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

How America lost its love for the stick shift

cnbc.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

311–320 of 729 posts

Re: How America lost its love for the stick shift

#311

Post by xkcd-sucks »

ubernostrum wrote: post #81
arielweisberg wrote: post #26

I learned to drive stick at 34 just for fun. Now own a Mazda 3 and MX-5. Worth it. It's not about out performing an automatic transmission it's about engagement. For some people that's not going to have any value. For others there is no going back to numb econoboxes with automatic transmissions. It's a shame more people don't get over the hump and get to see what driving can be vs. what it is for most.

I have completely the opposite view. To me, all the "engagement" type arguments just feel like someone telling me that they still insist on using only rotary telephones, because it makes them feel more "engaged" with the telephone, "closer to the machine", etc. So I don't find anything magical or special about having to manually manage the gears when a computer could do it more efficiently and relieve me of the need…

There's nothing magical about it... With a manual, there are two free parameters: Engine speed and its coupling to the wheels. With an automatic transmission, only the engine speed can be controlled by the driver.

Computers have gotten better at managing the coupling sensibly, but they still are not perfect at predicting drivers' future intentions.

Re: How America lost its love for the stick shift

#312

Post by smileysteve »

taeric wrote: post #189
nostrademons wrote: post #177

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Engine braking is a pretty gradual deceleration - if the car behind you doesn't notice that you're slowing down in the ~30 seconds it takes to close a safe distance with a car that's gradually slowing down, you got bigger problems. For that matter, automatics do it too. Take your foot off the gas in an automatic and wind/rolling resistance will eventually slow you down too. I find that the fuel economy savings from e…

Most people I know that refer to engine braking have always meant something faster than an automatic would do. Unless you are talking about letting of the gas and downshifting in an automatic. Is it guaranteed to get you in a wreck? Not at all. But, I would be surprised if people weren't more keyed to the "red light" in front of them than you are letting on.

To be fair, engine braking is quicker deceleration than an automatic does, a modern automatic will freewheel the transmission when coasting.

One of the first things i notice when driving an automatic that scares me the most is that it doesn't stop.

Thankfully electric cars are bringing this back. And i think studies are showing its safer.

Re: How America lost its love for the stick shift

#313

Post by int_handler »

t0mbstone wrote: post #163

Speaking as someone who has owned a number of sports cars with manual transmissions, I can tell you why I finally made the switch to automatic: Adaptive cruise control in stop and go traffic. I used to have to deal with a six-speed manual transmission in stop and go traffic for an hour every day, and it was pure torture. I mean, sure, it was fun for a weekend drive in the mountains, but it sucked the rest of the time…

Driving a manual car isn't about efficiency. It is about driver engagement. Yes, you can row your own gears with paddle shifters, but no automatic will ever give you the same kind of engagement or connectedness with the car as a manual with three pedals will.

But yes, if there is a smoking gun for the death of the manual in America, it would be our crumbling, congested roads and absurdly long daily commutes.

Re: How America lost its love for the stick shift

#314

Post by tempestn »

One thing I'd love to see in modern manual transmission sports cars is a lockout to prevent mechanical over-revs. It would be extremely cheap and simple to engineer—knowing the current RPM and gear ratios, it would just be a matter of a servo motor actuating a bar, physically blocking the shifter from engaging gears that would cause a mechanical overrev. If done right, the driver wouldn't even notice it was there, until they were going around a sweeping right-hander on the track, up-shifting from third to fourth, and find the car prevents them from accidentally pulling it into second instead...

Of course, most drivers don't track their cars, and it's pretty hard to mis-shift when you're not on the track if you know what you're doing. (Or even on the track, if you're careful.) But sometimes it only takes one, and given how simple it would be to implement something like this, it seems like a no-brainer for companies like Porsche, especially given we're already seeing things like auto-blip for manuals (which I'm far less keen on, fwiw, but fine with as long as it can be turned off!)

Re: How America lost its love for the stick shift

#315

Post by int_handler »

Someone1234 wrote: post #48

There's little argument for manual transmission anymore except in larger vehicles. There used to be an efficiency gap, in that a good manual driver was more efficient than an automatic. But two things have happened since then, we have computer controlled transmissions and CVTs. Manual drivers were more efficient because they learned when the vehicle would need to shift, and shifted preemptively. A computer controlled…

It seems you fully consider cars to be an appliance.

Today, manual cars aren't about efficiency. Manuals are about driver engagement and the feeling of connectedness with the car and with the road. You can think. of it as more of a luxury than a necessity, and that is still a very valid argument for manual transmissions in road cars, especially those designed to be driver's cars.

