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

381–390 of 893 posts

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

#381

Post by leonhandreke »

dep_b wrote: post #371
doener wrote: post #341

In Germany more than 80% still buy cars with manual transmissions: https://presse.adac.de/meldungen/technik/maenner-fahren-auto...

In Germany you are even required to drive fast on the Autobahn while taking your drivers' test I heard. I can't find the hard numbers to back it up but probably up to 160 or 180Km/H. This is very different from the sedated "keep your lane", slow speeds and wide roads everywhere traffic in the US.

I got my license in Germany and was never required to go that fast during any driving lessons or my test. My driving instructor told me to go roughly the recommended speed of 130km/h to practice some real-world Autobahn driving.

That said, I know of one person who was told to go fast on the Autobahn during their driving lessons by their instructor. Definitely not part of the official test though.

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

#382

Post by userbinator »

rsp1984 wrote: post #313
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…

An often lost fact in automatic vs. stick-shift discussions is that in practice automatic transmission causes much heavier wear on the brakes of the car. This is because with a stick-shift you can just gear down when going downhill or before a foreseen stop and let the engine do most of the breaking for you. You then only use the brakes to bring the car to a full-stop on the last couple meters. This gets you much bet…

In an automatic you can downshift to one of the low ranges, and that will effect engine braking. The ones I've driven allow you to shift between the forward ranges without depressing the lockout button, specificaly for this reason.

Unfortunately it seems a lot of drivers don't know about it.

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

#383

Post by jwdunne »

mattlondon wrote: post #259
jwdunne wrote: post #39

Very interesting. My Mrs asked me if most in the US drive manual after watching Gilmore Girls. Now we know! In the UK, it's quite different. Most I know drive manual. Only 1 swears by auto. I've only ever driven a manual so it's hard to judge. At this point, manual is second nature so it's hard to imagine not doing it. In fact, learning to drive in an auto is considered a fool's game. You are not allowed to drive a m…

I used to 100% drive manuals and it really was second-nature to think about changing gears - in fact the first few times I drove an automatic it was "interesting" as more than once I accidentally slammed the brakes on 100% with my left foot as my brain was on autopilot for where it was used to changing gears around the roads where I live. The thought process/autopilot my brain was going through was something like "ok…

At least you didn't stall!

I am now petrified of using an auto. Takes a long time for my habits to adjust and I'll be slamming on for ages. Drivers round here like to drive with their noses up your arse...

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

#384

Post by beeglebug »

Aaargh20318 wrote: post #319
computator wrote: post #251

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> because of Physics, an automatic transmission will always be less efficient You making that claim based on how automatic transmissions currently work, right? And not on every way they could work. Purely from logic, your claim has to be false: Imagine a humanoid robot sitting in your driver's seat, driving your manual transmission car, its robot arm doing the shifting exactly as a human would. Your manual car has be…

> Purely from logic, your claim has to be false: Imagine a humanoid robot sitting in your driver's seat, driving your manual transmission car, its robot arm doing the shifting exactly as a human would. Your manual car has been turned into an automatic and it is not less efficient. You're forgetting a very important factor: the automatic transmission can only respond to the drivers actions. Unlike the driver it has no…

A lot of cars today are probably more aware of what is going to happen in 20 meters than the driver is.

Surely the same data that is used for automatic braking, lane assist etc could be used to improve timings on automatic gear shifts?

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

#385

Post by kbart »

baq wrote: post #157
sshanky wrote: post #128

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In modern cars, disengaging the clutch (or using neutral) when coasting (toward a stop or down a hill) is less efficient than staying in gear. This is because it takes some fuel to keep the engine idling, where staying in gear allows the computer to completely cut fuel flow, as long as the forward motion is keeping the engine turning.

can confirm with anecdata: in my car the computer reports 0.0 fuel consumption when coasting in gear but non-zero when in neutral/clutch depressed.

another anecdata: I once drove a car that reported negative fuel consumption when driving down the hill.

EDIT: no, it was neither electric nor hybrid car, but some old petrol car with manual transmission (Saab 900 or similar).

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

#386

Post by namaemuta »

ollie87 wrote: post #210
0xAA55 wrote: post #199

I recently went to the ends of the earth to get a 2016 manual VW sportwagen in the US -- but it was possible after going to dealerships looking at me like I was insane. Shifting around in my BMW e36 5 speed will always be one of my greatest pleasures People complain about traffic, but I feel the opposite. I mean, in an auto if you see a spot to cut into you are forced to floor it to force the car in a low enough gear…

I also find it funny that people prefer autos for stop-start traffic. But every single car I've ever owned can be moved using the clutch alone, zero throttle input, so moving in stop start traffic is easy.

That's only because some manual cars have acceleration on their clutch but many others don't. I've driven some that don't have it and if you don't know how to do it, your engine will stop and you'll have to reignite it (with the annoyance of people honking at you).

It's also an annoyance when the traffic moves at different pace in a traffic jam because you have to stop, switch to first gear, move slowly, if the cars are moving fast enough switch to second gear, if they stop back again to first gear... If you are lucky enough and you are in a slope road, you can go without any gear selected and just use the brakes.

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

#387

Post by philoye »

Random data point: In Australia, I've noticed consistently, over the past year or so, that about 25% of used cars are manual transmission.

(Carsales.com.au is the leading used car marketplace in Oz and as of this comment there are 55k manuals and 171k autos for sale)

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

#388

Post by calcifer »

int_19h wrote: post #343
ehnto wrote: post #135

Holy crap, I didn't realise it was quite like that. I knew it was rare for people to know manual transmissions but why such a preference for automatic? In Australia pretty much everyone I know can drive manual, most cars come with the option and most cheaper cars are manual. It was somewhat of a masculinity thing too, and still is according to my younger siblings. To be honest I'm surprised the most that America does…

> Even if you don't intend to go racing, a manual is just a bit more interesting and keeps you paying attention the whole trip I'd rather pay attention to my surroundings than to the clutch. This goes for both day to day stuff (where it's better for safety), and pleasure road trips (where this lets you enjoy the scenery). For the most part, the automatic is simply "good enough". And in US there's no peer pressure to…

> I'd rather pay attention to my surroundings than to the clutch.

Me too, but I've been driving stick for over a decade now and 99% of the time I'm not even aware of the clutch, it's just muscle memory at this point.

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

#389

Post by pn0 »

Every single car or truck I have ever owned has had standard transmissions. Until recently. In the last 2 years, I have purchased a car and a truck and they have automatic transmissions simply because a manual transmission was not available. Like many (most?) people, I purchase used and had to take "stick shift" off of my list of requirements because the selection dropped to near zero. Definitely an end of an era.

Related: Though still available, it's getting harder and harder to find a pickup with a full-sized bed (8ft).

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

#390

Post by mrfusion »

vmarsy wrote: post #104
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…

>when automatic transmissions are consistently outperforming humans at fuel efficiency Do you have data to back this up? Unless you're driving a dual clutch "dry" transmission or a CVT, because of Physics, an automatic transmission will always be less efficient. The Automatic transmission Torque converter [1] will waste some of the energy provided by the engine, especially with city driving. Also, most automatic cars…

I think modern torque converters actually lock together once the speeds match.
Post reply on HN