MaudlinMutantMollusk: ecmoRandomNumbers: If you can't drive a manual transmission, you don't know how to drive, IMO.

QFT

/and might I add, who the f*ck would buy a Jeep Wrangler with an auto?
//Jeep herder, manual trans

There are many serious rock crawlers who prefer auto over clutching to climb and grind through trails. One of my uncles swore by auto, another by manual...my Jeep was a manual and did just fine.

AngryJailhouseFistfark: akchick1971: Nothing beats a manual in the snow and on ice. Way more control than an automatic. I would never willingly own an automatic.

Nonsense. That's why you have the gear selector which allows you to force it to 1, 2, or 3.

Being able to put the clutch in so that the drive wheels are neither accelerating nor braking makes recovering from a fishtail much, much easier.

When I was first married, my wife was living in Ottawa and I was living in Toronto (long story), so I would do the commute on weekends. We had a 4wd Chevy Blazer (automatic) and a Honda Civic (standard). If there was ever a chance that there would be dicey winter conditions (those familiar with the Trenton-Belleville stretch of the 401 will know what I mean) I would always choose the Civic. Hands down much easier to control on slippery conditions.

I base my self-worth and manliness on having a completely unnecessary skill.

DarkVader: Given how good computer control and dual-clutch automatic gearboxes are, there's no reason for manual transmissions to be built anymore. The computer is better at shifting than you are. Really. And the dual-clutch boxes don't have the lossy torque converters, so gas mileage/power to wheels is actually better than a stick. You CAN'T shift as fast as the computer. You CAN'T shift as smoothly as the computer. And you are NOT more in control of the car. The limitations of the stick mean that the car is more in control of you.

True, but I know the current conditions better than the computer. I know what's going on ahead so I might want to downshift, etc. Also, it's just enjoyable for me to drive a stick.

God Is My Co-Pirate: fark right off with that sexist shiat, subby. I learned to drive a manual while pregnant.

I haven't encountered men claiming women can't drive a standard, only women claiming the standard transmissions are an idiotic male invention that no one should ever have to drive. I don't understand what the problem is, but it seems pretty widespread in the USA. Do women in Europe have a issue with manual transmissions?

DarkVader: Given how good computer control and dual-clutch automatic gearboxes are, there's no reason for manual transmissions to be built anymore. The computer is better at shifting than you are. Really. And the dual-clutch boxes don't have the lossy torque converters, so gas mileage/power to wheels is actually better than a stick. You CAN'T shift as fast as the computer. You CAN'T shift as smoothly as the computer. And you are NOT more in control of the car. The limitations of the stick mean that the car is more in control of you.

If the computer understands what a "hill" is, then I might be willing to give it a try. Why not build a car with a standard transmission, but with a computer doing the actual clutch and shiftwork? Or is that what you are describing?

Loving the butthurt from the people who can't be arsed to spend 20 minutes to learn...

It's really not that hard.
(but it's so satisfying)

Hell, sometimes I double-clutch just for fun.
Engine brake, then handbrake to a full stop just to fark with tailgaters.

First car was a manual and free.
Second car was a manual because it was cheap.
Third car was a manual because I was used to manuals and it was cheap.
Fourth car was a manual and free.

A car is a chunk of metal that gets me from A to B. Automatic or manual, whatever is cheap. I don't care if it's a 100 year old rusting pile of metal as long as it gets me where I want in the time I want it to. Driving for enjoyment means I got new tunes on my iPod.

I rebuilt my 1986 Saab engine a couple of years back, and pulled the old three spreed auto and replaced it with a 5-speed manual. My gas mileage went up nearly 40%. And so did my enjoyment of driving.

AbbeySomeone: STFU trollmitter, I've driven both. I live in Seattle and we got us some major hills. Automatic is easier.

It has been a long time since I was forced to drive an automatic in a state that had hills, but have the automatics gotten smarter? The last one I dealt with didn't know what a "hill" was and was always in too high of a gear on sloped ground.

My first truck was a lifted '69 Bronco with a built 302 and three on the tree. That was no fun at all for commutes, even after putting a Hurst floor shifter in it. Thing was downright dangerous for a learner car.

