Automatic vs. Manual: The Ultimate Showdown Thread

[kingcars]

I highly doubt that was eirik's point behind his statement. I see no humor intended at all in it, but instead, a cheap comment made towards automatic drivers.

Or he was just pushing buttons...

 

[McLaren]

Or he was just pushing buttons...

Which is as unnecessary as his post. Enough buttons were pushed when this started in the GT-R thread, and they shouldn't be continued after reading through the last 5 pages of this thread.

 

[kingcars]

Which is as unnecessary as his post. Enough buttons were pushed when this started in the GT-R thread, and they shouldn't be continued after reading through the last 5 pages of this thread.

Just take a chill pill; relax. The rest of us have, and the conversation has been better for it. I never said his post was useful, just that you don't have to take it so seriously.

 

[McLaren]

Just take a chill pill; relax. The rest of us have, and the conversation has been better for it.

I don't think you're in any position to tell me to relax, considering your posts on the last 4-5 pages....

To be quite brief, I'm sick of hearing comments like eirik's, and they need to start being addressed as worthless comments.

 

[kingcars]

I don't think you're in any position to tell me to relax, considering your posts on the last 4-5 pages....

I've since calmed down, if you've read any of my posts over the last page or so. I am a human, after all.

To be quite brief, I'm sick of hearing comments like eirik's, and they need to start being addressed as worthless comments.

It was a simple statement. Traffic would be reduced greatly if only stick drivers were allowed. That's a valid point. Worthless to the conversation at hand, but valid (and true), and nothing to get worked up about.

Maybe you can start by paying attention .

 

[McLaren]

Maybe you can start by paying attention .

PB's post talks about the amount of reduced traffic. Eirik's comment is just a cheap shot. Your post refered to PB's, unless you believe it's true that anyone who can't work a manual should not drive, which I doubt is the case.

 

[kingcars]

PB's post talks about the amount of reduced traffic. Eirik's comment is just a cheap shot. Your post refered to PB's, unless you believe it's true that anyone who can't work a manual should not drive, which I doubt is the case.

Well your post was saying "posts LIKE eirik's," which I thought would include PB's (which my original comment did) and....yeah.....whatever.

 

[Perfect Balance]

PB's post talks about the amount of reduced traffic. Eirik's comment is just a cheap shot. Your post refered to PB's, unless you believe it's true that anyone who can't work a manual should not drive, which I doubt is the case.

My post was sort of a joke, I was slightly making fun of the US's dependency on automatic vehicles, saying that if eriks post was true, traffic would be almost non existant.

Worthless? I guess you could say so.

EDIT: Erik needs to realize that just because there is a swear filter, it doesn't mean you are allowed to type those words now.

 

[kingcars]

My post was sort of a joke, I was slightly making fun of the US's dependency on automatic vehicles, saying that if eriks post was true, traffic woudl be almost non existant.

Yeah, that's how I took it.

 

[Dave A]

No. Having to pay attention to what gear your car is in, what revs your engine is at, what gear you're about to shift into, or how much you need to blip the throttle in order to make a smooth shift does not keep your attention focused on what's going on around you.

You don't need to blip the throttle to make a smooth shift. You can, but you don't need to. You don't really need to pay attention to your revs, it just comes naturally to most people. But more often that not peopleshift based on sound.

It keeps your attention on the process of operating the transmission in your vehicle. It doesn't help you avoid collisions. You've never even once asserted HOW driving a manual helps you concentrate on anything besides operating the transmission.[;quote]This is true and to a degree I do agree with your point on a whole, how much I agree depends largly on what your main point is. Are you trying to say manuals are dangerous, or more dangerous than an auto because I would dissagree with that?

Yes. Operating the transmission distracts you from pointing the car.

I've driven both though only manuals extensively and when I drive a manual a certain level of attention consciously or not is required to operate it, if you take that attention out of the equation and stick me in a manual I am not paying more attention to other aspects of driving. That's just that bit of involvment gone. That effort isn't being subsituted for anything else so my concetration on accelerating, braking and steering is the same. The main difference is the drive becomes more routine and boring and that concentration in me at least is far more likely to drift.

