Save the Manuals!

[Beeblebrox237]

Although as HFS mentioned, there are exceptions to this, I like Manuals because I think that they're generally more fun and more interesting in a car than an automatic transmission.

 

[ZohsixGT5]

Danoff is exactly right. I don't have a problem with autos, as long as I have a way to select the gear myself in some form. I frequently drive my friends DSG Audi TT. Can I just cruise around in automatic mode all day? Of course. However, I prefer to use the paddles everywhere, simply because I like being in control of the gear changes. It is nice to have a choice though.

In regards to manual gear boxes, I will always have one. As Danoff mentioned it is not an ideal setup, but there is something about it that makes me feel more connected to the car. Like I'm driving a machine and not a computer. I don't despise autos, but as long as I have a choice, my sports car will be manual.

 

[Greycap]

I'll accept an automatic gearbox as soon as someone makes one that has direct drive except for the first 10 km/h or so, is always in the right gear for what I want it to do, features proper engine braking and overall works in such a way that I won't notice it.

If I want WOT acceleration using the low end torque instead of revving the engine, I want the gearbox to pull it off. On the other hand if I want to rev the engine to the redline I want the gearbox to pull it off too. During accelerations and decelerations between corners I want it to hold the gears instead of shifting up when I lift off and downshifting when I step on the throttle again.

If all of the above criteria are met without me having to resort to manual mode the gearbox is good. If I have to shift myself to get proper operation - I thought it was supposed to be automatic instead of manual?

 

[Danoff]

If all of the above criteria are met without me having to resort to manual mode the gearbox is good. If I have to shift myself to get proper operation - I thought it was supposed to be automatic instead of manual?

It's supposed to be what it is... if you can select a gear or choose to let it try to select a gear for you, why are you complaining?

My automatic has a manual mode, and I think it's a very useful thing. Why would you refuse to use part of the built-in functionality of the transmission? That's like refusing to use the clutch because it's supposed to be manual.

 

[Slash]

Danoff is exactly right. I don't have a problem with autos, as long as I have a way to select the gear myself in some form. I frequently drive my friends DSG Audi TT. Can I just cruise around in automatic mode all day? Of course. However, I prefer to use the paddles everywhere, simply because I like being in control of the gear changes. It is nice to have a choice though.

In regards to manual gear boxes, I will always have one. As Danoff mentioned it is not an ideal setup, but there is something about it that makes me feel more connected to the car. Like I'm driving a machine and not a computer. I don't despise autos, but as long as I have a choice, my sports car will be manual.

This is why I like the new shiftable automatic transmissions that have been coming out over the past few years. Automatic all the time but you can shift whenever you want.

 

[Perfect Balance]

That's weird... I assume you have a steering rack, gas pedal, and transmission set up in your basement so that you can manipulate them with a big grin on your face.

That sounds like fun actually.


I remember one time you mentioned something about a car that you could drive with your mind, basically an extreme example of a car without a mechanical interface. If you asked me if I'd enjoy "driving" in a car like that, I'd have to say no. If that means I simply like operating mechanical things and don't like driving, then so be it.


That being said, I have no doubt in my mind that a good dsg or similar transmission is far quicker and more efficient than a conventional manual, but I haven't driven one I considered "good" to this day, though I definitely see the potential, and for a race car, it would definitely be the way to go, but just for hooning around on the weekends a good manual is still my favorite way to enjoy a drive. I'm sure a large part of it simply nostalgia, but the fact of the matter remains that I still don't enjoy driving automatics as much as a proper manual.

 

[Danoff]

I remember one time you mentioned something about a car that you could drive with your mind, basically an extreme example of a car without a mechanical interface. If you asked me if I'd enjoy "driving" in a car like that, I'd have to say no.

Why not? I think it would be more fun than you think.

 

[niky]

The confusion of "interface" with the actual act of driving is an interesting one.

Back in the old days, there wasn't a proper interface. Ours is as it is now because of tradition. If I had to design a car from scratch, I would definitely not have so many controls handled by one extremity at the same time.

Having one foot control both accelerator and brake, for instance, is a disaster that has led to thousands of accidents. Not that motorcycles are perfect, either... the twist throttle has itself caused a whole lot of grief.

At least throttle and brake have a very intuitive action. More movement, more throttle or brake. But what about a gearshift?