Re: How America lost its love for the stick shift

#316

Post by ntsplnkv2 »

bobwaycott wrote: post #264
r00fus wrote: post #221

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is pure conjecture. You cannot control how traffic behaves, and if you constantly let people go in front of you, people behind you will get irrationally angry (danger exposure). Yeah you can smooth things out and inject a bit more zen into your experience by accelerating and decelerating more gently and leaving a larger than normal gap, but stop&go simply exists and is a pain even with an automatic. Adaptive cru…

Nah. When freeway traffic slows, you halve the speed of the vehicle in front of you. Leave 4-5 car lengths between you. Regulate your gas pedal usage so you never have to touch the brakes. You mostly just coast. Sure, there’s one vehicle that will come up quickly behind because that’s how everyone usually deals with it. By the time they slow, wondering why there’s so much space in front of you, they have time to reco…

> Adaptive cruise control is easy to achieve no matter the car, and without any technology doing it. You just do it yourself.

The whole purpose of cruise control is to not do it yourself.

Re: How America lost its love for the stick shift

#317

Post by taeric »

rpcope1 wrote: post #298
taeric wrote: post #160

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I confess I gained a ton of respect for Klik & Klack was when they gave the advice to not teach kids on a stick shift. This is akin to teaching a kid to ride a 21 speed bike. They can probably get up to that rather quickly, all told, but just learning the basics of balance and pedaling will already be difficult enough. Similarly, just learning the basics of the car will already be tough. Why add to it? Why not take a…

> Why not take away power steering? Because it would make it harder. What? Have you even driven anything that's not a big truck without power steering (and I don't mean a car with power steering disabled). It's not _that_ big a difference, if at all.

Have you seen a 16 year old try? Many failures are an adding up of a bunch of "not a big difference" differences. Why take that risk?

You would clearly stop short of taking away vision. Why not make people drive with a vehicle that doesn't have a rear window? All told, shouldn't be that big of a deal. That said, https://www.usatoday.com/story/money/cars/2018/05/02/backup-... was a headline story for a reason.

Re: How America lost its love for the stick shift

#318

Post by smileysteve »

taeric wrote: post #256
BeetleB wrote: post #228

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>This is dangerous, as you aren't signaling people behind you if you are braking... Engine braking results in a slow drop in speed. If the car behind you cannot handle a slow speed decline, he is the problem, and is driving too close to you. Most good instructors teach students to try to slow down as much as possible just by getting your foot off the accelerator (not with engine braking, and not with real brakes). As…

As I said up thread, there is usually a big difference in what folks refer to as engine braking and coasting a bit. In particular, my stick shift will slow dramatically faster when I engine brake in first/second compared to what will happen in any automatic I've ever driven. (In particular, it is entirely possible for me to completely engine brake to a stop sign. That is considerably more than just coasting to a stop…

Coasting in first is a rarity. Requires a really big downshift (with intense rev matching - older cars with less of a 1st synchro left will even require double clutching) or you to be in high rpms to start

Re: How America lost its love for the stick shift

#319

Post by smileysteve »

notyourday wrote: post #174
commandlinefan wrote: post #152

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I learned to drive in a manual. Now that my son is getting close to driving age, I wanted to teach him in a manual first, like I learned - and then I found out it's damned near impossible to _find_ one any more.

I find people who learned how to drive manual to be better drivers - they tend to think ahead which is understandable. One does not really want to shift just to jump ahead of one car to see that there's nowhere to go. It is too bad that fewer and fewer people have this skill.

I hypothesize that outlawing the automatic transmission would have an amazing effect on traffic. If everybody is driving a manual then there will be more foresight; and at the least you're probably reducing the driving pool by 10%

Re: How America lost its love for the stick shift

#320

Post by rrdharan »

dkr88 wrote: post #287
pssflops wrote: post #169

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My previous car, a 2008 Subaru WRX, in manual had cruise control; while it wasn't adaptive, it was the most important thing I will consider in any other manual transmission going forward. Stop-and-go traffic to my previous job made driving a chore and weekends weren't enough. I miss having that kind of control over the car, but the automatic Mazda3 I replaced it with has made that traffic an afterthought.

I test drove a 2008 WRX a while ago and the clutch was pretty heavy, IIRC. I remember thinking to myself "this would be a major pain in traffic".

I tried to learn to drive stick on a Subaru WRX, I believe it was a 2002 or 2003 model year. It did not go well. Almost ended a friendship and I had leg cramps for days. Fortunately I managed to get the hang of it later on a more forgiving Mazda Protege.
Post reply on HN