The Future Of The Manual Transmission

shipo

I don't have time to check, however, I believe that there are actually at least two or three flying Connies in the world today. Here are a few links:

http://www.airlinehistorymuseum.com/connie.htm
http://www.superconstellation.org/

Another good link is this one:
http://www.conniesurvivors.com/1-breitling_super_connie.htm

Back when I was first taking flying lessons my instructor had me do a touch and go at 4N1 (Greenwood Lake, NJ), and prior to that he had me do a fly over. I was in the midst of a thirty degree left bank 2,000' over the airport when I happened to look down and had to do a double take. "Wow! Is that a Constellation?" I asked my instructor.

"Yup, at least it was, now it's an out of business restaurant."

I'm not sure which is sadder; a Connie being sent to the scrap cutter, or a hacked up, broken backed Connie rotting on the tarmac in northern New Jersey.

Best Regards,
Shipo

wale_bate1

Thanks Shipo for the links. Most beautiful passenger liner ever, IMO.

No, we knew there were airworthy Connies out there (I've been in three of them, being a Connie fanatic), but I didn't know there were any left flying in uniform, let alone a model as late as the 1049, other than as eyes in the sky.

Thanks again.

wale_bate1

article on DSG. Outlines the principle differences between DSG and sequential manuals and points out pretty well the key advantages.
http://cars.about.com/od/thingsyouneedtoknow/a/ag_howDSGworks.htm

explorerx4

you will admit that given the chance, you prefer to fly in modern fbw planes because they are better, right?

wale_bate1

I'll admit I'm nostalgic, romantic and foolish when it comes to wings and water, that's what I'll do, and proud of it.

If I had to fly every day, you can bet your sweet bippy I'd want to leave the Connie at home. Gimme a 767.

I drive TBW...

taxesquire

From what I understand, DSG go right from 1 gear to antoehr, which is why you have to shift in sequence. My understanding is that there is no "neutral" in the car, except maybe as there is with an automatic.

If anyone can answer the above question, I'd really appreciate it.

wale_bate1

Here, I reposted the link:
http://cars.about.com/od/thingsyouneedtoknow/a/ag_howDSGworks.htm
That should clear things up on the shifts. You can skip shift yourself in manual mode, and if you are in auto mode, and the sensor input suggests rapid deceleration, it will skip for you to select the optimum gear, for example.

Neutral is accomplished by both clutches being disengaged as at a standstill with brake on, or by manually selecting "N".

lilengineerboy

I wonder how the "limp home" feature works. In the automatic I experienced a failure with, the gearbox picked second gear and the car would go from 15-45. Stopping or speeds below 15 got lots of grinding, and 45 was about redline.

wale_bate1

Don't know on that one.

BTW, I mispoke on the clutches in neutral. Completely forgot that when one is off, the other is necessarily on, so the correct answer on neutral is that one clutch is disengaged and the other is engaged, but with no gear selected.

jeffyscott

Having bought myself a new car with a 5 speed automatic yesterday, I was thinking back to the first new car we ever purchased.

I realzed I had forgotten that it did not used to be that you got one extra gear with the manual as I have been thinking, you got two. Our first new car was a Plymouth Horizon with a 5 speed manual. The optional automatic was a 3 speed. As one who bought manuals mainly for practical reasons, that was a big one.

If it was still a choice between a 3 speed auto and 5 speed manual, I'd have bought a manual. Instead it was a choice between auto or manual, with both having 5 speeds.

boaz47

And now there are at least two manufacturers that make a six and seven speed automatic. MB and Lexus I believe. I could picture a SMT with a seven speed but I can't even imagine a seven speed dog leg.

kyfdx

...has 8 speeds

boaz47

Oh my goodness, can you picture a 8 speed dog leg?

nippononly

I can try! Tell me there will be one available some day! :-)

(Actually, 6 forward speeds is more than enough for most applications, I think)

kyfdx

I think five is plenty.... if the ratios are all properly thought out...

My CJ-5 was a 3-speed..

nippononly

Well, I was thinking six speeds in a small-engined car, five for speed and one good overdrive gear for gas-saving highway travel.

