End of the road for manual shifters?

  • Thread starter Pebb
  • 254 comments
  • 16,799 views
That's not always true - in fact it's not even mostly true.

And in cases that it is true, I refer you to my post about old Alfas, as well as my post in this thread about the drive being about the drive.

And still I find it hilarious that you think it's impossible to have an involving drive with an automatic transmission. :rolleyes:

Umm, I beg to differ:

:rolleyes:

What was exactly said is you told me you "take exception to me saying anyone who wants a manual is stupid." I replied by stating that I didn't say that or think that. You've now clearly quoted me showing that, in fact, I didn't say that. Keep begging - the facts won't differ.

So please do point out where we said that you were stupid for wanting an automatic transmission car, or that you could never have fun driving one.

Your entire point 'the drive is just about the drive' is that a manual is a more fun drive than an automatic.
 
A manual transmission is more involving than an automatic, and there's no arguing that. Some people think having to work to get the car to perform well is fun. Some people like to just sit back and feel power of the car effortlessly stressing your neck muscles, as in an auto. There's not really any way to justify which one is more "fun".

But a manual is more involving.
 
S-Type R - 4.2 litre V8 / 400bhp / 399 ftlbs

S500 - 5.0 litre V8 / 383bhp / 391 ftlbs

I got you beat on engine size, but you certainly get the nod on bhp, torque and power to weight.

:)

Scaff

I drove auto versions of the C6 corvette & 2005 GTO: 6.0 liter v8/ 400hp/ 395 ftlbs. Does that count?
 
Automatics are becoming so good that it almost doesn't matter with new cars.
Add to that cars like the Infiniti G35. I've heard/read that it has a great manual tranny, and a fabulous auto. But every review I've ever read on the G35 (The sedan in particular) has exactly the same complaint about the manual equipped car. The clutch is either engaged or not. No "slippage". When some of the most experienced drivers (in that they have driven thousands of cars) say that it's a hard clutch to modulate, difficult to get a smooth start with, etc. I'll "settle" for the auto, thank you.
Keep in mind, I'm one that loves to be involved with the process of driving a car. I prefer a manual, even in heavy rush-hour traffic, with my bad knees.
But, I don't want a car I'd love with a clutch that is "difficult at best" to use.
I want to enjoy the experience of driving the car, not fight it every step of the way.
Granted, I'm on about the G35 because I've just about convinced the wife that it will make the perfect next car for me.:sly: She loves Nissans.
Also, If my commute wasn't 80 miles round trip on crowded freeways i'd still love/have a manual.
 
This thread is still going?

I'll never, ever, ever own a car with a torque converter. Maybe a truck intended for hauling stuff (where having an involving drive is a non-issue and slipping a clutch from a stop can become a chore) or off-roading (where the constant-on power of an automatic helps in maintaining momentum up steep hills), but never a car.

There's no point, especially with gearboxes like DSG around, which can combine the convenience of an automatic with the efficiency and some of the involvement of a manual. Semi-automatics just don't cut it, and are worse than both manuals and full automatics when in "manual" mode -- slow to shift, slow to respond to throttle, and often returning to automatic mode on their own.

I stand by my opinion that automatic-equipped cars (see above for trucks) are for people who are either lazy, don't care about driving (thinking about it as point-A to point-B and nothing more), or physically incapable of using a clutch and gear shifter (war veteran?). Not even navigating stop-and-go traffic is an excuse, because aside from the obvious possibility of buying a car with a sequential manual or DSG (assuming they'll be more widespread in the future), maintaining a long-enough distance from the car in front of you can enable you to rarely use the clutch. 💡

Does this mean that I hate, or even dislike people who drive an automatic? Not at all. If you want to be lazy, that's fine by me (I'd willingly drive a DSG-equipped Volkswagen in automatic mode, say, after a tiring day at work). Just don't deny that you are being lazy.


Edit: Of course, there are cars that are only available with an automatic, in which case swapping in a manual transmission makes you the least lazy of all. :lol:
 
I drove auto versions of the C6 corvette & 2005 GTO: 6.0 liter v8/ 400hp/ 395 ftlbs. Does that count?

