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
2001 BMW 330ci/E46, 2008 BMW 335i conv/E93
Plenty of cars are in that camp, and I disagree with some of the posters above who say there is no benefit to it. The benefit is saved gas and more. But my point really was that none of the automakers are putting any thought or energy into improving their manuals any more, they are too busy perfecting their CVTs and latest dual-clutch whatevers. :-(
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
I think it's the latter....
Edmunds Price Checker
Edmunds Lease Calculator
Did you get a good deal? Be sure to come back and share!
Edmunds Moderator
INFINITE....!
Which is why the CVT is so perfect.
And the problem with adding gear ratios to try and match a CVT is the "shiftiness" of those, always, continuously, selecting and shifting into a different gear ratio in reaction to relatively small changes in roadway conditions.
In another 50 years all of us with experience and/or love of stick shifts will be gone.
The DSG in manual mode will then satisfy the few "purest" remaining.
If by then some form of CVT has'nt taken the market by storm
Perish the thought but is probable.
So you think my novelty idea 30 years from now is too fantastical I presume? You're probably right unfortunately.
Sam
You could be correct, there could be a renewed interest in manuals in main stream cars but I kinda doubt it.
Honda continued putting manuals in cars even though sales were dismal.
People begged for V-6 Accord sedan manuals so they built a few and they were a dismal flop. At least they tried but I'm sure the corporate people who pushed for them were under the gun.
Five speed CRV's were produced from 1997-2006. Sales were so poor that they were dropped. A few people complained but not many.
EXL Accord manuals were dropped last year for the same reason.
As far as CVT transmissions? I for one don't like the way they drive. They remind me of an old Buick Dynaflow.
I suppose time will tell?
With the above in mind I have to ask, "Why all the hype surrounding CVTs and gazillion speed autotragic transmissions?" :confuse:
Sam
Sam
Here in the Seattle area we have lots of traffic and hills like San Francisco.
I had many a dyed in the wool automatic hater make the switch because they got sick and tired of sitting in traffic pumping the clutch or they got stuck on a steep hill in downtown Seattle with a car sitting on their rear bumper.
Not like Montana.
I went from a 5 speed Miata (1993) to a 6 speed (2008) and with the close ratios it seems pointless. It's just how Mazda geared it, my 6th is actually shorter than 5th gear on the 5 speed manuals.
Lost opportunity if you ask me. You'd never use 6th on a track anyway, so use it for low-rpm cruising to save fuel.
With the GTI, for example, there is NO reason I should be spinning at 3k rpms on the highway in 6th gear.
'11 GMC Sierra 1500; '98 Alfa 156 2.0TS; '08 Maser QP; '67 Coronet R/T; '13 Fiat 500c; '20 S90 T6; '22 MB Sprinter 2500 4x4 diesel; '97 Suzuki R Wagon; '96 Opel Astra; '11 Mini Cooper S
My last bicycle had I think 18 speeds and I know I would skip through most of them.
Sam
I agree that geographic location has a lot to do with it, but I don't think its hills. I think it may be a cultural feel of the region. It was much easier to find manual transmission vehicles in Santa Barbara than in SE MI, a mountainous region compared to a relatively flat area.
Bike gears are different and there is overlap. If you multiply out the ratios to get gear-inches or whatever, there are duplicates. That said, the same reason you need gears in a car is the reason you need gears on a bike. A cyclists' legs spin about 80-120 RPM. You want to be in a gear that lets you spin that speed to be efficient. If you are climbing Little Pine you are probably going to be in the "granny gear" in the front and if you are going down the Kamikaze at Mammouth, you are probably in a modified extra big ring in the front and a tiny one in the back.
When I ride, I don't use every gear in serial sequence, but if I am climbing a hill I use specific gears and when I am descending I use others. They are all pretty necessary. Granted if you are just on the bike for a couple of minutes to go to the ice cream place, you probably don't need gears at all.
Years ago now (when I lived in Chicago) I dabbled in the triathlon thing for a few years. My racing bike (only a 14-speed) had a relatively small "corncob" on the back and that was perfect for racing up and down Lake Shore Drive. I then visited a friend/police officer in Mammoth and while I was there I raced in the Mammoth Lakes Triathlon. A couple of days before the race I rode from town to a point just down-hill from Tom's Place/Sherwin Summit and back and realized that I just didn't have the gears to race in that area.
