The Future Of The Manual Transmission

lilengineerboy

I actually think its becuase people commute 2 hrs a day each way to work in heavy traffic becuase having a house in the country "improves their quality of life." My commute is about 25 minutes of driving with about 5 or 6 traffic lighs the whole way.
I think if I was climbing over the 405 every day or through the stop and go in the San Fernando valley, I would probably want an automatic too.
My point is I think it more a matter of lifestyle choices people make that make them want to get an auto. I don't think its an age related thing necessarily, the two 6spd vehicles I was refering to earlier are owned by a 60 and almost 70 year old.

jeffyscott

My commute is 15 minutes and 9.5 miles each way on very straight boring roads, with 3 stop signs, 5 lights, 3 turns. I am generally pretty lazy...so maybe it's just that .

But, yes in the past I thought the same way...if I were commuting in Chicago's stop and go traffic, for example, I'd have gone automatic a long time ago.

bumpy

The only time I ever skip-shift is when I'm in the SE-R and feel like winding it up to redline in 2nd, then hopping over to 5th. I don't do that much on account of the 228k on the engine. :surprise:
3-5 is awkward enough that I might as well just make a quick stop at 4th on the way there. I've never driven a six-gun, but I would imagine that 3-6 would be feasible.

lilengineerboy

On bigger motors, I think the first to forth is more common. The 3 litre+ sixes and eights have the torque. Something like a Vibe with its 1.8 might need each gear.

boaz47

who have manuals and drive the ideal manual roads, winding twisting mountain roads, commuting is pretty straight forward. Fifth or sixth gear once you start down the mountain and you don't shift again till you hit the first stop light once you get to the flat lands. The advantage I might have with a manual commuting down a mountain is if I use forth gear I don't have to ever touch my brakes. But is that still driving if all I am doing is steering? Still I imaging even for the most avid manual driver it would be nice to be able to pop out one transmission much like changing an air filter. For those days when you just want to chill out and listen to your sound system and relax going to or from work, popping it in drive and just shutting off once you hit the driveway. Then on the days you are feeling a bit like an outlaw you could just pop in the manual and try to exceed the posted limits for the next twenty or thirty turns on the way to or from work. But then that could cost you if the car following you happened to be black and white.

lilengineerboy

After 15 years of driving a stick, I don't really pay attention to it and it seems pretty automatic (the last research study I read mentioned 2-5 years to become proficient enough at a stick to not think about it, but there were uncontrolled factors in that study that skewed the numbers long). There aren't even hills here that I would deem challenging, so I still find myself in a tune-out and drive state sometimes. It does keep me off the phone, and I have to put my coffee down before I start at a light, but once under way, I can again enjoy liquid refreshments.
Actually I think the only times I wish for an auto was driving on the 405 with a whopper in one hand and a coke in the other just waiting like an idiot to be a statistic. I would like to think I am older and wiser

boaz47

Been there, done that. 91 to the 60 to the 710. Sometimes up to San Fernando and sometimes back from Ventura to Santa Monica. In a stick it was, start in first, move till I almost got to second, but if I did grab second it was stop right away. If I tried to drive slow enough so as to not have to stop and just creep along in first as soon as there was more than one car length between me and the other car I would get cut off. working for Xerox I once did a survey of our parking lot. Out of 150 employees at the Compton facility, it has since moved, there were three manuals. We all lived in other counties and had to commute.

explorerx4

i couldn't handle those california commutes. too much of your day spent in the car. i commuted 35 miles one way for a few years. now my round trip is about 27 miles and that seems awfully long sometimes. i rarely spend more than 20-25 minutes to get to work from home or the other way around.

nippononly

Whatever happened to start it in first, get it moving then shift to neutral and let it coast until the traffic either stops or you need to goose it again? That's my general preference in heavy traffic, which I (thankfully) hardly ever deal with.

Did anyone see the article recently on manual take rates in various places? I think it was in R&T, but I forget right now. In the U.S. it is 9%, so 1 in 11 buyers wants the stick. Not so good.