Most certainly does, but I have to admit auto versions of those two (particularly the 'vette) just doesn't sit right with me. Those two should be manual.

:)

Scaff
 
My acoustic guitar doesn't sound anywhere near as loud as my electric guitar does... yet, oddly enough, sometimes I still feel like playing the acoustic, even though I could turn the electric down.

Now, we're talking about street cars and driving for pleasure here. The car that is going to be the most fun to drive, overall, is the one that is most engaging and involving. In many of our cases, that means a manual transmission.

*snipped*

Duke, as always, you've captured the essence of driving... and by the way, I hate playing electrics... there's lots of expression, lots of speed, lots of power, but it's just nothing like banging it out the old fashioned way on a hollow piece of wood strung with wires so tight they'd take your eye out if you snapped one the wrong way. :lol:
 
And still I find it hilarious that you think it's impossible to have an involving drive with an automatic transmission. :rolleyes:
Please quote where I said that it was impossible to have an involving drive with an automatic transmission.
What was exactly said is you told me you "take exception to me saying anyone who wants a manual is stupid." I replied by stating that I didn't say that or think that. You've now clearly quoted me showing that, in fact, I didn't say that. Keep begging - the facts won't differ.
Keep stretching the point - the facts won't differ for you, either. The fact remains that YOU called ME a poser (it's spelled poseur, by the way) for wanting a true manual transmission... and I didn't call YOU anything. In point of fact I clearly stated that I didn't begrudge you your choice of transmission at all, or feel the need to comment on it. Let me remind you that YOU called ME a poseur.
Your entire point 'the drive is just about the drive' is that a manual is a more fun drive than an automatic.
You want to play the "I never said that" game? Fine. Again, please point out where I said that you could never have fun driving an automatic and called you anything bad for wanting one. I also gave a personal example of someone other than you who doesn't think that driving a manual is more fun, yet still manages to enjoy driving. This is relevant... how, exactly?

You're clearly on crack.

You somehow manage to interpret ME saying that manuals are "more involving" - a point which you stipulate above - to mean that I think it's impossible for an automatic car to be fun or involving to drive - a point which I have NEVER made.

Then you somehow manage to pretend that calling me a poseur is utterly, totally, and completely different from calling me stupid, and accuse me of "begging".

To use a trite expression, what color is the sky in your world, Doug?
 
Please quote where I said that it was impossible to have an involving drive with an automatic transmission.

Duke, you continue to stress the small stuff and miss my big points.

The point I'm making is that just because you haven't got a manual doesn't mean you can't have the exact same experience as if you did. Your point is that the manual offers the more rewarding drive. That's all. We won't change each other's minds, so there's little point continuing that end of the discussion.

The fact remains that YOU called ME a poser (it's spelled poseur, by the way) for wanting a true manual transmission...

But I didn't call you stupid, as you said. And I spelled the word correctly; poseur is a synonym. But again, you're stressing the small stuff.

to mean that I think it's impossible for an automatic car to be fun or involving to drive - a point which I have NEVER made.

Okay! Then we agree. Discussion over. Maybachs for all!

57-100706.jpg
 
Duke, you continue to stress the small stuff and miss my big points.
And you continue to make crap up off the top of your head, and then totally gloss over having done so.

I am NOT stressing small stuff and missing your big points. You, in fact, have never seemed to get even the fact that my big points might possibly exist somewhere.
The point I'm making is that just because you haven't got a manual doesn't mean you can't have the exact same experience as if you did.
No, it's not. If you have an automatic transmission, by definition you CANNOT have exactly the same experience as if you had a manual. Your real point was that I was a 'poser' for wanting a true manual transmission, particularly if it was at all slower than an automatic or clutchless manual. I got that.

The big point that nearly EVERYBODY in this thread has mentioned, and that you and I have discussed countless times before, yet that you refuse to acknowledge in any way (other than to occasionally shake your head in disbelief), is this:

MOST ENTHUSIASTS DO NOT GIVE A FLYING FRIG IF CAR A IS FASTER THAN CAR B, IF CAR B IS MORE FUN TO DRIVE..