Those thoughts and techniques are preventing me just a little from thinking every moment about which cars are where on the road and what they're doing.

They don't me.

I'm sorry Dave, I'm just not seeing it. I get just as bored leaving my car in gear down the highway as I do leaving an auto in gear down the highway. In my experience, most accidents happen in parking lots or low speed, low visibility situations. In those situations, concentrating on where all the cars are around you is essential. Negotiating the clutch does not help with that.

I'm not sure you got me, the point I was making wasn't hat driving on a highway in a manual is more or less boring than in an auto, my point was that driving on a highway is usually the point in driving where you have the least to do, the result of this is boredon, the resut of that can be lack of concentraion which can lead to an accident. In an auto you have less to do all the time. Like I said, imo it's a balancing act, some people may struggle with manual, a lot don't.

Not "driving", "shifting". Operating your transmission isn't driving.

It is an aspect of driving, it's still happening in an auto.

I agree, less attention is dangerous. That's why I think bad drivers should be driving ATs.

Most bad drivers will be bad drivers in both. A lack of attention isn't always down to having too much to concentrate on in the first place, it's often the opposite.

So what are you saying? That we should let people choose how complex they like their car to be? That's silly.

We already do,ie manual or auto. I'm not saying let people design the controls for thier cars, I'm saying that some people will find manual second nature, some will struggle.

 

[eiriksmil]

What kind of silly logic is this? If someone can't drive a stick, they shouldn't be driving? What if someone's arm just isn't suited to the amount of movement it takes to move the stick around., you think they shouldn't be driving if an auto is the perfect alternative?

I wasn't talking about disabled people, someone that are in pain when they gear or just physically just can't do it. My point was it took me a couple of days of getting a stick right when I started out driving. Getting the traffic and understanding what people in front of you might do takes a hell of a lot longer.. You don't need to be very technical to drive a stick, basically all people around here do it and I'm pretty damn sure Americans aren't dumber than Norwegians. And if someone is out on the road still not figuring out how to use this lever, dumping the clutch before the car is properly in gear or not hearing when you're riding the clutch, big chances they haven't figured out how to read traffic, observating properly or hearing a speeding car or an ambulance.

Most of the people using a manual poorly here are for instance old people who fills all the criterias above, and the same people are NOT good drivers in traffic.


My comments are not cheap shots, but you obviously have to write several paragraphs of expressing your opinions not to get faced with opinions you're supposed to have, but don't. And I won't even start on some of the elitist bull going on in this thread, breaking up posts in lines to reply by contradicting yourself just to be right and flaming others for doing the same.

 

[the Interceptor]

I'd like to address the point I made earlier in more detail:

We've all been to some kind of educational institute in our lives, may it be school, college or whatever. Thinking back, you will remember that there were moments when you almost fell asleep in class. There are several reasons as to why you did, and one of them is getting tired out of boredom. If you are condemned to just sit there and listen to what the teacher / professor /... tells you, you're solely acting passively. Over a period of time, that will lead to fatigue and probably even sleep.

Now remember what happened when you were forced to attend actively. Let's say you had to write down everything the professor wrote on the chalkboard. While your hand and your head may have started to hurt after a while, you weren't experiencing the same fatigue as described in the above example. The reason is simple: you were too busy to get tired.

The conclusion is simple: even if you actually have to do more work, you will stay alert more easily. The effects described by me earlier in this thread about driving a manual and driving an auto basically are the same thing. Since driving a manual requires you to do physical work (may it not be hard) and some thinking at the same time to meet the right decisions keeps you alert, which is crucial in daily traffic. Driving an auto will make your job of operating the vehicle easier, but for that very reason, can lead to fatigue over time.

I agree that this is not the case for every person in every car at every moment on this planet. It's simply based on my experiences with driving manuals as well as autoboxes. The question of which kind of gearbox is the better choice for the general public is in fact a different question, and therefore not really relevant for this discussion. I'm alright to discuss that as well, but then, we should seperate those topics.

