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
I am not that surprised about the demise of the XRS models - the Corolla XRS has never been real hot, although the Matrix XRS was popular for a long time. I would guess the big problem is not the customer demand in particular, but more that these models all use the extremely smoggy engine from the '00 Celica GTS - it just doesn't make the grade for emissions standards in '07 I guess. Pity. Anyway, I was curious to know if it was official, and it appears to be at least somewhat so! :-/
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
I remember when the Taurus SHO autos came out and they weren't as good as the stick. Funny how that works. If you don't want a performance car, get the regular Civic and save the gas for the rest of us :P
I don't know, it seems like the transmission is still an acid test for me. When I get someone talkng about how much of an automotive enthusist they are and they have a Camary automatic, I kind of just nod and stop paying attention.
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
Thankfully, John Mendel, the senior vice president of Honda's US auto operations stated in an interview that there will be no automatic Si vehicles!
it's next generation of front-drive cars and vans.
BMW is also reported to be planning to offer a twin clutch transmission in some models.
2001 BMW 330ci/E46, 2008 BMW 335i conv/E93
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
Gear ratios.
I used to own a 4X4 Dodge Dakota, V-8 & 5 speed. This thing shifted like, well, a truck. First gear was very low, and yes I understand why. Second gear was just a little higher, and if the truck was rolling at all, 1st wasn't even needed. 3rd was a huge jump from 2nd. 4th not much better. So the end result was you could take off in 2nd, then shift straight to 4th. Of course, 5th was overdrive and not much good 'till 50mph or so. Granted, this was a truck...
Recently, I bought a Saturn with the 2.4 & 5 speed. It shifts pretty well, but 1st is too low, and 2nd too high. It's as if the manufacturer didn't put any thought into gear ratios for normal driving. For a "sporty" car, maybe more of a close ratio approach or something would be better.
If you nail it from a start, the 1 - 2 shift will come almost before you can react. Then it's 2nd for an eternity, it seems. A six speed woul'd have been a better choice, I think.
I realize Dodge trucks & Saturns aren't the kinds of cars being discussed here, but the truck just plain sucked with the 5-spd, while I wouldn't have bought the Saturn without one. The truck was almost impossible to find with the stick, but my dealer had the Ions with sticks in all trim levels. Wasn't hard to find at all.
Sorry for the rambles. Hope someone can decipher what it is I am trying to say.
Thanks.
Uh, yeah, I think that is very valid. The gears must me mated to keep the enigne either in its efficiency range or its powerband. I haven't experienced that in my vehicles but what you are saying makes sense to me.
I tend to short shift, so the Accord will be in second as soon as its rolling(3rd in low 20s, 4th in low 30s, 5th about 45), but if I need it to, I can do almost 60 in second, and ~80 in third.
Given that the GTI appeals primarily to car enthusiasts it appears that there are some who disagree w your POV Nippononly.
2001 BMW 330ci/E46, 2008 BMW 335i conv/E93
Eh, I think they want it to appeal to car enthusiasts. I think it appeals to college girls in southern California (hardly a bad thing, but explains the transmission choice).
I think the "Car Enthusists" that it does appeal to are the ones buying the 50% with the manual.
I think a certain percentage would favor it because of the potential for superior performance/mileage. Another group would favor it because it's a direct application of race car technology and still others (like myself) would favor DSG out of necessity.
2001 BMW 330ci/E46, 2008 BMW 335i conv/E93
If you feel you are getting race technology in your vehicle, I have a Monte Carlo for you, just like the one in NASCAR.
I think its great we have choices with what vehicles we buy and what features they have. If that works for you and helps you enjoy your vehicle, I am glad that option exists.
For me, one of its more noticeable weaknesses is the inability to go down more than one gear without going through the gears in between. But mainly I hate the inability to modulate the clutch.
I was unaware that this technology was in use in racing, since I don't follow racing much. Where do they use it? This is not the auto-manual they use in F1, I don't believe. And as far as I know, DSG still can't handle high-powered applications, which is why the VW 2.0T is the most powerful engine they have stuck it with. Don't the VW V-6s get a conventional automatic?
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
With the truck, it seemed that if you could get the RPM up to 1500 or so, it didn't matter what gear you used. I mean unloaded, of course.
