The Future Of The Manual Transmission

bpizzuti

So if the unit is constantly adjusting ratios for peak performance, why would someone want to interfere with that? If the whole argument is the peak efficiency (either for power or fuel economy) and it can constantly adjust on the fly, why would you want to mess that up?

Yeah, why would you want to make a decision when the transmission knows what's best for the car's performance and fuel economy? You just made a point against manual trannys dude. But allow me to help you a bit: engine braking.

I don't know of a single slushbox/manumatic that will downshift on demand, unless it decides its okay. I know of very few that will hold a gear to redline.

I'd suggest you drive a Mazda sometime.

nippononly

"the transmission knows what's best for the car's performance and fuel economy? You just made a point against manual trannys dude."

Umm, I beg to differ. Having the car's computer decide what's best for my gear choice is anything but a point against manuals IMO. In fact, it is a point in FAVOR of the stick. Just one opinion.

lilengineerboy

Yeah, why would you want to make a decision when the transmission knows what's best for the car's performance and fuel economy? You just made a point against manual trannys dude.

Sorry you missed the sarcasm. I didn't say it knows what is best; I said the whole argument for its existence is peak efficiency. I just don't understand why you want to take something that could have an advantage and eliminate it.

But allow me to help you a bit: engine braking.

The Prius has a mode on the stalk thing marked "B" for engine braking.

I'd suggest you drive a Mazda sometime.

The Mazda6 was my frame of reference. That was what made me decide those things were goofy. Thankfully, they offer the V6 with a 3pedal/5spd arrangement, and are the ones most likely to get my $$$ because of that.

dudleyr

No car computer is as smart as a human brain (well most human brains ) - and certainly cannot see ahead and forcast what gear is neaded in the future.

boaz47

Sorry about the diesel rabbit chasing my friend. I will wait and look forward to seeing if that is indeed true. The last promised date to reintroduce such vehicles into our state was 2006. I guess I can be skeptical.

dudleyr, the idea that no computer is smarter than the human brain doesn't seem to impress the manufacturers or legislators much. If you have a relitively modern car you more than likely Have ABS and that does the correcting instead of allowing you to modulate the pedal as you brain might direct. If you buy another ar in ten years the Skid control will be mandatory and that will assist your brain in its efforts to corner correctly. You can't push red line in most cars today because you brain needs the assistance of a Rev-limiter controlled not by your brain. Nothing says these new devices are preferable to people you like to control their vehicles themselves. But the industry is heading that way and the legislators are legislating that way. The question doesn't seem to be if the choice will be left up to the consumer but rather for how much longer will the choice be left up to the consumer. I just don't see the average family opting for a Porsche just to drive a dog leg do you? And if they offer transportation pods as Nippon suggests it already looks like more than 90 percent of your fellow consumers will gladly give up selecting for themselves for ease of use. The future doesn't look like one that will be interested in driving for pleasure but it will be one that stresses economy and EPA ratings. Just look to see how the Hybrid society feels about the need for a manual.

lilengineerboy

If you have a relitively modern car you more than likely Have ABS and that does the correcting instead of allowing you to modulate the pedal as you brain might direct.

I would argue this is an enhancement designed to keep the driver in control, as opposed to something that takes control away from the driver.

skid control will be mandatory and that will assist your brain in its efforts to corner correctly

This I am still on the fence about, as most people really either 1. cant drive, 2. driving is a low priority.

You can't push red line in most cars today because you brain needs the assistance of a Rev-limiter controlled not by your brain.

Rev-limiters are usually well above red-line (500-1000 rpm), and can be modified with software. They are there to protect the motor, and since there is very little if any power to be had up there, I'm cool with it.

bumpy

Rev-limiters are usually well above red-line (500-1000 rpm)

Really? The fuel cutoff on my SE-R is around 7600 rpm. Never tried to find the cutoff on the S2000 (9000 is enough for me, and I'd have to hook up a standalone tach to read above that).

dudleyr

Braking is reactive, shifting can be proactive. Braking (abs) does not require complex logic, just detect traction and prevent spin. Far fewer parameters with braking.

