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

1177178180182183205

Comments

  • nippononlynippononly Member Posts: 12,555
    they will have to pry the gearshift from my cold dead hand.

    I VEHEMENTLY second that notion!

    As for CVTs, I fear most of the market will gradually shift to them because they are the cheapest transmission by far for automakers, so they maximize profit. The only holdouts with DSGs and the like will be luxury models in which the motorboating tendencies of CVTs will be deemed offensively tacky.

    And here I thought the worst thing I had to fear was an automotive future equipped exclusively with slushbox automatics!

    2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)

  • bpizzutibpizzuti Member Posts: 2,743
    RACECARS use "automatics" now. I don't consider them automatics, but you do. I consider them sequential manuals, dual-clutch sequentials, etc. But because they don't have a clutch pedal, some "purists" out there consider them "automatics" rather than sophisticated manual transmissions.

    Were you the same guys who pined for the acetylene lamps when electric headlights replaced them? Mourning the loss of innertube tires maybe? Missing that caurburated setup? :shades:
  • bpizzutibpizzuti Member Posts: 2,743
    Honestly Mazda seems to be the only one hanging on to slushboxes, but theirs is excellent. Other than that, slushboxes seem to be staying on trucks because dry-clutch DCTs can't handle high torque loads (I don't think anyone's gotten one to handle more than 250 lb-ft). The push is for dry-clutch ones because of the increased efficiency over wet clutches (which are awfully similar to torque converters when you get down to it).

    Ford is going DCT, FIAT is going DCT (including Chrysler Group), Volkswagen started going DCT a long time ago, now Hyundai's working on one (though I think they're still invested in slushboxes), and I hear GM has got a 7-speed DCT in the works too.

    Dodge dumped their CVTs, and I think only Toyota, Nissan and Subaru are still doing CVTs. Subaru's isn't terrible but Nissan has really put a lot of time and effort into theirs, and theirs is probably the best implementation so far. Toyota only seems to use their with their hybrids in planetary form, they're still using slushboxes everywhere else. Since Hyundai's 6-speed automatic is brand new I think it's going to be around a while (I hope Dodge stops buying them though). But Mazda's SkyActiv-D is probably the only one really worth keeping around over a good DCT.
  • Mr_ShiftrightMr_Shiftright Member Posts: 64,481
    But your argument presumes that new tech is always better than old tech.

    You could easily win an argument that an electric headlight is superior to an acetylene one in every way, or directional signals to hand signals (especially at night) but that would be not so easy an argument to win if you were trying to prove that a DSG substantially improves MPG, maintenance costs, or driver experience.

    One thing that folks enamored of new tech always seem to forget--that the old tech still does the job it was designed for.

    You cannot say, for instance, that motorcycles are better than bicycles, just because they were a newer invention and higher tech.

    Depends on what you use it for.

    If there is some compelling reason that I need a mini cooper than shifts in nanoseconds, I'd like to know it.
  • bpizzutibpizzuti Member Posts: 2,743
    TODAY you can easily win an argument about the electric headlight or directional signals. But you know what? When they were being introduced? You couldn't. Hand signals work just fine at night because you can see them with that natural acetylene light just fine, but no one's going to understand these newfangled blinking things and they're just going to cause accidents.

    Here's your compelling reason on your mini cooper: that time you spend with the clutch in is time the engine is spinning and generating power, but that power is not getting to the wheels. That's wasteful. It also slows down the car. A DCT minimizes that time, a CVT eliminates it (though it introduces a drone I'm not too fond of).

    I'll be happy to debate the relative merits of DCT vs CVT versus slushbox versus manual. Just so long as we're referring to them properly, because DCTs and CVTs are VERY different from slushboxes. Of course, some people might prefer to use the term "automatic" as a subtle ploy to keep the focus on manual vs slushbox and avoid talking about the directness and quick shifting of DCTs or the efficiency of CVTs. :shades:
  • icyou812icyou812 Member Posts: 77
    I agree - I prefer a manual. My wifey and I both drive nothing but manuals. All three - 08 Accord, 97 Dakota and a 01 Sentra SE.
  • nippononlynippononly Member Posts: 12,555
    From the introduction of the long-term BRZ, which Edmunds bought in an automatic because they have the manual FRS already and they wanted to compare and contrast:
    ...an automatic-equipped BRZ is a total betrayal of everything the 2013 Subaru BRZ is supposed to stand for. It interferes with the driver's communion with the road, cracks apart the shifting ritual and generally screws with the divine communication. A BRZ automatic may as well be a Buick...