A gear stick is just a stick, with an H-Gate selector with arbitrarily chosen gear positions (completely... remember when first was down and reverse was up?) that moves the forks around to engage the gears. It doesn't need to be a stick. It can be several toggle levers, one for each pair of gears, and one for the two different final drive ratios you sometimes find on modern six speed boxes. Of course, you'll need to remember to disengage the dog for the previous gear before going into the next, but more involvement is always good, right?

People could be just as easily served by a sequential manual, which is much more intuitive, and more mechanically direct. Also, a good sequential allows clutchless shifting.

Flappy paddles are wonderful. Never having to take your hands off the wheel in a corner make for much better driving.

-

If I'd been in charge of vehicle ergonomics at the start of the 20th century, I'd have put the accelerator and brake on a lever on the right (push pull), the clutch and gearshift lever on the left (squeeze for clutch, push pull for shifts), and have steering done by the feet, as in aircraft rudders and helicopter tail rotors. Drive by foot would probably be quite intuitive... a lot of sports involve driving or steering with your feet or body.

-

I'd still drive a car with a wheel, three pedals and a stick, though. Too old to get used to a completely new way of driving.

 

[Perfect Balance]

Why not? I think it would be more fun than you think.

I think it would be fun in the same way all new things are "fun". After that wears off I'll go to driving a regular car with the satisfying mechanical feel. Nostalgia? Sure why not. I still like it.

Not saying it's "better" though. Better than your average slushbox, sure, but there's no denying that technology has moved past user operated manual transmissions.

The confusion of "interface" with the actual act of driving is an interesting one.

I'm having hard time wrapping my head around what this sentence means.

I don't see the difference between "operating a transmission" and "operating a steering rack". In my mind they're both part of driving, and both can be made unnecessary by means of technology. To me, either one of them is just a means of getting the car to do what you want it to, whether it be drive forward or take a corner.

 

[homeforsummer]

Ours is as it is now because of tradition. If I had to design a car from scratch, I would definitely not have so many controls handled by one extremity at the same time.

It's amazing how much of cars in general wouldn't be the way they are today if it wasn't for tradition. They'd not likely use fossil fuels, for a start, if the idea came up today.

"Yes, what you have to do is fill up the car with this extremely flammable liquid, from an even greater container of flammable liquid at the end of your street. The engine burns it, makes a bit of a din and we'll admit, does cause a bit of pollution. Oh, and you'll constantly have to replace bits that wear out. And while you're at it, learn how to use this stick that lets the rather limited engine speed range take you to higher speeds... And incidentally, the shape of the interior will be completely dictated by having to put the engine somewhere in the confines of the bodywork"

It's why I quite like concept cars at motor shows. It's the car free of all traditional constraints.

 

[Greycap]

My automatic has a manual mode, and I think it's a very useful thing. Why would you refuse to use part of the built-in functionality of the transmission?

That's the point, or at least a large part of it... selecting the gears by yourself isn't very automatic, is it? If I want to shift I'll buy a manual, if I buy an automatic I'll expect it to operate satisfactorily without me having to tell it what to do.

Now that's not to say that I believe a normal H-gate shifter and clutch to be a perfect solution. In fact I wouldn't complain a bit if my car magically transformed its transmission into a WRC style sequential that only necessitates the clutch for getting the car moving, or even into a a clutchless H-gate version. Retain the clutch for the only thing it does really well - standing starts - and do the rest of the shifts without it.

 

[homeforsummer]

That's the point, or at least a large part of it... selecting the gears by yourself isn't very automatic, is it? If I want to shift I'll buy a manual, if I buy an automatic I'll expect it to operate satisfactorily without me having to tell it what to do.

I agree with you to some extent - when I test automatic cars, I tend to just leave them in auto the whole time. I rarely find much point selecting gears myself in a modern auto, as they're usually good enough to get the right gear most of the time.

However, there are exceptions. Anything genuinely sporty - hot VWs and Audis with DSG, BMWs, Mercs and Jags with multi-speed autos with paddleshift - it's actually a lot of fun to use these because they're so sophisticated.

I suspect as an owner I'd still leave it in "D" most of the time, but they're certainly the sort of cars that encourage you to make the most of the manual modes.

Of course, with Jaguars and most Mercedes there's often no manual option anyway, so that point is moot...

 

[Danoff]

That's the point, or at least a large part of it... selecting the gears by yourself isn't very automatic, is it? If I want to shift I'll buy a manual, if I buy an automatic I'll expect it to operate satisfactorily without me having to tell it what to do.

Why must it be all one way or the other? Why can you not accept a hybrid approach where the transmission does the shifting for you most of the time, but you can tell it what to do when you have a strong opinion?

