Save the Manuals!

[MatskiMonk]

Thank you, Smallhorses, for saying what I couldn't have.

You were the one that bought sexuality into this thread, then edited it with a (tongue in cheek?) comment about manly beards.. so don't play act all open-minded just because somebody makes a judgement based on your car and you want to turn the tables!

 

[Gil]

Okay, I'm, as always, late to the party.
First, It is not a matter of whether the car is an automatic or stick, that makes it faster.
Drag racing automatics are faster, because the fastest drivers are still using Power-glides.
It isn't difficult to be quick, and fast if you only have to shift one time.
It is also SAFER to run an automatic. There are so many ways to mess up a shift in an manual that can literally dis-embowel the trans and shoot shrapnel into the cockpit, that I'd prefer drag racing with an auto.

And just because you're in a stick shift doesn't mean it's efficient. The first vehicle I owned with a stick was a VW Bus. 1978 model that was built with one of the thousands of left-over Porsche 914 engines. Sounds like it should be a reasonably quick car, right?

Well, it was until you performed the 2-3 shift. I'd run that thing up into the stratosphere on rpms, shift to 3rd, and it would still bog down to just off idle rpm, and chug back up to a workable rev range.
The same car that would, if you revved it enough, lift the front wheels an inch of the ground on take-off.

I also had access to a Ford Country Squire station wagon (estate for those of you across the pond), That had a 429 SCJ with a Holley 1050 carb on it from the factory.
It had a 3-spd auto. It would only burn rubber with great effort. But it would go over 100 mph in second gear.


So, the argument really is moot. Is it more fun to drive a car with a manual?
Almost always.

Is it possible to have a good deal of fun in a car with an automatic?
Yup!

Does is take more skill, and physical adaptation to drive a manual well?
Yer damn skippy!

If you take two cars, same make and model, same exact gear ratios, one a modern auto, the other a manual, which one is going to be quicker?
That is actually pretty much going to be a wash till you get into SERIOUS horsepower.
New transmissions are way "smarter" than that old C-6 in my old T-bird, or the one in my father's Country Squire. And they shift up and down faster than a human can.
a few of them even blip the throttle to match revs.

So, it is no longer a matter of what is faster, or more fuel efficient.
It is nearly PURELY a matter of choice.

 

[Zenith]

snip

A nice write up that isn't relevant to the discussion. Again, it's not a "which is better?" thread.

 

[Gil]

A nice write up that isn't relevant to the discussion. Again, it's not a "which is better?" thread.

While true, it does apply to the argument at hand....
I also don't recall saying one was better than the other.
I DID attempt to convey that each type has it's place, and a bad one of either can make driving a chore.

 

[Keef]

A nice write up that isn't relevant to the discussion.

If posting one's support of manual transmissions isn't relevant to the discussion, then what the hell is the discussion exactly?

 

[Zenith]

While true, it does apply to the argument at hand....
I also don't recall saying one was better than the other.
I DID attempt to convey that each type has it's place, and a bad one of either can make driving a chore.

Okay, fair enough. Not ENTIRELY irrelevant . Good write up though 👍

If posting one's support of manual transmissions isn't relevant to the discussion, then what the hell is the discussion exactly?

Depends how you look at it, I guess. He seemed to be outlining the differences between auto and manual transmissions. I thought the discussion would revolve around "saving" manuals. But yes, I agree that him showing his support is relevant.

 

[MEJ1990TM]

I have. I think manuals are antiquated technology for sports cars. If you're talking about semi-trucks, that's a different story. I'm happy to see them die in fast cars.



Yea, those Veyron owners are a bunch of sissy boys. I look down on them and their girl car too.



...because it takes a real man to work that stick with the knob at the top. Only a real man can grab that thing in his palm and work it back and forth. If you're a man you can't get along driving unless have a bishop-shaped object in your palm that you can squeeze. When you start to hear the roar and moan (of the engine), there's nothing like the feeling of grabbing that rod and shoving it into your slot to send you into ecstasy am I right?

That's manly.

