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
Try it in an empty slippery parking lot ahead of time so you will have some idea of the degree of your increased steering and braking ability.
Still can't get my hand-brake parallel parking trick down, but maybe it's the car. I used to have that nailed back when I had a manual.
Ya those are fun to watch. You are trying this with a FWD and park brake activation on the rear axle tho right?? :shades:
I'm sending you a cool video i saved many years ago, sorta on this same vein but with a twist.....you'll see.. (it's 2.8 mg)
A six-speed automatic transmission is a $1000 option for the criminally insane folks who choose to forgo the standard five-speed stick;
pretty much mirrors my own. :-)
http://blog.caranddriver.com/tags/fiat-500/
I would have been a lot more interested in the Smart if it ran on regular and had a good ol' stick shift. I look forward to driving a 500 with a stick when it gets here - make mine the Sport!
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
I wasn't in the mkt when they were available. ALtho, really it is too small for many people's purposes. Ideal city courier car tho.
Plus, the cost of service maintenance items quickly reminded you of the cars blood lines, so that also hurts it. To this day, I'm not sure if it has proven to be a reliable car or not, do u know?
As for C&D choice of words, loved it! I like the looks of the 500. I wonder if it will rust? (old reps are hard to lose, lol)
It wouldn't be especially difficult to convert it to a conventional manual; probably the toughest thing would be routing the shifter cables around the fuel tank.
I don't think it was the gearbox that killed the Smart (except maybe for enthusiasts), I think it was that it achieved only marginally better fuel economy than vehicles that offer far more utility, and it required premium unleaded. Had they brought over the super-high-mileage diesel, it might have been a different story.
Cda got the diesel and it was incredible..but people were still too stupid to buy it. Just wait for the 4 and 5+ buck gallons and they will wish they had 'invested'.
What Would It Take for YOU to buy a diesel car?
"We get too soon old...un too late schmart".
or something like that..
Instead of calling people dumb for their choices, perhaps you can remember what they say about assumptions.
And just because your aroma senses don't spring into action with the same degree of recognizant stimulation when sniffing spent gasoline...doesn't make it any healthier. Personally, I'd rather be aware of what I'm inhaling so I can take appropriate action to reduce my risks.
This ties in ONLY obliquely with the hosts take on asthma sufferers. It is really hard to blame TDI's for asthma suffering when 98% of the passenger vehicle fleet are GASSERS (RUG to PUG users). Not only that but like for like models, diesels use less fuel. Manuals also use less fuel in most cases.
And I do not intend to sound like I am better than anyone else. But what I know, I have learned and applied to those before me, and I prefer to learn from those who have lived the longest, not those who are still wet behind the ears and think they know the future. The future is built on past.
I resist the pendulum effect with a vengeance.
Balance baby, we all should seek and adhere to (when found) that almighty fine line.
We really should move this over to the diesel discussion I linked a few posts back.
OMG, that explains everything!
http://www.autoblog.com/2011/01/18/report-first-batch-of-u-s-bound-fiat-500s-com- ing-with-manuals/
BMW May Launch 13 Front-Drive Cars Within 5 Years
Would you like a CVT with that Bimmer? :shades:
What triggered this was I went to my local TDI (they do gassers also) specialty repair shop and saw one on the rack in the air with the engine and transmission combination on the floor (on rollers). It had blown a lifter. The graphic caused me to look and imagine. So for example the combination is at once MASSIVE. BUT, in the over all scheme of things very ...small. There is not doubt in my mind that to remove the guts on a front engine drive with rear wheel drive combination would require a lot more time and effort, etc. it would be more massive, albeit more spread out. It I am sure sucks up a lot of room in the cabin that can be used for .... other issues.
They may do an M3 wagon so I almost forgive them.
I also think on the world wide aspect, BMW has to get volume or die or get eaten. This is probably part of that effort.
I can see the logic if they keep it to the very smallest (especially hatchback) ranks, so mostly in Europe.
2020 Acura RDX tech SH-AWD, 2023 Maverick hybrid Lariat luxury package.
I'm so sure about this. I think you will find that to get power to change directions, 90 degrees, is pretty significant. It is my belief (and I say this after having owned many many AWD and 4x4 config cars and trucks of all varying types) that, and let's use any common FWD with the engine sitting east/west, as soon as make provision for torque to be made available to drive the rear wheels, there is parasitic loss through a transfer case that must change direction of that torque. I believe this is why, that no matter how many attempts a brand uses to preserve fuel economy, by being predominantly front wheel drive, then adding in torque to the rear when the front slips, that the AWD potential car suffers greater FE than just the extra 160 to 250 lbs of the extra set of wheels being able to be powered. i.e take two tests, one car FWD only, add a 200 lb passenger. Then take identically geared etc etc car, but in AWD config, lose the passenger, and the AWD'r will use more fuel.