Certainly the Corvette doesn't need more than three MAX, maybe two would do.

boaz47

Ha Nippon, now I could only imaging a SMT or DSG in 8 speeds. Can you see a tripple gate and how wide the space between first and seven-eight would be? If the shifter were as wide as your thumb most cars you like would have to move the shift boot forward because you wouldn't have room for a five inch gate between the seats. But then you could put in a split axle and turn a five speed dog leg into a ten speed.

Do you think we will ever see a 10 speed automatic?

rayainsw

“Certainly the Corvette doesn't need more than three MAX, maybe two would do.”

Technically, one COULD drive my 2007 A6 using only one gear.

The trans. will allow a start in third gear ( as well as first or second ) and the 6500 RPM redline equals a top speed of 133 MPH - still in third.

If you’ll allow me 2 gears ( such generosity ) the range in second is 0 to 86 MPH and fifth will pull from about 35 – to absolute top speed ( sixth gear will not pull that – too deep an OD for that ) in the 180s.

Good enough for me.

- Ray
Happier with 6 – and at least 2 for every occasion & mood. . .

lilengineerboy

The 84-88 Corvette had a 7 speed or 12 speed depending how you looked at it(Nash 4+3), and the Volvo 740 had 7 as well (4 + OD in top 3 gears). The early 80s Dodge Colt had a 4 speed with a Power/Economy shifter that I think tweaked the final drive, giving you an 8 speed. And most of these examples were created while the earth was still cooling and they went away because they were deemed unnecessary to achieve desired performance.
My road bike has 20 speeds, all shifted manually via a combination brake lever/shifter, with 2 in the front and 10 in the back, my mountain bike has 3 in the front and 9 in the back. There are very few occasions I need all those ratios. On the road bike most of the time its in the big ring front and towards the middle in the back and the mountain bike is usually in the largest or smallest in the front (downhill or uphill). I don't think cars need 27 speeds, and the reason they keep adding speeds to automatic luxo-boats is because the powerband of the engines they are using is getting smaller and smaller and they need the gears to maintain it.

wale_bate1

Hmmm, from my experiences with the brand, I think in the case of the Lexus 8A, it's only because Benz has a 7A.

Think Nigel Tufnel: "but this one goes up to eleven"...

rayainsw

“the reason they keep adding speeds to automatic luxo-boats is because the powerband of the engines they are using is getting smaller and smaller and they need the gears to maintain it.”

I don’t see that the HP & TQ in the luxo-boats (?) you refer to as requiring an 8 speed trans.

The Lexus ( for example ) posts 380 \ 367 HP & TQ - and a reasonably wide power band.

My best guess is that ( in addition to marketing aspects ) they are adding gears to the automatic transmissions because smaller steps between gears ( can help to ) provide a smoother & more seamless transition between gears on acceleration.

And this allows a wider spread between first & top gear. Resulting in both better acceleration ability at lower speeds and lower RPM at highway cruising speeds.

And as I recall, the Corvette ‘7 speed’ was not a 12 speed – but essentially as you describe the Volvo: a 4 speed with separate OD operation ‘allowed’ on the top 3.

- Ray
Once logged many miles on a 1972 Volvo with a 4 speed manual & OD, but it only operated on fourth gear . . .

cobraboy1

I think that the only reason that Americans in general do not drive a stick is because it forces you to pay attention to wwhat your're doing. You cant really drive a stick and hold your phone to your ear (it can be done, but I wouldn't recommend it) and fiddle with your I-pod, palm pilot or whatever else it is that you have in your car/ or on your person.

Technologicaly speaking we have driven ourselves away from using the stick shift. (I drive one and so does the GF, but that is because we prefer pure sport driving, and racing) We have so many things out there to draw our attention away form driving and to whatever else it is that wwe are doing. I mean take for example, Fast food drive thru... The original Idea was to be able to pick up your meal quickly and then take it to work or home, because you didn't have any time to take a break and eat it. Now everyone has evolved much the way technology has to driving while eating.