Some people just don't get it. There is no acquired talent in driving an automatic. When you drive a car with a stick you are in control of what happens, and you have to be more in tune with what the car responds to. Now answer this, which is more exciting to watch, a guy who pulls a shifter into drive, or someone who can use the clutch and shift through four, five, or six gears without raising on the throttle?

 

[Joey D]

Now answer this, which is more exciting to watch, a guy who pulls a shifter into drive, or someone who can use the clutch and shift through four, five, or six gears without raising on the throttle?

Watching the driving motions of anyone is fairly dull to be honest.

 

[MatskiMonk]

Some people just don't get it. There is no acquired talent in driving an automatic.

Yup, you're pretty much wrong on that one, maybe too much of a sweeping statement? Trying to extract the best an auto has to give does require some experience and skill, its not necessarily a case of just keeping your foot in. No matter how mystical you like to portray the ability to manual shift.. fact is most people can do it, and they do it as second nature, its not difficult to make fast progress on a manual, its a reflex reaction most drivers do have. Controlling and timing throttle application to acheive the best shifts is an often overlooked part of driving an auto quickly.

 

[MEJ1990TM]

Yup, you're pretty much wrong on that one, maybe too much of a sweeping statement? Trying to extract the best an auto has to give does require some experience and skill, its not necessarily a case of just keeping your foot in. No matter how mystical you like to portray the ability to manual shift.. fact is most people can do it, and they do it as second nature, its not difficult to make fast progress on a manual, its a reflex reaction most drivers do have. Controlling and timing throttle application to acheive the best shifts is an often overlooked part of driving an auto quickly.

Throttle control is nothing special, and it's not unique to driving a slushbox. Throttle control is just as important in a stick shift too.

I've listened to a lot of people driving a stick shift ,whether getting on it or driving normally. 95% of what I hear sounds like an old lady could shift faster. Shifting fast is nothing special, but I strongly disagree with what you say. Most people I know do not have the ability to shift fast, or even people I hear on the street. Most people I personally know don't have the first clue of how to drive a stick. When they talk about it you'd think they were talking about performing open heart surgery or something.

 

[Azuremen]

Throttle control is nothing special, and it's not unique to driving a slushbox. Throttle control is just as important in a stick shift too.

I've listened to a lot of people driving a stick shift ,whether getting on it or driving normally. 95% of what I hear sounds like an old lady could shift faster. Shifting fast is nothing special, but I strongly disagree with what you say. Most people I know do not have the ability to shift fast, or even people I hear on the street. Most people I personally know don't have the first clue of how to drive a stick. When they talk about it you'd think they were talking about performing open heart surgery or something.

There is a skill to driving an automatic that is quite different than driving a manual. And before you jump on me about not having enough experience, I'm very competent with toe and heel and the likes. And because of the clutch and manual gear selection, you can have fairly sloppy throttle control in a manual versus an automatic, where quite a bit more is controlled by how far and fast you move that pedal.

And most people I know, especially younger people (yes, I'm looking at you) can shift fast but they are brutally hard on the drivetrain with it, and it is hardly useful for anything but straight lines in an relatively low powered car. Not to mention all the considerations with gearing and the flywheel, clutch, and throw.

 

[Perfect Balance]

Throttle control is nothing special, and it's not unique to driving a slushbox. Throttle control is just as important in a stick shift too.

I've listened to a lot of people driving a stick shift ,whether getting on it or driving normally. 95% of what I hear sounds like an old lady could shift faster. Shifting fast is nothing special, but I strongly disagree with what you say. Most people I know do not have the ability to shift fast, or even people I hear on the street. Most people I personally know don't have the first clue of how to drive a stick. When they talk about it you'd think they were talking about performing open heart surgery or something.

Have you driven a stick before? You shift slowly because it lets the rpms drop to the proper revs for the gear you're in. With a lightweight flywheel, you shift faster because the revs drop faster. If you're a super cool racecar streetracer jdmtyte bro, then you shift as fast as you possibly can because you like ruining transmissions and synchros, and breaking shifters off. But it doesn't mean you're better because you shifted faster.

