Death of manual transmissions?

[andrewg]

Originally Posted By: hattaresguy
They are going the way of the crank start, only old timers drive them.

I have zero interest in owning one unless its in a toy car...and it would have to be a vintage toy car because modern auto's are just better.

Most of the cheap cars on that list with a stick are incredibly bad, Chevy Spark? I'd rather ride a bike.


Rather inflammatory and equally inaccurate posting....but we all have our opinions I suppose.

 

[andrewg]

Originally Posted By: deoxy4
I have had many Honda vehicles. They make good engines and manual transmissions. I have never had a problem with a Honda engine or a Honda manual transmission in the five examples I have had.

Current versions of Honda vehicles with automatic and CVT transmissions are fraught with problems. Honda has slipped to #8 in customer satisfaction. Many of these complaints are related to transmission issues. Honda admits they have automatic and CVT transmission issues and will notify customers when they have fix. They won't get my money for one of these models.


My 2015 Honda Fit has a CVT. While it's not anything to brag about...the CVT has been completely flawless and not in any way "fraught with problems".
The only issue I've known was a recall for some small piece in the CVT that might break if placed under undue stress. My Fit wasn't on the list...but it was a simple fix for those that were. And as I stated before, my Ridgeline has the most perfectly functioning auto I've ever owned. Not a single issue at all since I bought it in 2012.

 

[HTSS_TR]

Originally Posted By: sciphi
Most folks have junk commutes where a manual is a chore. Traffic bites, why make it more miserable than it has to be by having a dead-tired left leg when arriving at the office? A manual in an urban surface street environment needs to be a good one to make it any fun. Even then, in that environment it's yet another factor to attend to. Urban freeway is different. However, sitting in traffic not getting much past 4th is annoying. Steady-state driving is where manuals are good. Not many folks have that luxury these days.

I rarely had my S2000 transmission at either 5th or 6th when I was on Ortega Highway(CA 74) in So Cal, it was either in 3rd or 4th gear because of many tight turn and changing elevation, also the S2000 has no torque below 2.5-3k so I need to keep the rev a little high to let the car hold on to the road.

This picture is near the end of Ortega highway(CA 74), the lake is Elsinor. There are many bikers on this highway almost every weekend afternoon. There is no better top down drive in a good afternoon than this highway in So Cal.

Steady-state is not good for a good manual transmission, it is best when you need to change gear every few seconds to accommodate the changing of the road, such as a tight turn then very short straight then another tight turn ...

 

[69GTX]

Steady state driving is meant for automatics. If you're going to be at 55-75 mph on the highway, the manual isn't much help. I try to avoid the highway at all costs since driving my M6 in 5th or 6th gear is quite boring, and there's much less throttle response. Shifting gears up/down in 2nd-4th is where it shines....and pretty much covers 5-125 mph. For simplicity, you could just keep it in 3rd from 20-95 mph.

 

[fdcg27]

Originally Posted By: hattaresguy
They are going the way of the crank start, only old timers drive them.

I have zero interest in owning one unless its in a toy car...and it would have to be a vintage toy car because modern auto's are just better.

Most of the cheap cars on that list with a stick are incredibly bad, Chevy Spark? I'd rather ride a bike.


An automatic might be faster and is certainly easier, but it is nowhere near as engaging to drive.
I'd drive a stick Spark before I'd own an automatic Ferrari.
An automatic in a car wearing the badge of a classic performance marque just seems gauche, but then little turbo engines lacking the full compliment of cylinders that made that marque do as well.

 

[stephen9666]

Originally Posted By: DoubleWasp
When I went shopping for my 911, I had the choice of manual or PDK (automated manual transmission). The PDK is simply superior in every way, except for parallel parking.


This brings up an interesting point. In that same scenario, I would have chosen the manual over the auto.

I don't care if the auto is "superior in ever way" in a technical sense. I would enjoy that car more with a manual.

 

[Jarlaxle]

Originally Posted By: Pop_Rivit
Originally Posted By: horse123
It's funny that all the people that are saying "manual transmissions are simple and cheap" are the same people obsessing over blind spot monitoring and other stupid nanny junk for incapable drivers.


There is nothing simple about a modern synchronized manual transmission. They've been dumbed down to the point that virtually anyone can drive them-there is nothing particularly difficult or engaging about them.

If you want to drive a real manual, then go find something that isn't synchronized and has both a main and auxiliary transmission. Maybe something with a 15 speed tri-plex or even a simple 18 speed Eaton.


Driven them...Spicer 5+2 (air and electric shift), Fuller 9 and 13-speed, Meritor 10, Clark 5-speed, and a Spicer 4-speed with 30' of linkage. No big deal.

 

[john_pifer]

I can't believe Porsche stopped offering the 911, arguably the biggest name in sports cars in the world.

I wouldn't buy a sports car without a traditional manual gearbox. Like someone said above, I don't care if it's faster around the track with an auto or a manual with electromechanical shifting - I'm going to enjoy the car more with a stick and a 3rd pedal.

 

[KrisZ]

Death of the manual transmission has been prophesized for how long now, 30 years? And it only took the automatics roughly 70 years to finally catch up with performance and efficiency.