I've been driving automatics ever since and haven't regretted it once. If I can ever afford another high horsepower vehicle, it'll have to be a dual-clutch paddle shifter. Then again I only drive about a thousand miles a year so I probably couldn't justify it.

pciszek: DarkVader: Given how good computer control and dual-clutch automatic gearboxes are, there's no reason for manual transmissions to be built anymore. The computer is better at shifting than you are. Really. And the dual-clutch boxes don't have the lossy torque converters, so gas mileage/power to wheels is actually better than a stick. You CAN'T shift as fast as the computer. You CAN'T shift as smoothly as the computer. And you are NOT more in control of the car. The limitations of the stick mean that the car is more in control of you.

If the computer understands what a "hill" is, then I might be willing to give it a try. Why not build a car with a standard transmission, but with a computer doing the actual clutch and shiftwork? Or is that what you are describing?

That's almost exactly what a dual-clutch automatic is. Just with... two clutches. They are very nearly as efficient as manuals (with *much* faster shifting) and worlds ahead of typical American slushboxes.

FlashHarry: SurelyShirley: Dealer wanted an additional $1300 plus they would have had to order one.

what the fark? didn't he want to make a sale?

my dealer bent over backwards to accommodate my order. they didn't even ask for a downpayment. seriously. they said that they could tell that i was serious.

When I asked the sales guy if they have any W8's in stock, he walked me to the door from the showroom to the lot, kinda pointed in one direction and said "the Passats are back there, let me know if you find something".
It was drizzling and it was So Cal, after all, so sales guy can't go out and possibly get wet.
Needless to say, I did not check if they had anything I liked, went on eBay, bought a 4 month old
Passat 2000 miles away and saved about $6K compared to So Cal prices.
Took it to a different dealer for "service" and put a good chunk of those savings right back into VW's pocket.
3rd and last VW for me.

How are you more in control of your vehicle with a manual? Sure, you're doing more work, but some of you seem to be implying that you're safer because of it.

I kinda get this. I recently bought a 2012 Chevy Sonic brand-new. I got the 6-speed manual because I like manual transmissions and at the time the turbocharged engine only came with a 6-speed. It also gets better mpg.

Even so, there are times during my commute where I kinda wish I had an automatic. Not even bumper to bumper traffic, I'm talking about situations where I'd rather not keep track of what gear its in and have to shift to maintain power. It might be the car, some other stickshifts I've had would be good accelerating from basically idle on up in every gear but 5th and 6th. The Sonic has a small turbo and its built for low RPMs, but even then it doesn't have the low end grunt of a V6 or V8. That might be the sacrifice that needs to be made to get 40 mpg city, I don't know.

In any case, its kinda nice seeing I'm not the only 1 who bought a new car with a standard. Trendy, or something.

Earpj: Would it be possible, or even feasible, to swap out the transmissions, since the "parts" car is an automatic? She prefers standard, so that would be important to her in making a decision.

/It's an 83 Datsun 280 ZX.

Swapping the transmissions should be possible but it requires cutting a hole through the firewall for the clutch cable at the very least. As long as they are the same model and year they should use the same bolt-pattern. If the transmissions used a different bolt set up, it's still possible just time consuming and difficult.

That said, transmission swaps aren't easy and it's likely to be expensive. Ask your mechanic.

/old man's '67 Camaro started life with a slushbox, now has a '69 IRS in the back with a Hurst 4 speed
//transmission was easy, replacing the back of the car wasn't
///not my problem/choice since the prior redneck owner did it
////8 MPG on a good day with a tailwind

gunther_bumpass:
Engine brake, then handbrake to a full stop just to fark with tailgaters.

Hey! Get your farking brake lights fixed!

profplump: ecmoRandomNumbers: If you can't drive a manual transmission, you don't know how to drive, IMO.

If your car doesn't have a spark advance lever it's not really a car, IMO.

The advance lever is easy, it's the velocitator and deceleratrix that always give me heartburn...

Nogale: Four clutches in six months.

First car, age 16, 1992.

/ Don't ask for details.

"rrrrrRRRRRRRRAWWWWWWWWWWRRRRRRRrrrrrrrrrb rrb rrb rrb *chirp*"

offmymeds: I learned to drive with one of these:

[image.rodandcustommagazine.com image 459x345]

Shift on the steering column.

Dude - three on the tree! We had a pickup with that arrangement way back when. It wasn't the first manual I ever used but I spent a lot of time in it because it was my granddad's truck and he lost his license (poor eyes) and I ended up driving him around for a couple years.

