electronics and garbage from them and avoid the automatic transmissions. It saddens me, though, that Mercedes stopped offering the C class with manual this year. Excellent cars, especially the most recent versions.
I drove 2 (500,500c) last week at the Motor Trend sponsored show in SC. It wasn't the Abarth edition, but it drives nothing like a Mini. It has really comfortable seats, but its steering isn't anything close to the responsive steering like that of a Mini. I felt like I was driving a much larger car, and if I was looking or the "fun, spirited driving experience", it's not one I would consider.
I hope the Abarth is different. If not, I suspect these are going to be no competition at all to Mini.
I liked the car, but I didn't feel like it was a sporty drive at all.
It says 195/45/16 tires. It should have 13 inchers on it, given its weight. Something more like the dimensions of a 80s Civic or Suzuki tire would be my guess. You simply don't need 16 inch low-profile tires on something that weighs that little.
Her Mini has 195/55R16 tires (RFTs), so it's not just the tires. I think the 500 is just designed with a softer, less aggressive steering, but it may indeed be different in the Abarth edition.
Again, it's not bad in the Fiat, just nothing like I would have suspected it to be...
The steering is a bit weird, but supposedly the Abarth's steering has been tightened up by 10% from the regular 500 - more effort and quicker ratio. They have also tweaked the suspension for better handling.
I don't really like the seating position, which does not change with the Abarth. I wish I had a Mini dealership less than 45 minutes from my house, because if I did I probably would have gone with the Mini base model, even though there are a lot of things about the interior I really don't like in that model.
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
Not so much gears, but certainly synchros and throwout bearing. Quite common.
'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
I would say that the throwout bearing is the most common manual transmission ailment, followed by, of course, clutch, then synchros, then bearings. Chipping off a gear is uncommon--you really have to work at it--but it does happen and then you are totally screwed, in a FWD car at least.
YES, sort of, I sat next to and watched one during a MD emissions test.
A while back you were allowed to choose, OBD2 or a real dyno run. Every one went with OBD2 because it was faster, but I was mostly curious so I asked for a dyno test.
They had to open a whole new lane for me, but they put my Miata on there and let me sit in the passenger seat to watch.
They give you a range of speed. Yes he watched it diligently, but the speed fluctuated up and down, just managing to stay between the lines (min and max speed).
It takes a lot of mental effort to peg the engine at 2500 RPM and keep it there, within tolerance, for the duration of the test., BRIEF duration.
It was not like that at all. Very, very different.
He accelerates up to a certain speed, staying between lines for min/max, even as it goes up and down.
Speed does wander, of course, quite a bit actually.
There is variance, even though he did managed to (barely) stay inside the lines.
It was road speed based, at least here in MD.
Sorry but this flies in the face of all the facts we presented. Manuals get better FE in the real world EPA reports by owners. Consistently so!
Unless you think all the manual drivers are lying?
I am not saying Should, Can, Will, I am saying they DO beat automatics.
Nowadays they plug in to the OBD2 port and you're out of there in 2 minutes.
Here in MD you have to do that every 2 years. I have 3 cars so it feels like I drive there every couple of months!
Yes...I remember reading quite a bit about the allowable ambient temperature range during EPA FE testing being discussed in the regulations (the link I posted a page or so back).
Evidently, it can make a significant difference.
ALL the manual drivers haven't reported in.
The few who have are avid about manual transmissions and I have little or no doubt that they are being truthful. On the other hand I'm quite sure, certain, that the numbers they report are taken from short term driving with a HIGH mental consentration level that cannot be sustained in the real world.
No, automatic drivers, ALL automatic drivers, can meet the EPA estimates with virtually no effort, no specific attention paid to shifting to benefit FE.
Your post immediately above:
ALL the manual drivers haven't reported in.
The few who have are avid about manual transmissions and I have little or no doubt that they are being truthful. On the other hand I'm quite sure, certain, that the numbers they report are taken from short term driving with a HIGH mental consentration level that cannot be sustained in the real world.
And, all the automatic drivers have yet to report in as well.