I believe there will always be a market for the manual tranny, unless we get the government involved and regulate it out of existence.

 

[Andrew1972]

Originally Posted By: fdcg27

I'd drive a stick Spark before I'd own an automatic Ferrari.


Really???? A manual does not automatically means its good. Some notably terrible examples I have driven are recent(2010+) Toyota Corolla and Toyota Camry. Honestly I don't think the manual did much for the vehicle. I felt the same with the recent Outback and Forester manuals, it does not make for exciting driving either.

I think they no longer are trying on certain manuals but putting significant effort into the non shift versions on plebian cars. My wife/I did really like the 6mt though in Honda Accord as it made the car engaging a tad to drive with decent motor/transmission combination.

 

[IndyIan]

Originally Posted By: KrisZ
Death of the manual transmission has been prophesized for how long now, 30 years? And it only took the automatics roughly 70 years to finally catch up with performance and efficiency.

I believe there will always be a market for the manual tranny, unless we get the government involved and regulate it out of existence.

I think in europe and the ROW, there will be manuals for a long time. Here? I don't know.
Maybe there will be few cars at the low low end, and some lower cost drivers cars like the Miata, FRS.
I'll have to try a dual clutch manual, or automated manual. I guess if they give full control, like a real manual they would be fine. Automatic rev matching would be nice I suppose, but maybe too much like a video game?
For now though, I like my simple manual in my simple car. I have a nice rural commute, and its a simple pleasure to rev match some downshifts and zip around a few corners with the ability to alter your line with throttle control, or decide half way through 3rd gear I want to stay in that gear to cruising speed.
Once the last kid is out of daycare, I'd like to get a mid hp rwd manual sports sedan, and it seems I'd better act sooner than later. Almost all of these cars are now only offered as AWD, automatic, pointlessly complex luxo-barges, in our market.

 

[KitaCam]

So, why are manuals so prevalent outside the US?

 

[supton]

Originally Posted By: KitaCam
So, why are manuals so prevalent outside the US?


Used to be cheaper, and with better mpg's, important things in places where gas taxes and taxes in general are much higher. Also, IMO, small light cars are fun with stick; brain-dead floaty barges not so much.

I'm not sure if Europe has the traffic jams that can occur in the US, but they certainly do have some, and plenty of windy/twisty/narrow roads. I'm not sure I buy the argument that it's because of American traffic patterns that we wanted automatics all these years. IMO, it was profitable to make automatics, and OEM's disincentivized manuals by making them lackluster (stiff clutch, long throws, etc).

 

[Quattro Pete]

Originally Posted By: supton
Originally Posted By: KitaCam
So, why are manuals so prevalent outside the US?


Used to be cheaper, and with better mpg's, important things in places where gas taxes and taxes in general are much higher. Also, IMO, small light cars are fun with stick; brain-dead floaty barges not so much.

On top of that, historically most repair shops did not know how to fix an auto trans due to lack of experience. And replacing an auto trans isn't cheap, so most people shy away from it.

 

[JTK]

Originally Posted By: madRiver
Originally Posted By: fdcg27

I'd drive a stick Spark before I'd own an automatic Ferrari.


Really???? A manual does not automatically means its good. Some notably terrible examples I have driven are recent(2010+) Toyota Corolla and Toyota Camry. Honestly I don't think the manual did much for the vehicle. I felt the same with the recent Outback and Forester manuals, it does not make for exciting driving either.

I think they no longer are trying on certain manuals but putting significant effort into the non shift versions on plebian cars. My wife/I did really like the 6mt though in Honda Accord as it made the car engaging a tad to drive with decent motor/transmission combination.



Could not agree more. Drive any late model Subaru manual transmission, maybe with exception to the WRX. Just horrible. Like it was a complete afterthought. Like I've said in other threads on this topic, my Subaru 5spd soured me so badly on sticks, I'll likely never own one again. Manuals was how I learned to drive and I've owned many.

 

[pottymouth]

The automaker build what they think buyers want. Like it or not, it seems pretty clear that the vast majority of buyers in the US want some kind of automatic. This isn't driven by the carmakers, it is driven by the buyers. If you haven't bought a new car in 10 years (or ever) your opinion doesn't really count.

I like manuals myself, but there is real validity in the idea that a manual transmission does not necessarily translate into a more enjoyable driving experience. My wife's Jetta is a good example. In typical driving, it is just not much fun. The 2.5 does not have enough torque at moderate engine speeds. This requires far too much shifting just to keep up with traffic. Couple that with a fairly agricultural feeling shifter and I believe the car would simply be more enjoyable overall with an automatic. My Golf wagon has the 6 speed, old fashioned automatic. I briefly considered a manual, but I do about 35K miles a year and a fair among of it in stop and go traffic. Add in the lower resale value and knees that suffered sports injuries in my youth and the auto was a better choice. It shifts when it is supposed to and the shifts are quick. In sport mode it can take a twisty road with as much enthusiasm as I care to muster. I had a '96 Maxima with a 5 speed and it was one of my favorite cars. The manual transformed the car over the automatic. My wife's car is the opposite. It really does depend on the car. Some people seem to think that stick=sporty or even worse, that driving a manual is some kind of badge of honor that proves they are a "real" driver. Wrong on both accounts.