 

[Casio]

I wasn't talking about disabled people, someone that are in pain when they gear or just physically just can't do it. My point was it took me a couple of days of getting a stick right when I started out driving. Getting the traffic and understanding what people in front of you might do takes a hell of a lot longer.. You don't need to be very technical to drive a stick, basically all people around here do it and I'm pretty damn sure Americans aren't dumber than Norwegians. And if someone is out on the road still not figuring out how to use this lever, dumping the clutch before the car is properly in gear or not hearing when you're riding the clutch, big chances they haven't figured out how to read traffic, observating properly or hearing a speeding car or an ambulance.

I don't agree with that at all. I know many people who do not know how to drive manual. My Auntie is over 40 and has never driven a manual, she has never had an accident. My uncle also 40, drives a manual and has pretty much crashed every car he's had since I knew him. That's not to so that people who drive automatics have less accidents, but the blanket statement that everyone who knows how to drive a manual is a better driver is just insulting.

Driver inattention is a factor in approximately 25% of road traffic accidents. Whether an automatic transmission system helps reduce the problem or, in fact, worsens it by making it more frequent, is not completely clear. One study which measured reaction time to hazard stimuli, however, found no significant difference among the drivers of manual or automatic cars.

 

[homeforsummer]

I find it irritating that this conversion has required me to ignore repeated personal attacks, and now attacks on my competency...I'll close the day with this. If your argument is so weak as to require personal attacks, please re-examine your position. Your argument should stand on its own

If you considered what I said personal attacks then I apologise, I was simply stating that you were annoying me. Which was the case last night.

I find it amusing that you're accusing our arguements of being weak, when a large proportion of your posts on the matter have been either one word or one line answers, or condescending use of our own posts in a fruitless attempt to make it look like we're contradicting ourselves. Not only that, but a few of us now have made it very clear why we think that it's ludicrous to suggest that shifting with a MT somehow distracts you from the business of driving.

For someone with such strong opinions I would have thought you'd be used to them being questioned. Perhaps you're just not used to people bothering to argue back when you voice yours, no matter how farcical.

You should not need to attempt to make me out to be an imbecile, egoist, or incompetent to make your position stick.

I'll address the "incompetence" point first. I don't in the slightest believe that you're incompetent, but I find it odd that someone apparently so adept with using a manual transmission finds it distracting to use. There are a fair number of very competent drivers on this forum, and I'd be very surprised if any of them found it "distracting" to drive with a MT. I'd even be very surprised if many of the new or recently passed drivers here found it "distracting" to use a manual transmission.

It's simply not a distracting thing to do and I can't remotely see how it takes concentration away from the actual process of driving, because it is part of the process. As I mentioned earlier, tuning the radio, or fiddling with the heater controls, or talking to passengers, or picking your nose are all distractions, shifting is part of the driving itself.

Next point: "Being an imbecile". You aren't. Again, something I've not said to you, or even implied. What I did say is that you were being annoying, in my own particular words. I've found other people on the forum annoying too, only they aren't usually as stubborn and therefore difficult to have a reasonable arguement with. I actually find you quite eloquent and you can certainly fight your corner fairly well, but you're fighting it with a point that doesn't make sense, so it becomes irritating finding new ways to make the same point because none of them seem to sink in.

Next point: "Being an egoist". You might well be, but it's not something I've noticed so far in the thread so it's not something I can judge.

Last point: If you'd started this all with a post about how you thought that manual transmissions might be more distracting than automatics, as opposed to taking one of my posts and doing an irritating "fix", then we might have started off on better terms. On the internet you can only really judge someone on their last post, and in my judgement you went from having some valid points earlier in the thread to simply appearing obnoxious and having a poorly thought-out arguement in only a few posts.

 

[kingcars]

[safer motoring quote stating they found no significant difference between auto drivers and manual drivers]

While that's interesting, I seriously doubt people are in the same state of mind during a driving test than just regularly driving around. Some things cannot be quantified through staged tests. Good find, though.