I like my manual, but they're going the way of the dodo. Autos are so much better than they were 30 years ago it's not even funny. They shift faster, they shift at better times, they're more efficient, they're quieter and smoother. Manuals used to provide better control, better fuel economy, more engagement, and better price. The price difference is gone on everything that's not an econobox as autos have become a standard option, the economy is gone, the control difference is mostly gone.. manuals only exist for the hobbyist. It's going to be hard to find a new car with a manual in another 30 years.

Tinton: I kinda get this. I recently bought a 2012 Chevy Sonic brand-new. I got the 6-speed manual because I like manual transmissions and at the time the turbocharged engine only came with a 6-speed. It also gets better mpg.

Even so, there are times during my commute where I kinda wish I had an automatic. Not even bumper to bumper traffic, I'm talking about situations where I'd rather not keep track of what gear its in and have to shift to maintain power. It might be the car, some other stickshifts I've had would be good accelerating from basically idle on up in every gear but 5th and 6th. The Sonic has a small turbo and its built for low RPMs, but even then it doesn't have the low end grunt of a V6 or V8. That might be the sacrifice that needs to be made to get 40 mpg city, I don't know.

In any case, its kinda nice seeing I'm not the only 1 who bought a new car with a standard. Trendy, or something.

You did the right thing - those cars are surprisingly decent for little econoboxes, EXCEPT for the automatic transmission - it upshifts by dropping the current gear, checking its email, grabbing a sandwich, then dropping the RPMs and lugging into the next gear. Jus' turrible.

I've only ever owned a stick-shift (although in high school I drove my parents' automatics - car and minivan). I know that I am now less fuel efficient than the computer on recent-model cards, so that's not why I go with stick shifts.

I drive stick shifts for the emergency preparedness factor, and because they're usually cheaper than automatic (used at least, the only way I buy cars). First, I was worried if I had to drive a friend's car (medical emergency, drunk driver, etc) and couldn't drive a stick shift. Also, one time (in band camp) I went skidding on wet leaves, on a peaceful back road, at a low speed. I didn't hit anything, but it was a real panic-inducing moment.

I decided right then that I always wanted to be able to brake through downshifting, even if the brakes were locked and the wheels were skidding. Granted, in the (mumble way too many) years since that leaves-sliding day I've never actually hit the same situation, but it seems like a reasonable thing to expect, and I'll be prepared. Long car rides are a pain though.

/chick with a mnual

AngryJailhouseFistfark: My 71 VW had this leg-press of a clutch pedal so I was used to really standing on the thing.

Jeeze, I remember those. Over the years I had a '68 Bug, '66 Squareback, '72 Bug, and a '72 Van. The clutch cable conduit was unsecured at the forward end, just behind where the pedal cluster bolted to the tunnel. If you let the cable get too slack over time, the conduit could jump out of place and jam behind the piece of metal that supported the pedal cluster. As John Muir said: "Let this happen and you will be very unhappy." The cable could then bind between the conduit and the support, making the clutch into a very effective press for your left quads, and it took the better part of an afternoon to fix it.

Always liked the shifter on the VWs, with the exception of the van - it always felt sloppy no matter how you adjusted it.

/All are gone but the van . . .

Earpj: Ouch.
8 mpg?

'67 396 V-8 with a 4 barrel carb. That's fairly good for that engine. Thanks to the wonders of the terrible drive efficiencies of the '60s it's getting something like 30% of it's power to the drive wheels. You can get closer to 10 MPG out of it if you keep your foot off the throttle. Neither of us commute in it, it's a car for fun.

Given how much of a pain changing the transmission is likely to be, I'd recommend not doing it. If your mechanic is willing to and doesn't plan on charging you an arm and a leg, there's no real reason not to.

rico567: Oh, you have the battery problem solved? No? You might want to look this up, then move on from your views about electric cars.

Reread please. I said might happen before they figure out the interface, which knowing car makers, may be a decade or two. I didn't say our electric jesuscars had already rendered anything obsolete, I sure wouldn't buy one at the current premium and problems.

Earpj: Our mechanic is actually fairly reasonable. Did the brakes, and changed the spark plugs on my sons 97 Mitsubishi for $230 yesterday.

