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

711–720 of 729 posts

Re: How America lost its love for the stick shift

#711

Post by martinald »

leoedin wrote: post #190
martinald wrote: post #121

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Seems to be really changing in the UK. I don't drive, but nearly all my friends/family members who used to have manual now have automatic. Also, most Ubers these days seem to have automatic transmission.

Most Ubers in London are hybrids because that gets them off the congestion charge. Hybrids are automatic because there's essentially 2 power sources. Outside London it seems to vary more, but then a lot more of them are manual.

No it doesn't, any taxi or private hire vehicle (PHV), allows you to not pay the congestion charge. I know a lot of people that have registered their vehicle as a PHV to get out of it (costs around £200 a year).

Re: How America lost its love for the stick shift

#712

Post by hfdgiutdryg »

raydev wrote: post #702
hfdgiutdryg wrote: post #645

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

And I'm saying that is, in and of itself, a huge problem. To be blunt, if you require a shifter in order to stay engaged while operating a two ton hunk of metal, you have no business being behind the wheel in the first place.

Re: How America lost its love for the stick shift

#713

Post by inferiorhuman »

kalleboo wrote: post #650
argonaut wrote: post #606

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For new cars today, though, automatics are almost always more fuel efficient.

Mechanically more fuel efficient, absolutely. But when I still drove a manual it always felt like I was planning ahead, engine braking early at red lights (which often meant I could coast though it without completely stopping) etc, which you can't do with the lesser control on an automatic. Driving "lazily" in a manual means reducing shifting which often translates to more fuel-efficient driving. Driving lazily in an…

> But when I still drove a manual it always felt like I was planning ahead, engine braking early at red lights (which often meant I could coast though it without completely stopping) etc, which you can't do with the lesser control on an automatic.

Sure you can.

Re: How America lost its love for the stick shift

#714

Post by emodendroket »

saltcured wrote: post #707
emodendroket wrote: post #440

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 unl…

I'm pretty short. Maybe that's it. Otherwise it's kind of mystifying to me.

Re: How America lost its love for the stick shift

#716

Post by saltcured »

foobarian wrote: post #273
Xurinos wrote: post #251

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To all the folks replying that someone will fill the gap in front of you: that’s the point. It isn’t about reaction time. It’s about letting traffic flow easier, not fighting with each other. It removes the need for your fellow drivers to feel a tension when it is time to switch lanes, to not have to make a risky maneuver. You get to relax when driving because now you aren’t competing to get to your destination, and…

This comes up often, but you gotta think about what would happen if everyone suddenly tripled the gap they leave in front of them. The same road surface would suddenly have 1/3 the throughput. I shudder to think what kind of traffic jam / commute time that would lead to at the edges of the road network. I do appreaciate when people drive densely packed and I try to do the same (up to a safety limit). For merging ther…

The problem is people trying to maintain ANY fixed gap. If they learned to treat the gap as a spring and then use their mind as a damper while still maintaining safety, they can cancel out many of the pathological oscillations and standing waves that disrupt traffic flow. This task is also much easier when people learn to monitor the road further ahead than just the bumper and taillights they are following.

Following too closely removes any margin for error and so requires you to either mimic every change in speed or create dangerous conditions.

Re: How America lost its love for the stick shift

#717

Post by rrdharan »

bluedino wrote: post #381
rrdharan wrote: post #320

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

If you think any modern hydraulic clutch is hard to push you should try an old z-bar clutch from the 70’s or early 80’s

It actually wasn't hard to push all the way down, it was just hard to feather. The spring back near the top is really aggressive.

Re: How America lost its love for the stick shift

#718

Post by rb666 »

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…

PLANET KILLER.

But yes, automatics are just so much more comfortable during rush hour.

Re: How America lost its love for the stick shift

#719

Post by ptaipale »

emodendroket wrote: post #664
ptaipale wrote: post #593

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's partly a thing of volumes: the models that sell a lot go cheaper than models that need to be ordered specially for specific wishes. So, in the US, everyone assumes automatic and manual gearbox isn't any cheaper. In many European countries, manual shift is the norm and you paid a lot of extra for the rare luxury model with a weird transmission that eats a lot of fuel. Nowadays, with DSG and other dual-clutch tr…

Manual is still usually about $1000 less in cars where it's an option. Probably for this reason, economy cars are more likely to offer it than fancier ones.

I would think this pricing is more based on a commercial positioning decision than actual economics - the manual is cheapest, and it maybe has less options for other fancy accessories, so that there is a very cheap "prices begin at" option which few people actually want. The margins may be even smaller there because of the extra cost of specific models, but it makes sense to have these available because then the volume models can have a slightly higher sales price.

Re: How America lost its love for the stick shift

#720

Post by ernesth »

Markoff wrote: post #692
ernesth wrote: post #682

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you add options to a cheap car, it becomes an expensive car. Dacia sandero costs 7990€. Dacia Sandero with automatic transmission costs 13750€.

i doubt the automatic transmission itself cost 4700€, most likely combined with most luxurious equipment and dacia it's not good example, they produced budget cars and their prices for standard features of other brands are extreme, for 14000€ you would be insane to buy sandero

Exactly, Dacia Sandero is a cheap car. Dacia Sandero with automatic transmission is not a cheap car (it automatically gets other expensive options).
Post reply on HN