In Japan it is only 17% - also pathetically bad for the future of the manual. :sick:

In Europe it is 90% - woo-hoo! I can see that Europe is going to be the great white hope for the future of the manual. :-)

boaz47

before I moved up to the mountains I commuted from Riverside to Compton. Many of those years were spent cutting through traffic on a motorcycle. I then got a Mini Truck. But as traffic got worse and worse I finally moved up to a full sized Pickup and an automatic. Life was twice as easy on the drive to and from work. I kept the truck and bought a Chrysler for my wife. It had all the bells and whistles. Blacked out dash, programmable trip meter that told me how well I was doing economy wise and how far I could go without running out of gas, and that dreaded but somewhat sweet woman's voice that reminded me that I forgotten to fasten my seat belt when backing out of the driveway simply to move the car. The move to the mountains caused me to take a second look at manuals and I have ended up with two manual cars and two automatic trucks. Last winter one of the main mountain roads washed out and for about six weeks everyone had to come up our side of the mountain to get home. Traffic before our city turn out got horrid and I would get stuck in stop and go uphill climbs three or four days evey week. After week two and having to slip the clutch till it was hot more than I had in years, I started driving the truck to work. It wasn't much fun going down the hill early in the morning, but the drive home was far less stressfull. I was glad when they re-opened the other road and I could get back to the car. But I was glad I had the truck option for that kind of commute.

boaz47

Not many seem to be packing their bags to leave here and head for Europe. I think the immigration to the US is still way above the rate leaving for Europe don't you?

nippononly

Oh ha ha! :mad:

boosthappy

well from all my time driveing clutch not that long only 17 here.... my 5 speed is pushing it... some times i just want to change over to auto... my dads nova used to have a 5 speed in it but after all the rebuilding and the mods it was a lot easer to let the car shift it self..

boaz47

Sorry, couldn't help myself. But getting back to being semi serious, why do you suppose the numbers are so low in Japan? From your perspective don't they represent the perfect demographic for the manual?

boaz47

Maybe the key word here is expressed in "easier"? For Americans a big selling point is convenience isn't it? I was thinking about this just the other day, whe was the last time you wrote a letter? I e-mail almost everything. Even to people I have met in Africa. And if I do happen to send a letter to someone, I type it on my computer and print it. I just sign my name at the end. For more than 99 percent of us I believe we accept easier as better.

nippononly

If I had to guess, I'd say the Japanese numbers are low because most of their traffic is very urban, and barely moves. What use is the stick if you never get to exercise it? Much the same reason as so many people have professed here in the States: if they are going to crawl along in traffic and never really get the chance to stretch their legs or drive for fun, might as well have the automatic.

I don't agree myself, but I don't spend much time in traffic, thank goodness.

Europe has autobahns. No autobahns in Japan! Japan also has a very good infrastructure of high-speed trains for intercity travel.

shipo

"Europe has autobahns."

True enough, however, I've spent many mornings commuting into Stuttgart on the AutoBahn, crawling along at 10km/hr.

Best Regards,
Shipo

boaz47

I was also going to mention Down town London and Manchester. Not much stretching going on there. But I think the licensing break they get for driving a manual might have something to do with it. From what I understand, not from personal knowledge, in England you have to get a license for a manual and Automatic separately and maybe the manual one is less expensive?

Still Japan represents the type of situation so many have said manuals should excel in.

jeffyscott

After 15 years of driving a stick, I don't really pay attention to it and it seems pretty automatic (the last research study I read mentioned 2-5 years to become proficient enough at a stick to not think about it...

Yep, it has been pretty automatic for me for a long time. You get to where you are trying to step on the clutch and reaching for the shifter when driving an automatic.

I wonder how the learning curve would be for going from 5 speed to a 6 speed? Might it actually be worse than learning from scratch, because driving a 5 speed has become so automatic?

shipo

"I wonder how the learning curve would be for going from 5 speed to a 6 speed? Might it actually be worse than learning from scratch, because driving a 5 speed has become so automatic?"

Pretty funny. I learned to drive a stick in a car that had a "Three on the floor" where first gear was down and to the left, below reverse. The only car with more gears than that that has truly felt natural to me was when Porsche was building 5-Speed transmissions with first gear in the same spot. I think it took me an easy two years before I no longer occasionally tried starting out in second gear when I went to my first 4-Speed.

Best Regards,
Shipo

jeffyscott

Porsche was building 5-Speed transmissions with first gear in the same spot.

So was reverse above 1 in that too? That would be really bad for those who were used to a normal 4 or 5 speed.

shipo

"So was reverse above 1 in that too?"