As for the argument at hand, Interceptor and homeforsummer have pretty well summed it up.

 

[Keef]

Of course, but I've driven manuals that have done similar things. It's still a machine and is not always going to behave the way you think it will or should. I have not driven a manual on an everyday bases for a long time though so the frequency is something I am not able to discuss.

I don't agree with your assessment of a machine's behavior. A purely mechanical machine will always behave as it should, and will always behave as you think it should. However, it may not behave as you want to or wish it would. Machines have limits. If you understand the machine, what it does, and its limits, it will always behave as you think it should. Until it breaks.

 

[Danoff]

Part 1 – Substantiating Personal Attacks*​

* (for the purpose of eliminating them in the future)

If you considered what I said personal attacks then I apologise, I was simply stating that you were annoying me. Which was the case last night.

Don’t try to pass that off as an apology. It isn’t one.

For someone with such strong opinions I would have thought you'd be used to them being questioned. Perhaps you're just not used to people bothering to argue back when you voice yours, no matter how farcical.

I’m also used to the namecalling and other personal attacks. It’s a common logical fallacy (http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/personal-attack.html) Happens all the time in the opinions board, and I’m used to it. It doesn’t mean it doesn’t grate on my nerves after a while. I usually don’t complain about it until it gets out of hand – which it did at the end of the day yesterday. Some examples of the personal attacks (not just from you) that I was referring to:

Wow, that's the dumbest, most ignorant thing I've seen stated in this thread.

Let me spell this out for you, since you obviously have reading comprehension problems:

Wow, you really ARE slow.

Danoff: With every subsequent post you're being more and more of a complete pain in the arse. I've gone from thinking your posts were fair, to thinking you'd made a few dubious comments, to just thinking you're being a stubborn, argumentative git.

Now, I know you think if you stick the phrase “being a” in front of an insult it makes it ok. So, you’d have no problem if I aid you were being a complete a**hole then right? Hypothetically speaking of course.

Just like not being able to shift subconsciously is an individual problem, no?

If you're adept at driving it, you shouldn't be distracted by shifting.

^^ Those are an attempt, by assuming the conclusion, to claim that the problem is my own competence. So is the following:

You're either overestimating your adeptness

Again I'd question your comment about adeptness if you happen make a habit of shifting in the middle of a corner. Or perhaps that's why you find manual transmissions distracting?

I had been ignoring kingcars’s attacks – because he hasn’t really been involved in the discussion. His posts tend to be a lot of “what he said!”. But when you started taking that position (albeit more subtly) I felt the need to put a stop to it. It doesn’t help anyone’s position to make their opponent out to be incompetent or stupid. That’s why it’s considered a fallacy.

Next point: "Being an egoist". You might well be, but it's not something I've noticed so far in the thread so it's not something I can judge.

“Stubborn” is a way of claiming that someone is letting their pride (ego) get in the way of their position.

you went from having some valid points earlier in the thread to simply appearing obnoxious and having a poorly thought-out arguement in only a few posts.

Again, I’m calling for an end to this kind of post. It doesn’t help you in the slightest. It only serves to obscure what the real issues are here, and I think there are some.

Part 2 – Back to the topic at hand. Are MTs distracting?​

Distracting from what? I’ve said “driving” in the past, but “driving” doesn’t seem to be something that is well defined. Many of you consider manipulating the transmission to be an integral component to “driving”. Ignoring, for a moment, that this attempts to assume the conclusion, I’d like to take a moment to clarify what I think MTs distract you from.

Perhaps “driving” is too all-encompassing a term. I tend to think of the act of “driving” as not necessarily being “manipulating the car”, but rather observing the road, noticing other drivers, attempting to predict their actions and position yourself in case of a poor decision on their part.