    They go on to say that for an automatic it isn't bad, but you always have to have that for an automatic qualifier whenever you are talking about a sport-oriented model, because if it aint manual it just aint as good. :shades:

    2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)

  • nippononlynippononly Member Posts: 12,555
    DCTs are indeed different from slushbox automatics - the slushboxes worked better in many cases. I have a co-worker with a new Fiesta automatic he bought about eight months ago. He regrets the decision to go automatic now, because the DCT shudders and lurches every time he is stuck in traffic or trying to crawl at low speeds.

    The same problem has been reported in the new Focuses, which share the DCT with the Fiesta.

    And there's really nothing the owner can do when that occurs, because they don't control the gears or the engagement of the gears. The computer does, which just goes to show you what computers know. ;-)

    The irony of my co-worker's situation is that he drove manuals for years, and just felt that with this purchase, and because his 50th birthday had now passed, he ought to "take some of the work out of driving". Oh, if only he had purchased a manual! Me, I will take that sort of "work" any day of the week and twice on Sunday. :-)

    2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)

  • bpizzutibpizzuti Member Posts: 2,743
    Maybe he should have researched his purchase and bought a GOOD transmission. Not all transmissions in a category are equal, and the Fiesta's DCT is one of the worse ones, even lacking a manual override.

    Good transmission = a transmission that does what the driver tells it to do. Regardless of type. See: Mazda SkyActiv-Drive, Nissan CVT (rubber band or not, it does what you tell it to do). Frankly, any Mazda transmission comes under this category. The Focus Sportshift DCT could belong here, the Fiesta DCT doesn't, nor does any transmission without a manual override, or that hits redline and upshifts rather than holding there while in manual mode.

    Manual transmissions are not necessarily "good" if you miss shifts or the clutch feel is off, or any number of other things.

    Maybe this thread needs a title change: The Great Transmission Debate
  • stickguystickguy Member Posts: 53,332
    manuals might have a brief moment of inefficiency during shifts, but ATs are inherently less efficient to start with (pumping losses, etc.)

    2020 Acura RDX tech SH-AWD, 2023 Maverick hybrid Lariat luxury package.

  • bpizzutibpizzuti Member Posts: 2,743
    Hmm, good thing neither dry clutch DCTs nor CVTs have pumping losses, etc, and minimize or eliminate that moment of inefficiency during shifting. Even though I know you want to imply that by using the umbrealla "AT" term to refer to all non-clutch-pedal transmissions. :shades:
  • stickguystickguy Member Posts: 53,332
    so, you picked the ones with drive-ability issues and compromises related to that?

    2020 Acura RDX tech SH-AWD, 2023 Maverick hybrid Lariat luxury package.

  • bpizzutibpizzuti Member Posts: 2,743
    Well, CVTs tend to be a bit rubber-bandy and noisy, but some people don't mind that at all, and no way you're going to cram that many different ratios into a manual gearbox, now are you?

    On the other hand, well-designed DCTs, while limited to about the same number of gear ratios as a manual, eliminate the momentary shifting inefficiency that manuals have, and some of them are designed extremely well.

    All transmission types have some members that frankly suck, and have both drivability issues and compromises. Including the vaunted manual, some of which have rubbery engagement or crappy clutches. Some automatics lose too much through the torque converter (you listening Hyundai?), some CVTs drone way too much, and some DCTs aren't tuned right for low speeds.
  • Mr_ShiftrightMr_Shiftright Member Posts: 64,481
    the clutches go out in your DCT? Does anyone rebuild these or are they exchange units?
  • stickguystickguy Member Posts: 53,332
    edited July 2012
    Just run down to the local AAMCO or Billy Bob's tranny and bait shop. I'm sure they can do a quick tear down and rebuild!

    yes, that was being snarky. No chance that a DCT or CVT is going to be repairable in the shop. IMO of course. If they go, pop it out and put in a replacement. At very, very large cost.

