The Future Of The Manual Transmission

xwesx

Funny; the first article duplicates itself at the half-way point on the page. It felt like deja vu for a moment there!

stever

They probably need to reflash the automatic typesetting software.

Nothing new in the story to you guys, but at least the media writes about manuals now and then.

Mr_Shiftright

I dated a woman for almost a year. We drove everywhere in my car. One time, her's was in the shop so she asked to borrow mine. I left her the keys---she calls me up and says "I can't drive a stickshift". :P

Three pedals wasn't even on her radar.

nippononly

I like some of the comments below the article, particularly the first one: "Having a manual is the difference between driving and steering...long live the stick shift".

2 thumbs up! :-)

Was down at the Subaru dealer today, which also is a Mazda dealer. Was looking at the Miatas in stock - they had one automatic (a Special Edition hardtop) and about 8 stick shifts. The salesman noted me taking note and said there is little point to ordering automatic Miatas as nobody wants them except the occasional older woman who comes in.....

When I'm looking into getting an FR-S next year, you can bet I will be looking only at sticks - why would anyone buy a proper sport coupe with an automatic? Might as well just drive a Camry.

nippononly

Even better, I just read the other article you linked!

"Stick shifts are for the thinking driver, those who want to participate in the ride, controlling the engine speed and gear ratio"

You got it. :shades:

bpizzuti

Because some of us also have to commute in our proper sport coupes. When I buy my Veloster Turbo (if I buy the Veloster Turbo), it 100% will be an automatic. A stick is just too much of a pain to deal with in highway rush hour traffic that goes from bumper-to-bumper, to 45 MPH, and back to bumper-to-bumper in the space of a mile or two, repeatedly. Especially with the long clutch travel in the Veloster Turbo (at least the one they had at the show).

Mr_Shiftright

I'd imagine this would not happen as often with a stickshift car:

Hitting the Wrong Pedal

nippononly

OK, I hear you....I commute in my stick shift in those conditions though.....still appreciate the stick......

dc_driver

I have owned manual transmissions almost exclusively for the last 23 years.. I was in the market to replace my trusty Mazda 3 manual with a new car. Manual's were not too hard to find in the compact and entry level sports car category (Mazda 3, Ford Focus, Hyundai Genesis coupe, etc). Where I noticed the issue was with sportier models of midsize sedans. Fusion V6, Camry V6, Hyundai Sonata Turbo, Kia Optima Turbo, VW Passat, Nissan Altima and Maxima, etc.

It is frustrating. With three young kids, I decided that a coupe or compact was not going to cut it, that left me buying a midsize sedan with a larger engine and a 6 speed automatic. The paddle shifters are cool, but not the same as as stick.

I am adjusting, but I am missing the manual.. I just don't see this changing anytime soon (companies providing a manuals for midsize sedans). My wife is happier (she was not a manual fan even though she could drive them just fine).

Ah well...

bpizzuti

You know, at some point, someone's going to decide to build a transmission. It will have 7 gates, 6 for forward gears and one for reverse. it will have a third pedal. None of these will be connected to anything: they will be there solely to placate the "manual" buyer. The gearshift and clutch pedal will actual electrical connections that send signals to a transmission computer that will first make sure the person sending inputs isn't a complete idiot. Given that 99% of drivers are in fact complete idiots, the transmission will proceed to prove that it's smarter and completely ignore the driver.

Now if only we can get the gas pedal and steering wheel to ignore them as well...

mcdawgg

"My wife is happier (she was not a manual fan even though she could drive them just fine). "

Same here. I still have a manual, but wife has automatic now - she's MUCH happier. She did just okay driving them, but still had "issues," even after many years.

dudleyr

My kids drive manual, I drive manual, but my wife has moved to an automatic minivan. She likes manuals (she even bought out stick Integra), but she likes having a minivan more. Wish the Mazda 5 was a little bigger - the third row is not really useable. We used to have a first generation Odyssey that was a great size.

My parents (mid 70's) both got their first automatic in the last few years (prius and tdi). My mother was fine with it, but my father was very reluctant. He tried the Insight with a stick but it was just too small so he wound up with the Prius. He averages 59 mpg on the cars computer.

Right now I am absolutely drooling over the BRZ. What a perfect car for a stick. Nice link below - despite what some say, they can drive at Consumer Reports.

http://news.consumerreports.org/cars/2012/04/video---2013-subaru-brz-hangs-the-t- ail-out-at-our-test-track.html

ateixeira

CR is often criticized, but they tend to like sporty cars. The Boxster and Miata have always scored well, for instance.

bpizzuti

CR is often criticized, but they tend to like sporty cars.

When you get down to it, who doesn't?

ruking1

My guess is this Subaru would be a real (old) dog with a 6 speed automatic transmission.

dudleyr

I agree. I think it would sing with a stick, but only having 150 ft/lbs would probably be noticed more with an automatic.