Just the same as things like the I-pod, palm pilot, laptop, Satalite radio, and etc. these things were created to make our lives easier, so that we could take our things with us to help us out. And I guess it was inevitable that all of these things therefore ended up in our automobiles. So maybe the fate of our, and my, beloved Manual Transmission. Is really up to how far technology takes us?

So now we are starting to see (maybe?) the spirited and racing driving problem and we are trying to create and newer and better way to reinvent the stick shift. We are trying to use that overabundance of technology and we have our heads in the wrong place. When maybe the best way to make a stick shift, is just to make a stick shift.

boaz47

Every thing you said is valid. However even in racing the manual is evolving to the paddle shifter, at least in the top classes. We are indeed creatures of convienince and are always looking for easier ways of accomplishing something that we may have already mastered. The point has never been if the Manual Dog leg three pedal works or not. It works just fine. The point is are Americans concerned enough with tradition to support it. Already 90 plus percent of the buying public says no. From a marketing standpoint it is hard to make a new and improved manual. As long as it has a third pedal it will be harder to learn to use than an automatic. More and more out vehicles are becoming computer assisted. ABS, Skid Control,Computer controlled engine management, traction control and now even automatic parking. We even have the option of not only power door locks buy remote starting. The last I don't think is offered with any manual vehicles.

It is our very culture that equates new and improved with easier to use. My new TV has absolutely no manual buttons other than power on and off. even my power tools now come with a laser so I can cut a straight line. I once had a hand auger in my tool box, but I haven't even seen one in years.

The manual works and for now has a devoted following. The question for the future is how long will it remain relevant? People have said they will always have a place in a sporting application. But if we as a nation go the green vehicle direction will that be true? If racing is any indication how long will it take for the DSG or SMT to trickle down to the entry level classes of cars? There may always be a place for the manual as a hobby vehicle but it doesn't look good for the mass market. For now we can only enjoy some of the best manuals ever made. I just have no idea for how long.

lilengineerboy

However even in racing the manual is evolving to the paddle shifter, at least in the top classes.

Very limited venues of very specific types of racing us a sequential manual, namely F1 and rally, and for rally that is only in the very upper echelon. Some rally cars have semi-automatic clutch systems requiring a 3rd pedal to get underway and not between gears (although arguably, I haven't had a problem up-shifting without the clutch in the past).

If racing is any indication how long will it take for the DSG or SMT to trickle down to the entry level classes of cars?

Its been about 10 years at this point since sequential transmissions were used in racing. It really hasn't changed things so much in racing overall. In the USA, the most watched race cars have carbs so I don't think we are cutting edge anything.

I also think if the USA "goes green" that remote start BS will go away too. A car idling cold puts out more emissions and gets 0 mpg.

wale_bate1

the opening statement much at all. Shouldn't surprise anyone.

Somebody find me solid data that stick drivers are as a group any less distracted than automatic drivers (or even semi-auto) and I'll buy it. Maybe there's some insurance data, but I think last I heard, premiums went the other way if there was a difference at all.

Sure as heck wouldn't jibe with my anecdotal observations in the least.

I don't ever, aside from when I was first learning, recall three-pedal driving requiring much attention in the least. Maybe start and stop on inclines. Maybe. It's mostly instinctive, IMO, once you're there.

I do propose however that one perhaps inherently understands gear selection and purpose better if started on a manual of some sort, whether that's sequential or three-pedal. I don't think left-leg work offers any enlightentment, persoanlly.

Bah. Part nine, I think.

My only observations on racing is that DSG has been banned because it provides an unfair advantage over manuals and SMTs in that there is no interruption in power flow.

jeffyscott

My daughter replied to an email, telling her about my new car with:

"Cool...looks like it will be fun to drive. Did you get the automatic, though? That makes me sad. :P"

As I have said, I bought manuals for practical reasons...more gears, better mpg, etc. I decided to look back at transmission choices we have had on all the cars we have bought, where there was a choice.