For example, and I think everyone who has been driving for a while does this, I try not to change lanes into someone’s blind spot. It’s a simple example, but I think it conveys the point. That’s one thing I think of when I think of the act of “driving”. I also think of understanding the limits of the car – lateral adhesion, braking distances etc. That leads to making driving decisions about safe turning speeds, and following distances. “Driving” to me is about making decisions regarding what is safe. “If there were a deer in the road around this bend, can I stop in time?” That’s what I’m claiming driving a manual transmission distracts you (ever so slightly) from. Obviously I don’t feel that it is a problem, because I drive one. It doesn’t distract me to a great degree. But each manipulation I have to do to accomplish the task of moving the car in the direction that my driving decisions dictate is one neuron that I can’t focus on the decisions the cars around me are making. I don’t mind a small degree of distraction – especially when the road isn’t being particularly demanding (open freeway, clear visibility). I don’t mind talking on the phone in car, checking a map, eating, or driving a stick (not that I think each of those things is the same in terms of their degree of distraction). The reason I don’t mind taking a few neurons off the road is because driving at all is a risk. Getting on the road is a risk in the first place. I accept a degree of distraction for fun (radio, MT, passenger) or for convenience (cell phone, eating, passenger). But I try to make intelligent decisions about the degree of the distraction and how much it will impact my ability to maintain situational awareness on the road.

It is impossible to eliminate distractions while driving. The goal should be to minimize them within reason. I don’t think that eliminating eating while driving is always necessary - same for other distractions. But it depends on your level of competency. If you’re a bad driver / tend to not notice other drivers around you, you should take steps to ensure that you can concentrate to a greater degree on the road. That may mean giving up eating, talking on the phone, the radio, or to passengers, or even giving up driving a stick.

Everything you do in a car, every single action you perform, is taking some small amount away from your awareness of the drivers around you. That’s my point, and I think that’s a position that’s almost impossible to disagree with.

driving an auto gives drivers fewer things to consider

If you don't pay attention while driving a manual, you'll bog the car down, stall it, not be able to accelerate and brake properly, etc.

 

[the Interceptor]

I get what you mean, but from my personal experience, I actually think it's the other way around for the following reason.

First, I want to say that using a manual transmission is an integral part of driving for me. It becomes such a minor point after a short while of driving that I, and I suppose that's the same for many others, don't really think about what I'm doing, I'm just doing it.

Every time I drive an automatic however, I repeatedly start thinking about how to operate the throttle to make the gearbox do what I want. Sometimes I hold back with accelerating a little, cause I don't want it to shift up at that moment, sometimes, I push the accelerator a bit harder to make it hold that gear a bit longer.

Now, one could argue that operating the throttle is just as an integral part of driving as operating a manual gearbox is. But it isn't. The autobox only reacts to my inputs to the car, and to make it react the way I want, I have to operate the car the right way. That does consume a bit of awareness. When I drive a manual car, the act of operating the car is a part fully controlled by me. I agree that the actual amount of work is more, but since it's a line of steps I have repeated many thousand times, I do not actively think about it and therefore am less distracted.

 

[kingcars]

I had been ignoring kingcars’s attacks – because he hasn’t really been involved in the discussion. His posts tend to be a lot of “what he said!”.

Maybe because I had already proven you wrong several times, you ignored me, and other people clarified the SAME points I already made (giving me no reason to once again reiterate my points). As for my attacks, I've already apologized a couple of times, and have stopped doing so. I don't know why you choose to ignore that also.

It is impossible to eliminate distractions while driving. The goal should be to minimize them within reason. I don’t think that eliminating eating while driving is always necessary - same for other distractions. But it depends on your level of competency. If you’re a bad driver / tend to not notice other drivers around you, you should take steps to ensure that you can concentrate to a greater degree on the road. It doesn't mean they will, it just means they have more reason to, and are more likely to do so as a result. That may mean giving up eating, talking on the phone, the radio, or to passengers, or even giving up driving a stick.

Everything you do in a car, every single action you perform, is taking some small amount away from your awareness of the drivers around you. That’s my point, and I think that’s a position that’s almost impossible to disagree with.

