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

701–710 of 729 posts

Re: How America lost its love for the stick shift

#701

Post by ddingus »

For me, it is commuter traffic and the powertrains getting much better.

Recently, I drove a little Hyundai round trip between Portland and Seattle. MPG for the trip was 54mpg! I drove upper middle of the pack, in terms of speed. Not poking around.

The decisions it made were insane good. I will sometimes data log my cars and try for peak fuel efficiency. So, I am really good at squeezing mpg out of a car. I get my communte optimized each time I use a new car. Been doing that for years. It is just a bit of fun.

That car nailed the usual oppirtunities for gains. Well done.

Honestly, I am not sure I could beat that car in a manual transmission version. At the least, doing so would require way more attention than I am willing to give.

Given the compute and greater efficiencies possible today, manual for fuel economy makes less and less sense. Electrics are coming too.

I love manual cars, but do not love them as daily drivers anymore.

Did not think it would happen. It has.

Re: How America lost its love for the stick shift

#702

Post by raydev »

hfdgiutdryg wrote: post #645
Zombieball wrote: post #532

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I can’t speak for others but I personally find driving a manual does help prevent accidents. Driving an automatic feels a bit mundane. Just hold the gas pedal in the same spot the whole time. It’s easy to slip into a boredom state (zone out) and not focus on the road. Even more so when tired. A manual car sort of kicks you in the butt every now and then: “hey, you’re in the wrong gear. Stay sharp, and upshift!”

This is the kind of thing I was talking about elsewhere. You need to take responsibility for maintaining mental engagement regardless of the transmission. Using a manual transmission as a crutch for mental focus is a terrible idea.

Of course. We're just claiming that it's easier to not give up on your responsiblity when you're managing your transmission alongside everything else.

Re: How America lost its love for the stick shift

#703

Post by jrbancel »

Marazan wrote: post #537
jrbancel wrote: post #128

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Automatic" is way to broad to be correct. A DCT (Dual Clutch Transmission) like the Porsche PDK is not remotely comparable to a torque converter based transmission. Yet, both are categorized as "automatic".

And one of those cost approximately my annual salary and the other doesn't. Telling people automatics are great when you are referencing a type that the majority of people will never have a chance of owning is a classic Hacker News manual-vs-automatic discussion trope.

Plenty of cars cheaper than a Porsche have a DCT.

Golf R, many Kia: e.g. a brand new Kia Soul for $22k.

Re: How America lost its love for the stick shift

#704

Post by crunchlibrarian »

fingerlocks wrote: post #552
crunchlibrarian wrote: post #408

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have not driven any Mercedes in a looong time, I'll have to try that. I also live at 8000 feet and regularly drive up to 10000 feet so that might be part of why every transmission seems horribly confused. Some car makers don't seem to test for thin air at all.

Can you elaborate on this? I understand that engine combustion is affected, but how does that impact the transmission? Is the torque curve skewed? Are ambient air changes not compsensated by the O2 sensor? Or does the transmission oil change in viscosity or something?

I don't know the details about how different engines detect air flow and oxygen (and I doubt anyone outside of a few dozen engineers who work at the companies do) but some of the auto transmissions seem to randomly upshift and downshift for no discernable reason, even when not applying throttle at all.

Some brands are just known to throw sensor and airflow codes by mechanics up here, like Kia & GM, while others compensate fine, like VW & Subaru. I don't know how the engine software talks to the transmission software so it's hard to say how related they are.

Re: How America lost its love for the stick shift

#705

Post by esaym »

tyingq wrote: post #628
esaym wrote: post #473

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Whether foot operated or hand pulled, you will have to use your hand to disengage it so not seeing the difference.

You had to reach down pretty far, and look down to find the release. A handbrake is a one handed operation you don't have to look at.

I agree is sucks. But the option is there.

Re: How America lost its love for the stick shift

#706

Post by loco5niner »

tomohawk wrote: post #578
_fizz_buzz_ wrote: post #564

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But it hasn't been proven that this happens more with automatic transmissions.