 

[Smallhorses]

So, it is no longer a matter of what is faster, or more fuel efficient.
It is nearly PURELY a matter of choice.

This is the crux of the matter, and in the US the choice is slowly but surely going away.

Unfortunately since the market for pure "drivers" cars (whether they be true 3-pedal manuals or more modern DSG types) is far outweighed by the market for SUVs / People Carriers / Family Cars / Hybrid econoboxes, in which the driving isn't about the experience, purely a method of transporting people or things from one place to another, and it seems the simpler this process can be made for most people, the better.
Unfortunately this enabling technology isn't necessarily making the roads any better. Back in the fabulously chauvanistic days of the 1940s & 1950s when Automatics first emerged and motoring was still generally the preserve of the mechanically-inclined gentleman, the automatic gearbox was ferociously marketed as a simpler way for women, who couldn't be expected to wrap their pretty little 1950s heads around the complexities of an extra pedal and a moveable lever, to be able to drive. (This, of course, goes without saying doesn't reflect my own views nowadays.) This article explains the way of the world back then pretty adeptly.
Ok, so most of America, (not just the ladies ) was sold on the ease-of-use and convenience and that means more people can go more places, and now we're getting more and more extra distractions in the vehicle, DVD consoles, SAT-NAVs, bluetooth setups, etc., none of which actually encourage people (despite the warnings in the car's manuals which people ignore anyway) to actually do what they're supposed to do while they're driving, i.e. keep their eyes and attention on the road, their mirrors, and reading potential upcoming hazards all around them. Does this abundance of distracted and less concentrated drivers make the road a safer place? Hardly.
Essentially taking the wheel of a car is putting you in charge of a 1 - 4 tonne weapon, and you should exercise the same due caution as would be expected to if you were handed a Colt 45 or Glock 9mm. You'd hardly want to have a pistol marksmanship contest where the participants were busy holding a cell-phone conversation with one hand, and shooting with the other while balancing on one leg and checking their hair / teeth / stubble / makeup or whatever in the mirror at the same time, would you?
Well, at least if you're going to, let me know and I'll be sure to make certain I'm as far away as possible from wherever it's taking place!
I'm not trying to imply that everyone who drives an automatic is like this, nor that no-one has ever tried to wrestle a full-sized slurpee cup & a Big-Mac while rowing their own gears, just that it's a helluva lot easier in one than the other, and that we, as human beings aren't renowned for our ability to stay focused and resist temptation when it's made all the more easy for us not to!

I know this discussion has taken place elsewhere, and there's no reason why a manual driver can't be similarly distracted, as I know Danoff has certainly attested to elsewhere, but when you're actively engaged in making sure you're in the correct gear, putting the clutch in when you stop, etc., it does mean for the most part that you can't drive half-assed like many people that're seen on the roads with their left foot up on the dashboard or poking from the driver's window, thus obscuring their view of the side mirror and clasping a cell-phone to their ear with one hand, hardly a picture of focus and concentration on what should be their primary task of driving.
For those of you who seem to be under the impression Danoff is anti-manual because he can't drive one, I can assure you that's not the case, he's just being realistic about what is going on in the market within his country of residence and with emerging technology and showing a willingness to adapt to it. It's his view (and one he's entitled to as a manual driver that's competent enough to engage heel-toe downshifts) that essentially the changing of gear by having to engage an extra pedal and move a lever sometimes many times a minute do distract a driver from the business of driving in somewhat the same way that changing a CD, answering a call or reprogramming a SAT-NAV would, and thus a modern automatic or ideally a fast double-clutch box which doesn't require you to remove 1 hand from the steering wheel each time you need another gear adds to the connectedness with the driving and direction of the car.
There are some of us that just prefer the feel of a manual over an automatic or DSG, and I'd maintain that it truly does become an unconscious reflex action to depress the clutch and select another gear, rather than a distraction, but in consumer terms we're a niche market and in terms of selling cars we're not going to be the first point of focus for a company that wants to make ends meet by selling a lot of cars. It's not that the companies can't or don't make manuals, it just doesn't make financial sense for them or the buyer to build, for example, a Chrysler Town & Country with a diesel engine and a 5-speed manual gearbox for the US, when the demand and the supply from the competition is all typically V6 gasoline + automatic minivans, and yet, you can get this in other parts of the world e.g. UK, Philippines, (albeit as a Chrysler Grand Voyager in the UK) because the demand for such is there.