    2020 Acura RDX tech SH-AWD, 2023 Maverick hybrid Lariat luxury package.

  • bpizzutibpizzuti Member Posts: 2,743
    Anyone who's seen a diagram knows how integral the dual clutches are to the system. It's a sealed no-maintenance unit designed to last the life of the car, and given that there's no clutch pedal for the driver to abuse, is less likely to ever need either of the clutches replaced anyway. Though I bet there are companies out there that will take discarded units, unseal and refurbish them, and sell them as rebuilt trannies, same as with all the other tranny types out there.
  • Mr_ShiftrightMr_Shiftright Member Posts: 64,481
    I'm just wondering about the effect of repair costs on car value. For instance, if my 2003 Mini Cooper had the CVT transmission and it bit the dust on me next week, that would pretty much total the car. I'd probably junk it.
  • bpizzutibpizzuti Member Posts: 2,743
    They're between $2500 and $3500 depending on where you get it from. Not too bad for what is essentially a major part for a FWD BMW. About the same an a regular auto tranny for the Cooper. I've seen manuals go for $2k for those things too.
  • Mr_ShiftrightMr_Shiftright Member Posts: 64,481
    edited July 2012
    Never heard of prices that low but.....here's a reputable outfit offering one for $5,450, and of course you have to install it, too.

    http://new.minimania.com/part/NMD1016

    So with perhaps 12-15 hours labor, we're lookin' at a repair bill of maybe $7800 out the door (in California).

    if say that CVT were busted on an insurance claim for road hazard, then the insurance company would total the car.

    but you are right on--a clutch job on a Mini is about $2K.
  • plektoplekto Member Posts: 3,738
    Good transmission = a transmission that does what the driver tells it to do. Regardless of type.

    The issue, though, is that virtually all transmissions with manual selection modes are useless. Take Mazda. It will shift with the paddles just fine except when you are decelerating hard and also downshifting at the same time and get to about 15mph. It will then shift for you all of a sudden into drive. It simply won't let you downshift while braking into first gear.

    My litmus test for a manual transmission or a manual mode on an automatic/DSG/sequential/etc is if you can stall(or it drops into neutral at the last second) it while in gear by selecting the wrong one. If it lets you do wrong things, then it's effectively a manual as technology aside, you're in complete control.
  • bpizzutibpizzuti Member Posts: 2,743
    So your criteria is that a transmission is good if it will let you abuse and break it? :shades:
  • cdnpinheadcdnpinhead Member Posts: 5,617
    transmission that allows skipped gears and/or the ability to hang around in neutral and decide over a few seconds if the traffic up ahead requires: shifting down two gears, shifting down one gear or leaving it where it is and accelerating.

    Simple things that don't cost nearly so much to fix are superior in my world.

    Ask most sailors (with actual sailboats) what they think of the seamanship skills of the power boat crowd, while keeping in mind that both types of vessels have benn available for well over a century and will probably continue into the forseeable future.

    A manual transmission allows me to shift when I want how I want and to change my mind in the middle if I want. Yeah, "I want" gets repeated a lot -- go figure.
    '08 Acura TSX, '17 Subaru Forester
  • qbrozenqbrozen Member Posts: 33,736
    The issue, though, is that virtually all transmissions with manual selection modes are useless. Take Mazda. It will shift with the paddles just fine except when you are decelerating hard and also downshifting at the same time and get to about 15mph. It will then shift for you all of a sudden into drive. It simply won't let you downshift while braking into first gear.

    You kind of lost me there. So... you are in 6th, let's say, and brake hard down to low speed... at which point are you prodding the paddles? Because it should be long before you reach that low speed. And where in the world are you driving hard that requires a 15-mph maneuver? Racing in parking lots? :confuse:

    '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

  • bpizzutibpizzuti Member Posts: 2,743
    I guarantee most well-designed DCTs will shift up two gears faster than you can manage to your single shift that skips a gear.