1986 Plymouth Horizon
3 spd auto 24/29 mpg
5 speed manual 26/35 mpg
manual = +2 gears and +2/6 mpg

1989 Plymouth Voyager, 4 cyl
3 speed auto 21/23 mpg
5 speed manual 21/28 mpg
manual = +2 gears and 0/+5 mpg

1996 Ford Contour, 4 cyl
4 speed auto 23/32 mpg
5 speed manual 24/34 mpg
manual = + 1 gear and 1/2 mpg

2005 VW Jetta, 5 cyl
6 speed auto 22/30 mpg
5 speed manual 22/30 mpg
manual = -1 gear and same mpg

2007 Mazda6
5 speed auto 24/31 mpg
5 speed manual 24/32 mpg
manual = no change in gears 0/+1 mpg

The first 3 we had with manual transmissions and the last two with automatic.

This shows the drastic decline in manual transmission advantages in terms of number of gears and mpg. There was also a transition, where in the past the manual transmission car would run at lower rpm at a given cruising speed, now this is typically reversed and it is the automatic that runs at lower rpm.

explorerx4

good thought about 'remote start'.

explorerx4

wait until '08 until posting epa numbers. everyone know for most drivers, the numbers are a fantasy. it is easier to fake out the test with an automatic transmission, if a manufacturer chooses to do so.

boaz47

You could be right. But remote start makes it nice if you live in Palm Springs and you want to run the air a few minutes before you get in a car that will leave blisters on your hand if you touch the steering wheel. Plus I would like to get my heater working on those frosty winter mornings. Automatic features seem to be making some interesting inroads however. By 2010 or 11 as I understand it they will mandate automatic skid control? Just saw automated parallel paring on TV last week. So as I see it the safety people are looking to the computer to solve our driving shortcomings and our air quality problems. Some are even using a braking by wire system and are looking into throttle by wire. That gives the computer even more control. The ecology people are asking the manufacturers to make their cars greener and unless they can find a way to computerize our drivers, manual drivers tend to drive dirtier than automatic drivers because they hold the gears passed the optimum shift point. Be honest how many of us shift at the light or the line?

while to many the manual still holds some romantic notion that we have a connection to the car unless something drastic happens, the number of manuals sold in the US every year will continue to get smaller till companies like the big three or four will have to decide if they are worth making at all.

In racing you are correct. F-1 has dropped the dog leg. WRC had dropped the Dog leg. I believe the DPT and all the top ranks of ALMS have dropped the dog leg. It seems every class that they start using SMTs in converts in less than two years. You may be right that there is time, but the writing might be on the wall. We can only wait and see.

jeffyscott

while to many the manual still holds some romantic notion that we have a connection to the car

I think you hit the nail on the head with that comment. I never had these romantic notions that I was a "real driver" or more "connected to the car" because I had a manual.

I bet some had these same feelings about losing the crank starter, non-power steering, non-power brakes, etc. too

I really think the traditional manual transmission is on the road to becoming a hobbyist feature in new cars. It may be a very long road, but that we are on that path seems clear to me.

spiritinthesky

"The ecology people are asking the manufacturers to make their cars greener and unless they can find a way to computerize our drivers, manual drivers tend to drive dirtier than automatic drivers because they hold the gears passed the optimum shift point. Be honest how many of us shift at the light or the line?"

The "problem" with this argument is that it is just plain WRONG. And it bothers me that there seems to be a hell of a lot of "do-goody airchair ecologists" that don't know their greenhouse gas emitting rear ends from a inert hole in the ground. They probably failed their high school chemistry class and have degrees in sociology or liberal arts, but by god, they sure know how to "emit" crap.

I recently bought a Porsche 911 Turbo 6-speed manual. EPA estimates of 18/25 mpg and 9.0 tons of emissions. Compared to the 5-speed automatic, with EPA ratings of 17/25 and 9.2 tons of emissions. That's both an MPG and greenhouse gas emmission advantage for the manual.

The 2007 BMW 550i that I would likely replace my current 2003 M5 with has three transmission choices:

Automatic: 17/25 mpg 9.2 tons
6-speed manual: 17/24 mpg 9.4 tons
SMG: 16/22 mpg 10.2 tons

However, the automatic above, equiped with the sport package that is standard on the 6 speed, results in the EPA dropping to 16/24 and, presumably, more greenhouse gas emissions than the 6-speed manual.