I would expect the take rate for the auto to be relatively low on this vehicle.

ateixeira

http://www.autoblog.com/2012/05/09/2013-hyundai-sonata-gets-1-100-price-increase- -drops-manual-opt/

xwesx

It's not that no one wants a manual, it is that it is limited to the BASE model! I don't buy base models, but I do buy manuals. So, where does that leave me?

Well, not in a Sonata! :P

fintail

I wonder if a single example of a current gen manual Sonata actually sold.

dudleyr

Exactly - self fulfilling prophecy.

Offer the stick on a version nobody wants then drop the stick because nobody buys it.

ateixeira

Fitzmall has 214 Sonatas in stock, guess how many manuals?

Zero! :sick:

Agree about base only being a mistake, in fact it should be the exact opposite, Turbo/sport model only.

Or let Kia appeal to those buyers.

I have seen, in fact driven, a Kia Optima manual. Also base only.

dudleyr

2013 Accord model list is out. They still have the MT available on 3 sedans (LX, sport and EX) and 4 coupes (including V-6). I am sure they will capture the Sonata stick market. They also moved up from a 5 speed to a 6 speed for the I4 stick. Hopefully 6th gear is nice and tall.

Would still like to get power leather seats in an Accord stick, but I'll suffer with cloth if that is my only choice. Passat TDI and Possibly Fusion could also be contenders. Mazda 6 could be interesting if they bring over the diesel.

http://editorial.autos.msn.com/blogs/autosblogpost.aspx?post=af1dd966-f8f7-4ff5-- - 90d0-2ca73dbca440

Interesting article. Author is not a believer.

ateixeira

I wouldn't put too much weight on the opinions of a publication that uses a photo of an ancient 4 speed manual and thinks a Mazda6 is the best car they'll ever own.

nippononly

Gee WHIZ is that guy ever negative about manuals!

I am resigned to them eventually existing only as fringe options in a few models though. I bet the day there are NO midsize sedans with available sticks will occur before 2020 (the only real hopes of holdouts in that regard are VW and Mazda - but I wouldn't put my money on the Passat, and it looks like Mazda may fall on very hard times so who knows what it will have the resources to do.....so there go my only two real hopes. :-(). And traditional compacts (models that aren't specifically designed to be sporty) will follow a few years after that.

And in all those entry-level models what will the traditional base stick shift be replaced by? The GODAWFUL CVT, not ONE of which I have yet found to be even remotely bearable....my latest drives being in the new Outback and then most recently the 2012 Impreza, but before that having sampled a couple of Nissans with CVTs. They absolutely suck, and if a CVT or a traditional TC automatic were my only choices, I would have to go with the slushbox.

But for another 10-15 years I hope to be able to still get the transmission of choice in my new car purchases. And heck, I will be in my mid-50s by then, so if that is really the end of the road for manuals I can just resort to buying only used cars from then on. ;-)

ruking1

I think the opportunity is really hidden in plain sight with the 84.2 mpg record being set by the Taylor's in a 2012 Passat TDI 6 speed manual (aka longest distance (1,636 miles?) on a factory tank full of fuel (19.3 gals?)). The Passat TDI's H EPA is 43 mpg DSG AND 6 speed manual. The people that favor automatics will of course up to vilify 6 speed manuals.

Looked at in a different way, the record could have been attempted with the automatic transmission, DSG option, which is better than the so called slush box automatic !! ?? 6 speed manual transmission has been amble shown time after time that it is the go to machine to get the high mileage done better than the best automatics. Again it would have been instructive to have its competitor. i.e.Toyota etc say a Camry or a Camry hybrid to have been run side by side to see what would have been the results of the "competition". Indeed they do not have to do it side by side but duplicate its methodology. I would swag they don't even DARE. Why NOT? They would probably not even come close to the 84.2 mpg figures.

So the deletion of the manual transmission option in a corporate point of view was a no brainer in that now that line can charge a minimum of 1,000 dollars more for the whole line of vehicles. In todays competitive auto markets 1000 dollars is a whale of a profit.

Mr_Shiftright

I make an attempt to go over to the Dark Side a few weeks ago--test drove a friend's very VERY clean '99 Porsche 911 with tiptronic. Nice car, good price---but I just couldn't do two-pedals on a car like that.

nippononly

And rightly so! The thing is, while I would take a manual over an automatic any time there was a choice, I can appreciate why people might choose an automatic in a minivan or an SUV or whatever. It's so unengaging to drive anyway, how much difference could a stick shift really make?

But in a car that is intended to be bought for fun and sporty driving, it's just unthinkable to me that anyone would go with the auto. And yet they so often do.....I just don't get it. What a way to ruin an otherwise great car, in the case of that 911.

