Fewer than 3% of cars sold in the U.S. have manual transmissions • Hacker News Board

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

#181

Post by Neil44 » Thu, Nov 17, 2016, 9:11 AM UTC

vmarsy wrote: post #104

henrikschroder wrote: post #46

I got my driver's license in Sweden, and the official driving handbook completely worships manual transmissions, and makes several untrue claims about how much better they are than automatics. You can choose to do your road test in an automatic, but that'll earn you a restriction on your license, barring you from driving a manual. It's probably fair, but almost everyone (myself included) chooses to practice in manual…

>when automatic transmissions are consistently outperforming humans at fuel efficiency Do you have data to back this up? Unless you're driving a dual clutch "dry" transmission or a CVT, because of Physics, an automatic transmission will always be less efficient. The Automatic transmission Torque converter [1] will waste some of the energy provided by the engine, especially with city driving. Also, most automatic cars…

Those things have not been true of automatics for the last two or three generations. They have clutches inside the torque converter, they can block shift. But it is only the latest generation of gearboxes that return better economy figures than manuals. Until very very recently auto boxes were indeed much worse for economy.

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

#182

Post by skrause » Thu, Nov 17, 2016, 9:12 AM UTC

kriro wrote: post #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…

German licenses also have an expiry date, at least since 2013. Your license without expiry date will also need to be replaced in 2033: https://www.adac.de/infotestrat/adac-im-einsatz/motorwelt/be...

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

#183

Post by cannam » Thu, Nov 17, 2016, 9:12 AM UTC

henrikschroder wrote: post #46

I got my driver's license in Sweden, and the official driving handbook completely worships manual transmissions, and makes several untrue claims about how much better they are than automatics. You can choose to do your road test in an automatic, but that'll earn you a restriction on your license, barring you from driving a manual. It's probably fair, but almost everyone (myself included) chooses to practice in manual…

My driving instructor (in the UK) came from Sweden. He thought automatics were much safer and reckoned everyone should drive one, especially in the city, but he didn't like teaching them because they were so boring.

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

#184

Post by Neil44 » Thu, Nov 17, 2016, 9:12 AM UTC

vmarsy wrote: post #139

burfog wrote: post #133

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Lock-up torque converters don't waste power. They started to become popular in the 1970s, and are pretty much universal now.

You're right, however those only work at higher speeds, hence the "especially with city driving" :) From wikipedia : A Lock-up clutch is used in some automatic transmissions for motor vehicles. Above a certain speed (usually 60 km/h) it locks the torque converter to minimise power loss and improve fuel efficiency.

Negative, current generation transmissions lock up from first gear.

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

#185

Post by jfitbsidbfb » Thu, Nov 17, 2016, 9:13 AM UTC

viraptor wrote: post #151

jfitbsidbfb wrote: post #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…

> a clutch wearing out during the working life of a modern manual car is a joke Could use a reference. The wear will depend a lot on your area - mountain roads will kill it faster than suburban commute. But either way, I tried to find anything more authoritative than a forum post (which say anything between 100k and 300k), and it's pretty hard to do. Have you got a link with an actual survey or producer stats?

I can't find anything official either. Most of the guys I know also drive stick and none of them have worn out a clutch unless they take their car to the track. Seems to be a pretty well known among stick drivers that manufacturers build them to last the life of the car these days. Can anyone from Europe chime in on this?

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

#186

Post by [deleted] » Thu, Nov 17, 2016, 9:13 AM UTC

viraptor wrote: post #151

jfitbsidbfb wrote: post #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…

> a clutch wearing out during the working life of a modern manual car is a joke Could use a reference. The wear will depend a lot on your area - mountain roads will kill it faster than suburban commute. But either way, I tried to find anything more authoritative than a forum post (which say anything between 100k and 300k), and it's pretty hard to do. Have you got a link with an actual survey or producer stats?

[deleted]

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

#187

Post by jfitbsidbfb » Thu, Nov 17, 2016, 9:13 AM UTC

viraptor wrote: post #151

jfitbsidbfb wrote: post #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…

> a clutch wearing out during the working life of a modern manual car is a joke Could use a reference. The wear will depend a lot on your area - mountain roads will kill it faster than suburban commute. But either way, I tried to find anything more authoritative than a forum post (which say anything between 100k and 300k), and it's pretty hard to do. Have you got a link with an actual survey or producer stats?

I can't find anything official either. Most of the guys I know also drive stick and none of them have worn out a clutch unless they take their car to the track. Seems to be a pretty well known among stick drivers that manufacturers build them to last the life of the car these days. Can anyone from Europe chime in on this?

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

#188

Post by jfitbsidbfb » Thu, Nov 17, 2016, 9:13 AM UTC

viraptor wrote: post #151

jfitbsidbfb wrote: post #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…

> a clutch wearing out during the working life of a modern manual car is a joke Could use a reference. The wear will depend a lot on your area - mountain roads will kill it faster than suburban commute. But either way, I tried to find anything more authoritative than a forum post (which say anything between 100k and 300k), and it's pretty hard to do. Have you got a link with an actual survey or producer stats?

I can't find anything official either. Most of the guys I know also drive stick and none of them have worn out a clutch unless they take their car to the track. Seems to be a pretty well known among stick drivers that manufacturers build them to last the life of the car these days. Can anyone from Europe chime in on this?

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

#189

Post by antirez » Thu, Nov 17, 2016, 9:13 AM UTC

In Italy the percentage of automatic cars is very small, I've no exact idea but it's like the reverse of U.S. numbers, maybe 5% or 10% are automatic, even if I bet this number is raising. Because of that I always used manual cars in my life, but recently because of family and the realization I mostly drive in city traffic, I got a SUV (that is normally not my preferred car) with automatic transmission. Well... it's a lot less stress honestly if most of your drive happens inside a city. However interestingly, from time to time I use my wife's car which has manual transmission, and for a few minutes is definitely a lot more fun. You also really never lose your practice driving manual cars, even if you don't touch one for many months, it's like driving a bike. So manual is cool but I would suggest people approaching driving cars to learn the manual way to a have a more complete understanding of how a car works and be able to use a manual car in an emergency.

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

#190

Post by TomMarius » Thu, Nov 17, 2016, 9:13 AM UTC

henrikschroder wrote: post #16

TomMarius wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can get better 0 to 60 time with manual.

It should be completely obvious that machines can be made to do things quicker, better, and more reliably than humans.

So why are Mercedes-Benz, BMW, Skoda, Volkswagen and such reporting slower zero to sixty times on automatic transmissions?