The automatic transmission isn't the option.......

Status
Not open for further replies.
I agree, its the other way around now. somewhere around the early to mid 2000's automatics were starting to become the only option.
 
Many sales brochures list the manual transmission as the standard selection, and an automatic is "optional". This is different from most dealers ordering automatic-equipped models and saying that you'd have to "special order" one with a manual.

If you go to Honda's pricing page for the Fit, you can see that they list "5-Speed Manual Transmission" and also "5-Speed Automatic Transmission (available)"

http://automobiles.honda.com/fit/price.aspx

If you go to Honda's specifications page for the Fit, you can see that they list the manual transmission as "standard" and the automatic as "available".

http://automobiles.honda.com/fit/specifications.aspx

I think the writers of the article have it correct. The manual transmission is "standard" or baseline equipment. The automatic is "available" or optional equipment above the baseline.
 
I think the reason the automatic is optional is so that they can list the base price of the car at a point 1500 bucks below what the real base price (for 90% of buyers) is. At least that was Honda's way a few years back.

As sad as this conversation is (if you enjoy a manual) I have a feeling in five years when the next gen fit comes out it will be a lot worse.
 
Originally Posted By: bepperb
I think the reason the automatic is optional is so that they can list the base price of the car at a point 1500 bucks below what the real base price (for 90% of buyers) is. At least that was Honda's way a few years back.

As sad as this conversation is (if you enjoy a manual) I have a feeling in five years when the next gen fit comes out it will be a lot worse.


5 years? Imagine my concern as I plan to hold on to the Camry stick for 10+....
 
Originally Posted By: bepperb
I think the reason the automatic is optional is so that they can list the base price of the car at a point 1500 bucks below what the real base price (for 90% of buyers) is. At least that was Honda's way a few years back.

Yeah, now you're starting to see a trend with some manufacturers where there is no price difference between manual and auto trans. Manufacturers are achieving greater economies of scale with automatics as they sell a lot more of them compared to manuals, at least in the US.

Now, in places like Europe, automatic truly is an option.
 
I don't think the cost to manufacture has anything to do with it.

Currently the Fit costs 15425, or 16225 with automatic. I think it's a way to advertise the car as starting under 15,500 when you know for 90% of buyers won't buy that particular car and it really starts a little over 16 grand. Even if the cost was identical this is still a great marketing strategy.

In Europe (Ireland at least) having an automatic is a liability when you go to sell the same way having a manual is here.
 
Even with economies of scale I suspect a stick costs less to make. No ECU required, at least not for shift control. Automatics have lots of gear surfaces (ring, sun, etc), and bearing surfaces; solenoids to engage/disengage; brakes and clutches. Stick may have some cables and more fancy linkage, but it seems to me that an automatic simply has more to it, and thus has to cost more. Plus, while sticks are not common here they are still common elsewhere, so if a maker could standardize the trans (final drive ratio can be altered separately) then they can still achieve cost savings.

[Supposedly if I change fifth gear ratio in mine then cruise control may not work, so there is some monitoring going on. Hit the clutch while using Cruise will kick out cruise too. But apart from that, no brains trying to decide what gear ratio to pick next.]
 
There's a cost for EPA certifying every powertrain. Stick shifts are hard because you can lug them in high gear and make tons of NOx. They also have to "dashpot" when you slam the throttle closed although electric throttles do this pretty well now. Even if you manually lock an automatic in top gear the TCC usually disengages by computer control, helping emissions.
 
As the vehicle's programming gets more complex in combination with more available gear ratios or CVT, "automatics" are getting better fuel economy in some vehicles.

A prime example is the 2012+ Subaru Impreza. I have yet to hear of a 5spd manual 2012+ Impreza (or XV Crosstrek) owner who consistently gets better MPGs than one equipped with a CVT.

The CVT equipped do a good 10% better.
 
Originally Posted By: eljefino
There's a cost for EPA certifying every powertrain. Stick shifts are hard because you can lug them in high gear and make tons of NOx. They also have to "dashpot" when you slam the throttle closed although electric throttles do this pretty well now. Even if you manually lock an automatic in top gear the TCC usually disengages by computer control, helping emissions.


Have a drive in my focus. It doesn't shut the throttle at all. If you kick it into neutral while rolling, it races at 2000 rpm. The revs don't even drop when shifting gears if you push the clutch all the way in! I have to barely depress the clutch to disengage it, but not far enough that the computer knows I'm pressing it.
 