No matter how mystical you like to portray the ability to manual shift.. fact is most people can do it, and they do it as second nature, its not difficult to make fast progress on a manual, its a reflex reaction most drivers do have.

Possibly in the UK where most people can and do learn in a manual shift car, and you're rightly penalised for learning in an automatic by being issued an Automatic Only Licence.
However, there are some absolute horrors on the road that shouldn't be allowed out there because they've never grasped what seems to come to you and probably most people you know as a reflex action. These folks would either be better off with an automatic so they can concentrate on the road instead of what their feet / hands are doing, or better still, get the bus!

This passage from Wikipedia on the Automatic Transmission page alludes to this too:

Most cars sold in North America since the 1950s have been available with an automatic transmission. Conversely, automatic transmission is less popular in Europe, with 80% of drivers opting for manual transmission. In some Asian markets and in Australia, automatic transmissions have become very popular since the 1990s.

Vehicles equipped with automatic transmissions are less complex to drive. Consequently, in some jurisdictions, drivers who have passed their driving test in a vehicle with an automatic transmission will not be licensed to drive a manual transmission vehicle. Conversely, a manual license will allow the driver to drive both manual and automatic vehicles. Examples of driving license restrictions are Croatia, Dominican Republic, Israel, United Kingdom, some states in Australia, France, Portugal, Latvia, Lebanon, Lithuania, Ireland, Belgium, Germany, Pakistan, the Netherlands, Sweden, Austria, Norway, Hungary, South Africa, Trinidad and Tobago, Japan, China, Hong Kong, Macau, Mauritius, South Korea, Romania, Singapore, Philippines, United Arab Emirates, India, Estonia, Finland, Switzerland, Slovenia, Republic of Ireland and New Zealand (Restricted licence only)

Sadly in the US it seems that you can be taught to drive in a car with a stop & a go pedal, a steering wheel, some mirrors and some turn signals (though the use of the latter 2 seems entirely optional once you've been issued a licence, as does remembering anything about rights of way and lane discipline! ) Right after doing this you can go out on the road, unassisted and with no prior experience and get in everyone's way while you learn to use a clutch and gearshift, while it's most certainly not "second nature" to do it.
There are plenty of drivers out here that want and enjoy driving a manual vehicle, but again in marketing terms they're a minority compared with the people who don't necessarily want to enjoy driving in any way, but still want to be enabled to go places. (See my points above.)
To anyone that's ever been taught or has tried teaching someone else to use a clutch and manual shift, it's undoubtably a longer, more complex and frustrating process of clutch-torturing, herky-jerky starts, over-revving, bouncy starts like a kangaroo, and countless stalls at take off or coming to a stop, than teaching someone to drive an unstallable stop-go automatic, and there's little wonder that with no additional incentive to learn manual that many people in the US don't. That's fine, for the most part the majority of people aren't interested in driving a car as quickly as possible and needing the perfection of a race-critical, rev-matched downshift or lightning quick upshifts in their day to day lives, especially as stricter legal requirements and draconian speed limitations make it more and more difficult to find good stretches of road to enjoy, and hence what's marketable prevails which nowadays with a focus on being ecologically and environmentally sound means the proliferation of CVT and high-tech 6,7,8-speed automatics that've gone a long way to eliminate the jerky shifts and fuel-guzzling nature of bygone autoboxes.
It does leaves plenty of choice of wonderful old manuals out there for those of us that want them to choose from, and, as has been so rightly pointed out here already, when we're all in that wonderful position of being able to buy a brand new Lambo / Porsche / Ferrari then we can start to pester them for the true manuals we'd like instead of their faster and more efficient flappy-paddle Dual-Clutch setups just because it suits us better.