Also is is very hard for most drivers to detect and react to the loss of traction, and very easy to shift properly.

nippononly

"Sorry about the diesel rabbit chasing my friend"

How funny you should use the term "rabbit chasing", when in fact one of the first diesel choices to be available early in calendar 2008 is the Rabbit (by VW; 5-speed manual is standard :-))

:-P

spiritinthesky

"Manual transmissions offer significantly better fuel economy than automatics, if they are driven properly. Manual transmissions are typically about 96% efficient, while automatics are about 85% (which explains why automatics must be water cooled). The BSFC (brake specific fuel consumption) of gasoline engines show that for in-city driving (under about 8 HP, easy to calculate), the engine speed should not exceed about 35% of redline RPM. I have a 2003 Subaru Forester with a manual transmission. For the last 3 years, I have been consistently getting about 38-39 mpg in the summer (34-35 mpg winter) in combined city-highway driving by keeping the engine speed between 1500 and 2000 RPM, except on the highway....Keeping the engine speed below 2000 RPM in the city will not lug the engine because a) The ignition timing is microprocessor controlled, and b) the engine torque required at 2000 RPM is about 30 Newton meters (for 8 HP), about 20% of WOT (wide open throttle)."

Sorry, but in spite of your attempt at technical eloquence, that is a very poor definition of "properly" driving a high compression, high performance manual transmissioned gasoline engine. That is, assuming you want it to last a long time and retain its performance capabilities.

Any attempt/need to accelerate or even maintain speed on moderate grades with that Subaru chugging along at 1,500 rpm IS going to result in poor combustion which, over time, will lead to engine deposits and stresses vs. running the engine at 2,500+ rpm.

Go ahead and follow your penny pinching strategy with your Subaru to eek out evey last MPG you can get - just don't buy an M3 or 911 with your gas savings. I'd suggest a nice diesel engine with a 4,500 rpm redline as your next car - at least it will be closer to the engine's sweetspot with your chugging strategy.

Porsche and BMW engineers will tell you that more excess engine wear occurs because people drive at too low of rpms than too high. That's one of the reasons we hear "mostly highway miles" to describe a used car and associate that with less wear than (often lower rpm) city driving. If it were up to me, in addition to the redline indicator, I would have a shaded orange area on a tach below 30% of redline which should be avoided except under intial acceleration in 1st or 2nd gear.

I wish you luck with your Subaru. It isn't the most advanced engine out there and you probably will never tell the difference in the stress you are subjecting it to. But don't be fooled by your own analysis. Hop on a bicycle and put it in its top gear and take a ride up a hill at a low cadence. You may burn less energy, but your more likely to pull a hamstring or have a heart attack standing on your pedals trying to generate torque than if you used the proper (higher rpm) lower gear. Not to mention all the pissed off riders behind you waiting for you to get moving.

lilengineerboy

Porsche and BMW engineers will tell you that more excess engine wear occurs because people drive at too low of rpms than too high.

Sshhh don't tell the guys that made the gas eTa series engine in the 528e and 325e. The motor was considered one of the most reliable and robust motors ever (the valvetrain was way overbuilt for the application)and redlined at 4500 or 5000 rpm.

dudleyr

While I occasionally went up the tach, I usually shifted my Integra at 2500 rpm (less if I was just chugging around town). 230,000 miles later it runs great and the valvetrain still looks new. It does not burn a drop of oil and the spark plug color is perfect (no soot or oil).

This whole gotta rev the engine thing may have applied to older engines, but is not valid today.

andys120

This whole gotta rev the engine thing may have applied to older engines, but is not valid today.

That's probably true but what's the point of owning a sporty M/T car (like an Integra or a BMW) if you don't wring a few revs out of it?