Things have changed. With sophisticated microprocessor-based electronic controls autos can shift well. Their durability can equal a manual. They can offer better fuel economy than a manual, particularly a CVT. DSG gearboxes can outperform the best manuals. Additionally, the traditional price savings of a manual transmission in a new car is not necessarily there anymore.

I enjoy a stick in the right car if I'm driving for recreation. For day to day use, the auto really makes more sense and makes for a better overall ownership experience. It's easy to live with a stick if you don't drive much or live in a place with little traffic. If you live in a major metropolitan area it can become a drudgery. I'm laughing at the smug attitude of the guy who has only 78K miles on a 34 year old VW. I do that in a little over 2 years! Think we might have different needs? His entire country is slightly smaller than the state of Oregon. It has much higher population density than the US. Why would anyone think that drivers in such different places would find the same cars appealing? If you don't live here, why would you even care? I don't mind that many Europeans buy tiny, underpowered little hatchbacks. I'll presume they make a lot more sense over there than they would here.

If I were to buy something like a Miata, I would buy a manual because it suits the character of the car and fits with the kind of usage I would get out of it. A CR-V? Not so much.

 

[pottymouth]

Originally Posted By: JTK
Originally Posted By: madRiver
Originally Posted By: fdcg27

I'd drive a stick Spark before I'd own an automatic Ferrari.


Really???? A manual does not automatically means its good. Some notably terrible examples I have driven are recent(2010+) Toyota Corolla and Toyota Camry. Honestly I don't think the manual did much for the vehicle. I felt the same with the recent Outback and Forester manuals, it does not make for exciting driving either.

I think they no longer are trying on certain manuals but putting significant effort into the non shift versions on plebian cars. My wife/I did really like the 6mt though in Honda Accord as it made the car engaging a tad to drive with decent motor/transmission combination.



Could not agree more. Drive any late model Subaru manual transmission, maybe with exception to the WRX. Just horrible. Like it was a complete afterthought. Like I've said in other threads on this topic, my Subaru 5spd soured me so badly on sticks, I'll likely never own one again. Manuals was how I learned to drive and I've owned many.


Wow! The manual in the Subaru must be unbelievably bad if you preferred the CVT. A 10 mile test drive of a 2016 Forester with CVT made me cross that vehicle off my list. I absolutely hated it. The worst CVT I have ever driven. All noise with little acceleration. Seemed to be only interested in saving gas. It felt like the gas pedal wasn't really connected to anything , the throttle response was so bad.

What specifically was wrong with the manual?

 

[GaleHawkins]

Clearly in the USA a vehicle with a manual transmission will have a limited number of people that can take it for a test drive.

My brother and one guy at work has the new Ford Focus with the "auto" manual transmissions. My brother just got a new 'clutch' replacement. The guy at work has been in four times for shifting issues and it is still not right.

We have three older vehicles with manual transmission and both of our 18 year old kids drove manuals before autos.

While the Aisin Warner AWF21 automatic 6 speed in the 2006 Ford Five Hundred is awesome it only has Low (1 and 2) and D (6 speeds with TC lock up). The Towncar has OD lock out. The 2002 Dodge Ram 1500 has OD lock out as long as you keep it under 40 MPH.

On small county roads we have to use the brakes a lot because there is little engine breaking. Now I do like 6 speed autos that you can manually shift.

The most fun manual I ever had was a 1985 BMW 528e five speed. I used the brakes very little.

At the age of 65 I would like a manual BUT my left knee has limited range of motion and will need to be replaced some day. I will never buy a new vehicle with a manual transmission for a daily driver.

 

[DoubleWasp]

Originally Posted By: stephen9666

This brings up an interesting point. In that same scenario, I would have chosen the manual over the auto.

I don't care if the auto is "superior in ever way" in a technical sense. I would enjoy that car more with a manual.


To each their own. I have other cars with a third pedal. I enjoyed this one a lot more with the PDK than the stick. There's something to be said for being able to instantly execute gearchanges without having to remove a hand from the wheel.

There's no denying that there is a very good reason why automated manual transmissions have replaced stickshift transmissions for performance driving.

 

[Jetronic]

Originally Posted By: supton
Originally Posted By: KitaCam
So, why are manuals so prevalent outside the US?


Used to be cheaper, and with better mpg's, important things in places where gas taxes and taxes in general are much higher. Also, IMO, small light cars are fun with stick; brain-dead floaty barges not so much.

I'm not sure if Europe has the traffic jams that can occur in the US, but they certainly do have some, and plenty of windy/twisty/narrow roads. I'm not sure I buy the argument that it's because of American traffic patterns that we wanted automatics all these years. IMO, it was profitable to make automatics, and OEM's disincentivized manuals by making them lackluster (stiff clutch, long throws, etc).


Manuals are still about $3000 cheaper in europe. Traffic jams are as bad or worse as in the States.