Well, I guess daughter will just have to ask after she sees the part car.

That's not terrible for that much work.

At least you let your kids make the decision. My first car was a piece of shiat because my father over-rode my decision. Given the choice between a '92 Saturn SL1 and a '90 Carolla it's a no brainer. He chose the Saturn, he chose poorly.

Good luck.

Incontinental_Drift: DarkVader: Given how good computer control and dual-clutch automatic gearboxes are, there's no reason for manual transmissions to be built anymore. The computer is better at shifting than you are. Really. And the dual-clutch boxes don't have the lossy torque converters, so gas mileage/power to wheels is actually better than a stick. You CAN'T shift as fast as the computer. You CAN'T shift as smoothly as the computer. And you are NOT more in control of the car. The limitations of the stick mean that the car is more in control of you.

True, but I know the current conditions better than the computer. I know what's going on ahead so I might want to downshift, etc. Also, it's just enjoyable for me to drive a stick.

You can force downshift on every single automatic in the entire world by shifting it to something other than D. Usually L, 2, 3, or 4.

Women apparently not asked about this

I see some people are offended, and I know someone will chime in with something about PC bullshiat, but they're right to. See, the thing is, the reason why the U.S. has automatic transmissions is because car dealerships sold people on the idea that they needed to get automatic transmissions because, well, you couldn't have the little woman driving your car to get the groceries and grinding the gears, now could you? Ha, ha, ha. The real reason: it was an extra luxury item.

AngryJailhouseFistfark: threedingers: AngryJailhouseFistfark: akchick1971: Nothing beats a manual in the snow and on ice. Way more control than an automatic. I would never willingly own an automatic.

Nonsense. That's why you have the gear selector which allows you to force it to 1, 2, or 3.

Being able to put the clutch in so that the drive wheels are neither accelerating nor braking makes recovering from a fishtail much, much easier.

Nonsense. That's what the electronic traction control is for.

My ideal would be traction control paired with a manual transmission, but not all vehicles have traction control. And call me old fashioned, but I prefer to know what the tires are actually doing and what they're about to do. An automatic will sometimes downshift unexpectedly a few seconds after you've let your foot off the gas and the abrupt change in engine braking can cause a momentary loss of traction at the drive wheels. Couple that with gusty cross winds and you can get into a fishtail.

Living in Canada, I've done more than my fair share of winter driving. I own three vehicles, one automatic with ABS (1999 Toyota Sienna), one manual with ABS (1996 Acura 1.6EL) and one manual without ABS (1989 Mazda Miata). Of the three, the Acura is the best winter vehicle.

SurelyShirley: gunther_bumpass:
Engine brake, then handbrake to a full stop just to fark with tailgaters.

Hey! Get your farking brake lights fixed!

ha ha.. exactly. Once stopped, I use the brakes while putting it back in gear.

/dick

DarkVader: Given how good computer control and dual-clutch automatic gearboxes are, there's no reason for manual transmissions to be built anymore. The computer is better at shifting than you are. Really. And the dual-clutch boxes don't have the lossy torque converters, so gas mileage/power to wheels is actually better than a stick. You CAN'T shift as fast as the computer. You CAN'T shift as smoothly as the computer. And you are NOT more in control of the car. The limitations of the stick mean that the car is more in control of you.

/Yes, I can drive a stick just fine, thanks.
//And yes, a stick is in many ways better than a hydraulic slushbox.

Those are only available in expensive higher-end cars. The "manualmatic" paddle shifter bs they put in cheap commuter cars sucks balls. I drove a Hyundai Veloster with 1 and it was farking horrible. I assume it had some sort of dual-clutch setup since when it would take off it'd engage like some 15 year old brat learning stick for the first time. Shifts were slow and unpredictable (it'd upshift too early, downshift too late, sometimes upshift/downshift at idiotic times) and even if you put it in manual mode it'd still upshift for you close to redline.

I shift faster and smoother than most automatics. I can take off on any hill, if shuffling my foot from brake to gas won't work I use the e-brake. I also rev-match, double-clutch downshift, heel-toe, etc as the situation requires. I've yet to see a computer do it as well as I can. Maybe for most other people the SMG is smoother.

This is just as bad as the dog vs cat argument... ugh.

snortimer: This is just as bad as the dog vs cat argument... ugh.

