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

301–310 of 893 posts

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

#301

Post by exDM69 »

ollie87 wrote: post #218
sebcat wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> especially if you are shifting a certain way because you can see traffic or the lack of it, up ahead. Downshifting instead of using brakes is more environmentally friendly as well. Though you can do this with an automatic too (or semi-automatic I guess). My mother has a car with paddle shifters which you can use if you want, or you can just keep it in automatic. Best of both worlds. Edit: I drive stick, though. It'…

It's funny, I just got a new car (manual, of course) and it has "rev-matching" so when you shift down a gear it automatically heel-toes (basically a throttle blip) which means there's not much engine braking going on during downshifts. Granted when driving quickly and dropping a cog or two to overtake a slow moving vehicle it's great. Slowing down for traffic? Not so good. Took some getting used to changing down gear…

Are you sure it actually blips the throttle and it's not just the synchromesh gear in the gearbox? There's no need to blip with a synchronized gearbox, which has been the standard in road vehicles since the 1930s or so.

Even if it does blip, you can still utilize engine breaking but you have to shift early and sometimes skip gears.

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

#302

Post by blub »

saiya-jin wrote: post #221
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…

wow, you are incorrect in almost every statement. I get it, you like easy driving without worrying about clutch and gears, but not everybody is like that. I would never want automatic transmission for my car, it's inferior, expensive, less fun and car has no way knowing details of road situation I am facing and choices I am about to make. And I am far from petrolhead person FYI. Another point - I don't know a single…

Won't a double-clutch + kickdown get around the safety limitations though?

As a manual driver I can potentially screw up fast acceleration from a still-stand, e.g. when needing to do a quick merge with pretty bad consequences.

I've also noticed that my shifting is very tuned to the weight of the people normally in the car, I choked the engine twice when on a trip with friends and a full car. Embarassing and potentially dangerous. Note: more than a decade experience on manual.

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

#303

Post by [deleted] »

chiefalchemist wrote: post #296

You'll know we're serious about climate change when this changes. Manual gets better gas mileage. Sure it might be a small difference but even just 3 miles per gallon is 10% on 30 mpg. Over hundreds of thousands of cars that adds up. But we can't be bothered. It's an inconvenience. You can't drink your soy latte and drive at the same time if the vehicle is manual. I guess you can say it's a matter of priorities.

[deleted]

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

#304

Post by datashovel »

I'm in US, and am always struggling to find new cars when I'm ready to buy because of this probably. Just recently I visited a dealership where the sales guy told me flat out "manual transmissions are extremely rare anymore".

It may be a diagnose-able issue :) but I was a wreck (literally) when I first started driving because I would lose focus on the road.

Manual transmission, it seems to me, gives me a far better "feel" for the current state of the car. How fast I'm going, and because I have to change gears it keeps me more focused on the monotony of driving.

So far in my recent search I've been reluctant to even consider an automatic transmission because of what may or may not be just a psychological crutch.

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

#305

Post by Retric »

datashovel wrote: post #304

I'm in US, and am always struggling to find new cars when I'm ready to buy because of this probably. Just recently I visited a dealership where the sales guy told me flat out "manual transmissions are extremely rare anymore". It may be a diagnose-able issue :) but I was a wreck (literally) when I first started driving because I would lose focus on the road. Manual transmission, it seems to me, gives me a far better "…

Have you tried a car with paddle shifters? There is no clutch, but you still select gears.

Now they don't provide every advantage of a manual transmission, but you can for example downshift to avoid excessive breaking.

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

#306

Post by Broken_Hippo »

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.

This is truly a non-issue once you actually learn how to drive a manual transmission well. It isn't like people keep both hands on the wheel anyway. I'd even argue that people with a manual transmission might react more quickly since they are used to at least keeping both hands readily available anyway. If it is that urgent, you forgo shifting the car.

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

#307

Post by LoSboccacc »

kalleboo wrote: post #180
henrikschroder wrote: post #160

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I should probably have qualified my statement with an "over time, in real driving conditions". In a measured test, with a skilled driver, who does the right thing for the entirety of the test, it is most likely that he or she will be more efficient with a manual transmission than with an automatic. However, in real life, for real humans, over a longer period of time, the drivers with modern automatic transmissions wi…

I'd love to see some kind of study that went deep into how the results pan out over a certain population and why. My own anecdote is that I'm a better driver in a manual. I'm a lazy driver, and lazy in a manual means avoiding stopping/gear changes by anticipating green lights and so on. Being lazy in an automatic results in more stop and go for me because it's no more effort. I could be as efficient in an automatic,…

It also depend on the car engine. Slow revving 4 pots need to stay in a specific range to efficiently move the car weight, so a (proper dual clutch) automatic can get an edge there.

Large six cylinder revving to mid-range (say, 7500) with ample torque at all range can drive the car in overdrive even at city speeds, but an automatic will treat most change in throttle as a downshift. Because they have no ability to understand your intent.

I guess self driving car with an automatic can really fix that, especially because they can get geared optimally to the driving inputs the software tells them and they have 'inside brain' information.

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

#308

Post by blub »

Reason077 wrote: post #223
edoloughlin wrote: post #169

Earlier quoted context omitted.

However, it's more convoluted to use. You have to engage the clutch, put the shifter in neutral, and release the clutch again This is how you should drive if you know you're going to be stopped for more than a few seconds. 'Convoluted' doesn't come into it - it's the default.

I've driven manuals most of my life. Before stop/start came along, I was in the habit of just holding the clutch pedal down while stopped at intersections or in traffic. Anecdotally, I think most drivers do the same. Now, when driving stop/start equipped vehicles, I always try to use it. But in a manual, it does takes more thinking and effort and I wonder how many casual drivers actually bother. The thing is, most of…

I consider holding the clutch down really unusual. Never did myself except when I was pretty sure that start/stop would trigger unnecessarily.

Now I just don't care about that, since it was too annoying at stop lights, which has led to incidents of auto-stop and immediate start and even a half auto-stop. Didn't notice and bad effects on the car.

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

#309

Post by lb1lf »

_nalply wrote: post #134
lb1lf wrote: post #97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In Norway, too, we have the same restriction. I think I've driven a manual transmission car once or perhaps twice since my driver's test. As for eco-driving, I was told in no uncertain terms by the guy who examined me that if I tried to drive as eco-friendly as the official course material suggested, he'd fail me for being a hazard to other traffic.

That's because you'll prefer to run over pedestrians crossing the street so you don't have to break and waste kinetic energy.

-That only works for children; adults have too large a moment of inertia for this technique to be effective.

Seriously, his (valid, IMHO) point was that driving eco-friendly was all well and good when conditions allowed (A distinction not being made by the training manual) - but when interacting with other drivers, accelerating slowly, for instance, would often mean you could never (legally) enter a road where you're required to yield.

The Norwegian definition of yield being that you should in no way impede on the operation of the car with right of way - in theory, if you're entering a road with right-of-way and a driver already on it has to ease up on the throttle pedal even for an instance to maintain safe distance, you're breaking the law.)

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

#310

Post by masklinn »

rwbt wrote: post #9

A few years ago I had to learn stick shift because there was a good deal on a car I liked and decided to see if it's worth it. Ever since, all my cars are standard transmission and I wouldn't have it any other way. They're definitely going away, but I'll keep buying as long as they're available. There is something very satisfying about the mechanical nature of a stick shift car. Mind you, I drive in traffic heavy Los…

> They're definitely going away

Stick is the default and overwhelming majority in Europe.

Post reply on HN