Is this not the best of all worlds?

In my car, if I'm cruising along in "D" and want to pass someone, I pull the stick to toward me and punch it toward the dash, suddenly I'm in 4 with more passing power without having to change my throttle position. When I'm done I put it back in "D". Where's the problem?

Automatics that have manual modes are better than pure automatics (does that exist?) because they give you extra tools. I don't know why you would refuse to use those tools just because you have pre-conceived notions that automatics ought to be able to handle every situation perfectly and read your mind or else they're garbage.

Shifting all of the time is a pain. Automatic all of the time is a pain. Anything in between is condemned as not all manual and not all automatic - but that's the best possible transmission!

 

[SpartanG]

I can't believe this thread is still going!

Has anyone brought up the point that different classes of cars are okay with different transmissions? A commuter/dd sedan is completely fine as an auto, only needed in stick/clutch form if the owner wants a more fun car. And let's be honest, getting a manual econobox like the mazda2/3 makes the cars way more fun than their auto counterparts. But some cars will better do their job as automatics anyway. Imagine the L.A. traffic grind, having to launch the car every 10 seconds to move a total of 3 feet. That isn't what makes a manual fun.

But something like a sports car, project car, or weekend track car needs a manual. Simple as that. Since you aren't taking the car in traffic every day there's no excuse not to go for it.

Don't forget that with a DCT, you miss out on technique like heel-toe and double clutching.

 

[Danoff]

Don't forget that with a DCT, you miss out on technique like heel-toe and double clutching.

...because you don't need to do it... because the DCT human interface is superior. There is no "missing out" here.

 

[AudiMan2011]

In my opinion, manual gearboxes are still going to be around for years to come, but they may end up only being seen on affordable enthusiast's cars GT86/BRZ/FR-S, MX-5 Miata, Nissan Z, hot hatches etc.

Supercars and exotics have to try and ahead of the game in terms of technological advancements. Hence why the next generation of super-exotics (Ferrari F70, McLaren P1, Jaguar C-X75, Porsche 918 Spyder) are being devoloped with advanced DCT gearboxes or single clutch robotised manual.

 

[alexlam24]

Well as far as I can say, supercars in the future won't have manual gearboxes, mainly because of how much power they're making. My sister has a friend who owns a R8 and he said, when you have over 500 HP, a manual gearbox isn't the best.

 

[Exorcet]

Well as far as I can say, supercars in the future won't have manual gearboxes, mainly because of how much power they're making. My sister has a friend who owns a R8 and he said, when you have over 500 HP, a manual gearbox isn't the best.

Why not? And why don't Viper/Corvette/S7/GT owners seem unconcerned despite 600/650/750/550 hp?

On the subject of manuals, I don't think they'll go away for a long time, but they are dieing out.

For what it's worth, I plan to get a manual so I can practice with it, but for street driving my preferred transmission would be autoclutch and manual gear selection.

 

[Azuremen]

Well as far as I can say, supercars in the future won't have manual gearboxes, mainly because of how much power they're making. My sister has a friend who owns a R8 and he said, when you have over 500 HP, a manual gearbox isn't the best.

It really has nothing to do with the power as much as the efficiency that dual clutch systems can provide. Which is why most supercars moved away from the traditional manual a few years back. Though we still have things like the ZR1 that manages just fine.

Feels more like you wanted an excuse to mention how you know someone that knows someone with an R8.

 

[alexlam24]

It really has nothing to do with the power as much as the efficiency that dual clutch systems can provide. Which is why most supercars moved away from the traditional manual a few years back. Though we still have things like the ZR1 that manages just fine.

Feels more like you wanted an excuse to mention how you know someone that knows someone with an R8.

No I wasn't, I was just saying a dual clutch or whatever gives you more control

 

[Azuremen]

No I wasn't, I was just saying a dual clutch or whatever gives you more control

Umm, how?

 

[alexlam24]

Umm, how?

When you have 500+ hp, the last thing you want is a manual, you get more control over the car and you won't stall it. Plus, its easier to drive in traffic

 

[ZohsixGT5]

It really comes down to preference and ability. I have 450hp and have never stalled in traffic or anywhere else.

 

[Goshin2568]

When you have 500+ hp, the last thing you want is a manual, you get more control over the car and you won't stall it. Plus, its easier to drive in traffic

Haha I'm sorry but that just means you suck at driving. Dual clutch doesn't give you more control. It might be easier, but it's not more control.

I didn't know it was impossible to drive a motorcycle.