With the Saturn, it just seems that 1st is only useful to get the mass moving, and second is a little too tall. I can understand that the truck was designed to move a lot of cargo, or tow a relatively heavy trailer. The Saturn seems to prefer 2500 or better, after you shift.
I guess what I am really trying to say is that it seems that the manual is an afterthought. In the case of the Dakota, it certainly was. The 4.7l was designed with an automatic tranny. I'm sure that GM figured that most every Ecotech would be paired with an auto tranny.
I just feel that most domestics equipped with a manual just end up with whatever part is waiting in the warehouse, as opposed to being matched to the power & weight of the vehicle in question.
Clear as mud now??
You mean it has a carbeurator and RWD? :P
2001 BMW 330ci/E46, 2008 BMW 335i conv/E93
As for handling high-powered apps, I understand that Porsche is planning to offer DSG throughout their lineup in a few years. Right now their least powerful cars are the type 987s (Boxster/Cayman) @ 245hp.
2001 BMW 330ci/E46, 2008 BMW 335i conv/E93
You mean it has a carbeurator and RWD?
LOL exactly, with them big stickers, jus like da one dey wreck every week on dat TeeVee
This is not the case anymore automatics come with just as many gears as manuals and, if anything, the manuals run at higher rpms in the top gear. Automatics also now typically get about the same mileage as manuals.
since i started coasting, when possible, in my focus, the mileage has taken a noticeable jump.
btw, in the focus 4th is the gear that bugs me. 1 thru 3 seem pretty evenly spaced, but hit 4th and the engine lugs.
i am amazed how slow i can go in 1st gear.
Maybe in the EPA estimates, but it is not always the case in real life. For example, the Honda Fit. Most people who are reporting the very low mileage numbers are the ones who drive the 5-speed automatic, and in general the 5-speed manual in that car delivers superior mileage results. The only time the automatic might have the advantage is in 100% highway driving where (as you correctly pointed out), the manual runs at higher rpms....although I consistently receive 40+ mpg in highway driving with my higher-revving manual.
Someone pointed out earlier that traffic is a cause of the switch to automatics. I don't think so. Traffic and driver laziness might be a problem, but traffic itself is not as big of a factor. There are other places with just as horrendous traffic, and yet with a manual/automtic ratio opposite that of the US.
I get much pleasure from actually controlling my car's transmission. As I've said (ad nauseum), I can engage the clutch exactly as I desire after having skipped a gear or who-knows-what with a manual transmission.
The automatic doesn't offer me that, besides which it costs 2-4X as much to fix when it breaks.
Actually, I have noticed just the opposite on my two cars:
Acura TL 6-speed: I consistently get only 15-17 mpg in town. A friend with an auto TL gets 19-20 in similar driving. At 70 mph on a pure highway run (300+ miles), I get 29-31 depending upon temperature, etc. My friend gets 28-30. We even tested in a golf trip this spring taking turns to draft each other on a 242 mile highway run. At the end, I filled up with 7.90 gallons, he took 8.15.
Porsche 911S: I get 14+/- in town. Another associate with a tiptronic gets 16. Last weekend I drove back 365 miles from a trip at an average of 71 mph and got 26.4 mpg, including a couple of heavy traffic slow downs for 10-20 miles. A previous trip in which I drove straight through averaged 27.5 mpg at 74 mph. My friend's "record" is 25.2 mpg with cruise control set at 70.
My belief on the variance is that the automatic shifts at lower speeds than I do around town and, perhaps, more efficiently. I rarely shift before 3,500 to 4,000 rpm in either car. You have to really goose an automatic to keep it from upshifting shifting before about 2,500 rpm. But, on the highway, in spite of higher RPMS, I believe the manual is more efficient because it doesn't have the power eating torque converter that, albeit in limited use, is still sucking up some of the drivetrain efficiency.
Interestingly, I also had a Honda S2000 that would consistently get 30-32 mpg on the highway in spite of an EPA rating identical to the 911S - 26 mpg. And at 75 mph, that car was running at around 4,100 rpm in 6th gear (9,000 rpm redline). Could never understand why a 2.0 liter 240 hp 4 cylinder in a 2,800 lb car had the same EPA highway rating as a 3.8 liter 355 hp 6 cylinder in a 3,300 lb car. Makes me think those EPA guys had a dart board in the lunch room.