Once again, you skew the data to "prove" the point you are "attempting" to make.
For the record I have not logged my MT mileage on that site, and if I did the average would go up further in favor of the MT. Increasing an already landslide victory.
Maybe wwest can humor us with some real life examples (with enough sample points) that shows an advantage for an automatic in mpg.
Or find some repeatable real world tests were every car takes the exact same route and has its fuel measured by lab equipment. Consumer Reports is about the only place that does this and they have tested dozens of MT and AT of the same car and in every case in their repeatable lab tests the MT got better (or equal - only one or two and never for both mpg and acceleration) mpg and acceleration. This includes the DSG in a VWTDI which got 34 mpg with the DSG and 38 mpg with the stick.
Sure, driver is:
A) drinking coffee, etc, etc.
C) on the phone
D) on the phone, handsfree.
E) necking
F) tired
G) sleepy
H) reading a map
I) glancing at the GPS display.
J) watching a movie
K) DUI
Shall I go on...?
That would require a "test" wherein the driver would be completely unaware of even being involved in a "test". Telling the driver that they are involved in a test will ALWAYS result in a modification of the driver's natural actions.
Other than driving for the "thrill" of it, driving is a VERY boring task, no real challenge to the human mind so our mind ALWAYS finds something else to occupy itself with.
That's the exact test that my '87 325 would fail. NOx emissions, IIRC.
Unless you keep them until they are 20 years old - then just apply for historic tags. Voila! No more emissions tests required.
Thanks.
Back to the topic....
The EPA FE tests clearly show a distinct tilt in the balance of manual transmissions getting superior FE overall, with automatic transmissions closing the FE gap.
That information mirrors the claims of average drivers' responses.
One can disagree with those results, but the burden of proof is on them to demonstrate the validity of their claim. So far, citing driver distractions does nothing to support automatics get better FE, if for no other reason that drivers utilizing automatics suffer from the very same driving distractions as those driving manuals.
Now, one can attempt to make the argument that only a few manual drivers overall are competent with manual gearboxes, but I could make the very same argument about drivers with automatics, since automatics don't operate in either a 100% "on-off" manner.
So, at the end of the day, there simply isn't any statistical or hard evidence that, on average, a trained manual driver gets less FE than the same trained automatic driver.
Nothing I have posted here prohibits any particular automatic driver from exceeding the FE of a manual driver, but 1 or 2 points on a graph don't make a trend.
Compare 2 drivers and 2 cars:
A 57 yard old man in a Buick equipped with a manual, and his grandson, a 17 year old in the same model Buick, but his is equipped with an auto trans.
They drive the same number of miles in a 3 month period. Then, they swap cars for a 3 month period, but again drive the same number of miles.
Odds are, in both cases, the 57 year old grandfather gets better FE.
This occurs even as multiple models are being released (or are already here) that have EIGHT-speed automatics. Will the humble manual forever be behind in the number of forward gears from now on?........it used to be in the lead all the time. :-(
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
As far as number of gears goes there is a point of diminishing returns. (kinda like razor blades - do we really need 5 blades to shave). Are 8 speeds (or nine) really needed in an automatic, or is it just a game of oneupmanship? I suspect the latter.
I also don't think you need as many gears with a stick because there is no hunting for the perfect gear for every hill. Just select gear you need and drive up or down hill. An automatic tends to unlock as it finds resistance going up a hill which means more rpm, but less power to wheels (from tranny inefficiency) which of course makes it more likely to need a downshift. A manual is always locked in every gear the entire way up the hill and does not have the parasitic loss.
As far as number of gears - anybody remember the twin stick in the Dodge Colt. Never drove one, but it gave 8 forward gears (and two reverse). Kinda like a bicycle where you have a two speed transfer case (front two sprockets) and a 4 speed gearbox (rear sprockets).
Do the same thing with a 6 speed and you have 12 gears ( though I suppose some may overlap depending on how it was designed. The transfer case would be the equivalent of a "sport", and "eco" button on an automatic. Add normal setting in the middle and you have 18 speeds. Is this necessary - no, but it would not be hard for sticks to join the high number of gears game.