    And if you're hanging around in neutral and thinking for a few seconds on MY highway you'd better be doing it on the shoulder. :shades:
  • steverstever Guest Posts: 52,454
    Ask most sailors (with actual sailboats) what they think of the seamanship skills of the power boat crowd

    You'll be hard pressed to find a sailboat much smaller than a Laser class that doesn't have a kicker on it. And some paddles. :)
  • cdnpinheadcdnpinhead Member Posts: 5,617
    . . .if you're hanging around in neutral and thinking for a few seconds on MY highway you'd better be doing it on the shoulder.

    Well, aren't you just a breath of fresh air. :D

    In heavy traffic in the city, things change quickly, at least here, but I'm sure anything applicable to my situation or point of view is totally unlike anything you'd be comfortable with.
    '08 Acura TSX, '17 Subaru Forester
  • bpizzutibpizzuti Member Posts: 2,743
    If things change that quickly, how do you have a few seconds to think about it? I'm familiar with city traffic, that's why I stay away from it. :shades:
  • cdnpinheadcdnpinhead Member Posts: 5,617
    edited July 2012
    You'll be hard pressed to find a sailboat much smaller than a Laser class that doesn't have a kicker on it. And some paddles.

    Well, I'll plead guilty to the former (Palmer 30 hp), but not the latter.

    Two examples: 1) While navigating from Vancouver to Active Pass in the Georgia Strait in mild fog (visibility a mile or so) I had a guy in a motorboat hail me and ask where Active Pass was. I started to give him the compass heading and he stopped me with "I don't use a compass -- just point." I did. 2) While going through the Chittenden Locks in Seattle (between the sound and Lake Union) there were probably 20 or 30 small boats of various types in the smaller of the two locks. It appeared to me that the sailboats were equipped with lines & fenders & a notion of how to use them (I think they're called knots & hitches), while many of the power boat guys appeared to, well, make it up as they went along.

    Different strokes, I guess.
    '08 Acura TSX, '17 Subaru Forester
  • steverstever Guest Posts: 52,454
    Different strokes, I guess.

    Us real boaters use open canoes. Talk about paddle shifting. :P
  • stickguystickguy Member Posts: 53,332
    Canoe?

    Real men swim.

    2020 Acura RDX tech SH-AWD, 2023 Maverick hybrid Lariat luxury package.

  • steverstever Guest Posts: 52,454
    If you aren't swimming while canoeing rivers, you aren't playing hard enough. :D

    Okay, back to manuals, here's one to put on the test drive list:

    "The hot-rod Focus, which has a version of Ford's global 2.0-liter turbo four, is rated 23 mpg in city driving and 26 in a combined city-highway mix.

    The ratings for the ST, which is being offered with manual transmission only, give up 3 to 4 mpg in exchange for nearly 100 more horsepower than the base non-turbo 2.0-liter Focus that's rated 36 highway, 26 city and 30 combined with manual transmission and 37/27/31 with the dual-clutch automatic."

    Hot-rod Ford Focus gets 32 mpg highway rating (USA Today)
  • Mr_ShiftrightMr_Shiftright Member Posts: 64,481
    100 extra HP in exhange for 3-4 MPG?

    Yes please :P
  • stickguystickguy Member Posts: 53,332
    I'll take 2 please.

    That would be about 360 HP out of my Volvo, and 15-17 running around town.

    Sounds good to me!

    2020 Acura RDX tech SH-AWD, 2023 Maverick hybrid Lariat luxury package.

  • nippononlynippononly Member Posts: 12,555
    Of course, for $2000 more you can get a WRX with the same power and AWD to go with it. The mileage sucks though.