Going to redline never hurt a well built engine.

dudleyr

Going to the redline certainly does not hurt and I am/was not shy about doing that either to pass somebody or just for the occasional fun. But day to day driving the kids to school and commuting to work the vast majority of my driving is under 2500 rpm (a little more in 1st gear becasuse the revs build fast, and more on the highway because there is no 6th gear)

dino001

38-39 mpg in the summer (34-35 mpg winter) in combined city-highway driving by keeping the engine speed between 1500 and 2000 RPM, except on the highway

Are these Imperial galons and 2.0 N.A. Australian version? I would have to see a 2.5i Forester making 38 mpg US. 1500 rpm at any decent load is going to ruin the engine. It's like trying to ride a bicycle on 13-tooth gear uphill at cadence of 50 rpm. Try it once and feel what you are subjecting your engine to .

jeffyscott

Some of the manual gates in the automatics could be better implemented, true (some will shift for you at redline) but the better ones are truly manual control in that mode (Mazda's come to mind).

Tested this today in my Mazda6. It went up to and a little over redline in manual mode. I had thought it would shift right at or a little below redline. Just when I was manually shifting to second the car felt odd...I thought maybe it was trying to shift automatically right at the time I did. But after reviewing the owners manual, I think instead it was interupting fuel delivery. The manual says:

In manual shift mode, gears do not shift up automatically. Don't run the engine with the tachometer needle in the RED ZONE. If the tachometer needle enters the RED ZONE, you may feel engine-braking because the fuel delivery will be stopped to protect the engine.

Not sure that cutting off fuel is better than having it upshift automatically at redline...why do you think it is?

dudleyr

"1500 rpm at any decent load is going to ruin the engine. It's like trying to ride a bicycle on 13-tooth gear uphill at cadence of 50 rpm."

The thing is the engine is not too far from max torque evan at those low rpm's. Typical driving is not much of a load and will not ruin the engine. Now if you were to floor it up a steep hill in top gear at 1,500 that would not be great for the engine, but that is not what is happening.

Research anybody who put 500,000 miles on a non rebuilt engine and you will find that they all drove gently at low rpm's. Low rpms are not bad for an engine.

bpizzuti

Not sure that cutting off fuel is better than having it upshift automatically at redline...why do you think it is?

Because if it DID automatically upshift then they would have to take heat for the tranny automatically upshifting in manual mode instead of allowing the driver to hold at redline.

Personally, I prefer the fuel cutoff...if I wanted it to upshift I would have told it to upshift.

kyfdx

Ditto.... I like the fuel cutoff better than an automatic upshift.. Otherwise, why have a manual mode?

jeffyscott

Okay, you guys like fuel cutoff better, but you did not say why. What is the advantage of cutting off fuel over just having it shift, in case you forget to do so.

I think I would rather not have the car go above redline in the first place and the reason is I don't want my engine damaged.

The uses (to me) of manual mode would be to downshift before accelerating to pass or to use a lower gear for engine braking on a down grade. Not that I am likely to forget to just do the shifting if in manual mode, but in the case of passing once I have downshifted and start accelerating, upshifting at redline is not a problem...cutting off fuel may be a problem. For the engine braking usage of manual mode, I don't see an advantage to either solution to the "oops, I forgot to shift" problem.

kyfdx

I want the manual mode to mimic a manual transmission... holding the lower gear heading into a turn, or whatever.. If I want it to shift automatically, I can just put it into Sport mode to shift at the redline... Having it work with the fuel cutoff/rev limiter just gives you one more option..
Plus, all the cars I've had with rev limiters/fuel cutoffs will really not allow you to exceed the redline on acceleration... at least not enough or long enough to matter...

Of course, with a true manual, you can exceed the redline by downshifting at too high of a speed... which is not a problem with the auto-manual..

regards,
kyfdx

bristol2

Surely if the setting claims to be manual, it should be manual? In other words it should neither upshift or use fuel cut-off. As with a manual if you go over redline and take no action, you damage the engine. If you want the car to figure out what you should do, don't use the 'manual' setting. If you want to make all the transmission shift decisions, don't drive it over the red line unless you plan on damaging the engine.
Slush box drivers can't have it both ways.

kyfdx

Sorry.... I had an '84 Porsche 911 manual-transmission.. and it had a fuel cutoff at the redline.. That really has nothing to do with automatic transmissions.. That technology has been around forever..