Yep, noticed that for a few years now, engine likes to rev up when I would go to shift. Have to let off before thinking about hitting the clutch. IMO it's a minor cost to pay in order to get a trans that doesn't get confused as to what gear to be in.

I'm also not quite convinced on the manuals getting better mpg's. A short geared stick is of course going to be at a disadvantage. Use the same ratios though and I bet the results will be in the stick's favor. Simply less drag in a stick. [No clutches/drums/whatever with parasitic drag.] At least for us highway guys who can manage to do most of their driving in top gear anyhow. Lots of stop and go and yes I can buy the auto might be the winner. Assuming you can live with the trans programming.
 
Automatics got faster than sticks in the late 50s to 60s. They got more economical in the 90s when the engine management system got integrated with the transmission control system and everything could act in harmony. Manufacturing cost- a 3-speed automatic was an amazingly simple thing once you actually look inside one (the cutaway drawings are always misleadingly complicated). More speeds means more copies of basically the same parts (sun/planet/ring gears and associated brakes and clutches). Assembly is very "procedural" for lack of a better word- stack disks, insert snap-rings, etc. and very adaptable to automation. Manuals aren't as "simple" as people often think by comparison, and some steps of the assembly are more hands-on. And frankly, much lower volume these days

But nothing is more FUN than a real manual with a stick on the center console, and nothing is more disappointing than paddle-shifters pretending that the transmission isn't really an automatic.
 
I've been tempted to buy a 4spd auto and do a teardown for fun. Someday. I did recently watch some vids on how they work, and they may have less parts. But I'm not sure what kind of drag exists, especially on each brake that is not currently engaged.

Point taken though about easier assembly (and less machine work/fine fitting?). Too bad they can't take an auto setup, with its planetaries and put in a real manual clutch, and real full manual shift control. [I realize the trans pump would have to somehow see the engine, so as to get necessary pressure.] I know it may increase NOx but I know I can eek out a bit more mpg if I could only prevent some downshifts.
 
With an auto, the engine can bog down and eagerly upshift to achieve listed fuel economy figures, unlike the much less controlled shift points and MPG of a human deciding when to shift. Plus, we're lazy and untalented lol
Only in North America.
 
The real reason for both automated gearboxes (aka dual clutch, etc.) and slushboxes is they can easily be integrated into the entire suite of safety and economy features. Modern cars with a yaw system, traction control, turn-in braking, abs, collision avoidance, etc. simply must have control over the transmission as well.

PS, they usually do better in gas mileage too if driven normally. A real hyper miler can do better with a stick in many cases...
 
Originally Posted By: SteveSRT8
The real reason for both automated gearboxes (aka dual clutch, etc.) and slushboxes is they can easily be integrated into the entire suite of safety and economy features. Modern cars with a yaw system, traction control, turn-in braking, abs, collision avoidance, etc. simply must have control over the transmission as well.

PS, they usually do better in gas mileage too if driven normally. A real hyper miler can do better with a stick in many cases...


Subaru WRX 2015 for Yaw, Acura TL SH-AWD, Mits Evo etc have all accomplished those items with a manual gearbox.
 
I went to the NY auto show last week and in mid size 4 door the stick choices are getting more limited. Sonata, Optima, Camry, Fusion, Outback, Legacy all are no longer available in a Manual tranny. Volkswagon listed stick as standard with auto an optional upgrade on Jetta and Passat as well as the rest of group. Mazda6 available in stick, Accord (EX I think), Forester, Many smaller cars still available to be ordered with stick.

The sad part in many of the "smaller" midsize cars was also the SERIOUS lack of back seat leg room. What good is a 4 door vehicle if you can't sit in the back seat anyway?

Mazda6 was real nice, Passat Diesel for 26k with 6 speed stick, 30+mpg city and 43 highway was a beautiful car with lots of room for four people.
 
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: rjundi
Originally Posted By: SteveSRT8
The real reason for both automated gearboxes (aka dual clutch, etc.) and slushboxes is they can easily be integrated into the entire suite of safety and economy features. Modern cars with a yaw system, traction control, turn-in braking, abs, collision avoidance, etc. simply must have control over the transmission as well.

PS, they usually do better in gas mileage too if driven normally. A real hyper miler can do better with a stick in many cases...


Subaru WRX 2015 for Yaw, Acura TL SH-AWD, Mits Evo etc have all accomplished those items with a manual gearbox.


Indeed, but they are isolated outliers in a LARGE pool of cars being manufactured, eh?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top