Sorry to pick on you because of your state of residency, but you live in a state where the governor drives a 9 mpg Hummer, Federal tax credits are available for 6,000+ lb SUV's, the per capita registration of such SUV's is the highest in the country, and 35+ mpg Mercedes diesels are illegal? And now we have some BS about manual transmissions are a major contributor to global warming. If you'd just get rid of the hot air in California, we'd be watching the ice caps grow.

P.S. If I'm not mistaken, you are conversely a big fan of SMG's due to their "technology". Well you are free to pay $2,000 for such a unit on the 550i, but you'll be hit with a gas guzzler tax and the knowledge that you are dumping 10% more emissions into the atmosphere. How could you live with yourself?

habitat1

"I think you hit the nail on the head with that comment. I never had these romantic notions that I was a "real driver" or more "connected to the car" because I had a manual."

Romanticism aside, I sincerely pity someone who "feels connected" with a slushbox or finds it as rewarding to drive as a crisp short throw manual. Whether it's a $20,000 econobox or a $100,000+ sports car, I can't imagine ever finding a mushy automatic as anything but....mushy. And that's the last thing I want in any aspect of my life - cars, or romantic encounters.

boaz47

I totally understand your distaste for the contradictory state of our politics in this state. But that aside connected or not connected, feeling sorry or not feeling sorry has little to do with the direction the industry is heading. People may bemoan how lazy people are getting and may debate the green issue, unless you look at the EPA green car guide and see how many main stream vehicles do better wiht the automatic option, but that will not change the direction unless someone starts taking the money out of their wallets and starts buying manual transmissions in far greater numbers than they do today.

In truth even the greatest manual proponant will drive whatever they produce to drive in the future. If they get to transportation pods people will ride in transportation pods. If manuals are not available in their favorite vehicle they will still buy that favorite vehicle. We in this country have a car culture not a transmission culture. Already more that 90 percent of the consumers in the US agree. The transmission doesn't matter as long as the car looks good to them. I drive a manual because it works for my style of driving and I could get one in the car I wanted. If the car I wanted didn't come with a manual it wouldn't be a deal breaker for me. If I wanted a Prius I wouldn't get something else simply because it isn't offered in a manual. If I were going to get a SUV I have no problem getting one with a automatic. I just don't believe anyone in this forum will give up driving if they stop offering a manual in the car they want or worse yet stop offering manuals with a third pedal.

You are correct I admire the technology of the SMT and the DSG but I can wait till and if they become more affordable. But unlike some here I have CD player in my car, not a Cassett deck even if I had a boat load of Cassetts when I got a car with a CD player. I just didn't get one till the price difference was within reason. I will have no problem replacing the CD player with a Ipod either if I get to that point. I don't miss having a 8 track, or a cassette deck even if they worked very well and were inexpensive to begin with.

This debate comes down to one simple fact. It doesn't matter one whit what we want in a transmission if they don't offer that transmission. Right now manuals represent less than 10 percent of the total market share in the US car market. At some point if this market trend continues the manufacturers will have to decide if it is worth the effort to offer a manual at all. The question is, will that trend be reversed or will your grandchildren have to ask you what a third pedal is?

mick8

Is there a manual transmission that has a no rollback feature? The Jetta has a no roll feature on the automatic but none on the stick. My wife will not drive a manual because she's fearful of rolling backwards on a hill. thank you. Mike

iluvmysephia1

if we consumers continue to buy them. I'll go out on an oak tree limb and predict that we'll always have manual-transmissioned cars available to buy new.

They're just funner, better, longer-lasting, less troublesome and...cooler. Honk-honk.

shipo

The new BMW 3-Series has a "Hill-Holder" feature built into its braking system, so, "Yes", there is at least one car with a manual transmission with a "No rollback" option. ;-)

Best Regards,
Shipo

chris703

Hi, I believe Subaru offers one in the Forester, and has been offering that feature in other models over the years depending on the type of clutch.
Good luck!

boaz47

Sophy---If you are an example of the loyal manual dog leg fan then I guess the manual is doomed. Just a few days ago you said,

"They are absolutely loaded, the 828/2 is retailing for only $14,000 and it's a paddle shift automatic tranny-driven rig. The 828/2 will have the 1.6L "Tritec" motor that BMW plops into the Mini-Cooper. What's not to dig here? Am I missing something?"