I doubt if most enthusiasts would care one bit about the percentage of manuals verses automatics if there were not the deep seated fear that the day might come when the family people mover might not come with a manual. Very early on we took a poll with the people debating this issue and even among the manual proponents a majority had a spouse with a automatic. That didn't seem to bother anyone and I doubt if they were constantly calling their spouse a lazy driver. We are simply moving away from driver involvement into automation. We now have ABS pretty standard and I understand they will mandate Skid control on all cars in the next few years. The greenies don't like the fact that manual drivers shift at higher than reccommended RPMs and so make their cars less green than their automatic counterparts. The feel of control some enjoy just seems to be slipping away.
You seem hell bent on extrapolating that, because the majority of people buy automatics, that is the way the entire world is going. A good CD changer may be more important than a good shifter to 80-90% of drivers, but that other 10-20% is a damn lucrative market, as Porsche, BMW and other "enthusiast" oriented manufacturers can attest. They aren't bleeding $5.9 billion of red ink in the third quarter like the (majority catering) Ford.
Think about how sad it would be if your "majority rules" extrapolations were true in other areas. We'd all be living in tract subdivisions of cookie cutter vinyl sided houses, wearing polyester and rayon clothes and watching American Idol and Desparite Housewives like zombies.
And, I'm about as worried that the "greenies" will take away my ability to drive a manual transmission as I am worried that they won't allow me to buy a real solid cherry or walnut dining table by Stickley.
Try not to accept defeat prematurely. I hope you don't still have a closet full of polyester leisure suits. Some of us recognized that real wool, unsophisticated as it is, was here to stay.
I'm rather partial to stick shifts and solid cherry by Hooker myself. ;-)
Best Regards,
Shipo
I think part of the reason is that the Fit (and the engine it uses, in fact the entire engine family) was never designed for a conventional automatic. All over the world the Fit/Jazz has either used a 5-speed manual or a CVT, which tends to be more efficient than the conventional AT.
Anyway, the cars you list are considerably higher-powered. In the case of a smaller-engined car like the Fit (1.5L 109HP), the negative effects inherent with a conventional AT are more pronounced, and it seems like you would need to be harder on the pedal to get the same performance as the 5MT, and hence use more fuel.
Also, my last car was an automatic with a very similar-sized engine and horsepower rating, my driving style has not changed, and I receive considerably better fuel economy in the Fit.
...and thank you for accurately putting into words in post #1235 what I have been thinking for quite some time, but couldn't find the right words for
I also think the mpg isn't as linear on the auto as on the stick, like if you drive like a grandma, both will get close to their max, but if you drive like a crazed looney, the stick will return better economy than the auto.
Seriously, while I can't tell how long it will take the future of manuals with three pedals doesn't look as bright as the picture you might paint. Six Speeds is about as far as a manual can afford to go today with a third pedal. and six speeds just may not be enough anymore. I watched as third pedals disappeared in F-1. Even if Shumacher might have objected he was swept along with the majority. People managed to talk me into watching WRC cars a few years ago. I quickly noticed than none of the factory cars came with a traditional shifter. Then it started in ALMS. after something like 50 percent of the top cars started using paddle shifters the third pedal seemed to almost disappear.
I now realize it was my fault that this happened and I apologize to all of those racers that wanted to keep three pedals. I guess they can simply move to a lower class car? I am sorry I forced even Porsche and BMW to start offering DSG type transmissions in their cars. Maybe the uproar by enthusiasts will be so great that Porsche and BMW will simply drop their efforts at introducing what so many have called simply another form of Automatic. Please forgive my speculations of the direction these trends seep to point to. Don't be concerned, the manual will be with us forever, just they way it is. Maybe I can find that three speed column shifter on my next car while I break out one of my old leisure suits. And do you have any extra collar stays I can burrow when I get out my wool suit for the winter. I can't seem to find any in the stores near me. :surprise:
It is clear to me that you have your brain stubbornly hardwired to be incapable of distiguishing between something that is an actual improvement and something that is merely a substitute (and in this case, in the opinion of many, an inferior one).
