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

861–870 of 893 posts

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

#861

Post by Annatar »

antisthenes wrote: post #761
Annatar wrote: post #477

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If there is no dry clutch and no clutch pedal, I consider that to be an automatic. And in such a system, I'm only allowed to signal gear selection: if I make a mistake or request a gear someone else thought I shouldn't request, the software won't comply. This implies that someone is assuming they know better than me how to drive, and enforce this assumption. This notion infuriates me. It's one thing to operate within…

> This implies that someone is assuming they know better than me how to drive, and enforce this assumption. This notion infuriates me. You get mad because your assumptions about your own superiority get placed under doubt by reality and physics? Must be hell of a way to live. Sounds like a dunning-kruger effect and some anger management issues rolled into one.

You get mad because your assumptions about your own superiority get placed under doubt by reality and physics?

Now you're incorrectly assuming that the engineers' and programmers' assumptions about how I drive are correct, and they know better than me. Who are they and what do they know? Who am I and what do I know? What if I'm a professional driver or an engineer just like them, or both? You don't know either of the two parties, so how could you possibly judge this correctly? The answer is - you cannot. You are berating me for challenging what you perceive to be an authority, as if I hadn't studied physics and mechanical engineering and knew nothing about those subjects, and even go so far as to imply I'm incompetent and suffer from an illusory superiority complex based on Dunning-Kruger research.

Is this what we're coming down to nowadays, if someone says "I know what I'm doing, and I don't want someone else to tell me how to do it", they'll be sticker-slapped with a superiority complex? That's the society you want to live in? And that is okay?

Bottom line is: a car with an automatic transmission does not do what I want, how I want, when I want it, and does not drive the way I want and expect it to drive. It fails my requirements, whereas a manual transmission and a dry clutch don't try to meet my requirements or expectations - what I want, how I want it, and when I want it is solely up to me. If I mess up, that's on me as well. It's my problem, my responsibility, and that's great.

As far as I'm concerned, since driving is a very important part of my life and identity, dictating, through the use of transmission or shift points, for example, is attempting to dictate how I live. I, an individual, equate that with someone telling me what I must believe, and what I must accept, "because it's better for me", and this goes against what I believe is my basic right to self-determination. That is one of the reasons I reject the automatic. If I have no direct say in it, then at least I can indirectly vote with my wallet.

Must be hell of a way to live.

I deal with it.

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

#862

Post by Annatar »

viraptor wrote: post #843
Annatar wrote: post #458

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have noticed systemic abuse of ad hominem labeling anyone who doesn't lavish high praise and criticizes instead. Please show some emapthy and think about how the code could be improved instead, so these criticisms can be addressed with a practical solution. In this particular case, all my criticisms can be addressed by offering a manual transmission option with a dry clutch, not even code optimization is required.…

> I have noticed systemic abuse of ad hominem labeling You literally said it's due to developers' dim opinions. Lots of people don't like auto transmissions, and that's fine. Just chill about it. > you know that all such source code is under strict non-disclosure agreements Nope. Are you saying that all such code is under strict NDA? Likely, you can still say you signed one and cannot talk about it if that's the case…

You literally said it's due to developers' dim opinions.

I did, and I stand by what I wrote: the product is bad, no matter how you slice it and dice it! But to label a generalized categorization based on anecdotal yet empirical experiments as ad hominem is outrageous. In my view, that is wanton abuse on equal grounds with censorship and other repressive measures, just because someone on the Internet doesn't like what someone else on the Internet wrote.

Lots of people don't like auto transmissions, and that's fine. Just chill about it.

That is a very personal issue for me, because driving is a physical and mental activity that I undertake intensely every day, and take it way more seriously than the average person. If I could chill about it, I would not have commented in the first place. But if one does not report what's broken, it will never get fixed:

"we can't fix it if we don't know it's broken."

Now, I don't mind having that choice, but when it means that it messes with my capability to choose a manual, because none is offered, that is where I have a major problem. If people want to drive automatics, I don't like it, but it's their choice and in general I don't care, as long as I can have my choice available, a manual. Live and let live. However, the situation is not developing in that direction, quite the opposite.

You can easily have embedded systems with no kernel to speak of.

Any firmware is an unikernel unless it is running as a generic operating system with generic processes and running multiple, distinct applications, or capable or running more than one single application. Otherwise, if the firmware is one single image running as one single monolithic body of code, they are one and the same. BIOS firmware, for example, is a unikernel. OpenBoot PROM is a unikernel. ECU firmware is a unikernel.

It may be a unikernel, but since you're possibly under NDA you're not saying that, are you?

Okay, you got me. I may not say anything. Well played, well played, I salute you.

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

#863

Post by JetSetWilly »

a_c_s wrote: post #708
JetSetWilly wrote: post #645

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As I said, high end automatics can outperform manuals in lab conditions. This is because obviously they can choose to perfectly and optimally shit up and down gears in a lab better than a human can. That does not mean that they can do so in real life. A human knows what conditions they are driving in. A human knows if they need to stop in 50ft, a human has all kinds of intelligence about upcoming torque requirements…

Having more control isn't something everyone values: some people would rather focus on where they are going than the process of getting there. By that metric automatics are far better.

Absolutely. I'm not saying manuals are better. Like any technology choice there's a trade-off. In this case the trade-off is it makes driving a car less complex, which is good, at the cost of some other things.

I just find it curious the notion from some Americans that driving a manual is inherently old fashioned and thus inferior in every way. Maybe it is a technology bubble thing as well.