You have some good points here. HOWEVER, our side of the argument is stating that, when driving a manual, the driver has more reason to observe his or her surroundings to ensure safe passage and a properly driving car. There are some great examples, explanations, and analogies backing up our point, and you continue to ignore them.

 

[Danoff]

Every time I drive an automatic however, I repeatedly start thinking about how to operate the throttle to make the gearbox do what I want.

Yea, that's totally valid. If you're used to driving a manual, switching to an automatic at first is bound to be more distracting. Totally agree. 👍 Any car that I drive besides my current one is distracting for the first few days.

As for my attacks, I've already apologized a couple of times, and have stopped doing so. I don't know why you choose to ignore that also.

Don't take it personally. Thanks for the apology. Homeforsummer asked me to substantiate, so I did. It was in response to him, not an attack on you.

You have some good points here. HOWEVER, our side of the argument is stating that, when driving a manual, the driver has more reason to observe his or her surroundings to ensure safe passage and a properly driving car.

The fact that your life on the line isn't enough? The extra effort involved with moving a lever back and forth is sufficient to give you that extra little boost you need to pay attention?

 

[kingcars]

The fact that your life on the line isn't enough? The extra effort involved with moving a lever back and forth is sufficient to give you that extra little boost you need to pay attention?

We're talking about bad drivers here. Obviously, we wouldn't be talking about them if they cared enough to pay attention based on the fact their life is on the line, because then they'd be good drivers.

 

[Danoff]

We're talking about bad drivers here. Obviously, we wouldn't be talking about them if they cared enough to pay attention based on the fact their life is on the line, because then they'd be good drivers.

Well, if their safety isn't enough you think that moving a lever is going to convince them to pay more attention?

 

[kingcars]

Well, if their safety isn't enough you think that moving a lever is going to convince them to pay more attention?

Not necessarily, but they at least have more reason to pay attention when driving a manual vs driving an auto.

 

[Danoff]

Not necessarily, but they at least have more reason to pay attention when driving a manual vs driving an auto.

To certain things, I'll admit. You have more reason to pay attention to how stale that light is coming up - to see if you can hit it in second gear instead of first. You have more reason to pay attention to braking in front of you. But I think the "I don't want my face to be in the windshield" reason kinda dwarfs the "I don't want to have to shift" or "I want to be ready to shift" response.

I don't think that driving stick gives you any additional reason to pay attention to cross traffic, blind spots, merging traffic, swerving traffic, etc.

If anything, I drive more aggressively when I'm in an MT because it's more fun to drive aggressively. But that's a personal response - not the fault of the transmission.

I don't think MTs make you pay any extra attention to most of the things that cause accidents. And anything they do make you pay extra attention to you already have huge reasons to pay attention to.

 

[the Interceptor]

I don't think MTs make you pay any extra attention to most of the things that cause accidents. And anything they do make you pay extra attention to you already have huge reasons to pay attention to.

Good point. Even if I see small differences in levels of awareness between the gearboxes, I have never met a situation where the other type of gearbox would have made a difference in terms of the actual danger of an accident.

 

[McLaren]

And if someone is out on the road still not figuring out how to use this lever, dumping the clutch before the car is properly in gear or not hearing when you're riding the clutch, big chances they haven't figured out how to read traffic, observating properly or hearing a speeding car or an ambulance.

Simply untrue, and I'm positive you have zero proof that someone who can't operate a manual can't figure out traffic. My neice is 20 now (driving since 15), can't drive a stick for squat (and she's tried repeatedly), but she takes every precaution possible when driving. Zero accidents, zero tickets, zilch. I can not say the same for those in my family who do own a manual, myself included.

Most of the people using a manual poorly here are for instance old people who fills all the criterias above, and the same people are NOT good drivers in traffic.

This is nothing but an assumption. Unless you have actual evidence all old people fill those criterias and are not good drivers.

My comments are not cheap shots...

Then, you should have put more thought into that reply than something that sounded like biased-crap. Had you actually taken the time to wrote what you meant by it instead of cursing, you might have made a point.