I visited a shop in Mammoth Lakes and bought the widest range rear cluster I could fit without having to change anything else (I just had to be mindful of the fact that I couldn't run on the largest chainring while also on the inner most rear gear; my chain wasn't long enough) and a-racing I went. Turned out to be one of my best races relative to the competition.
On the way up 395 there were points where I was out of the saddle dancing for all I was worth, and other points where I had to wipe tears out of my eyes because my speedo was registering north of 60mph.
Sam
It is really good for:
1. mpg (same speed but app- minus 250 to 500 rpm,
2. going even faster,
or if one doesnt mind,
3. optimization @ same rpm but higher speed
The Miata engine NEEDS 3000RPM to systain a 60MPH roadspeed.
*** operating with the A/F mixture enriched, ~12:1 ratio rather than 14.7 required by EPA standards.
Only the factory engineers can advise you on that. It could be that the torque curve of your GTI engine is such that 3k rpms is the PERFECT gear ratio for FE with sustained highway cruising at a specific speed.
That said, earlier that same year I was cycling north of Queenstown in New Zealand on my (exceedingly non-aerodynamic) touring bike (equipped with rear panniers and a front pack), and while I was heading down a very steep and curvy mountain road I hit an astounding 75 mph. Scared the stuffin' out of me.
Then there was the morning after the Mammoth Lakes Triathlon where I left my friend's apartment early and did a round-trip to Bishop. On the way down US-395 I got into a nice tuck on the front bars and managed to sustain speeds between 55 and 65 for twenty minutes. I won't talk about the ride back up in that hot/dry/sunny eighty some degree day. :P
So which gear (and ratios) is forfeited on this minor surgery?
Sam
I didn't know those speeds could get that high on a bike unless you were towed with a hitch line. 75 is pretty gutsy to be sure.
Sam
However to answer your question directly,
it is a .756 oem stock 5th gear to any one of 3 (there are more and also OTHER gears):
.681 (- 11% rpm) drop,
.658 (-500 rpm this is HUGE for a TDI)
.717 (-5% rpm)
mpg gain is roughly HALF of the rpm percentage drop or 5.5%, 2.5%)
Here is a (teaser) vendor reference for one such option .658 gear swap
If this is verboten, apologies in advance.
Not to over load an already TMI post there is also a 6 speed manual transmission upgrade. Gears are semi customize able. The European Jetta TDI comes with a 6 speed manual transmission normally and with BIGGER injectors (.205 vs .184) for 1. better mpg, 2. more hp and 3. torque. (90hp /155 ft #'s vs 100hp/177 #ft )
I'm assuming that a MT Subaru was the chase vehicle from the commercials a few years back.
I wonder if the 2.5 could handle that .658 swap? Or maybe it could handle the .681
Or are the transmissions different all together? I guess they might be because the TDI has over 80 lb more torque.
Bridge over Shotover.
Yeah but you'd never need 6th there. So make 6th taller.
I swear you have to look down to tell the difference between 5th and 6th, that's how close they are.
Some times I'm in 6th and I think I'm in FOURTH. No kidding.
Most of Japan is like that as well along the coast. Especially along the western side. Good things happen when they decide to design a car for some place other than a freeway.
2012 Kia Rio Eco hatchback
This one gets a 1.1L diesel engine for the European market and gets 73mp-U.S. gallon measurement. Whew. The one I am thinking of buying will get more like 40mpg with the stick, I would guess, before really looking in to the specs and research out there on the new beauty designed by Kia's Chief Designer, Peter Schreyer, formerly of Audi Motors of Germany. I can really see the European influence on this car.
I was thinking I wanted a 2012 Ford Focus SE hatch in 5-speed form but I think once I start comparing the two cars together apples-ta-apples Kia will beat Ford hands-down in value quotient.