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

#864

Post by dx034 »

Accacin wrote: post #348
dx034 wrote: post #318

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problem is also congestion. Manual trasmission is great when there's not a lot of traffic, but it's a pain on your morning commute in LA/SF/NY/... In Europe you either live on the countryside or use public transport. Comparably few people are stuck every morning on the highway on their way to work (still a few though).

How can you make such a ridiculous and broad statement? I'm in the UK and I commute an hour to work down the motorway/highway. With traffic it's an hour and I drive a manual car like just about everyone else. Most people I know still drive to work, even if the city where we live is pretty good for public transport with a lot of buses and trams available.

I didn't look up data before, but the data seems to confirm my statement. In the UK, 68% of the working population commutes by car [1]. In the US, it's around 88% of commuters that commute by car [2]. In London, the share of commuters by public transport is as high as 50% [3].

An article I found on citylab also confirms my statement somehow (although it refers to Berlin). [4]

Now, that this influences automatic vs. manual transmission is very subjective, I can't back that up. I could be wrong there, but the rest of the statement is at least not "rediculous".

[1] https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachm...

[2] https://www.census.gov/hhes/commuting/files/2014/acs-32.pdf

[3] http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20160105160709/htt...

[4] http://www.citylab.com/commute/2015/09/how-london-and-berlin...

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

#865

Post by nommm-nommm »

fnj wrote: post #795
nommm-nommm wrote: post #550

Earlier quoted context omitted.

8 year (96 month) car loans are becoming a "thing" in America. Sure, a car that's cost more than your yearly salary looks "affordable" if you only look at the monthly payments and you can manipulate those payments by stretching out the loan forever. I believe 30 year mortgages being "standard" are also kinda a scam[1] for this reason. Basically the idea everyone having many monthly payments is acceptable. When I boug…

The difference is that you can get an honest 3.5% fixed APR on a 30 year mortgage, but nothing close to that for a car loan, unless it is a subsidized scam.

Where? In the United States if you have great credit you can get a car loan for under 2% APR in the US for a new car. Under 4% for a used car.

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

#866

Post by kazga »

ldev wrote: post #215
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…

Same here in Lithuania - everyone learns and takes exams with manual transmission or they won't be legally allowed to drive stick. Same with "eco" driving - staying in higher RPMs or downshifting to overtake a car is a no no. But after passing driver's exam most people buy automatic - it's just so much more convenient in the city. I would rage in traffic if I had to do "clutch, neutral, cluth, first gear" mantra for…

downshifting to overtake a car is a no no.

Interesting. German driving schools actually explicitly tell you to downshift before overtaking so that your acceleration is higher and you spend less time in the "wrong" lane.

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

#867

Post by Accacin »

dx034 wrote: post #864
Accacin wrote: post #348

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How can you make such a ridiculous and broad statement? I'm in the UK and I commute an hour to work down the motorway/highway. With traffic it's an hour and I drive a manual car like just about everyone else. Most people I know still drive to work, even if the city where we live is pretty good for public transport with a lot of buses and trams available.

I didn't look up data before, but the data seems to confirm my statement. In the UK, 68% of the working population commutes by car [1]. In the US, it's around 88% of commuters that commute by car [2]. In London, the share of commuters by public transport is as high as 50% [3]. An article I found on citylab also confirms my statement somehow (although it refers to Berlin). [4] Now, that this influences automatic vs. m…

Oh I don't doubt more people commute by car in the US at all.

Your statement was "In Europe you either live on the countryside or use public transport.", your own sources show that 60% don't use public transport and I don't know how you can be so sure that the other 40% live in the countryside. Unless by countryside you mean "live outside of a city"?

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

#868

Post by Accacin »

fnj wrote: post #807
Accacin wrote: post #348

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How can you make such a ridiculous and broad statement? I'm in the UK and I commute an hour to work down the motorway/highway. With traffic it's an hour and I drive a manual car like just about everyone else. Most people I know still drive to work, even if the city where we live is pretty good for public transport with a lot of buses and trams available.

For many years I had a 70 minute commute, too, and it was a breeze in a 5-speed, even though it entailed a lot of through-town and traffic lights. On the whole I enjoyed it very much. What wasn't any fun at all were all the 10-20 minute traffic jams when all the idiots were bumper-to-bumper, oscillating between 3 mph and zero every few seconds. First gear, neutral, first, neutral; accelerate, brake, accelerate brake.…

Depends how often you drive using a clutch. I've always driven using one so now even in long traffic jams I don't really notice my foot aching.. However when I first learned to drive it really used to ache.

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

#869

Post by THE_PUN_STOPS »

city41 wrote: post #627
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…

I live in Silicon Valley and sit in nasty traffic daily in my manual transmission car. It's such second nature it doesn't even register. A motorcycle is a different story. Holding the clutch in with your left hand gets downright painful after a while. Thankfully lane splitting is legal here.

I have semi-regular nightmares about getting stuck in eternal stop-and-go traffic on Storrow Drive in Boston on my motorcycle... The lanes are too narrow to lanesplit, there's nowhere to get off (it's a very limited access expressway and the exits are usually even worse) and people honk and swerve around you if you try to attain the average speed of the crowd by leaving a gap. Yeugh. My left hand hurts just thinking about it.

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

#870

Post by luca_ing »

lmm wrote: post #574
luca_ing wrote: post #570

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> (gravity is turning the wheels which are turning the engine). ... which brakes the car, so you still lose energy. Can't find literature at the moment, but ISTR that the valve train can take several kW to operate.

Sure. Turning the engine is going to take energy one way or the other. But you can use energy that would otherwise be wasted heating up the brake pads rather than energy from burning fuel.

I think the alternative was coasting, not braking.
Post reply on HN