    And the WRX, just like the Focus ST, comes ONLY with a manual. The way all dedicated sport models should be. :-)

    2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)

  • eliaselias Member Posts: 2,209
    my future manual transmission is a chevy cruze wagon diesel M6 if GM really brings it.
    more distant future would be a corvette with M6.

    by manual transmission, I mean with a manual clutch too.

    and it's still a manual transmission if ECM auto-matches for the gear/wheel-speed - that doesn't change the transmission being automatic or manual, but it is a sort of automatic-RPM/throttle. afaik, most manual-transmission cars have had this ECM RPM/auto-throttle inbetween gearshifts for the last few decades. So the driver doesn't have to feather the throttle to keep the rpm correct for the shift up or down.
    I first saw the auto-throttle-during-shifts feature in a manual transmission car on computer controlled 4bbl carbed Z28 in 1985.
  • Mr_ShiftrightMr_Shiftright Member Posts: 64,481
    I don't even consider MPG as a benefit for a manual transmission anymore. The astute car buyer should rather be looking at total "gallonage" between their old car and their prospective new one. Naturally, the owner of an old F350 is going to see a remarkable improvement in gallonage per year when he steps into the WRX and would be more than happy--but if you hop out of a Mini into a WRX, you aren't going to do that for the purpose of saving gas.

    You have to wonder what people are thinking when they are spending $30K and worrying about a 3-4 MPG difference, and weighing that over driving dynamics among their choices.
  • kyfdxkyfdx Moderator Posts: 265,514
    My wife's Infiniti G37X is a big pig with eye-watering acceleration... (327 HP).. She has a light foot... gets about 18-20 mpg overall vs. the 21+ mpg she got with her X3..

    In a reverse scenario, I would gladly give up 50 HP for another 3 mpg.. It would still be straight-line fast and meet all of her needs..

    Not that it's a major concern of mine, but assuming that people care less about fuel mileage as the price goes up seems to be a fallacy... The Acura (insert your favorite luxury make here) forums are full of people who paid $40K for their cars and wonder if they can run regular instead of premium....

    Edmunds Price Checker
    Edmunds Lease Calculator
    Did you get a good deal? Be sure to come back and share!

    Edmunds Moderator

  • Mr_ShiftrightMr_Shiftright Member Posts: 64,481
    Oh I'm not saying they don't care--I'm just saying it doesn't matter much in dollars and cents.

    So, if you spend $40K on an Acura and you switch from premium to regular, and drive 12,000 miles a year, you have put a whoppin' $96 bucks a year in your pocket.
  • fintailfintail Member Posts: 58,414
    edited July 2012
    That's surprisingly bad mileage for the G - must be the AWD. My E55 will average about that, with a much larger fuel swilling V8. I can easily obtain 25mpg on the highway, too - good mix of power and economy, especially for an aging car.

    The new biturbo E63 has about 160 more hp (maybe 200 more with the performance pack), but only sacrifices a couple mpg - if one needs the power, it is a small price to pay. On all of these, premium isn't recommended, it is required. Those who spend 40K+ on a car and balk at 25 cent fuel premiums should stick to buying 4cyl Camcords.
  • michaellnomichaellno Member Posts: 4,120
    Wow .. two of the three cars in my household prefer premium ... and they both get it. The daughter uses 89 octane premium in her 2010 MINI, and my wife's 2010 Mazda CX-7 gets nothing but 91 octane Shell.

    Neither one of them think much about the added expense (.20-.30 per gallon).
  • stickguystickguy Member Posts: 53,332
    the RWD G sucks gas too. Has always been an issue for that model.

    2020 Acura RDX tech SH-AWD, 2023 Maverick hybrid Lariat luxury package.

  • kyfdxkyfdx Moderator Posts: 265,514
    Yeah... hers is the AWD (hence, the X) I think it's rated at 17 or 18 mpg city...

    But, her X3 was similarly rated, and she did much better...

    All of our vehicles used Premium, until we got the '87 BMW... it takes mid-grade... :)

    Edmunds Price Checker
    Edmunds Lease Calculator
    Did you get a good deal? Be sure to come back and share!

    Edmunds Moderator

  • srs_49srs_49 Member Posts: 1,394
    the RWD G sucks gas too

    You talking about the G37S? I've got a 2009 G37S-6MT, and it gives me consistently a tad over 26 mpg. True, that's with 75% 65 mph+ highway driving, but still good IMO for a car with that type of performance.