You're doing something extremely common on GTPlanet, confusing the concept of driving something (lots of things can be driven, golf carts, go karts, bigwheels, plastic barbie corvettes, motorcycles, bicycles, recumbent bikes, segues, even cars)... you're confusing that... with the interface.

Think about the word "drive" for a moment - can you use it to describe riding a motorcycle? Can you use it to describe controlling a go-kart? What if that go-kart had only one control, a joy stick. Push the joy stick forward - kart goes forward, pull it back - kart goes back, side-to-side - kart turns. Can you not "drive" that go kart? Can you not drive a riding lawn mower? Can you drive a tractor? A Zamboni machine? A fork lift? Note the terminology at the top of this page:

http://www.ehow.com/how_2002028_drive-forklift.html

Of course you can, because "drive" is not specific to cars. Otherwise you'd never have need of the phrase "driving a car". You'd just say "driving" (which, admittedly, people do, but they also say "driving a car" to differentiate from driving something else).

I understand that you guys love the manual transmission interface. But don't confuse it with driving. Driving is what formula 1 drivers do despite not having a stick shift, it's what motorcycle racers do despite not having a steering wheel, stick shift, or gas pedal. It's g-forces, lateral acceleration, apexing, overtaking, etc.

First off, you don't say "driving a motorcycle". The correct phrase is "riding a motorcycle"

Secondly, you are wrong on your whole spiel there. The interface dictates the action. Think about the action of driving a car. Where is the action taking place? The action of driving is what your body is doing, the car has nothing to do with it. When you are driving a car, your hands are moving a wheel left and right, for the purpose of steering, and shifting if it's a manual, and your feet are operating 2 or 3 pedals for the purpose of accelerating and braking.

Then switch over to a motorcycle. You are using the weight of your body to tilt for the purpose of steering, you are using your hands to accelerate and brake, and operating a clutch and shifting with your feet.

I'm sorry but those are two completely different things. You can call it "driving" if you want, but that is what the vehicle is doing. You, the person, are doing completely different actions. Call it what you wish but operating a car and operating a motorcycle are two completely different things.

One could make a very good argument that motorcycles are the most pure driving experience to be had given that it's as close to just you and the turn as you can get without running... and running is not driving (driving implies that you're controlling some other object that is providing the motion).

As far as interfaces go (and the manual transmission is exactly that), stick shifts kinda suck. Any interface that requires 3 feet and 3 hands is not exactly perfect for creatures with 2 feet and 2 hands. It's hard, sure (though not so hard that millions of people can't figure it out), and rewarding when you accomplish that difficult task. But it's a crappy interface, and it's not driving.


Edit:

So where does that leave us? It leaves us with people who are attached to manual transmissions for nostalgia reasons. Perhaps it was because they grew up driving stick, or perhaps it was because they watched Vin Diesel shift in Fast and Furious (they always had another gear when the writers wanted them to speed up didn't they?). Whatever the reason for the nostalgia, that's why people can't handle the death of the manual.

It's very much like people who love their record players despite CDs doing a better job. It's like people who are attached to wine corks even though the screw tops do a better job. There are a bazillion examples of this throughout all kinds of products and activities. It's an extremely common emotional reaction to progress - but it's futile because the next generation will look at it rationally.

That's just your opinion though. I don't drive manual for any of those reasons. There are multiple hundred other reasons why someone would prefer a manual over an automatic besides yours listed.

I'm not implying that people who choose to drive automatics are lazy, not at all, but I'm not a fan of car being made easier to use. Every time you drive lives are at stake. Not being dramatic, but I'm differentiating the difference between cars and other random things. Cell phones, computers, etc. can and should be made easier to use because there is no penalty for being lazy.

Anyway, back to the point, when car manufacturers add things to make driving easier, it gives a lot of people an excuse to be lazy. "Oh the car does that for me." While in some cases it's convenient, most of the time it just give people an out, an excuse not to pay attention.

Sorry for the rant, but my reason in saying all of that is this: Why would you want to have a computer do something that you can do yourself. The more things that you have control of the better, so long as you aren't distracted by all of the things. (Stuff like adjusting brake bias on the fly in a street car would just be ridiculous).

Say all you want about having 2 feet and having to use 3 pedals and that makes a crappy interface or whatever, but people are perfectly capable of driving like that, and it gives more control to the driver.

 

[Azuremen]

When you have 500+ hp, the last thing you want is a manual, you get more control over the car and you won't stall it. Plus, its easier to drive in traffic

It isn't the last thing you want at all, I know plenty of people that manage 600 WHP cars with manuals just fine.