But this point is so anathema to you that you don't even appear to comprehend it. It's one of those things you can't get your head around and so you barely seem to even perceive it, despite its looming presence and clear obviousness to all around you. You relentlessly argue that acceleration is the primary (if not only) criteria that makes a car fun to drive.

No one is saying you can't feel that way, but it's time for you to stop telling us we shouldn't disagree.
 
I've mostly driven manual trasmissions all my life. Multiple times the manual transmission bailed me out of a situation that would have left me stranded had the car been auto. My first car was a real junker, I had to hit the gas every time I hit the clutch or it would die in the middle of the road. Occasionally it wouldn't start and I had to pop the clutch. On another occasion I managed to break the linkage in the transmission, but was still able to get it home in one gear. Manuals are definitely more robust than autos.

But the number of people that know how to use that advantage are dwindling, as, I believe, are the number of people that enjoy driving manuals. New drivers are in the US are laregly driving automatics, and many of them won't see the point of learning to drive a stick.

Moreover, driving a stick can be a major hassle, even for someone who knows how to drive them well. I hate driving my RSX-S in traffic, something I have to do often here. I also don't like that the wife will never drive it voluntarily - even though she has her own car, that matters.

Our automatic bothers me on occasion, especially with cruise control in hills where it has a tendancy to freak out. But there are times when I prefer her car to mine.

Yes, it would be lovely if we all had enough money to dedicate a car to ourselves simply for joyriding, but most of us are using our cars for more than that. Most of the people talking about the joys of the MT in this thread are driving them to work every day.

Honestly I have to say that I don't enjoy my MT so much more than an auto. Yes, autos irritate me occasionally with a poorly placed shift. But is it really that much fun to row through six gears? Occasionally it is, but every once in a while it sucks too, especially when you stall in the drive-through. Or when you forgot that you were coasting in gear and you dump the clutch expecting the car to be in neutral. I also really hate going from 5th to 6th in my tight gearbox and wondering if I accidentally fell into 4th. Not to mention that I have synchro problems in 2nd and 3rd which make the car feel a hell of a lot less smooth than it should.

If someone like me can grow up learning how to drive on a manual, and despite really enjoying cars and driving can decide that it's worth it to switch to automatics, do MT's really have much of a future? I'm not so sure.

At the moment, I think our next purchase will be a BMW 330i... and I think it'll be an auto.

Wolfe
I stand by my opinion that automatic-equipped cars (see above for trucks) are for people who are either lazy, don't care about driving (thinking about it as point-A to point-B and nothing more), or physically incapable of using a clutch and gear shifter (war veteran?). Not even navigating stop-and-go traffic is an excuse, because aside from the obvious possibility of buying a car with a sequential manual or DSG (assuming they'll be more widespread in the future), maintaining a long-enough distance from the car in front of you can enable you to rarely use the clutch.

That technique doesn't work in places where people like to take the fast lane and then jump into a traffic-filled turning lane at the last second. Those people love MTs because they always leave a nice space in the traffic. I'm well aware of the technique, and it has weaknesses.

Wolfe
Does this mean that I hate, or even dislike people who drive an automatic? Not at all. If you want to be lazy, that's fine by me (I'd willingly drive a DSG-equipped Volkswagen in automatic mode, say, after a tiring day at work). Just don't deny that you are being lazy.

Yup. It's lazy of me not to want to screw around with the clutch every 10 seconds for a hour of traffic. It's also lazy of me to use a remote instead of getting up to change channels on the TV. I don't get any enjoyment out of either one.
 
^ Um, Maybach's are far too expensive! If we're talking A/T's, I'll take the Prius or Civic Hybrid anyday (both are CVTs)!

BT-> But seriously, its all about "drivers preference", it really doesn't matter which IS better or which is not. Most enthusiasts or should I mean "drivers" wants a more "involved" or total control feel of a M/T, some may like DSG/Tiptronic/Sequential/SMG/Manumatic/Semi-Auto trannys for faster lap times. Commuters who treat their cars like an "appliance", or doesn't care about driving should consider conventional A/T or CVTs. Its all about the driver/commuter decision on which car should that person want. (:
 
I drove auto versions of the C6 corvette & 2005 GTO: 6.0 liter v8/ 400hp/ 395 ftlbs. Does that count?