You're welcome to come to my company for our open forum "Fourth Friday" lunch this week and present your case as to why you think I made a technological mistake buying a 2007 911 Turbo with a 6-speed manual. I'll invite my friend who owns a BMW dealership. He'll be interested on your take as to why he now has unsold 7-speed SMG M5's in stock with a 6-12 month waiting list for the 6-speed manuals. And I'll also invite the poor soul that recently purchased a 911 turbo with a Tiptronic so his wife could drive it. He thought that, becase it was rated as being faster than the manual, it would be just as much fun to drive. He has called me twice offering $10k to swap cars, since other than the transmission, mine is nearly identical to his. He's offered his wife as part of the trade.
Try as you might to throw out an irrelevent comparison, I seriously doubt there is a significant market for an obsolete, inferior 2-stroke carburated Jet Ski. Not that I'd know one if I ran over it in my boat. The fact is that there are plenty of us with decently thick wallets that don't find a whole lot to like about a $3,500 (Porsche Tiptronic) to $10,000 (Ferrari F1) alternative to a 6-speed manual. We aren't racing Forumal One cars on at Monaco. We are driving through the Shenendoah Mountains this weekend. Porsche's new DSG will be the best that current technology has to offer in that area, which is truly wonderful. But offering me the best vanilla ice cream in the world won't change my preference for chocolate.
And don't flatter yourself. You haven't created any mass market trend towards automatic transmissions. Any more than you did towards "man-made fibers" no matter how many polyester leisure suits or rayon sweaters you own. :surprise:
Wake up, please. By your definition of the auto industry, manual transmissions have been a "niche" market for at least 40 years. Porsche is probably the largest company that has had more than 50% manual transmissions since at least the late 1970's. So what is it that you are just discovering in 2006? That a mass market Camry no longer is available with a stick (I don't know that, just guessing)?
You have prognosticated repeatedly that:
A good CD changer has become more important than a good shifter.
The feel of control some enjoy just seems to be slipping away.
Seriously, while I can't tell how long it will take the future of manuals with three pedals doesn't look as bright as the picture you might paint.
You are all over the place. Telling habitat1 that the picture doesn't look bright (he also drives a 911), but telling me the "niche" market will always exist. What the heck is the point you are trying to make, if there is one? Actually, save it. I really don't care to hear doomsday prognostications ad naseum all over agian. If you think you are that good at predicting business/automotive trends, I respectfully suggest you use your talents to figure out the next best thing and make yourself a few hundred million. But even if it takes you until 2020, I'll give you two to one odds on one of those million that there will still be a Porsche 911 and it will still be available with a manual transmission. Fair enough?
As I've said before, I'll do without the luxury long before I'll do without the sport. Either less room (roadsters) or less lux will work for me before I suffer an automatic transmission.
i have to laugh, just saw a commercial during the basball game for the st louis home brand of beer.
it featured 2 ferrari's 'racing' each other. one of the shots showed use of the paddle shifter.
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
Electric vehicles and electric-based hybrids (versus the ICE-based hybrids we have now) won't have a manual, because they won't have a transmission at all. Single-motor vehicles just have a straight reduction gear and a differential, and hub-motor vehicles won't even have that.
Electric motors don't need a transmission. They make peak torque at any RPM. Transmissions in general are a mute point.
Peak torque on most types of electric motors is just above zero rpm (peak would be at zero in theory, but torque is undefined at 0 rpm), then decreases in a regular asymptotic curve as rpm increases. Horsepower remains constant through the rpm range.
All they need in addition is a GPS-based nav system with lane sensing and "intelligent" cruise control to completely drive themselves. Plug in your destination & get out the newspaper. I guess it'll sound an alarm when arrival is achieved.
From the sound of it, all this is months away, much in the sense that the moon is feet away (lots of them). People movers (at airports, for example) have their place, but a personal version holds no appeal to me. Sounds like some think it can't come soon enough, or at least when it does that the masses will embrace it immediately & in large numbers.
I take great pains to avoid what the masses think is appropriate.
I assume an AT is simpler for a hybrid, especially if it cuts the motor out at low speeds (or when stopped) and auto starts it. Not sure how that would work with a clutch and stick shift!
2020 Acura RDX tech SH-AWD, 2023 Maverick hybrid Lariat luxury package.
now if we have a 1200 r/m motor we can go: 1200(rev/min)*1422.198(mm/rev)*(1 mile/1,609,344 mm)*(60 min/1hr)=63 mph max speed
I guess that is reasonable for in town stuff. Someone check my math and logic.