Basically the only way to get the choice that Gil was talking about is to ensure that you're out there buying a brand new manual car as often as possible (I've done my bit this year! ) and encouraging others to do likewise so the demand is visible. Sadly in US you'll probably find that it's a losing battle, since as the demand for autos / DSGs goes up, so the unit cost comes down, and that argument that tends to keep Europeans in manuals, i.e. the lack of willingness to part with the extra cash for an auto-equipped equivalent vehicle, goes out of the window as the auto becomes the default option and cheaper to produce than the slow-selling niche market manuals.
Demand speaks for itself, and is evidenced by many reviews and statements, such as this for the new US-spec Fiat 500 from Car&Driver, and the last line is particularly telling:

An automatic is available, of course. It’s an Aisin six-speed added to the lineup exclusively for the U.S. (In Europe, the only option other than the manual is a single-clutch automated manual that was promptly shot down by Fiat’s American ambassadors.) Fuel economy drops off dramatically with the automatic, to a Fiat-estimated 27 mpg city/34 highway from the stick’s 30/38. The automatic is smooth but not particularly sporty. It does have a manual shift gate, but it upshifts on its own at redline anyway and downshifts with no more enthusiasm than would a 1985 Ford Econoline, so there’s little other than a desire to delay upshifts and burn more gas to encourage drivers to shift for themselves. Still, Fiat expects 90 percent of customers to opt for the autobox—the car may be Italian, but those buyers will still be American.

On the face of it, posting on an internet forum or having a bunch of unlicenced teenagers petition a manufacturer isn't going do anything to save the manuals.
Only by voting with your dollars/pounds/pesetas/Euros/Yen or whatever in a new-car market will your voice be heard.
So get out there and buy fellow manual crusaders!

 

[Gil]

I've been the one to teach my sons to drive a stick shift. It is indeed a tortuous process.
And I've deliberately started their learning in the local high school parking lot, because at the back of the school is a slight incline.
And to a man they didn't believe it could be done till we traded seats.
I have put my right foot in my lap and modulated the clutch to make the car go, and then patiently explained the concept of "friction point".

That said the reward comes when the whole thing becomes "second nature" and you just instinctively know that there will be no answering of the cell phone, no extensive radio fiddling, stubble admiring, etc. because both of my hands will be busy controlling the vehicle.

That said, I have to agree with small horses in that some people should really consider public transport, cause they are barely cut out to drive an automatic. Not because they don't possess the necessary skill, but because they don't possess the attention span.

 

[fitftw]

^ I agree with all of your points. Do you think more women have the ADD-while-driving syndrome than men? I would say so. Most of them couldn't care less about a car, much like a microwave. Men who are like this astound me.

What are the stats on car accidents caused by people driving automatics vs. stick?

 

[Azuremen]

^ I agree with all of your points. Do you think more women have the ADD-while-driving syndrome than men? I would say so. Most of them couldn't care less about a car, much like a microwave. Men who are like this astound me.

What are the stats on car accidents caused by people driving automatics vs. stick?

Excuse me while I pick my chin up from my desk.

Did you really just say that? Honestly? Really?

Well, everything makes sense now.

 

[Gil]

^ I agree with all of your points. Do you think more women have the ADD-while-driving syndrome than men? I would say so. Most of them couldn't care less about a car, much like a microwave. Men who are like this astound me.

What are the stats on car accidents caused by people driving automatics vs. stick?

The ONLY part of that I can "agree" with it that most women have "car as appliance" syndrome.

My wife could pretty much not give a crap what it looks like or drives like.
If it is front wheel drive, has four doors, is reasonably comfortable, and has a decent sound system, she is happy.

She is also a pretty good driver. She isn't a high performance driver by any means, but she keeps it between the lines, doesn't wander in the lane, and has a fairly good idea what is going on around her.
She also has the skill set to drive a manual, but prefers not to.

 

[homeforsummer]

If you're a super cool racecar streetracer jdmtyte bro, then you shift as fast as you possibly can because you like ruining transmissions and synchros, and breaking shifters off. But it doesn't mean you're better because you shifted faster.