Cats > Dogs. It's a scientific fact.

Given a choice, I won't drive anything but a manual. Automatics just aren't the same experience.

The wife can't drive manual and didn't want me to get my current manual car. I used this fact to get the dealer to drop the price on said car, which tipped the scales enough for her to drop her opposition to the purchase.

Bonus: She can't bang it up if she can't drive it.

offmymeds: I learned to drive with one of these:

[image.rodandcustommagazine.com image 459x345]

Shift on the steering column.

/get off my lawn

So did I in a 1967 Chevy pickup. Three in the tree. When I got into the drivers ed car I almost broke the automatic transmission lever and demanded to know where the clutch was.

ronaprhys: Gleeman: So does this put manual drivers in the same club as those who think analog audio is better than digital?

OTOH, analog music lovers will deny science, blind studies, and all other forms of proof to show that they don't know their ass from a hole in the ground.

/Except for women drivers.
//And I use the term driver there very loosely.

Analog is superior to digital because of sampling rate. Think about it, an analog audio source has no gaps in "data". Sampling rate means a digital recorder only pulls data from the analog source in certain intervals. That means with a digital audio source, at least part of it is missing when compared to the original. You can hear it on the right equipment, the better the setup the more you can tell the difference. I've recorded some music from vinyl to flac, 24-bit 96khz with an 8000 kbps sampling rate. On my 5.1 setup it sounds completely different from mp3s of the same song.

offmymeds: I learned to drive with one of these:

[image.rodandcustommagazine.com image 459x345]

Shift on the steering column.

/get off my lawn

Three on the tree in the middle of the night,
I have this steak on my head 'cause I got into a fist fight...

nickerj1: You can force downshift on every single automatic in the entire world by shifting it to something other than D. Usually L, 2, 3, or 4.

Yes. This is what I do when I drive my wife's mini van. I also noted that I just like driving stick. I guess this is similar to coding in C vs Java. Both are fine languages, but C feels "closer to the metal", as does a manual transmission.

imfallen_angel: ohokyeah: Oh yeah, a human can tell when a hill is upcoming or they need to pass another vehicle and can promptly downshift as needed. An automatic transmission takes a second or two to realize you need more power after you've throttled the gas pedal before it will downshift. The computer might be better at shifting for initial acceleration issues, but it's not better at knowing when you need more power due to environmental changes.

hmmm... no.

If you know how to drive, you can control your transmission and the switching of gears by how you press your gas pedal... and if you need an extra speed burst, you just floor it, causing the system to downshift (go in overdrive), it's just as fast (or faster) as someone with a manual is, taking the time to clutch and switch the gear (even with clutch-less shifting)..

Or, you can even force-shift an automatic down a gear by selecting a lower 'gear' than D (drive). Also useful in the snow.

//can drive manual, but don't see the point in anything but high-performance vehicles

Boxingoutsider: I don't know how anyone could want to drive an automatic personally. It feels like driving around in a boat. Now, I haven't driven the newer generation of automatics, but even there, I know they won't shift when I want to. I LOVE the feeling of power when you're right in the torque range, and how quickly the stick responds. Cars with 300hp and automatics don't feel nearly as responsive as my 225hp stick.

The real issue here is automatically assuming that the granny cars that families and fleets buy are in any way representative of all automatic transmissions. (Let alone the 80's and 90's version of it.) Any coupe, quite a few sedans and even a few larger cars have paddle shifting now, so you can still have your gear preference without playing footsie with your car all day. A lot of cars have optional CVT, which can be geared for power or mileage and when done right gives you so much more control than manual - they can instantly be in any torque range at all. Until you've tried either, lumping all automatics into the classic boat feel is silly.

SnarfVader: The_Sponge: kmmontandon: The_Sponge: IMHO, Wranglers should only be manufactured with manual transmissions.

And never sold to college girls, who try to drive them like sports cars.


And anyone who puts those ultra flashy rims on them will be shot on sight.

And bring back the straight six.

The 4.0L the best engine ever put in the wrangler! To hell with the 3.8L crap. Worked on jeeps for years, currently own an 86 land cruiser with a straight six and four on the floor.

Next time I get a car, I'm taking local traffic conditions under consideration before making my purchase.

/clutching in stop-and-go traffic jams murders my legs