But it is pretty obvious. In an automatic, you pretty much have to touch the brakes to slow down. In a manual, you have other options. Taking your foot off the gas in a manual tends to slow the car quite a bit more than in an automatic, for example.

> In an automatic, you pretty much have to touch the brakes to slow down.

Not with the regenerative braking in my hybrid.

Re: How America lost its love for the stick shift

#707

Post by saltcured »

emodendroket wrote: post #440
JshWright wrote: post #425

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's more effort to push the clutch in and out between stops (keeping the pedal in doesn't take much effort, it's moving the pedal that takes work).

I guess it depends on what you're driving, but that certainly hasn't been my experience.

It might depend on your size? I am tall and long-legged, so the effort of using the clutch is lifting my leg above the pedal and feathering it. Holding the clutch to the floor is no different than resting my foot on the dead pedal next to it. The only reason I would not want to hold the clutch for a long time is if I am worried I would be distracted and forget I was in gear.

I would never put my manual in neutral unless I am about about to set the parking brake. It represents a mode shift in my attention and vigilance. I always did this startup sequence (and its reverse for shutdown): foot on clutch, foot on brake, start engine, release parking brake, transmission into gear, foot off brake and over gas pedal, feather clutch to pull away.

Like many on this long thread, I eventually compromised and got an automatic because of the narrowing options in the new car market here in the US as well as to make my wife comfortable sharing the car.

I am learning to enjoy the extra gears and the aggressive automatic shifting program that gives a quiet, comfortable cruise. With a manual, I would never shift my way so close to the idle speed when cruising, because my ear would be telling me it is time to downshift. But, knowing that the computer is handling it means I enjoy the comfort and can be impressed by the fuel efficiency in this mode.

I do miss the engine braking though. I think automatics are tuned to an irritating preference for coasting. I'd much rather have to keep the gas pedal depressed in order for it to sustain speed, and to have it automatically downshift and slow the car when I start to raise my foot. I'd like the automatic to do this all the way from highway speed down to the slowest crawling speed in the lowest gear, without any other inputs.

Re: How America lost its love for the stick shift

#708

Post by TheGRS »

mulmen wrote: post #371
TheGRS wrote: post #113

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I get that sentiment, but man would that be an easy thing to abuse systemically. Having a car is very essential to life for most Americans.

I’m not convinced. 80% of Americans live in cities. Certainly some of them do truly need cars but there must be some significant population that can get by without them. For a sample size of one I don’t actually need one myself.

I don't typically need one myself, but I'm a software dev who lives close enough to downtown bike into work or take a 20 minute bus ride.

But this is a huge exception to what the rest of my life was like. If I lived in the burbs it would be very difficult to manage without a car.

I have to imagine a significant portion of the 80% you cited lives in the suburbs and are 30-60 minutes away from their jobs and 15-30 minutes away from grocery stores.

Re: How America lost its love for the stick shift

#709

Post by lenocinor »

tjr225 wrote: post #668
hfdgiutdryg wrote: post #641

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In every US city I've ever spent time in, including San Francisco and Portland, you're taking your life into your own hands every time you use a crosswalk. Or even a sidewalk, as people will just turn into driveways without checking if the sidewalk is clear first.

I agree with one exception- Seattle. For all of Seattle's faults the drivers are very aware of pedestrians and very courteous towards them.

Agreed. Also, some college campuses I've been to are great with drivers stopping for pedestrians.

Re: How America lost its love for the stick shift

#710

Post by Marazan »

jrbancel wrote: post #703
Marazan wrote: post #537

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And one of those cost approximately my annual salary and the other doesn't. Telling people automatics are great when you are referencing a type that the majority of people will never have a chance of owning is a classic Hacker News manual-vs-automatic discussion trope.

Plenty of cars cheaper than a Porsche have a DCT. Golf R, many Kia: e.g. a brand new Kia Soul for $22k.

I bet you dollars to donuts that the average person doesn't spend 5 figures on a car. They spend 4 figures on a second hand model.
Post reply on HN