👍

I'd also add that I've sat beside people who seemed to be ruining the transmission even shifting slowly, let alone trying to do it quickly. These people were born for automatics...

 

[fitftw]

^ I agree with all of your points. Do you think more women have the ADD-while-driving syndrome than men? I would say so. Most of them couldn't care less about a car, much like a microwave. Men who are like this astound me.

What are the stats on car accidents caused by people driving automatics vs. stick?

Excuse me while I pick my chin up from my desk.

Did you really just say that? Honestly? Really?

Well, everything makes sense now.

Yes, I did. Now prove me wrong or get on with your day. Ask any girl to show you how to check their oil level, or where their air filter is, the two most simple tasks on any car. I'm betting you don't know much about engines either. Everything make sense now.

Men invented cars. Women have no spatial recognition. Women simply don't belong on the road behind the wheel of a 5,000lb retardedly overpriced and pointless LUXURY SUV tailgating my 2,000lb mini-car while they're on a cell phone applying make-up. Women rely on men more than men rely on women for stuff.

Don't they make you learn a little about how a car works before you can get a license in other continents besides North America because we suck? Most Americans can't tell something is wrong with their car until it literally just stops running. Lack of mechanical empathy. Most people don't belong on the road, period.

 

[Liquid]

fitftw, your posts across the forum are certainly lacking in tact and grace.

 

[fitftw]

What can I say? Humanity doesn't live up to my standards and expectations, thus I knock everyone down a peg or twenty.

 

[homeforsummer]

What can I say? Humanity doesn't live up to my standards and expectations, thus I knock everyone down a peg or twenty.

Presumably so they can meet you at gutter-level.

 

[SpartanG]

I think your dislike should be pointed at both genders, not just women... Men are more likely to be interested in learning about cars, but the guys who don't care still know nothing about what's under the hood.

Also, he lives in new jersey guys, give him a break. The drivers and women there are all certifiable.

 

[Perfect Balance]

I'm betting you don't know much about engines either. Everything make sense now.

 

[McLaren]

Yes, I did. Now prove me wrong or get on with your day.

How about you prove it instead, since you're the one making the claim.

Ask any girl to show you how to check their oil level, or where their air filter is, the two most simple tasks on any car. I'm betting you don't know much about engines either. Everything make sense now.

What does it matter? There's just as much a large ratio of men who can't do it either.

Men invented cars. Women have no spatial recognition. Women simply don't belong on the road behind the wheel of a 5,000lb retardedly overpriced and pointless LUXURY SUV tailgating my 2,000lb mini-car while they're on a cell phone applying make-up. Women rely on men more than men rely on women for stuff.

If there was ever a borderline-sexist post in this section, this is it.

What gives you anymore right to be on the road than a girl? Because you're a man? Because you know how to work on a car? Get out of here, you tool.

Don't they make you learn a little about how a car works before you can get a license in other continents besides North America because we suck? Most Americans can't tell something is wrong with their car until it literally just stops running. Lack of mechanical empathy. Most people don't belong on the road, period.

There are far more other issues Americans need to learn about driving than how a car works.

But, you can't see that because you're nothing more than an extremist from this group of enthusiasts who believe the way the automobile is advancing in technology is disgraceful & believe that a car with a manual & no driving aids is the only acceptable car to drive, and everyone else is just a step below you.

 

[Smallhorses]

^ I agree with all of your points. Do you think more women have the ADD-while-driving syndrome than men? I would say so. Most of them couldn't care less about a car, much like a microwave. Men who are like this astound me.

What are the stats on car accidents caused by people driving automatics vs. stick?

I don't think you can prove that either way. True, a woman in the US is statistically more likely to be driving an automatic, but she's also statistically more likely to be carrying kids as rear-seat passengers and dealing with the multitude of distractions they cause too. It's not really possible to generalise otherwise you end up making rash statements such as "It's not women or men in general that are distracted, but young, inexperienced drivers of both sexes that're most likely to think that they have the capacity to send and receive text messages while driving who cause accidents."*

*(Not necessarily my view or opinion, but an appropriately worded generalisation to illustrate a point.)