Question - have you driven a manual, in real life?

 

[Pupik]

It really comes down to preference and ability. I have 450hp and have never stalled in traffic or anywhere else.

Also, the quality of the engagement and fluidity of the clutch and how you use the throttle pedal. I've driven three different Audi RS4's, and I was amazed how much of a pussycat it was at slow speeds, in first and second gears, with 420 horsepower. Mind you, you're probably using 10 percent of it at parking lot speeds, but it felt a lot less clumsy than my Scion does (which makes about a quarter of the peak power). Even gooseing the RS a little was smooth as silk...a pity it's such a money pit to maintain when new.

Question - have you driven a manual, in real life?

The question is has he driven anything at all. You don't carry the car, after all. The clutch pedal isn't suddenly Thor's hammer because the car makes more power.

It's the n00b who slams the pedals of an exotic upon immediately driving it that gets into mayhem, not someone who's used it like a normal car for a few minutes first.

 

[ZohsixGT5]

Another point to note about high powered cars, you really don't have to give it any revs to roll from a stop. Just slowly let out the clutch. It's actually easier than say, my grandfathers 86' B2200 with 90hp.

 

[Danoff]

Secondly, you are wrong on your whole spiel there. The interface dictates the action. Think about the action of driving a car. Where is the action taking place? The action of driving is what your body is doing, the car has nothing to do with it. When you are driving a car, your hands are moving a wheel left and right, for the purpose of steering, and shifting if it's a manual, and your feet are operating 2 or 3 pedals for the purpose of accelerating and braking.

Then switch over to a motorcycle. You are using the weight of your body to tilt for the purpose of steering, you are using your hands to accelerate and brake, and operating a clutch and shifting with your feet.

You've proven that the action of driving is dictated by the interface... that's kinda my point.

I'm sorry but those are two completely different things. You can call it "driving" if you want, but that is what the vehicle is doing. You, the person, are doing completely different actions. Call it what you wish but operating a car and operating a motorcycle are two completely different things.

You operate them differently, but it's driving either way.

Look if you're playing a PS3 or playing a Wii, you're doing two completely different things... but you're still playing video games.

That's just your opinion though. I don't drive manual for any of those reasons. There are multiple hundred other reasons why someone would prefer a manual over an automatic besides yours listed.

...because they're into tradition? They like making things harder than they need to be?

I'm not implying that people who choose to drive automatics are lazy, not at all, but I'm not a fan of car being made easier to use. Every time you drive lives are at stake. Not being dramatic, but I'm differentiating the difference between cars and other random things. Cell phones, computers, etc. can and should be made easier to use because there is no penalty for being lazy.

Making a car easier to drive with a simpler interface does not require the driver to stop looking at the road. To the contrary, it should enable the driver to pay more attention to the road and less attention to RPMs. What the driver does with that freedom is their own business, not the fault of the transmission.

If you got an automatic and became a lazy driver, that's on you buddy, don't blame the transmission.

Anyway, back to the point, when car manufacturers add things to make driving easier, it gives a lot of people an excuse to be lazy. "Oh the car does that for me." While in some cases it's convenient, most of the time it just give people an out, an excuse not to pay attention.

Their fault. People don't pay attention while driving stick too.

Sorry for the rant, but my reason in saying all of that is this: Why would you want to have a computer do something that you can do yourself.

That's is why we invented computers.

Say all you want about having 2 feet and having to use 3 pedals and that makes a crappy interface or whatever, but people are perfectly capable of driving like that, and it gives more control to the driver.

Yes, you can get good at using a poor interface, we've been over this.

 

[Exorcet]

Why would you want to have a computer do something that you can do yourself.

human landing


computer landing


Also calculators.

 

[McLaren]

Well as far as I can say, supercars in the future won't have manual gearboxes, mainly because of how much power they're making. My sister has a friend who owns a R8 and he said, when you have over 500 HP, a manual gearbox isn't the best.

Too many variables here. What kind of car, what kind of transmission, how much horsepower, what is the tune setup, what sort of modifications, etc.

There's no doubt that in high horsepower cars at a competitive level, the automatic/DCT has the advantage because the driver doesn't have to take that quick 1-2 second time frame to shift, but it still comes down to what kind of car we're talking about & what's been done.

A car modded to 880whp such as my buddy's Shelby GT will most likely eat through the stock clutch & eventually the transmission, but a stage 3 clutch & a couple tranny mods will hold that power easily.