Mr_Shiftright

I read somewhere that even new Corvettes are sold about 50-50/stick vs. automatic.

I'd certainly consider buying an automatic pickup truck, though.

My MINI's too much fun for an automatic as well---the older ones like mine have an audible supercharger whine, and when you run through the 6 gears really fast, it's quite an audible treat.

stever

how much difference could a stick shift really make

Plenty. Even if you're wallowing through the curves, shifting is fun. But when I sent my wife to the Mazda dealer, the rest of the 5 didn't grab her. :sick:

nippononly

I have driven the 5 with a stick, and it is a hoot to drive! When I was talking minivans, I wasn't really including the little 5 in my thinking - I was imagining the 4200-4500 pound behemoths that pass for "minivans" these days, like the Grand Caravan, Sienna, and Odyssey.

The supercharged Mini is much more my bag than the Corvette, but if I owned either one the only transmission that would be acceptable to me would be a stick. As for pickups, it's nice that that is one place you can still get a stick pretty much throughout the varous trims and engines, and I would take a stick there too, especially if I went with a smaller 4-cylinder truck.

stever

A stick was available back in the early "smaller" Caravan days but they were pretty rare even back then. Knew one couple in the canoe club with one and they were trying for more mpg with it. The last MT van I got to drive was a '69 VW Bus.

I'm going to revisit the 5 if and when the current rides die.

Drove a '90ish F-150 stick last month, but very briefly. In that kind of rig, I may prefer an automatic. Talk about a wallower.

Mr_Shiftright

A lot of the potential pleasure of a stickshift is the feel and throw of the gearshift itself. Some transmissions are so clunky that you'd almost rather have an automatic.

kyfdx

I read somewhere that even new Corvettes are sold about 50-50/stick vs. automatic.

I bet the base model Corvette (non-Z06, non-ZR1) is a lot higher than 50% automatic...

I will say... Chevy really turned that car around with the C5 model in '97... The Vette was turning into the Lincoln Town Car in terms of demographics and sporting intentions, until then.. It's a respectable sport car, now.

volkov

Why the hate? I just don't see why people have such an issue with the CVT. I have driven 3 or 4 now, and drive one quite often in my wife's Prius. I also drive the monster truck with auto regularly. Do I prefer the experience to driving with a stick? Absolutely not, but to me CVT is just another automatic and in some ways better. No big clunk on sudden downshifts for one (the VW DSG was rather unpleasant in that regard). Maybe coming from the old 2.0 WRX turbo, I don't have an issue with the rubber band complaint some have, although I consider that baseless, because the response is actually linear. Even when 'switching' gears, CVTs are putting power down. Traditional autos are not.

Mr_Shiftright

I think the problem is that CVTs have varied widely in their application--some are quite okay, some truly awful---and they have also exhibited various maladies. Probably the worst thing about them is that they don't add to the driver experience at all.

ruking1

I really do not think his outlook approaches hate. The issue with the CVT is really one of not being in too many of the PVF, both volume and percentage. Reactions have been spotty at best. Indeed not many know how many are really out there in that they just call them automatics.

So for example, 2012 MB ML 350 Bluetec employs a 7 speed hybrid CVT. Even MB does not make a point of calling it a hybrid CVT ! ? I am waiting to see how IT ( CVT) does longer term on a 455# ft of torque vehicle; both time 10 years and mileage 150,000 miles Plus. Now the interesting thing is that MB really had one of the better to BEST Bluetec A/T combinations (slush box automatic). I am swaging they switched because of trying to improve mpg. To be perfectly honest, one reason I bypassed it was because I really didn't want to be a POTENTIAL uncompensated test bunny.

The drive train (8 speed A/T) I wound up getting has a 10 year/100,000 warranty vs The MB ML 350 BlueTec's 4 year/50,000 miles.

Concurrently, I am living with an 8 speed A/T slush box. So far I am really happy with it. It meets specification for 627 # ft of torque for a 406 # ft diesel engine. This is a 54% safety factor.

I have not been able to ascertain what the torque handling specifications are for the MB ML 350 BlueTec 7 speed hybrid CVT. The best I can do is 455# ft plus an unknown safety factor.

bpizzuti

But don't automatics vary equally widely?

I think the main problem with CVTs as people see them is that they are even less involving than most automatics. The "rubberband" effect negates the direct drivetrain connection to some degree, and engine running at a constant RPM could be a bit too hypnotic.

stever

Indeed, some manual transmissions are quite okay, some truly awful (like the '90 F-150 one I experienced a month ago).

nippononly

CVTs have varied widely in their application--some are quite okay, some truly awful

I have yet to meet the CVT that is "quite okay", but I have only driven the Nissans, the Subarus, and the Prius so far. Who else is making a CVT out there? Perhaps I have yet to sample the okay one.

