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

491–500 of 893 posts

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

#491

Post by ehnto »

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 think that is part of the issue though. The scenery really isn't where your mind should be while driving, simply looking to the side for 5 seconds is enough distraction to cause an accident.

http://www.distraction.gov/stats-research-laws/facts-and-sta...

I think for an already attentive driver it might be okay, but I would argue that a manual transmission would force people who are in the habit of being distracted to pay more attention. For one, you can't hold a phone very well while changing gears from a stop.

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

#492

Post by [deleted] »

torrent-of-ions wrote: post #366
Broken_Hippo wrote: post #295

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I knew it was rare for people to know manual transmissions, but why such a preference for automatic? I think this is twofold. First off, most drivers education doesn't teach a manual transmission anymore, nor is drivers education a requirement. While my parents learned on a simulator in school, I learned it from experience (and so happy I did) - my first car was a manual. But the second part of this is that there t…

> nor is drivers education a requirement This is it really. Americans aren't very good at driving. In the UK we are taught that it's one of the most dangerous things you'll do in your life, which it is. In America it's just like learning to walk. You have to do it and it doesn't matter how you learn. Check out the road safety stats. USA is pretty much an outlier amongst first world countries by most metrics.

[deleted]

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

#493

Post by wil421 »

bitL wrote: post #339

I never understood how to use automatic transmission in snowy/icy conditions. To me it's basically a lottery. With manual transmission and clutch I can actually recover from a slide almost immediately (the moment you start sliding you disengage transmission right away with clutch and do initial correcting maneuver which you cut short the moment you feel any kind of traction in order not to oversteer; it takes some pr…

If you have a capable system an automatic can be an advantage.

My car has several modes including Sand and Snow. Both modes will remap the transmission and provide more/less torque. In some modes it will even start in 2 so you don't spin your wheels and get stuck. The throttle response in the pedal will also be increase/decreased as well as the sensitivity of the steering wheel.

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

#494

Post by Nullabillity »

henrikschroder wrote: post #176
Annatar wrote: post #121

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And since the car is most often better than you at knowing when you should shift gears, why have the manual transmission in the first place? From my empirical experiments, and from understanding how modern automatic transmissions work, the assertion above is incorrect, and here is why: a modern automatic transmission is controlled by firmware, a unikernel. The shift points and the shifting logic are based on the deve…

I didn't downvote you, but you are on Hacker News, and you are complaining about bad software, and making the claim that said software will never improve, despite car manufacturers having extremely high motivations - to the tune of billions of dollars of market share - to improve this software, to meet stricter fuel efficiency laws and safety laws.

Solving good automatic transmission in isolation is basically solving general AI. And then you have the opposite problem of constantly trying to predict how the black box will behave.

Much better to have the driver (regardless of human or software) control both transmission and the other concerns.

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

#495

Post by txdv »

JoeAltmaier wrote: post #482

All of mine are manual. Live on a gravel road - can't properly drive on loose gravel with an automatic. Then you have to creep along at 10mph. I can do 55 in my Subaru. Another downside of auto - they have all sorts of 'traction control features' that take over the accelerator. What that really means is, when driving on loose gravel they start to vibrate like one of those old vibrating-football-game toys and the car…

I don't think most of us normal people would do that.

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

#496

Post by lfowles »

JoeAltmaier wrote: post #482

All of mine are manual. Live on a gravel road - can't properly drive on loose gravel with an automatic. Then you have to creep along at 10mph. I can do 55 in my Subaru. Another downside of auto - they have all sorts of 'traction control features' that take over the accelerator. What that really means is, when driving on loose gravel they start to vibrate like one of those old vibrating-football-game toys and the car…

> they have all sorts of 'traction control features' that take over the accelerator.

That's not exclusive to automatics, both of my manual cars will take over a bit if I start to lose traction.

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

#497

Post by larrik »

JoeAltmaier wrote: post #482

All of mine are manual. Live on a gravel road - can't properly drive on loose gravel with an automatic. Then you have to creep along at 10mph. I can do 55 in my Subaru. Another downside of auto - they have all sorts of 'traction control features' that take over the accelerator. What that really means is, when driving on loose gravel they start to vibrate like one of those old vibrating-football-game toys and the car…

Isn't doing 55 on gravel going to destroy your paint?

Traction Control, on paved roads, is extremely beneficial, and one of the best safety innovations since seatbelts.

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

#498

Post by mgcross »

esw wrote: post #415
shash7 wrote: post #346

Earlier quoted context omitted.

E36 BMWs are a dream to drive in manual. Its a shame they are getting increasingly rare to buy in Melbourne.

The same is true of other older BMWs. I've owned four, and my E30 was still the best.

My daily driver is an 06 mini Cooper S (6 speed), but my weekend car is my old e30. My son will be 16 next May. I've offered him the mini, but he wants the e30. I don't know if I can let go of it!

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

#499

Post by kaiserama »

exclusiv wrote: post #117
zippergz wrote: post #35

I'm a car enthusiast, and I was a manual transmission purist for many, many years. But then I had to be honest with myself, and admit that the VAST majority of my driving is commuting in traffic. And that driving is much less annoying with an automatic. My leisure driving is maybe 5% less fun without a manual, but that's far outweighed by how much better my daily commute is. At this point, I'd only buy a manual for a…

While I agree regarding traffic I think everyone would be way more courteous and the roads would be safer if everyone drove a manual.

Maybe not courteous, but at least attentive. If you're driving a manual in stop and go, it's hard to be playing with a cellphone (not that it doesn't happen). You are being forced to spend some thought on the act of driving, which I think is a good thing.

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

#500

Post by jccalhoun »

nostrademons wrote: post #168
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.

How modern is modern? I could believe this of my 2009 Honda Fit, but I'm fairly certain that my dad's '92 Civic, '99 Civic, and '92 Accord got better mileage when coasting with the clutch disengaged.

I also have an 09 Fit. I use the clutch to coast all the time. I think the only gauge that shows fuel usage is the mpg one? when I coast it just goes over to infinite. I don't think it does that when I don't put the clutch in.
Post reply on HN