Accident statistics are bound to show in the US that automatics are involved in more accidents simply because there's about 8 times more of them on the road than manuals, it's not going to prove anything, and it's highly unlikely that the transmission type was at fault for 99.9% of any accident anyway.
A freeway bump in traffic is more likely to be caused by a distracted driver paying attention to something other than the vehicle in front of them coming to a stop and depends not on auto/manual. Conversely, a high percentage of accidents that occur out on twisty roads and lots of the pictures we see of wrecked exotics, M3s, STis, Evos, wrapped around trees, parked upside down and backwards in ditches or through hedges are manuals, again not wrecked because of the transmission, but because of the driver's vain belief that because they can drive a manual like a racing driver, they're instantly in the Michael Schumacher talent pool, and overstretch the capabilities of their vehicle, something that an A to B uninterested automatic driver isn't likely to go trying.
Go to UK, and you'll likely find that there's far more manuals involved in accidents because about 80 - 90% of people drive them, and thus an automatic is statistically much less likely to be involved. Again it's got nothing to do with the transmission type but the statistics which are heavily skewed the opposite way to those in the US will give you diametrically opposite results.

Women have no spatial recognition. Women simply don't belong on the road behind the wheel of a 5,000lb retardedly overpriced and pointless LUXURY SUV tailgating my 2,000lb mini-car while they're on a cell phone applying make-up. Women rely on men more than men rely on women for stuff.

Excuse me while I pick my chin up from my desk.

Did you really just say that? Honestly? Really?

Well, everything makes sense now.

👍 Welcome back to the 1950s!

Presumably so they can meet you at gutter-level.

👍

I guess we could ask his girlfriend if she can find the dipstick or air-filter, however, with views like that, it's doubtful he has one!

 

[Azuremen]

Presumably so they can meet you at gutter-level.

I'm not even sure that is low enough, given the amount of ignorance going on here.

And I mean, I clearly don't know anything about engines. Might have to do with the fact I like cooking and doing art stuff with a camera. Or clothes and style. The purple car probably doesn't help either.

Oh dear, I must just be doomed to a life of driving luxury cars while fixing my scarf and texting.

 

[MEJ1990TM]

There is a skill to driving an automatic that is quite different than driving a manual. And before you jump on me about not having enough experience, I'm very competent with toe and heel and the likes. And because of the clutch and manual gear selection, you can have fairly sloppy throttle control in a manual versus an automatic, where quite a bit more is controlled by how far and fast you move that pedal.

And most people I know, especially younger people (yes, I'm looking at you) can shift fast but they are brutally hard on the drivetrain with it, and it is hardly useful for anything but straight lines in an relatively low powered car. Not to mention all the considerations with gearing and the flywheel, clutch, and throw.

Sure, power shifting is hard on the drive train. I can't think of any delicate way of going about shifting without raising off the throttle and still using the clutch. It is a pretty easy way to pick up a tenth in the quarter.

Have you driven a stick before? You shift slowly because it lets the rpms drop to the proper revs for the gear you're in. With a lightweight flywheel, you shift faster because the revs drop faster. If you're a super cool racecar streetracer jdmtyte bro, then you shift as fast as you possibly can because you like ruining transmissions and synchros, and breaking shifters off. But it doesn't mean you're better because you shifted faster.

Yes, I've driven a stick before. I drive a four speed car every day. I'm not saying I shift like that all the time, but if you are running the car out what the hell is the point in not slamming the thing into the next gear? For what it's worth neither Chevelle has a lightweight wheel, they are both around 30-35 lbs. You don't need an aluminum wheel to shift fast.

I have also never broken a transmission. Neither car have slicks, or even sticky street radials. On a speed shift nothing happens, and when I power shift the '70 the tires are what give. The '71 doesn't make enough power to do anything radical on a power shift.

 

[daan]

I guess we could ask his girlfriend if she can find the dipstick or air-filter,

I'm sure everyone can all point to the dipstick in this scenario.

 

[eiriksmil]

I own one auto car, a US import Golf Mk2. I also own 8 manual cars.. I see a pattern... I like driving