This was a direct quote by you. So you would jump ship in a heart beat? But you aren't alone. I believe quite a few Mini drivers opted for the CVT in Europe so you are as normal in that regard as you can be.

cdnpinhead

The "no-rollback" feature is generally called a parking brake. This is why all manual transmission cars have a hand-operated one.

One sets the brake when stopped on the hill and waits for the light to turn green (or whatever--traffic to clear, etc). At that point, you release the brake with your hand as you engage the clutch & accelerate away.

It's been happening for decades.

shipo

"It's been happening for decades."

Funny you should mention that. My first car with a stick was purchased when I lived in hilly San Diego and it actually had four pedals under the dash, gas, brake, clutch and parking brake. I would have loved to have had a hand operated parking brake in that car but alas, I had to master the whole clutch-starting-on-an-incline thing without the being able to effectively use the parking brake to help me out.

Best Regards,
Shipo

saabgirl

My wife will not drive a manual because she's fearful of rolling backwards on a hill.

Well, this is an Aha! comment, I think.

Many? Most? Almost all? cars are purchased in a family negotiation. Party A wants family transportation, something that's easy to drive, holds the loot when coming back from the mall, is safe, maybe offers a modicum of entertainment for the family's urchins, will hold gram and gramps in a pinch -- and offers a transmission that allows you to select Forward or Reverse and forget about it.

Party B would like something that shows the proper appreciation for living at the tail end of the Golden Age of Internal Combustion -- part of which, I contend, is a manual transmission. Yes, I know, you can shift some automatics. Thanks, but that's what the manual is for.

You all know the joke, "My wife and I talked about which car to buy and compromised. We bought the one she wanted."

I can make a few sensible arguments for choosing a manual, but the fact is that they're just more fun to take into a corner hard, select the gear that will generate the most torque, wait for it to straighten out, and then punch it. In fact, I did that tonight with my missus in the passenger seat (of my turbocharged, performance exhaust equipped guy toy) and she beamed at the squeal, roar and acceleration -- but would never agree to buy a car with a manual for her use. She thinks hitting passing gear is sufficient fun.

I think (nearly) every joint family decision on car purchases is biased toward the automatic -- though some lucky fellows are benefitting from those of us who took the trouble to introduce our daughters to the proper appreciation of driving a car with a clutch.

lilengineerboy

It has been my experience that even when the numbers don't favor it, the manual will get better fuel economy than the auto.
The reason is the auto will do well if you drive it like a blue hair (grandma reference, not punk rocker) but if you try to be even the least bit agressive, that 24 mpg number falls to 15 mpg or so. In a manual, even driving the snot out of it, the 24 mpg number falls to about 19 or so. I had a lot of seat time in automatic and manual Honda Accords from the 90s and still get in the 30s with a manual while never besting the sticker's 28 in an auto.
That car was ultimately sold as salvage due to transmission issues while the manual is still running (on the original clutch).

nj2pa2nc

We are those drivers that prefer manual transmission. In fact when we consider getting a new car-if it does not have manual we do not even look at it. Maybe sometime we might consider automatic but not for hopefully many more years.We currently own an 05 Hyundai Elantra GT- 5 spd and an 06 Acura TSX- 6 spd. Luckily we still have a choice

iluvmysephia1

in regards to the Obvio! 828/2, it's true, I have been enticed by the Obvio! website to want to drive one with the paddle shifter and experience shifting w/o clutch operation.

But ever since Mitsubishi announced that the long-awaited Lancer for 2008 will be at dealer lots in March of '07 my thoughts have been glued on a manual-tranny Lancer in either GS or GLS getup.

The Obvio! website advertises "effortless" paddle-shifting and quick acceleration for it's little 828/2 and that does have me curious. It's just that the Mitsubishi Lancer GLS with that bodykit and spoiler has my attention firmly turned away from the Kia Optima and 828/2 now. This new Lancer is the car I've been waiting for Kia to make. The Suzuki SX4 and the Optima are still interests of mine but I think I want a 5-speed manual Lancer for my next car.

