Earlier quoted context omitted.
And don't forget leaving from a stop uphill.
There are many techniques to start uphill. In Italy the driving test is on manual transmission and many people use manual. I trained in Rome, parking on the left side downhill (so backward is uphill), it was tough, but learned a lot of tricks in the process to prevent stalling. You also become very attuned to the clutch I do love manual transmission, but the purpose is to have fun, not for daily usage.
The end of the manual transmission is near?
451–460 of 875 posts
Re: The end of the manual transmission is near?
#452Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Automatic is more fuel efficient I thought it was the opposite. Has that changed?
It hasn't changed, automatic gearboxes still eat up more fuel than their manual counterparts on the same cars.
Also automatic gearboxes can change gears usually much faster than humans. Operating the clutch is hard and when not done in the correct way, letting the clutch slip too much, waste energy.
Taking this all into account, in many cases, an automatic transmission might be more efficient.
I have been driving cars with manual transmissions all my life. My current car as indicator lights telling you when to change gears up and down. I often find myself skipping gears, especially when accelerating in the city, I often skip fourth gear. The car has six gears and you should already switch to the fifth gear when driving 50Km/h. My first car only had four gears, and the fourth gear was only used when driving over sixty. If a car has more gears it also means that you have to shift more often, which might make driving less efficient in city traffic due to the many more moments you shift slightly at the wrong moment.
Re: The end of the manual transmission is near?
#453This article misses mentioning that by far most EVs have no gear changing at all. The Porsche Taycan has 2 gears as did the original Tesla Roadster. Pretty much every other EV has one. So it's not only that manuals have been losing ground to automatics, but automatics have their days numbered as well. Also grouping dual clutch transmissions like the PDK with regular old torque converter automatics is extremely silly.
Re: The end of the manual transmission is near?
#454Re: The end of the manual transmission is near?
#455Earlier quoted context omitted.
sadly I've seen an increasing amount of American-style SUV and pickup trucks in France since the start of covid.
There already were a few before, but now Dodge must have done something "right" because there really are many RAMs around. Those things are so ridiculous for Paris, that I'm pretty sure they don't even fit through some streets. Hell, my father used to have a fairly common French sedan that would sometimes need a lot of maneuvering through the public garage ramps, and would barely fit in the parking slots.
Re: The end of the manual transmission is near?
#456Earlier quoted context omitted.
I will point out that modern electrics don't do automatic anymore. The "automatic" transmission is all software. There is a fixed gear ratio. EV motors have almost perfectly flat torque curves across the entire RPM spectrum. That feeling when you pump the RPMs and let the clutch go? An EV could give you that from 0 to 180kph without ever having to switch gears. An EV doesn't need to be quicker than a manual. There is…
What about deceleration with a fixed gear ratio? I’d assume there’d need to be braking applied without being able to downshift
I will also add that the break pads in EVs are criminally underused to the point that they reach their maximum service life with barely any usage on them.
If you want a comparison, it's basically like flicking on the little dynamo engines on a bicycle and then turning on the light. It'll slow you down a lot quicker than without the light on. Same principle here and works just as well.
Re: The end of the manual transmission is near?
#457Earlier quoted context omitted.
sadly I've seen an increasing amount of American-style SUV and pickup trucks in France since the start of covid.
There already were a few before, but now Dodge must have done something "right" because there really are many RAMs around. Those things are so ridiculous for Paris, that I'm pretty sure they don't even fit through some streets. Hell, my father used to have a fairly common French sedan that would sometimes need a lot of maneuvering through the public garage ramps, and would barely fit in the parking slots.
Re: The end of the manual transmission is near?
#458Earlier quoted context omitted.
> reasonably sized as in the 50s and 60s. Fire all your designers, go back to whatever your models were in 1965 What alternate dimension are you from? My older brother had a 60's Ford Fairlane when I was growing up. My first car was a 67 mustang. I had a friend with a 68 Camaro. I knew someone else that had multiple Thunderbirds from that era. These were not small cars. The Mustang and Camaro were the size of a full…
> The Mustang and Camaro were the size of a full size sedan today , if not bigger This is verifiably false with three minutes of searching, which I did on my cellphone as I sit by a campfire. As an owner of both a 1965 Mustang and a 2015 Explorer, the difference in size between these vehicles is comical. I've rented a 2020 Camry that was larger in every dimension. It got great gas mileage, but small it was not. 1967…
Re: The end of the manual transmission is near?
#459Earlier quoted context omitted.
> misunderstanding that higher revs = higher fuel consumption That is a good approximation. Each revolution has to do a somewhat fixed amount of work due to resistance. However too low revs will mess up milage too due to bad combustion.
A question tho. A manual transmission makes engine braking possible. But I never quite understood whether engine braking actually does suck a lot more gas thru the carb. In other words, when your foot is off the gas but there is high airflow thru the carb, does it draw gas ?
Re: The end of the manual transmission is near?
#460Earlier quoted context omitted.
> reasonably sized as in the 50s and 60s. Fire all your designers, go back to whatever your models were in 1965 What alternate dimension are you from? My older brother had a 60's Ford Fairlane when I was growing up. My first car was a 67 mustang. I had a friend with a 68 Camaro. I knew someone else that had multiple Thunderbirds from that era. These were not small cars. The Mustang and Camaro were the size of a full…
> The Mustang and Camaro were the size of a full size sedan today , if not bigger This is verifiably false with three minutes of searching, which I did on my cellphone as I sit by a campfire. As an owner of both a 1965 Mustang and a 2015 Explorer, the difference in size between these vehicles is comical. I've rented a 2020 Camry that was larger in every dimension. It got great gas mileage, but small it was not. 1967…
I'm not sure why you compared the Mustang to an Explorer though. I mentioned the thunderbird as being comparable to trucks, and those were well over 200 inches in the 60's. It's still an exaggeration to say that's as large as a truck with a crew cab in most cases, but the 209.4" length of a 1969 Thunderbird sedan is slightly longer than a Ford F150 with a regular bed size at 209.1". They were all, by most measures, much larger than their comparable categories today, and much larger than those categories a decade or two ago.