So.. there..

bristol2

I guess I need to red line my Accord and see what happens....maybe, maybe not.

kyfdx

My last manual transmission Accord was 1982... no rev limiter then..

bumpy

It's no big deal. On the SE-R, hitting the cut-off just tells the computer to shut off the fuel injectors. The engine is just pumping air at that point and slowly spins down until you lift off the gas pedal, and the computer gets that input from the throttle position sensor and turns the injectors back on.

jeffyscott

Surely if the setting claims to be manual, it should be manual?

That depends on what you view the purpose of the "manual" mode. For me it is not about pretend shifting, but just a more attractive and somwhat easier/quicker way of allowing one to manually choose a gear in limited circumstances.

Besides the two circumstances I gave, Mazda indicates that you can use the manual mode to start in 2nd gear in slippery conditions. I've never done that with a manual, so doubt I will do it with this automatic...but that is another of those limited circumstances where it might be used by someone.

Apparently, in your view it should be a way to blow your engine ...I'm gonna have to go ahead and disagree with you there .

lilengineerboy

Every manual transmission car I've had has been equipped with a rev limiter. It doesn't help if you downshift going too fast (ask the E36 M3 guys about that ) but it will cut on acceleration.

In slick, snowy conditions, I have to use 2nd and go very easy on the clutch to get the RWD car to move at all, less so with the FWD, and the AWD car I think I could put it in gear and side step the clutch and it would still take off fine.

Driving my mom's minivan (auto)in the snow with miserable traction control was pretty annoying. I would rather have just had a clutch and some control over moderating the power going to the wheels.

tallman1

I guess I need to red line my Accord and see what happens....

The rev limiters will kick in.

boaz47

It seems as if people have resigned themselves to allowing computers to control our fuel flow to override our ability to push our engine “too” far into red line. Obviously the reasoning is we are not skilled enough to watch our tachometers or listen to our engines. We don't seem too upset that they are mandating a computer control over how we corner in ten years with skid control. Remember once skid control is mandated in the new cars heal and toe tail out maneuvers will not be possible even in rear wheel drive cars. We didn’t put up much of a fuss over ABS even if many of us learned the skill of modulating our brakes before ABS ever came out. Anymore our cars won’t even start without computer assistance. If the black box goes south so does our ability to drive the car.

We have accepted power seats, power windows automatic dimming mirrors and some even have automatic parallel parking and backup radar to warn us if we are too close to the car behind us because we can’t judge for ourselves. Yet we seem to believe having a manual connection to the shifting fork is important enough to take a stand?

More than 90 percent of the driving populace in the US already has given up the clutch and of the 8 percent or so that still drive manual many don’t seem all that resistant to SMTs and DSGs. It is just hard to see all these things happening and still say there is a bright future for manuals, or at least dog legs in our future

lilengineerboy

It seems as if people have resigned themselves to allowing computers to control our fuel flow to override our ability to push our engine “too” far into red line. Obviously the reasoning is we are not skilled enough to watch our tachometers or listen to our engines. We don't seem too upset that they are mandating a computer control over how we corner in ten years with skid control. Remember once skid control is mandated in the new cars heal and toe tail out maneuvers will not be possible even in rear wheel drive cars. We didn’t put up much of a fuss over ABS even if many of us learned the skill of modulating our brakes before ABS ever came out. Anymore our cars won’t even start without computer assistance. If the black box goes south so does our ability to drive the car.

Boaz I was thinking of you today while reading this:
Focus shifting to avoiding crashes

More than 90 percent of the driving populace in the US already has given up the clutch and of the 8 percent or so that still drive manual many don’t seem all that resistant to SMTs and DSGs. It is just hard to see all these things happening and still say there is a bright future for manuals, or at least dog legs in our future

Aww Chiken Little, so much doom and gloom, it will be okay. Macs are <8% of the market, they are a very profitable, although niche, market. Like true 3 pedal manuals, they aren't going away any time real soon. I don't think they are going to take over the world, but I don't see them going away either.

nippononly

"Macs are <8% of the market, they are a very profitable, although niche, market"

The difference, of course, being that Macs command a premium in price to compensate for their low sales volume, whereas in transmissions, the manual is usually the discount choice.

