Live data from Hacker News

The end of the manual transmission is near?

popularmechanics.com

451–460 of 875 posts

Re: The end of the manual transmission is near?

#451

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.

Yes the clutch becomes your BFF. But can you really say that a manual is not for daily use ? It certainly helps when dealing with ice & snow.

Re: The end of the manual transmission is near?

#452
post #333

Earlier 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.

I think from a purely mechanical point of view, this is the case, meaning that if you have two cars, one with manual gearbox and one with an automatic gearbox, both driving at the same speed with the same gear ratio, the one with the automatic gearbox will likely use slightly more fuel. But even this might not the case at all possible speeds. But at some speeds when the car with the manual gearbox is using the wrong gear, it might use much more gas. The problem with the manual gearbox is not in the gearbox but the human using it. First of all, not all drivers know when is the best moment to change gears and even if they know, they are not always able to change gears at the right moment. When you are turning on a crossing and accelerating, switching gears can be difficult.

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?

#453

This 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.

The article feels like it's about a decade out of date. These days the issue has largely shifted from manual vs automatic to ICE vs hybrid vs full electric, with the obvious consequences for transmission type.

Re: The end of the manual transmission is near?

#454
post #240

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Okay but then why is the rolling brick wall of a modern pickup allowed?

Because they're not classified as passenger vehicles, so they don't have to meet the same standards.

Insanity in one sentence.

Re: The end of the manual transmission is near?

#455

Earlier 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.

Same thing happened to SUVs. It's mostly "i want a bigger car than my neighbour" kind of thing , and now there are many more SUVs, driving in a sedan around them feels a bit intimidating, as you are worried they may not see you well enough on the road. It's a downward spiral. Now people want something even bigger on the outside and they go with pickup trucks.

Re: The end of the manual transmission is near?

#456
post #397

Earlier 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

The electric motor just turns into a generator and charges the battery. Engine breaking with an EV is literally refilling your tank, so to speak. The modern EVs are pretty smart about it and will also apply the breaks sneakily if the engine can't bring up enough resistance (due to battery being charged, too much change in a short time, etc.)

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?

#457

Earlier 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.

In NL, a RAM can be bought as a company car, effectively dodging road tax. (50 euro vs 200 euro per month). For comparison, you pay 100 euro per month for a tiny car if it runs on diesel (these were 'green' and exempt from road tax 10 years ago). Or between 30 and 70 per month for gasoline cars.

Re: The end of the manual transmission is near?

#458

Earlier 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…

Someone PLEASE build a browser extension that automatically coverts those Disney numbers to normal units :)

Re: The end of the manual transmission is near?

#459

Earlier 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 ?

For cars with carburetors, yes it does use a little fuel because some air will get sucked into the engine. Fuel injected cars use none because they simply don't activate the injectors if you're not pressing the gas pedal.

Re: The end of the manual transmission is near?

#460

Earlier 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…

Perhaps I remember the mustang as larger than it was because my next car was significantly smaller, a 240z, but it is at the large end of the compact cars, which have been getting larger themselves as of late, as tends to happen. Actually, most the popular cars have gotten much larger in recent decades. In 2002, the Camry was much closer in size to the Mustang, still about 6" longer, but skinnier.

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.

Post reply on HN