Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

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

latimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

361–370 of 893 posts

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

#361

Post by 72deluxe »

mbrookes wrote: post #353
vmarsy wrote: post #104

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>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…

Coasting in neutral or with the clutch disengaged is both more dangerous and less efficient then engine braking. In the UK you will fail your driving test if you coast, and in some countries / states it is illegal - with good reason. Just google it - not a single article supporting your argument.

But if you're coasting down a hill and not braking, your engine is idling and you're making use of gravity. The engine will be turning over at ~1000rpm instead of 2000rpm in my diesel.

Understandably it is dangerous as you are not in control of the transmission and therefore the wheels, hence the failure in the UK. But I got through some incredibly scarce times by coasting a bit on the commute to work...

With automatics you would need to brake down the hill to stop the car "running away" as it wouldn't engine brake automatically to compensate for gravity's effect.

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

#362

Post by zappo2938 »

I was living San Francisco when I got a job in Las Vegas. I needed to buy a car to live in Vegas, I never owned a car before then. This is 1998 and I bought a beautiful late eighties standard transmission Toyota pickup. I already had my license for a few year but I really learned to drive with a standard transmission living on a hill in Cole Valley for two weeks. Fun times.

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

#363

Post by aluhut »

Reason077 wrote: post #101
silon7 wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's only correct for modern automatic transmissions. Plus sometimes start/stop. Probably not for old "3 gear with torque converter" or similiar.

Modern manual cars have start/stop technology too. However, it's more convoluted to use. You have to engage the clutch, put the shifter in neutral, and release the clutch again. Compared to automatic where you just have to hold your foot on the brake pedal. Stop/start reduces fuel consumption on test cycles like NEDC for both automatics and manuals, but I'll bet in the real world the benefit is mostly seen with autom…

Just have to hold your food on the brake?

It's a pain...and depending on the break, it really may become pain.

Usually if I drive my manual private car, I disengage the gear already on the way to the red light. It just rolls. I break, motor turns off. When I want to start, I push the clutch, motor turns on, off you go.

The good thing is, If I want the motor to launch, I can by pushing the clutch slightly. I can also release it and put my legs wherever I want. I can relax.

Holding one leg constantly on the break is just annoying. For you, your leg and the guy behind you who has to look into that bright red light pointlessly shining in his eyes.

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

#364

Post by quickben »

henrikschroder wrote: post #329
saiya-jin wrote: post #221

Earlier quoted context omitted.

wow, you are incorrect in almost every statement. I get it, you like easy driving without worrying about clutch and gears, but not everybody is like that. I would never want automatic transmission for my car, it's inferior, expensive, less fun and car has no way knowing details of road situation I am facing and choices I am about to make. And I am far from petrolhead person FYI. Another point - I don't know a single…

> wow, you are incorrect in almost every statement. And yet you didn't refute a single one of them, and only offered subjective preferences and personal anecdotes. You like driving a manual. Bless your heart. Modern automatics still accelerate faster and are more fuel efficient than manuals. Just take a look at what the car manufacturers themselves report.

People can invent points and refutals. Physics, dictates manuals to be more efficient.

Automatic transmission 'learn driver habit' multiplies the above, and yet everybody in this discussion ignores it. CVT comes closer to efficiency of manual, but it's not popular because "the car just doesn't have the power on demand dude".

This subject is a horse beaten to death, and then to a pulp, where people that have sporadic and rather incomplete knowledge, write novels based on what was on the car sale pitch.

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

#365

Post by GFischer »

exclusiv wrote: post #117
zippergz wrote: post #35

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…

While I agree regarding traffic I think everyone would be way more courteous and the roads would be safer if everyone drove a manual.

Just go to Italy or Argentina (100% manual) and you'll be disabused of that idea VERY quickly... that's the worst behaving traffic you'll ever see.

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

#366

Post by torrent-of-ions »

Broken_Hippo wrote: post #295
ehnto wrote: post #135

Holy crap, I didn't realise it was quite like that. I knew it was rare for people to know manual transmissions but why such a preference for automatic? In Australia pretty much everyone I know can drive manual, most cars come with the option and most cheaper cars are manual. It was somewhat of a masculinity thing too, and still is according to my younger siblings. To be honest I'm surprised the most that America does…

> I knew it was rare for people to know manual transmissions, but why such a preference for automatic? I think this is twofold. First off, most drivers education doesn't teach a manual transmission anymore, nor is drivers education a requirement. While my parents learned on a simulator in school, I learned it from experience (and so happy I did) - my first car was a manual. But the second part of this is that there t…

> nor is drivers education a requirement

This is it really. Americans aren't very good at driving. In the UK we are taught that it's one of the most dangerous things you'll do in your life, which it is. In America it's just like learning to walk. You have to do it and it doesn't matter how you learn.

Check out the road safety stats. USA is pretty much an outlier amongst first world countries by most metrics.

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

#367

Post by aluhut »

datashovel wrote: post #304

I'm in US, and am always struggling to find new cars when I'm ready to buy because of this probably. Just recently I visited a dealership where the sales guy told me flat out "manual transmissions are extremely rare anymore". It may be a diagnose-able issue :) but I was a wreck (literally) when I first started driving because I would lose focus on the road. Manual transmission, it seems to me, gives me a far better "…

I wonder if there was a point where manual cars were super cheap because they had them but nobody wanted to buy.

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

#368

Post by quickben »

blub wrote: post #302
saiya-jin wrote: post #221

Earlier quoted context omitted.

wow, you are incorrect in almost every statement. I get it, you like easy driving without worrying about clutch and gears, but not everybody is like that. I would never want automatic transmission for my car, it's inferior, expensive, less fun and car has no way knowing details of road situation I am facing and choices I am about to make. And I am far from petrolhead person FYI. Another point - I don't know a single…

Won't a double-clutch + kickdown get around the safety limitations though? As a manual driver I can potentially screw up fast acceleration from a still-stand, e.g. when needing to do a quick merge with pretty bad consequences. I've also noticed that my shifting is very tuned to the weight of the people normally in the car, I choked the engine twice when on a trip with friends and a full car. Embarassing and potential…

Double clutch+ downshift works only for the transmissions that have parts where they enable that usage. Many don't.

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

#369

Post by fiatjaf »

exclusiv wrote: post #117
zippergz wrote: post #35

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…

While I agree regarding traffic I think everyone would be way more courteous and the roads would be safer if everyone drove a manual.

Check out Brazil.

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

#370

Post by beachstartup »

bradlys wrote: post #212
nappy wrote: post #154

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've never found driving a manual hard on my calves... even a little bit. Maybe just me? Or something you get used to if you drive a manual all of the time?

Drive a car with a very stiff and/or difficult clutch. The difference between a Honda Civic or Miata clutch and something like a Jeep is pretty wide. I've only driven a handful of manuals but I have pulled a muscle in my left leg from driving an YJ Jeep. Stop and go will wear down your leg real fast in that. Not a great feeling to be limping around a bit the rest of the next day or two. Only happened once in the 10k…

just to add: a heavy clutch can require 50+ pounds of pressure in a sports car or a jeep/truck/etc.

i would be surprised if even 5% of manual-drivers have driven a vehicle like that even once in their life.

Post reply on HN