    I think it would do even better if 6th gear were a bit "taller". The rpms run 2100 at 60 mph. That car could get by with a true overdrive that would reduce the rpms at 60 mph to, say, 1700 which would probably boost highway mileage a bit.
  • qbrozenqbrozen Member Posts: 33,736
    Yeah, I'm not sure what makes it worse... the AWD or the automatic.

    I had a 350z 6-speed and averaged 25.5mpg. My G35X auto? 21. :sick:

    '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

  • eliaselias Member Posts: 2,209
    During the cold half of the year or especially on long highway cruise-control drives , it's 87 ctane in my pontiac that prefers premium, so that's about half of its 100k miles so far. Maybe it's saved $500 or $1k over 7 years? I'll take it. That should pay for lower-control-arm/bushings/balljoints.

    Also sometimes I've seen a 75 cents or $1 cost difference between 87 & 91+, instead of the usual 20 or 25 cents. Unless it's super-hot I'll select 87 in that case too.

    Naturally all this works much better thanks to the manual transmission... and the stock ECM "tune".
  • eliaselias Member Posts: 2,209
    for me, multiple "anecdotal" long-drive test results are all consistent with better mpg on highway cruises using 87 octane compared to 91+ octane. owners of other (lighter) cars with similar engine have reported the same result.
    I understand there is more energy content per gallon of 87 than premium, so there is theoretical basis to explain the results toc.
    who knows, maybe it applies for automatic transmissions too :|;)
  • colin_lcolin_l Member Posts: 591
    having seen and held in my own hands the effects of detonation, there is no way I will ever use less than premium in a vehicle that either 'recommends' or requires PUL.

    you can only do so much with a knock sensor and timing retard. :sick:

    besides the possibility of severe engine damage, you get horrible mpg when the timing is being pulled back.

    yeah, not in my cars. I'm ok with paying the premium for premium.
  • eliaselias Member Posts: 2,209
    hi Colin,

    have you got any facts or manufacturer specs to support your surmise? do you imagine that the risk is worse with a manual transmission than with automatic, since with manual one might be in too tall a gear for longer than an automatic, since automatic will kick-down more quickly and more reliably than manual shifter would!?

    if one considers that knock and pinging are two different things, then there's no worry of damage in an engine that supports 87 octane as well as being optimized for 91+ .

    Knock is bad.
    Pinging is good (it is part of maximizing mpg).

    I've put about 900k miles on 9 engines that "recommend" premium.
    half with 87, half with premium. half manual-transmission, half automatics. 5 GM V8 cars, and three volvos/automatics with 5-cylinder engines, two with turbos, one without. No worries, the engines all ran fine with the 87 octane just as manufacturer wrote in the owners manual, but sometimes maybe with lower performance.

    Can anyone identify a single engine problem in the history of humanity in any modern vehicle optimized for 91+ but which supports 87 octane too?
    Colin, What happened when you saw "detonation" with a stock tune in a factory car that supports 87 octane as per manufacturer? Mushroom cloud? Threw a rod? something spectacular?

    Until I see evidence of a single engine problem, I'll have to believe the car manufacturers specs and a million or so miles of driving, instead of your imagination & surmise. Show us facts & details, not just handwaving. Even your "anecdotal example" will be as interesting as my ~1M miles of driving. For my "anecdotal evidence", I'm showing you the manufacturers own specs/warranties, and 500k of driving with 87 octane in engines optimized for 91+ but which allow 87... (GM V8s and volvo I-5s). Cheers !
  • Mr_ShiftrightMr_Shiftright Member Posts: 64,481
    too risky to not use premium in a premium-recommended car---your engine "map" may not handle the engine timing too well and combustion "detonation" can tear an engine to pieces--literally.
  • bpizzutibpizzuti Member Posts: 2,743
    Premium-RECOMMENDED or premium-REQUIRED? There's a difference...some of the ones that recommend premium will work with regular gas, just with a power reduction. The ones that won't would be the ones where it's required.
Sign In or Register to comment.