Actually in the current Corvette, the optional 6L80E automatic is being well-accepted because of the 6-speed operation, manual override, and the fairly intuitive way in which it selects its gears. The GTO suffered by having the old 4L80E, not to say it is a horrible gearbox (actually, probably one of the best in terms of strength and reliability), but missing two-cogs it lost out.

...I do agree with Scaff that they should be equipped with manual transmissions, particularly the Corvette, but to be completely honest, there isn't a whole lot of performance that is lost with the slushbox, particularly in the Vette with the 6L80E.
 
I did indeed drive the 6 speed auto and it is good, though i didnt like the placement of the shifter "paddles". That said, I'd still prefer the manuals myself.
 
^ I know what you're talking about. I thought it was pretty stupid that you have to push them forward instead of having to pull them towards you... Didn't they ever drive a Ferrari F430?

The GM press stuff that I have read, and what has been repeated again and again to me is that apparently their setup is better, and allows the driver to shift faster based on hand placement...

Do I believe it? Maybe...

When I looked at a 335i with the SMG a few weeks ago at the GR Auto Show, it had the paddles which could be pushed forward to shift. Maybe GM was onto something?
 
Yup. It's lazy of me not to want to screw around with the clutch every 10 seconds for a hour of traffic. It's also lazy of me to use a remote instead of getting up to change channels on the TV.

It's just lazy for you to drive a car. You could be walking instead.

At the moment, I think our next purchase will be a BMW 330i... and I think it'll be an auto.

Don't make me get on a plane to California so I can kick your ass when I get there, Dan.


M
 
That technique doesn't work in places where people like to take the fast lane and then jump into a traffic-filled turning lane at the last second. Those people love MTs because they always leave a nice space in the traffic. I'm well aware of the technique, and it has weaknesses.
Yup. As I said, it can help, not will help.

It worked for me driving to and from the Chicago Auto Show last Friday, so it isn't impossible.

Yup. It's lazy of me not to want to screw around with the clutch every 10 seconds for a hour of traffic. It's also lazy of me to use a remote instead of getting up to change channels on the TV. I don't get any enjoyment out of either one.
I would equate the remote control vs getting up more to something along the lines of a manual transmission with synchros vs a manual transmission without synchros. I would then equate an automatic transmission to having the TV change channels automatically, basing its decisions on whichever shows had the highest ratings, and switching to those. Hurray for Reality TV shows! :indiff:
 
For the record, many of the paddle shifter equipped cars are not equipped with a clutch pedal. Maserati and Ferrari come to mind as having cars so equipped. Does this make them unworthy, even if you could afford them?
 
Don't make me get on a plane to California so I can kick your ass when I get there, Dan.
:lol:

To be fair though to Dan, LA traffic really is that bad. Whenever I drive home, I don’t go through LA anymore, because I just can’t stand it with my manual tranny – I purposely take a rather involved detour (for anybody familiar with the area, I take the 56 to the 15 north, then take the 15 until the 60, then somehow make my way to the 210).

Of course, I’d rather get stuck in stop-and-go in my Mazda rather than the old Ranger – that was an absolute SOB in traffic.
 
It means you won't get the enjoyment of getting the perfect change from a stick and clutch, you might get a different kind of enjoyment though. I think this is where the argument lies, what type of enjoyment do you get when you remove involvment, can that enjoyment be classed as being as great or greater than... That's an individual thing I think, for me, as much as I'd love to own a Ferrari or Maserati, I would miss the clutch. Though I'd hazzard a guess that owning a car like the Maserati Gran Turismo shown in another thread would be enough of a counter weight. That's me personally though, I tihnk it's going to be a little different for everyone.
 
Gil
For the record, many of the paddle shifter equipped cars are not equipped with a clutch pedal. Maserati and Ferrari come to mind as having cars so equipped. Does this make them unworthy, even if you could afford them?
I don't know of any roadcar that has both paddle shifters and a clutch.