Oh geez, there ya went and done it, forced me to think back some quarter of a century to the last time I drove a 928 5-Speed. ;-) Yes, I seem to remember that reverse was indeed above first gear. That having been said, please don't quote me on this.

Best Regards,
Shipo

andys120

Porsche shifters use what is known as a "Racing pattern" which facilitates a quick shift from second to third. You only shift from first to second once in a typical race so it's more important to have the two-three in a straight line.

At least that's the theory :confuse:

shipo

I know that was the case in 1981, is that still the case today?

Best Regards,
Shipo

dhamilton

don't ever tell car makers they don't need to build stick..

lilengineerboy

Wow I didn't realize they were still doing that in the 80s. My to-you-and-down 1st gear Porsche experience was a 73 914. The late 80s (but pre-964) Carerra was "normal" shifting pattern.

midnightcowboy

Going to a 6-speed is not problem easy to learn. Been driving manual shifts since the 3 speed on the column days, before the Betels were a hit on Ed Sullivan nad before we went to the Moon, before video games even pong around the
time of the first color TVs LOL.

Long live manaul shifts: two 6-speeds and one 5-speed

MidCow

151ranch

going to a 6-speed is no problem. What is a problem is 2 vehicles: '04 Element 5-speed and '05 TSX 6-speed. I keep looking for 6th when I'm in the Element (it needs a higher gear)

boaz47

That prayer is the real crux of the problem. At what percent will the manufacturers decide the manual isn't worth offering? We already see that in Mini Vans. Have you ever seen a mini van manual in this country? And in difference to my friend Nippon I know they make manuals for mini vans because I have seen them in Africa and Isreal. Still, not in the US. And the manufacturers do take notice of buying habits. When the Accord was first offered in a V-6 the didn't offer a manual. When the G-35 first hit our shores they didn't bother bringing over the manual. I don't believe the Camry V-6 came with a manual. At the time SUVs were at the panicle of their popularity, no one drove a manual. even if they were on the option list. Hardly any full sized pickups, the single most popular vehicle in the US, are equipped with a manual even if the manual is supposed to be the standard transmission for that vehicle. SO if they are looking to streamline their operations at what point do they decide not to include a manual option on their assembly line? I will freely admit I haven't a clue at what point that might be. But someone decided Americans would buy a manual mini van so they simply didn't bring them to us. I think the last mini type of van I can remember with a manual was a VW bus. If all manuals were like the one in the old VW Bus even I wouldn't drive one for any reason.

jeffyscott

Have you ever seen a mini van manual in this country?

Well, I'm gonna have to go ahead and say...YES . We owned one. 1989 Voyager with 2.5L, 4 cyl engine and 5 speed manual trans. Don't know when they dropped that.

kyfdx

I seem to remember Datsuns having that same shift pattern in the '70s... Reverse on the upper left, with 1st directly below...

Actually, if you grew up driving 3-speeds, it is completely normal.. and makes complete sense.. My '76 CJ-5 had the same set-up (just no fourth or fifth gear).

lilengineerboy

My ex-gf's mom in high school had a 5spd Aerostar and we had a 5spd turbo Caravan. I knew several people with 5 speed Toyota mini-vans.
I think the other thing that happened to minivans is they got no so mini. My friend's Oddessy (I can't believe I am old enough that my friends are getting minivans, but I digress) is bigger than his Dodge work van (his second, the first was a 3 on the tree).

nippononly

Hmm, all the Toyota vans in the 80s came in manual, and were sold aplenty in just that configuration.

The Camry was available in V-6 manual until the last generation.

Honda actually ADDED a manual for its V-6 Accord, because of demand. Ditto Nissan with the G35.

And both of my SUVs were manual V-6s. So there! :-)

Actually, you bring up a point which kind of works in FAVOR of the manual: while the auto continues to be the OPTIONAL transmission, they can charge $1000 extra for it, even when they know that 91% of the vehicles they sell will have it. The consumer won't complain, because there IS a no-charge transmission, if only they knew how to operate it! So maybe they will keep the manual in the mix just to be able to continue charging that pure-profit $1000 extra for what is in all but name the standard transmission.

krony

"At what percent will the manufacturers decide the manual isn't worth offering?"