Which is why my salvo to automakers is this: make the manual the extra-cost option! I don't mind, I will pay the $1000 premium that automatic buyers are paying now. I will pay the premium, that is, as long as it will ensure the continuing existence of the manual. :-)

cdnpinhead

". . . .power seats, power windows automatic dimming mirrors and some even have automatic parallel parking and backup radar to warn us if we are too close to the car behind us because we can&#146;t judge for ourselves. Yet . . . ."

It may or may not surprise you to learn that I detest all of that s*** (let's say stuff) at least as much as I do automatic transmissions. The good news with most of it is that it can be ignored (save power windows) when it breaks, as it most assuredly will, sooner or later. I put up with it because I have to. I drive my car alone 95% of the time, so seat/mirror adjustments are moot. I set it and forget it. The fact that I could (probably) change the stuff easily is well beyond irrelevant.

boaz47

LOL...Oh I hope Nippon doesn't look at that post. He would see transportation PODS all over it. You did know that mack is converting to Intel processors in some of their machines? One has to wonder how that will effect their Mac-ness. And Remember they were going under until Jobs came back and Gates infused money into Apple, I wonder why he did that? The corporate joke used to be who would be the CEO of Apple next month?

I agree with you that if we don't have to change our automotive ideals and move to Hybrids, bio diesels or fuel cells and the ICE continues to be the main force in our vehicle choices manuals may stay longer that I predict they will. Not in the majority of cars and not in the US except as niche transmissions but for some sporting cars maybe. But if Toyota and their comercials are correct and Hybrids become the norm manuals are all but dead here. There is nothing in the future or automotive development that I can see that would indicate a bright future. At best it looks like a lingering death. I see performance machines heading towards things like the DSG and economy heading towards the CVT. Both are receptive to computer control for the EPA and even for the article you posted.

jeffyscott

From the "Focus shifting to avoiding crashes":

Front sensors, for example, already are being used in some cars to detect when a driver is getting too close to another car and automatically slow down the vehicle.

I am all for that. I am tired of the constant tailgating, particularly when it is being done by giant SUVs or semis.

tallman1

Macs are less than 8% of the market,

Hmmm, I drive a manual and I use a Mac. I guess I'm VERY unique. :shades:

lilengineerboy

Front sensors, for example, already are being used in some cars to detect when a driver is getting too close to another car and automatically slow down the vehicle.

I am all for that. I am tired of the constant tailgating, particularly when it is being done by giant SUVs or semis.

Its used in adaptive cruise control. The operator can set a following distance and the vehicle will maintain that distance as best as it can, but if urgent and sudden braking is needed it sounds an alarm and the operator has to pound the brakes.

Forward collision warning systems are making their way to market, but not mitigation systems. There are alarms and buzzers and dancing ladies that come on when it thinks a collision is eminent but the driver still has to pound the brakes.

lilengineerboy

Macs are less than 8% of the market,

Hmmm, I drive a manual and I use a Mac. I guess I'm VERY unique.

...Except for it being an Accord...

dudleyr

Where I am Accords are actually pretty rare. There are fewer than a dozen in my town (15,000 people) and I have the only stick. My Integra was the only one in town.

There are dozens of Suburbans for every Accord.

elias

grammar nitpick: something is either unique or or not unique. there are no other degrees of uniqueness.
ok, you knew that already.
onto the manual-trans subject. i bet there are zero vehicles available with both manual trans and adaptive-cruise-control. someone prove me wrong on that bet? benz C series has manual trans, but i don't think it has adaptive cruise control. some of the bigger-$ Benzes have it, i think - but without manual trans available.
i don't like the adaptive-cruise-controls because they use infrared rangefinders and they set off my V1 infrared-laser detector repeatedly. (those Japanese darth-vader-looking crossover FX35/45s, for example).

tallman1

...Except for it being an Accord...

lol

iluvmysephia1

is just a drop in the bucket back to the man he took...ummm....codgered...I..I mean gently persuaded important information from in order to build his M-soft industrial juggernaut. What's good for Job's is good for business, sort of.