As I said before, I'll never own a car with a torque converter. The reason why I specify "torque converter" and don't just say "automatic transmission" is because of the computer-controlled sequential manual transmissions that you are referring to, such as Ferrari/Maserati's F1-SuperFast/Cambiocorsa, BMW's SMG, Toyota's SMT, and Volkswagen-Audi's DSG, which often feature an "automatic" mode that shifts itself.

Why are those transmissions acceptable? Well, not only do they use a clutch (or two clutches in the case of DSG), which maintains much more power efficiency through the transmission, they also allow full control over the transmission when you want it (unlike semi-automatics which often return to automatic mode when they feel like it) and shift at ludicrous speeds (unlike semi-automatics in manual mode, which have to ponder every shift before making it).

Sequential manuals don't offer as much driver involvement as a good ol' manual, but they're better than any torque-converter-based solution, and if the manual transmission really is headed for that great junkyard in the sky, I wouldn't mind driving something with a DSG-style transmission.
 
I thought a sequential manual was a Jeicho or Hollinger--and those certainly have clutch pedals, since you need to use them on a downshift. There is an air shifter, but the clutch is not disengaged during a shift.

I understood that the BMW SMG and similar were "robotized manuals", since the clutch is robotized and needs to be disengaged even during upshifts.
 
I thought a sequential manual was a Jeicho or Hollinger--and those certainly have clutch pedals, since you need to use them on a downshift. There is an air shifter, but the clutch is not disengaged during a shift.

I understood that the BMW SMG and similar were "robotized manuals", since the clutch is robotized and needs to be disengaged even during upshifts.
From what I've heard and seen, the term "sequential manual" now encompasses both.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sequential_manual_gearbox#Use_in_road_cars
 
Well, I solely care what's faster. I differ. :(
But don't you get it, yet? No :( required. It's OK that you differ! You just need to understand that many of us (not even all of us) differ from you too!

I drive 15 or 20 miles every day - round trip to work, errands, ferrying kids, etc. At almost no time during those trips do I break 65 mph. At almost no time do I need (or could even use) full-throttle acceleration, because of traffic, stroplights, etc. So arguing over decimal seconds in 0-60 time is utterly pointless to me, since the opportunity to notice much difference in that number is almost nonexistent. As long as the car has enough power to step off from a light with authority, or to squirt into a hole in traffic without white knuckles and an apologetic wave, then that's as good as I'm going to be able to use under most circumstances.

Consequently, since I don't spend my weekends at the drag strip and I don't run the Stoplight Nationals every day, I prefer to find my pleasure in driving a car in other parts of the experience. That means I want the most tactile, interesting, involving driving experience I can have within the venue I get to drive in.

Let me put it another way: who's the bigger poseur - the person who takes pleasure in what they have to work with, or the person who insists on having a marginally better capability, but who will rarely be able to use that capability?

Again, you're free to want what you want and enjoy what you enjoy, and I won't try to talk you out of it. But you really need to recognize that other people can want other things without being idiots.
No Maybachs?
I'll take it. It just won't fit in my garage.
 
:lol:

To be fair though to Dan, LA traffic really is that bad. Whenever I drive home, I don’t go through LA anymore, because I just can’t stand it with my manual tranny –

I understand. I can even relate, since I grew up in NYC and now live in Jersey. It can take 2 hours just to drive 15 miles around here. The Z4 is stick and we'll simply never drive it into the city.

Its all friendly ball busting.


:) It would be for the wife of course. I'm not ready to give up my Acura just yet.

On fine.. hide behind a woman. Big sissy.


M
 
LA's traffic isn't really all that bad. It's a pain at times, but you just have to know your way around it. I worked as a courier for a while, and drove a manual, all over LA and the West Side, at all hours of the day, and never minded it.
 
Well, I solely care what's faster. I differ. :(

That's a very odd statement. Why not just go by a noble M400 and be done with it then? Granted it is a stick and about 100K$, but it also does 0-60 in 3.3 seconds. That beats out the ZO6 Vette.
 
Back