You've hit it Boaz. From a manufacturing perspective, I think when you get below 20% it's tough to justify. If you simply look at domestics the V6 Fusion only has an auto and on the GM side neither the Malibu or Impala have one. For an OEM it makes a lot of stuff easier not to offer it. Easier for dealers to figure out what to stock, easier on the assembly line, less service parts to stock, etc. Just think how many cars don't have power windows, same type of deal. Realistically I doubt they loose any (measurable) sales.

I think there's only two reasons for manuals in the US today: performance and price. The performance crowd demands it and on the price side it allows them to have a lower list price and charge $800 for an auto for the entry level car.

I may have to but a car in Europe 20 years from now to get a beloved manual.

krony

Nippon, Have to disagree a bit on the "pure profit". Just the costs I can think of and I'm sure I'm missing some:
-design
-design testing
-additional manufacturing cost
-additional parts to stock (assuming some are specific to the model)
-additional sourcing cost since volumes are higher on the auto

All that hinges on whether you aren't building the same model for a non-US market, then I can buy the "pure profit". I'm sure there are finance guys at the OEM's that can tell you whether it's worth it. The thing you can't figure out is the sales you lose when you don't offer it.

nippononly

Well, I stated that badly. Certainly the extra charge for the auto is not "pure profit" in the sense it costs them nothing, but it does allow them to advertise an unrealistically low base price for the car - good for drawing in the buyers, who will want the automatic 91% of the time, and ante up the extra $800-1000 for the "optional transmission" and bam! The oldest trick in the book - bait and switch, only totally legal-like. :-)

And while it's not pure profit, do you think really think the manual transmission costs them $800-1000 less PER UNIT than the auto for all those items you listed? I think not.

jeffyscott

I think the other thing that happened to minivans is they got no so mini.

That is true about most vehicles, they have pretty much all gotten bigger. But yes, our Voyager was only 176 inches long, IIRC. The Caravan is now 189 inches long. I think in 1989 that was about the size of the Grand Voyager/Caravan, because I remember that it added about 1 foot to the length.

But getting back to the topic...at that time the value of the 5 speed was it made the 100 HP engine much more adequate. We even towed a 1200# pop-up camper and got 25 mpg while doing so. The automatic was a 3 speed. So the 5 speed gave you two extra gears and much better gas mileage on the highway 28 vs. 23. Also I imagine the 5 speed was a lot quieter, running at lower rpms, at highway speeds.

Today I am looking at cars that have 5 speed automatics, plenty of power (for me) even in the 4 cylinders, and the same gas mileage with the automatic or the manual.

boaz47

All valid points. From what I have read the Civic is most often offered in the Sunday adds as a manual. It is also sold in the same automatic numbers as we have been discussing. It is a favorite among the young women as a first car. With that in mind and considering that 9 out of ten of them get automatics we should be able to see that of those 9 buyers not many will be looking for a manual the next time they buy. If we apply the 7/11 method of ordering cars at the dealership we see part of the problem. If you stock 100 Civics and 20 of them are manuals but only ten of those sell the next order will be for 5 less. It will continue ordering that way till the balance is reached. Most people are simply not willing to shop a lot of dealers to get the Civic with the manual if all they get to test drive in an Automatic. I didn't say no one was willing to keep looking, only that better than 90 percent aren't.

wai

Is Corolla not appeal to those first time buyers especially female?

nippononly

If I had to guess, I'd say the manual take rate on Civic is higher than the average of 9%. My local dealer stocks way more manuals than that, and sells every one.

But this year the mileage of the manual is actually LOWER than the automatic on the Civic, so the disincentive to buy it in manual is more powerful than ever. Honda was really dumb to make the manual less fuel efficient than the auto, IMO. These are basic city transport for couples and small families, not race cars (SI trim excepted).

boaz47

Still the differences are still weighted heavy in favor of the Automatics so you were correct in stating that in most cases the manual is simply a sales lead in. I don't think the Corolla has the same draw, at least in southern California, as the Civic to young women. If looking at high School parking lots means anything. The Corolla seems far more popular with young families and retired people. The S has given it some respect with the younger drivers but it seems to be a car more geared to people mostly concerned with price a fuel economy. The Civic is the one they get for looks and practicality. After all you can get cold air intakes and other after market parts for a Civic just about anywhere. Every auto parts store I have been in has something to trick out your Honda.

