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

601–610 of 893 posts

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

#601

Post by Johnny_Brahms »

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…

The driving schools are a huge lobby group in the laws regarding getting your drivers license. After I got my license, they successfully lobbied for a mandatory lesson for instructors (not too expensive, but still not a small income). Learning stick shift is harder, and takes a lot more practice. There is probably some economic interest in having people learn to drive stick.

The only AT cars that I know have better fuel economy than good manual drivers are cars with CVT (continuously variable transmission). They are expensive and not something I would fix myself though :)

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

#602

Post by rsync »

CoffeeDregs wrote: post #585
irishcoffee wrote: post #552

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've always wondered about this. In my head, using the engine/transmission to "brake" when in gear going down hills or slowing down seems like a bad idea. Something is getting stressed in order to slow the car down. Having to replace my brakes makes sense, they get worn out, and its relatively inexpensive (especially if I do it myself). I have always been wary of staying in gear to brake. And, as it so happens, my ma…

The Car Talk guys addressed this and agreed with you. It's better to use the brakes to slow down since they're ablative and designed to be replaced with wear. Causing the engine to do extra revolutions means extra wear on something that's quite difficult to replace/repair... That said, I drive a manual and use the engine for braking...

I have always thought this.

Growing up in the mountains, in Colorado, it was drilled incessantly into me how important it was to use engine/transmission braking on long hills, etc.

I know it, I understand it ... and it always irked me.

I never liked the idea that I would save wear and tear on a consumable that is meant to be regularly worn and repaired and instead transfer that wear and tear to an integral part of the car that is non-trivial to replace or repair.

I would think very carefully about this if I were towing a boat or a horse trailer, but in a normal car it just seems backwards.

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

#603

Post by hx87 »

irishcoffee wrote: post #552
po wrote: post #470

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not only that but staying in gear when going down hills or slowing down will reduce the wear on your breaks by using the inertia of the engine to slow the car instead of break pad friction/heat.

I've always wondered about this. In my head, using the engine/transmission to "brake" when in gear going down hills or slowing down seems like a bad idea. Something is getting stressed in order to slow the car down. Having to replace my brakes makes sense, they get worn out, and its relatively inexpensive (especially if I do it myself). I have always been wary of staying in gear to brake. And, as it so happens, my ma…

Your engine is designed to withstand fuel-air explosions. When engine braking, all it does is compress and expand air, at much lower pressures, so revolutions during engine braking are easier on your car than those during regular driving.

Clutches get less wear during engine braking because it doesn't slip. When you disengage and reengage the clutch because you're using the regular brakes to slow down, the clutch slips and damages itself.

In the end, the reason for engine braking isn't to reduce the cost of brakes--it's a safety measure that keeps the brakes cool for emergencies & miscalculations, since overheated brakes don't work.

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

#604

Post by sbalea »

nepotism2016 wrote: post #229

I got to San Francisco last October and was due to pickup my "top class" rental car from AVIS. I got to the parked car and noticed it was automatic. I straight away thought this was a mistake and ran upstairs to ask for a manual transmission car. The two ladies before the counter looked all confused and said I would be very lucky to find such car...something like a sports car. So I spent the next 20 minutes inside th…

I always feel the urge to play California Love while rolling out of LAX onto 405

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

#605

Post by heywire »

pkolaczk wrote: post #374
3poundkilograms wrote: post #239

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The lock-up only locks up in very limited conditions, especially older ones. There's basically a few specific speeds with a 10km/h margin that locks up.

My Mazda CX-5 locks up in all conditions, even if it is cold and in the first gear. And it has better EPA than the same model with MT.

I also drive a CX-5. When I test drove it, one of the things that stood out to me was how it felt "heavy" when taking your foot off the gas. I guess that was just the engine breaking that I wasn't used to on my previous vehicle. Over the last year I've averaged 30-31mpg (mostly highway), which I don't consider too bad for an AWD compact SUV.

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

#606

Post by hx87 »

J-dawg wrote: post #554
ohyoutravel wrote: post #472

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I can't think of any situation outside of a race course where this would be a necessary maneuver. If you're going so fast on public roads where you need to left foot brake to transfer weight to avoid skidding off the road, it sounds like something is wrong. Where are you doing this enough where having a car with throttle cut off is enough of an annoyance where you won't buy a car with it anymore? For reference, I got…

I agree. It's also incredibly difficult for those who haven't practiced as you have. The few times I have tried it (in safe conditions) I have ended up braking far too hard. My left foot somehow doesn't have the "feeling" of my right foot on the pedal. One racing driver technique that can be useful in normal conditions (in a manual) is heel-and-toe braking. I use it to avoid excessive engine braking while downshiftin…

It's much safer if that how you learned to drive from day one. Unfortunately most existing drivers don't have the skills to safely left-foot brake so that's how we teach new drivers.

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

#607

Post by barrkel »

akerro wrote: post #391
barrkel wrote: post #334

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In the UK at least, CBT is not geared vs automatic specific. If you do your basic training on a scooter, you can still ride a geared 125 unaccompanied on the road. The full test is specific though. The bigger issue with scooters vs geared bikes isn't the extra effort of using the gears, it's the much higher centre of gravity and (usually) wider turning circle of geared bikes that complicates manoeuvres. More forward…

>In the UK at least, CBT is not geared vs automatic specific Of course it is, I was actually talking about UK. Bottom of CBT cert has a line "Moped / Motorcycle", if you have "Moped" ticked and want to ride a gear bike, you have to re-do the CBT on a gear bike.

This is not correct. There was a review done of the training scheme and a recommendation was made to change this. But without legislation, the most the DVSA can do is "recommend that riders take further training if they want to ride a geared motorcycle".

See item 6 in the table on page 8 of https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachm...

FWIW, I think a staged CBT is a fine concept, especially in London, but there's a risk that an automatic-only CBT would make things worse because of the incentive structure.

In a busy urban environment, focusing on the hazards on the road should be a much higher priority than mastering machine control. Spending time on a scooter is a fine way to adjust to this. Moving on to a geared bike is less problematic as the amount of new input and reactions that need to be dealt with at once is reduced. But a split between auto-only and geared CBTs would probably push more riders to go geared sooner rather than later (to avoid prematurely limiting their options), and increase overall risk on the road. I think this is part of the reason for the prevalence of geared cars on the roads in the UK.

On the other side, if you learn to ride out in the countryside, there's no guarantee you'll be any good at handling the hazards of rush-hour metro traffic.

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

#608

Post by bosdev »

johngalt wrote: post #558
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…

There used to be a similar theme in the US, but it slowly disappeared from 1990-2010. Primarily because they are so rare they are now more of a quaint oddity more than a sign of driving competence. The game theory on why manuals are disappearing is obvious. Drivers who can drive MT can also drive AT, but the reverse is not true. I love MTs, but buying one means dealing with the following hassles: 1. Finding a dealers…

The Dodge Ram is still available in manual.

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

#609

Post by gcb0 »

fazzone wrote: post #108
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…

>gear-shift indicator in the dash. My VW has this. It's useless, I never look at it. It is very simple and clearly intended only to give the best results on the controlled gas mileage testing - I believe that if a manual car has a gear-change indicator, the EPA test drivers are supposed to follow it. The advantage of a human selecting gears is that they can use more information than just the speed and engine rpm; for…

it's not useless if you're deaf.

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

#610

Post by arprocter »

dx034 wrote: post #72
civilian wrote: post #29

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.

Once you're done shifting you put your hand back on the wheel.

Driving around constantly holding onto the stick is a bad habit

Post reply on HN