Notice I said 5-speed manual Lancer? Mitsubishi makes the Lancer with a 5-speed stick standard equipment! Whoo-hoo for the stick shift. I now want the top-o-the-line GLS Lancer, too, not the middle of the line GS. I want the spoiler and bodykit Lancer with Navigation and bluetooth and all the gadgets. Now the tricky part of convincing my wife we need to trade the Sportage in.

jeffyscott

One sets the brake when stopped on the hill and waits for the light to turn green (or whatever--traffic to clear, etc). At that point, you release the brake with your hand as you engage the clutch & accelerate away.

If you are doing this, then you do not really know how to drive a manual transmission yet :P .

I also had a manual with foot operated parking brake, it was a 1989 Plymouth Voyager.

cdnpinhead

Wow -- I had no idea. Somehow I had it in my head that this is a logical world & that no mfr would put a foot-operated parking brake on a car with a manual. Go figure. What brand vehicle was it?

My oldest Datsuns came with the parking brake in the middle of the dash (well, it was below a bit, but you get the idea) so it could still be hand operated. Oh well. Live and learn.

Side note -- read your RFT post & was interested to see that your GFT of choice is the same as what I'm running now on my car. Way cheaper than the Pilots I wore out (at a good number of miles) & working just great after 18+ months & 28K miles.

shipo

"What brand vehicle was it?"

It was a 1970 Dodge Challenger. It originally had a 318 3-Speed (a "Three on the Floor"?), however, I came across an AAR Cuda that had been rear ended so hard that the rear bumper was in the front seat and the transmission tail segment had been split. So I bought the 340 6-Pack and then found a New Process 4-Speed out of a 440 Super-Bee. Some exhaust work, a little machining of the bell housing and a Borg & Beck clutch and I was set to go to town. Ummm, four speeding tickets in as many weeks later and I put the 318 back in (keeping the 4-Speed and the new dual exhausts of course). ;-)

Regarding the Kumhos, yup, they seem to be the best deal going. ;-)

Best Regards,
Shipo

boaz47

"it's true, I have been enticed by the Obvio! website to want to drive one with the paddle shifter and experience shifting w/o clutch operation."

This quote is one that helps prove a point in your case. It may be what had relegated the manual to a minority position in the market place. It reminds me a bit of the Beta Max verses the VHS debate. Most people would swear Beta was a better system but when you went to the video store it was clear more people wanted a VHS. In fact it looked very much like this debate. The Avid few had Beta's and swore they would never change. I believe Beta came first but I am not sure all I remember is it was about 90 percent VHS to 10 percent Beta when I got my first recorder. Soon you couldn't find movies to rent for a Beta and then you couldn't get a Beta anywhere.

This may not happen to manuals. I am not trying to make a direct connection. But if people get smitten by a vehicle and it comes with a automatic most people will buy it. (most being more than 90 percent) And, even if some in this forum say they wouldn't consider it, because they are in a minority and don't represent as much profit to our capitalistic companies there could be a point where manuals simply aren't offered in their vehicle of choice, much like the Maxima. Could they switch to an Altima? I believe they could but I also believe they will be offering a CVT for the Altima as an option this year as Nissan is beginning to offer more and more CVTs in their cars. Is this a trend and can we in this country see it? I believe we see it but there are so few that care that we ignore the trend.

jeffyscott

Used to be if you bought a manual transmission the car would cruise at lower rpm at a given speed and therefore be quieter. Now this seems to be the opposite in many/most cars.

For example in the automatic I bought, the overall final ratio is about 25% higher than the manual. The manual has a ratio of 0.755 in the top gear and final drive ratio of 4.388, while the auto has 0.692 and 3.863. If my math is correct this translates, @ 75 mph, to 2730 rpm with the automatic vs. 3412 rpm with the manual.

lilengineerboy

Hmm that does seem like a big difference. If the difference was truly that big I would imagine a substantial hit on the fuel economy of the manual relative to the automatic.