7 manual gears is going to be the limit, IMHO. And even that is going to have limited applications since you need something powerful enough to hold its speed at such low RPMs. Of course, my argument is that, if it is powerful enough to do that, you don't need such tightly spaced gearing that required 7 speeds anyway. :confuse:
Dudley, what you are describing is also standard fare in big rigs. High/Low and all the gears that accompany each.
'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
Oh, of course. That, and I don't believe they have made one yet that can handle too much power.
'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
I do remember the Colt twin stick. Seemed like a real good idea that never caught on.
2020 Acura RDX tech SH-AWD, 2023 Maverick hybrid Lariat luxury package.
Enthusiasts tend to care little about gas mileage (hence the all-out Prius hatred), so I doubt they spend time on the EPA web site. That's probably the last place they visit, if you think about it.
But, as Nissan discovered, there are many who simply dislike the "feel" of a non-shifting transmission, as it feels "broken" to them.
I think much of the negative feelings will disappear over time, as more auto models are equipped with CVTs, and more experience is gained by drivers.
Properly programmed, a CVT is the best replacement for a manual.... It has infinite gears.
No doubt, it would be easier and more economical for manufacturers to offer only automatics, but there appears to still be enough demand to keep that from happening....at least, for now.
Me neither, but it exists.
Watch the Top Gear segment on the Nissan Leaf. Totally unfair.
Listen to Cavuto or Limbaugh rant about the Volt. Better yet - don't.
I remember seeing Titus on TV cracking a joke about a Prius in the parking lot being lit on fire.
They want their V8s and hot rods and you ain't doing nothin' to stop 'em. Keep oil cheap no matter how many soldiers have to die for it. :sick:
No hunting for the perfect gear....with a stick...
Yes, that's why automatics are going toward more gear ratios while sticks are stuck at ~6.
Stick drivers already do not wish to deal with the distraction, FULL TIME distraction, of 6 forward speeds, so how many, with even more gears, would make use of selecting the "perfect" gear for each and every roadway condition.
Not even that 1%..I suspect.
"...Are 8 speeds (or nine) really needed in an automatic..."
Of course, I would think that question would have been answered by the very existence of the CVT with an "infinite" number of gear ratios.
As already mentioned drivers of automatics are becoming irritated by the "shiftiness", constant up and down shifting, of these new 6-8 speed automatics for no reason obvious to the driver.
The next move might well be a combination of 6 "base" speeds with a CVT at the top. That would eliminate the irritating "shiftiness", even somewhat un-nerving, feel.
I can see manual transmissions being retained in bargain-basement sub-compacts, in AWD wagons, in Japanese pocket-rockets (EVO, STi) and in diesel cars (diesel torque makes a manual trans so easy to drive).
I can see CVTs in "family-movers" and in mid-range hybrids, neither of which is designed for fun or sport.
And of course, I can see traditional manual transmissions disappearing in 200 mph sportscars, eventually, although these cars might still have clutches--just no 3rd pedal.
I can see manual transmissions being retained in bargain-basement sub-compacts, in AWD wagons, in Japanese pocket-rockets (EVO, STi) and in diesel cars (diesel torque makes a manual trans so easy to drive).
I can see CVTs in "family-movers" and in mid-range hybrids, neither of which is designed for fun or sport.
And of course, I can see traditional manual transmissions disappearing in 200 mph sportscars, eventually, although these cars might still have clutches--just no 3rd pedal.
I think that's pretty much the future, at least, in the internal combustion engine world. Electrics may simply go with direct drive motors at each wheel.
Actually, not quite true. The Tesla roadster has 2 forward gears and of course, 1 reverse.
and speaking of CVTs, some do have artificial "gears" to mimic the feel/sound of an AT. So basically, removing the inherent efficiency because people think it sounds funny.
2020 Acura RDX tech SH-AWD, 2023 Maverick hybrid Lariat luxury package.
True. Its actually the exact opposite. It has ZERO "gears."
'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