But I SINCERELY doubt it.

Anyway, I won't be buying automatics of any kind as long as there is at least one model on the market under $30,000 that offers a manual. I think I might literally buy whatever it was, provided it had four seats, regardless of other factors. That's how important it is to me for my car to have a manual transmission.

volkov

What I am asking, is what is it about the CVT experience that you cannot tolerate even to the level of a traditional AT? That is what you said, and it has nothing to do with long term reliability. What specifically is wrong with CVT that At does better? I find both equally numb with the exception of the quirks of AT that I find unappealing. I do find it interesting that manufacturers have deliberately hobbled their CVTs by giving them set numbers of gears so that reactionary consumers are less threatened. The MB tranny and Subaru being perfect examples which are made to have artificial pre-set ratios to change to. From an engineering and physics standpoint, this is nonsensical.

ruking1

I think that if one approaches it predominately to even solely from an engineering and physics stand point, which in effect renders other points of view moot to nonsensical, one can only get a German car, albeit BMW, MB, Audi, Porsche, etc.

Let us take the PDK / DSG. Over the years (10 that I am aware of) there has been one notable dissatisfaction for that component, which seems to be a major one in the US markets: it is NOT like an A/T (slush box).

CVT's have faced the rubber band and/or numbing issues, etc.

Mr_Shiftright

I've only driven 3 CVTs for any length of time and they were, admittedly, cars that are now a few years old---and I absolutely "hated" all 3 of them. It's not that I'm a mean, vindictive person---these 3 CVTs deserved all the scorn they got from me.
(MINI, DODGE, AUDI). Whizz, bang, clunk!

I realize I owe it to CVTs to try them out again in 2012 and I certainly will.

ruking1

In light of the topic, the latest offerings are really a sort of hidden homage to the 4/5/6 speed manual transmissions, M/T's. The more things are driven by the so called higher fuel mileage standards (on the ICE) almost all roads lead back to the M/T. One example is the Car of the Year VW Passat TDI SEL with the 6 speed M/T.

The upshot it has the LEAST parasitic effect, that in effect has not been overcome by technological efforts to drive it (parasitic effects) BACK. The other side of one hand clapping is the turbo diesel engine.

Mr_Shiftright

also MTs are the least prone to disaster. Rebuilding a modern CVT carries a shocking price tag. May god have mercy on your soul once you're out of warranty. How 'bout $6500 bucks for a new one on a MINI? That would be about 1/2 the market value of my car. :surprise:

ruking1

Another super good point. Not only are slush boxes, CVT's and DSG's more costlier to acquire, operate, but the maintenance AND (potential) repair costs ( both scheduled and unscheduled) are also much higher. I do not think it an accident that most cars in Europe are M/T's.

lemmer

Just out of curiosity, I looked up a couple of used CVTs.

2005 Prius - $1000 with one year warranty.
2005 MINI - $3300 with no warranty.

ruking1

Clutch and flywheel kit (V-6 upgrade for a 5 speed 4 cylinder ) $333.00 (300# ft of torque handling capability from #155 # ft)

volkov

And let me be clear, avoiding a technology to be prudent about potential catastophic failures is completely reasonable. Just ask scores of Gen 1 Highlander Hybrid owners what happened when the inverter bought the farm at 3.5 years of age. $7000 price tags were common place.
Talking of parasitic loss, that was another issue I had with the DSG (and surprisingly in the 2 recent 6sp auto Chrysler products I have rented) - very aggressive engine braking. They were all incapable of coasting in any way and were much more intrusive than the Prius which at least scavenges energy when it does so. Even moderate hills at city speeds meant you had to keep on the gas pedal to maintain speed. Same hills I know I would be flying down at idle or on vacuum in the WRX.

ruking1

In TDI's there are synergies between the drive trains, DSG's and 5/6 speed manuals.The bottom line is engine braking is way less than gasser engines and there is zero fuel draw while coasting in gear. Coasting in neutral can not only be a safety issue, but in the scenario to which you refer can also draw fuel where ZERO can be better. This of course is a cumulative thing that might be hard to measure in that .2 gal can be a normal per hour draw in neutral.

Mr_Shiftright

Another technological advance that works against both manual transmission cars AND diesels is the new "stop/start" technology that is appearing, and will appear more and more, in new cars.

Stop/Start can be quite effective in saving gasoline, but when coupled with a manual transmission it requires the car to be in neutral and clutch pedal out---this rather inconvenient fact might induce people to "ride" their clutches so that they can ignore stop/start tech.

As for diesels, each stop and start creates vibration and noise that is distracting, wherein with a gas engine the transition is usually undetectable.

So stop/start favors the automatic gas engined car.