That is the case for the Rio "EcoDynamics" ,powered by an all-new 1.1-liter three-cylinder CRDi diesel engine that, according to Kia, will make it the greenest car on the road and will achieve an impressive 88 miles per gallon (73 U.S. MPG). The tiny engine produces 69 bhp, but who cares about horsepower here? The magic number, as inscribed on the showcar in the pictures, is 85. Precisely, 85g/km of CO2 emission output, thereby "out-cleaning" the Smart fortwo (86g/km of CO2), the current title-holder of the cleanest car in the U.K., and certainly all hybrid vehicles like the Toyota Prius (89g/km of CO2).
The 3-cylinder diesel Rio EcoDynamics achieves its amazing emissions figures with the help of Kia’s ISG stop start system. The car will also be available with 1.4- and 2-litre petrol engines as well as a 1.4-litre diesel.
http://www.thecarblogger.net/2011/03/geneva-2011-2012-kia-rio-ecodynamics.html
2012 Kia Rio Eco rear end...sweet...the body the U.S. market gets will look just like this!
One Kia enthusiast referred to this car as the Kia Rio Cinco. I sat down in one...a 2001 Rio Cinco 5-speed on Sept.29, 2001. My wife ran over to a Pepper Red 2001 Kia Sportage 4X4 5-speed stick and the rest is as they...history. So I have always seen the sweetness of Kia's Cinco historically speaking.
We ended up buying the '01 Sportage at Jerry Smith Kia of Anacortes, WA that Saturday. But the thought of a Cinco was planted in this noggin perty well, apparently.
2021 Kia Soul LX 6-speed stick
riiiigghht. We also should never ever use any tires other than OEM, cause that's what the engineers chose. Or non-OEM brakepads, spark plugs, shocks, etc.
Given the torque curve and the acceleration on tap at even 1500rpms in 6th, I stand by my statement.
'11 GMC Sierra 1500; '98 Alfa 156 2.0TS; '08 Maser QP; '67 Coronet R/T; '13 Fiat 500c; '20 S90 T6; '22 MB Sprinter 2500 4x4 diesel; '97 Suzuki R Wagon; '96 Opel Astra; '11 Mini Cooper S
On a completely separate note, I must say that this is the first Rio that looks decent enough I might actually consider driving it. Kia/Hyundai have really been on a roll recently with coming up with very nice designs in their hatches and sedans. They must have broken that ugly stick they once used to beat all their designs!
I give it a thumb up.
I love detail in a small car and Peter Schreyer has penned nice detail all over this new Kia motorcar. Take a look at the hood...see the nice swirls coming up from just above the KIA badge emblem there? Sweet. Nice wheel design so we don't have to buy aftermarket wheeling, either.
Love to see some early availability date information and pricing information on various feature packaging for this car in the near future sometime.
2021 Kia Soul LX 6-speed stick
My statement, more exacting, was: Only the factory engineers have the where-with-all to say if 3,000 RPM is the most optimal engine speed, FE wise, to sustain 60 MPH in your car given the limitations of your gearbox.
YOU cannot ascertain that absent a CVT and fuel flow rate meter.
Well some of the nuances might be: what rpm the max torque and max hp comes on. Probably more importantly, what you want to do amidst the calculations and trade offs. The good part is one can almost radically (within a few narrow parameters) tweak things that are important to them. Some examples better hp, torque, mpg. The thing I like the best is most all of it is street legal and passes smog checks. Indeed it does not directly affect smog measures but does effect them (better fuel mileage) When you pair with with beefier clutches, bigger turbos and injectors and chipping, it will still pass smog checks and in effect be a sleeping monster @ 48-52 mpg, till you want to wake it up. :surprise:
Yes, I think a lot of folks really are not aware of how much 80# ft of torque MORE (or less, as the case might be) really MAKES. On gassers you have to spend BIG money to normally get 80# ft more.
As I've already asserted, I am convinced the car would have no problem maintaining highway speed in 6th and get better mileage in the process.
'11 GMC Sierra 1500; '98 Alfa 156 2.0TS; '08 Maser QP; '67 Coronet R/T; '13 Fiat 500c; '20 S90 T6; '22 MB Sprinter 2500 4x4 diesel; '97 Suzuki R Wagon; '96 Opel Astra; '11 Mini Cooper S