Paddle shifting isn't all the evil manual-lovers(of which I still count myself one of)make it out to be. My CVT finds 'em smoothily in 'D' for relaxation and if I want to play at least I have the option to flip the aluminum. The technology works well and is manufactured tight, it invites flipping quickly through the numbers and the car quickly accelerates in turn...the Lancer is quiet in the cabin and tight as can be, not even a hint of a rattle and roll anywhere.

I don't see manual tranny's going away, though, any time soon. I would consider going manual again. I have such a short drive to work in this little cow town and even though we go to Phoenix and Tucson occasionally I have only racked up 1,300 miles in just under 5 weeks of driving the sporty Japanese sedan.

lilengineerboy

Paddle shifting isn't all the evil manual-lovers(of which I still count myself one of)make it out to be. My CVT finds 'em smoothly in 'D' for relaxation and if I want to play at least I have the option to flip the aluminum.

Why would you paddle shift a CVT? The whole idea is that it optimizes its ratio continuously. I just don't get this concept. This, to me, is even more pointless than the boy-racer-slushboxes.

nippononly

This intrigued me: I was chatting with my boss this morning, and discovered that even though he and his wife haven't owned anything with a stick shift in it for 20 years, they DID teach both of their sons to drive stick, and guess what? Both kids now own stick-shift cars! One has a Prelude, the other has a pick-up. They are in their early 20s.

With any luck they will teach their kids to drive stick too.

Just thought it was interesting that two parents who last drove stick shifts in the 80s taught their kids the manual. Kinda takes some air out of the theory that people who drive automatics won't teach their kids to drive stick, thereby shrinking the number of people able to drive one each generation.

jeffyscott

You drive a lot, by my standards ...1300 in 5 weeks would be 13,000 per year. I've only got 2000 in 3 months on my new vehicle.

boaz47

Sounds like a ground swell. I have taught several young people how to drive stick. One out of five has bought a manual for their first car. Can you guess why they did that? I asked and the answer will not surprise you one bit. Automatics are easier to find and so finding a good looking used car with a automatic is easier as well. As far as new cars go? The local dealers are a lot like your Toyota dealer and there are few if any manuals left over for test driving. Talking to the salesmen it is easy to see how these things happen. Half the sale can be made just by getting the new driver into the car. Often the car dealers are in high traffic areas and so new drivers driving a stick feel less at ease. One stall in traffic can kill a sale. It doesn't have to but it can.

Your friends have bucked the trend as you have said. The question is how many other have gone along with it? Obviously 90 something percent continue to follow the trend.

iluvmysephia1

that I have there to use if I want to. There are times I just pop it in 'D' and drive but technical engineeering doesn't even come in to play here, with me. Just an amusing little gadget to have that someone else may find more important than I if we sell it. I don't see that happening any time soon.

It is fun to paddle shift, though, I still may get the itch to do some real clutch action shifting again someday. I am not leaving the fold entirely, no-no.

By my old Puget Sound area driving standards 1,300 miles in 5 weeks is miniscule driving. Really. Here in this dusty and hot little town in SE Arizona it is a reality. We're taking off in a few minutes to go to Safford, AZ, a 40 mile drive, to go shopping. I'll be watching the mpg-avg-ahhh-meter closely as I coast the final 25-odd miles north in to Safford. We did 37.2mpg the first trip in there after buying the Lancer GTS. Trip number two netted a 30.2mpg average.

krony

Got one for ya. The '07 BMW 5 series offer active cruise control for a $2200 option...but you use girl math (sorry ladies)...you can save $1275 if you avoid the auto and stay with the 6 speed manual...so it's really less than $1000.

krony

I asked a while back if anyone knew of a site that listed models with a manual transmission. Found an awesome site tonight.

Forbes Auto Feature Search ">

You can even plug in your prefered hp, power to weight, option codes, etc to get the models that work.

bristol2

I don't know about that site, maybe I'm missing something.

It returned some like the Buick Ranier and Cadillac DTS among others when I asked for manual, $25k-$35k....