crimsona

With Toyota discontinuing the XRS line of the Corolla and Matrix in 07, whereas Honda is adding a Civic SI Sedan (likely manual only?), just shows the different demographics Toyota and Honda are getting.

boaz47

I think you are correct. Toyota is trying to become the Automotive giant of the world and Honda is just trying to be Honda. One has a view to the masses and the other to their customers. I don't think Honda will make the SI a manual only but they might. At least in the first runs. They took such a bath with the release of the newer SI hatchback they might try to cover more bases this time. But Honda at least attempted a sporty hatch. Not my cup of tea but they made an effort. Toyota doesn't seem even remotely interested in sporty anymore.

john500

Civic SI is almost synonymous with manual transmission. There has never been an SI automatic (since its inception in 1986 as the "S" or sport model that happened to coincide with the first year of Honda fuel injection "i") and there never will be an SI automatic as long as it is gasoline powered.

nippononly

the new SI is to be manual-only, not to mention the first SI sedan ever. Ooooh, how the times they are a-changin'! :-P

And just to clarify your remarks, it was the last-gen hatch that sold slowly. The new coupe model is selling so fast that at 15K per year total, dealers don't keep them on the lots long. And it is still manual-only.

I would like to know if the other poster has anything definitive concerning Toyota's discontinuance of the Matrix and Corolla XRS trim, or if that is just speculation? I have seen no announcements of this from Toyota.

And the XRS is also manual-only, and the Matrix XRS sells quite well - it was a big hit 4 1/2 years ago when it was new. Now it is getting old, but it still isn't the permanent addition to a dealer's lot that Land Cruisers and Sequoias are nowadays. Note that those two models are auto-only - that was Toyota's mistake! They should have made them with an available manual. :-P

boaz47

I thought I said the last Generation SI hatch? I know the coupe is selling better. It was a bone of contention between you and I when we were discussing hatches some time ago. I used the Newer SI hatch as an example or the Coupe preference in the US.

But isn't it a lot like software or the old video format? If you are a software designer where is the profit? In making software for 97 percent of the computers or for 3 percent? Where was the profit in video recorders? I have read many times that Beta was superior to VHS but what survived?

I am not pulling for the demise of the Manual, I just don't see how the interest can be maintained for most of the driving public. And if the interest isn't there who will be willing to invest in the next manual advancements? We live in a capatalilistic society, like it or not. Is the manual doomed to the niche market or a specialty item only? Will Hybrids become popular and if so where does that leave the manual? Will EPA restrictions ever favor self rowing our own gears? What doesn't the manual have that grants them a place in the future other than "feel"? Simplicity over a automatic? I agree but what about over a CVT? These are questions we need to look at.

carlisimo

"I wonder how the learning curve would be for going from 5 speed to a 6 speed? Might it actually be worse than learning from scratch, because driving a 5 speed has become so automatic?"

You don't really mean that, do you? =]

I just moved from a 4spd manual to a 6spd, and there certain is a learning curve. But it's no different from moving between two manual cars of any gear number. Every clutch and shifter is so different...

But within a week or two I knew what speeds went with what gear, how to push the shifter into place to get 6th instead of 4th, stuff like that. I still find 4th->5th a little difficult though.

It's nothing like when I learned to drive stick after a year with an automatic. That was difficult for me, and it took me a long time to get consistent at it. Now I step into an automatic and the first thing I do is fumble around trying to step on a clutch so I can start up the car...

john500

I've heard the same comment about 2006 being the last year for the Corolla XRS, Matrix XRS and Pontiac Vibe GT. It was mentioned in a recent "new cars" guide that I was reading at Borders, although I don't know the source of their information. I think you made that prediction a few months back about the Corolla XRS. Oddly, all of them appear to be getting canned.

crimsona

http://www.caranddriver.com/dailyautoinsider/11424/toyota-posts-pricing-for-2007- - -corolla-matrix.html

as reputable as you're going to get. See the last line.

In any case, this is already reflected on the Canadian Toyota builder I believe - no XRS for the Matrix - and no AWD too

boaz47

Nippons got to be hearing music in the background, Duh duh duh duh, dadumdum da dumdum. Another one bites the dust. In Toyota's never ending search for fuel mileage they will sacrifice options. However Nippon has made note of this trend in Toyota before.