And I won't even start on some of the elitist bull going on in this thread, breaking up posts in lines to reply by contradicting yourself just to be right and flaming others for doing the same.

This better not be directed towards me.

While that's interesting, I seriously doubt people are in the same state of mind during a driving test than just regularly driving around. Some things cannot be quantified through staged tests. Good find, though.

Studies don't necessarily have to be conducted during a test. That study may have been observing folks who had no idea they were being used.

Not necessarily, but they at least have more reason to pay attention when driving a manual vs driving an auto.

BUT, the question that remains are they paying attention to road or the transmission? I believe Danoff has made this clear several, several times already.

 

[kingcars]

To certain things, I'll admit. You have more reason to pay attention to how stale that light is coming up - to see if you can hit it in second gear instead of first. You have more reason to pay attention to braking in front of you.

Agreed

But I think the "I don't want my face to be in the windshield" reason kinda dwarfs the "I don't want to have to shift" or "I want to be ready to shift" response.

But doesn't the shifting response somewhat lead into the face-in-windshield response? If you don't shift properly, your face may end up being in the windshield.

I don't think that driving stick gives you any additional reason to pay attention to cross traffic, blind spots, merging traffic, swerving traffic, etc.

Agreed, but there's nothing about an automatic that makes them want to pay attention to that stuff either.

If anything, I drive more aggressively when I'm in an MT because it's more fun to drive aggressively. But that's a personal response - not the fault of the transmission.

Thats funny, cause I actually drive more conservatively now that I have the 5 speed. But that may also be because I'm still trying to learn it. I'll find out soon enough.

I don't think MTs make you pay any extra attention to most of the things that cause accidents. And anything they do make you pay extra attention to you already have huge reasons to pay attention to.

I think rear-end accidents are common, and as you said, driving a manual gives the driver more reason to look ahead for such situations. In most situations, however, I don't think transmission choice has anything to do with it. However, there are a few situations where a manual driver *might* be more aware, but I don't know of any where an automatic driver would be.

BUT, the question that remains are they paying attention to road or the transmission? I believe Danoff has made this clear several, several times already.

It's also a point we have rebutted several, several times already. For most manual drivers, shifting becomes so normal that it does not take any focus off of the road.

 

[Sureboss]

I have to agree with Dan on this. If you need to drive a manual to make yourself more aware of your surroundings, then you shouldn't be driving. The consequences of what happens if you don't concentrate should be enough to make you concentrate on your surroundings. Responsibility would be a good word.

Being a cyclist (4 days a week) I like to think that I observe my surroundings very well. My own life being in danger if I don't. Drivers should think the same. Most do, you've got to be heartless not to. I've had driving lessons in a manual and I got used to it after about 8 hours tuition. For me, it became a use of habit, rather than a distraction. If it distracts you, you should consider whether you are safe to be on the road.

As for driving pleasure. Only one thing wins, doesn't it?

 

[kingcars]

Studies don't necessarily have to be conducted during a test. That study may have been observing folks who had no idea they were being used.

Good point 👍

I have to agree with Dan on this. If you need to drive a manual to make yourself more aware of your surroundings, then you shouldn't be driving. The consequences of what happens if you don't concentrate should be enough to make you concentrate on your surroundings. Responsibility would be a good word.

I've already responded to this point:

We're talking about bad drivers here. Obviously, we wouldn't be talking about them if they cared enough to pay attention based on the fact their life is on the line, because then they'd be good drivers.

We're talking about BAD drivers, not good ones.

For me, it became a use of habit, rather than a distraction. If it distracts you, you should consider whether you are safe to be on the road.

As for driving pleasure. Only one thing wins, doesn't it?

Agreed fully.

 

[McLaren]

It's also a point we have rebutted several, several times already. For most manual drivers, shifting becomes so normal that it does not take any focus off of the road.

So, then what's this point you manual guys seem to be making that manual drivers pay more attention to the road? If the shifting becomes second nature, what says they can't be distracted by anything an auto driver becomes distracted by?