Another way to grasp just how much power is used to power the rear wheels of a fr engine car, is to look at a few motorcycle engine configurations. ANd put them on a dyno to measure rear wheel HP. For example (there are many) any bike whose engine sits in the frame with the crankshaft inline (north and south) in the frame, vs sitting east/west. In the north/south config, (think Honda Gold Wing, ST, or BMW Boxers all those bikes have their crank north/south. Torque does not have to change direction to get going to rear wheel (except of course at the rear gear hub, so it becomes a case of how many times do you want to multiply this direction change?) Now, take a bike like a Yamaha FJR or Kawasaki Contour, whose engine crank sits east/west in the frame. In a shaft drive configuration, torque has to change direction twice. First at the engine to get torque going to the rear, then again at the rear hub.
You can take a bike like the Honda ST which has less power, less torque and even weigh a lot more than the FJR, yet in a real world setting will not perform as inferior as the numbers would suggest. It is because more of that torque is more easily being turned into motion by the time it gets to the wheel.
With RWD cars like Bimmers, they can reduce parasitic losses by using aluminum drive shafts and such..(do they do that, I wouldn't be surprised if they do) but there is no getting around that torque direction change. It is compounded with an engine sitting north/south that drives the fr wheels too, cuz now torque has to change direction an extra time to drive those fr wheels.
I agree that if BMW does FWD it will be to get the average FE up for their brand to more easily meet CAFE. They have a lot of high performance gas hungry engines in their lineup. And unfortunately, few customers still opting for the diesel versions, but little by little people are catching on to 450 ft lb and 42 mpg in the same sentence.
You can't have sports and front wheel drive at the same time while your competition is still offering traditional RWD designs. (ie - if BMW does this, Mercedes/AMG will eat them for lunch)
2020 Acura RDX tech SH-AWD, 2023 Maverick hybrid Lariat luxury package.
The basic concept ( off stand and/or dyno ) is hp/torque @ the flywheel - MINUS hp/torque @ the REAR (AWD if so equiped) wheels= parasitic hp/torque loss.
I have long since forgotten the actual measures, but on a Corvette 6 speed stick shift vs A/T; the losses were 11% M/T vs 15-18% A/T. So losses can be a min of 4% to more than 7% due to transmission differences.
So for example, oem's are trying to make up for the loss/es by adding another gear/s (6/7/8 speed) and/or both; adjusting the gearing ratios on the A/T to try to PAR 6 speed manual stick shift equipped transmissions. (obviously gearing is also "optimized or can be optimized"). What is STILL problematic is the mpg and power/torque ranges are much better (use able might be a more descriptive operative term) for the 6 speed manual stick shift, even as the epa ratings MIGHT be identical and/or 6 speed manual might be rated LOWER than the A/T.
edit, but to clarify, my point (and admittedly, brevity is not my strong suite
another edit - the extra 6+ speeds also offer a greater percentage of the time spent with engine being able to operate at a (not necessarily peak but good) torque range in relation to car speed. But as I mentioned probably in a diff thread, since we have great control now over timing, fuel amt, and even intake trac length, we are able to extract a lot of an engine's torque at pretty low revs. So, IMO, any more than 6 really, just starts to make a tranny busy. I say this with regards to our pretty restrictive speed limits of 25 to 75 mph, where most of our speeds in everyday use are about 5 to 75.
And in keeping with our being on the same page here in support of the manual, I think that .....no.....I KNOW that manuals, if geared identically (they are not, they are usually shorter) and in the right hands, could still do better in city driving even tho EPA shows otherwise in recent years. Toyota especially ( I mention them because when I was car shopping for AWD anything, Toyota were among the first to get away from offering manuals. This is more evident in Cda than the USA (4 cyl 4x4 Tacoma as an example...you guys had the 2.7 with 5 speed stick, we could only have 4x4 with the 6 cyl 4 litre and auto, altho now we too have your truck. The dealers saw they were losing new sales cuz many used buyers went to the trouble to import back into Cda, the sticks)
But a manual in the right hands could still do better. It's just that an auto, especially with 6 speeds, seems to be able to do better with the vast majority of drivers, who wouldn't otherwise drive a manual properly. Too much clutch slippage at starts, more revs than needed between shifts etc. So the parasitic losses of the auto, get muddied by driver incompetence in a stick, so manage to prevail with better numbers with the auto.
As for your comment tho on literature, there are just so many variables, especially given the vast number of vehicles. But some laws of physics of course can be applied no matter what the comparison. Your very example of them using more speeds in autos to help camouflage the parasitic loss disadvantages, proves it.
And of course the initial shock load on axles and bearings etc when people discover they can peel rubber with even a fairly small engined stick.
One reason manuals might be going away.... :-(
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
Another (non Civic specific) is that for some reason other components seem to last longer with manual transmissions vs A/T (there are some BIG IF's of course): specifically longer lasting brake pads, rotors, tires, shocks, struts.
FWD and F/awd can turn HAZARDOUS in a New York Minute if wheelspin/slip were too easily allowed to develop and be sustained. That's why TC implementation on FWD and F/awd vehicles is so highly sensitive.