Live data from Hacker News

Fewer than 3% of cars sold in the U.S. have manual transmissions

latimes.com

81–90 of 893 posts

Re: Fewer than 3% of cars sold in the U.S. have manual transmissions

#81
post #11
post #8

I was looking for a nice AWD hatchback. Subaru cancelled the WRX and STI version. Focus RS sadly goes with a manual only. Seems kind of silly to work so hard on performance/acceleration and then waste time on shifting.

Do any performance-focused vehicles use CVT? Answer: No.

Well, it was banned in F1 over a decade ago

Re: Fewer than 3% of cars sold in the U.S. have manual transmissions

#83

For me this is an emotional topic. I want everybody else to use it, but I myself do not want an electric car, an automatic car or a general speed limit. Arguing about stuff like this with (some) Germans is like arguing about guns with (some) Americans. Sure, there is a reasonable position, which is better for society. I don't care, don't take away my [insert toy here]!

How would it be better for society if everybody had automatic transmission?

Re: Fewer than 3% of cars sold in the U.S. have manual transmissions

#84
post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I delivered pizza one summer in a manual. I can't ever go back. :D I really think that driving manual requires you to be more attentive... and I should look to see if traffic accidents data backs me up.

Not sure if that's the case. While I love manual transmission, I would rather argue that it is more dangerous as you're often forced to have one hand away from the steering wheel, which makes it harder to react quickly.

How many people keep both hands on the steering wheel at all times (not counting smokers or idiots on their cellphones)? Also quick reactions are usually done with your right foot on the brake, not by swerving wildly around.

Re: Fewer than 3% of cars sold in the U.S. have manual transmissions

#85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> when automatic transmissions are consistently > outperforming humans at fuel efficiency What? So far each data sheet has shown higher fuel consumption for automatic vehicles.

DCTs are typically 3–5% more fuel-efficient than manual transmissions.

That's to be expected as a dual-clutch transmission is a robotically operated manual transmission with an extra degree of freedom. Most automatics are completely different technology that has always been less efficient.

Re: Fewer than 3% of cars sold in the U.S. have manual transmissions

#86

I'm a car enthusiast, and I was a manual transmission purist for many, many years. But then I had to be honest with myself, and admit that the VAST majority of my driving is commuting in traffic. And that driving is much less annoying with an automatic. My leisure driving is maybe 5% less fun without a manual, but that's far outweighed by how much better my daily commute is. At this point, I'd only buy a manual for a…

Exactly! For commuting you should get an automatic and for the weekend you should get a manual.

I was a fan of manual cars for a long time, but the more time I spent stuck in traffic, the more I love automatic transmissions.

Re: Fewer than 3% of cars sold in the U.S. have manual transmissions

#87
This is unfortunate given that manufacturers regularly game fuel mileage tests fof automatics to give buyers a sense of better gas mileage(to justify the higher price). Real world tests by consumer reports and others continue to show that manual transmissions get better gas mileage in real world conditions on top of being much more reliable.

And before someone mentions it, a clutch wearing out during the working life of a modern manual car is a joke. I've driven multiple manual cars to over 200k miles and never had to replace a clutch. If you wear out a clutch your car is defected or (more likely) you're utterly terrible at driving stick

Re: Fewer than 3% of cars sold in the U.S. have manual transmissions

#88
I have a license for manual transmission as that's the default in Germany. My US license is expired now* but I only drove automatics there. I always thought it was curious that the default in the US is automatic and in most other countries I've been to it is manual...in fact there's an ego thing at play here, too. A lot of people in Germany think automatics are for people who can't drive properly.

My next car will be an automatic, the convenience is nice and I doubt that I can get any extra performance out of my mediocre shifting habits. Automated or semi-automated driving (lane control and whatnot) is also a lot nicer with automatics (I've seen a manual that had the features and it was a usability nightmare).

There's a couple of use cases for manuals most notably driving on icy roads and possibly mountain regions but that's rare here. For everything else I'm assuming automatics are optimized beyound my abilities (saving gas by motor-breaking etc.)

*Random sidenote: German licenses don't expire. Not sure if it's different by state in the US but I could renew my US license by paying some money, there's no renewal test AFAIK

Re: Fewer than 3% of cars sold in the U.S. have manual transmissions

#89
post #34

I prefer stick but can't always get it. Even the cheapest Korean manufacturer can make a 5 or 6 speed manual that is close to unbreakable. And you can, in difficult situations at least, shift better than the automatic - especially if you are shifting a certain way because you can see traffic or the lack of it, up ahead.

> especially if you are shifting a certain way because you can see traffic or the lack of it, up ahead. Downshifting instead of using brakes is more environmentally friendly as well. Though you can do this with an automatic too (or semi-automatic I guess). My mother has a car with paddle shifters which you can use if you want, or you can just keep it in automatic. Best of both worlds. Edit: I drive stick, though. It'…

Downshifting doesn't really slow you down if you have one of those new 3 cylinder gas engines, for their lack of a throttle valve.
Post reply on HN