Driving a manual car isn't about efficiency. It is about driver engagement. Yes, you can row your own gears with paddle shifters, but no automatic will ever give you the same kind of engagement or connectedness with the car as a manual with three pedals will.
But yes, if there is a smoking gun for the death of the manual in America, it would be our crumbling, congested roads and absurdly long daily commutes.
It was about efficiency and cost for ages though. That's why manuals were popular and why they aren't popular in the US anymore. Modern automatics (dual clutch, CVTs, even computer controlled single clutch and plain old torque converter slushboxes) are so much more efficient now that manuals don't make as much sense as they used to.
Agree, simply in that by changing my driving style I could get 30+ miles per gallon of gas using a manual but not an automatic of the same type of car. It's interesting that people don't even know that anymore. Additionally, manual can be very useful in a snowy/icy climate -- starting into 2nd can get you going on a slippery road where some automatics will have trouble. Much more control of torque.
But when I still drove a manual it always felt like I was planning ahead, engine braking early at red lights (which often meant I could coast though it without completely stopping) etc, which you can't do with the lesser control on an automatic. Driving "lazily" in a manual means reducing shifting which often translates to more fuel-efficient driving. Driving lazily in an automatic is very different.
I'd love to see a study on hypermiling with auto vs manual in real-world condition. AFAIK all the efficiency numbers we have are just based on purely mechanical tests on a driving cycle on a dynamometer, and we all know what that kind of testing leads to.
> But when I still drove a manual it always felt like I was planning ahead, engine braking early at red lights (which often meant I could coast though it without completely stopping) etc, which you can't do with the lesser control on an automatic.
A modern DCT transmission doesn't use a torque converter, which is where most of the efficiency was lost. A DCT is effectively a manual transmission that's automatically operated.
Even torque converter automatics don't use torque converters for anything other than low speeds anymore. Most modern automatic transmissions have the ability to mechanically couple the input shaft directly to the transmission effectively bypassing the torque converter in most if not every gear.
It's one the of the reasons the ZF8 transmission is used in everything from the new BMW 8 series down to the Dodge Charger.
Even torque converter automatics don't use torque converters for anything other than low speeds anymore.
Unless something has changed radically in the last few years, that's just not true. The torque converter will drop out of lock-up as soon as you demand sufficient acceleration (this will vary tremendously by engine - i.e. an inline four will do it regularly, a big V8 may meet most of your acceleration needs without dropping out of lockup) or tap the brakes. Torque converter with lockup have been around since 1950ish.
Locking out the torque converter isn't a new idea, it's just that newer transmissions are very aggressive with engaging the lockout thanks to all the software that lives in a modern car.
Having spent a decent amount of time with ZF8 speed the torque converter is almost always locked out. Throttle response and engine braking don't lie.
I don't understand what throttle response has to do with demonstrating that it's in lockup. With an average car engine, you're going to get fairly disappointing acceleration with the torque converter locked up. I suspect that what you're seeing is the effect of having a torquey, high performance engine, based on the example cars you listed. They just don't need to drop out of lockup to deliver the day-to-day acceleration you want. Also, performance car transmissions have been tuned to behave differently than run of the mill transmissions for at least as long as I've been driving. For example, engine braking in my college friend's then-new 90s Mustang GT, whereas my family sedan would prefer to free-wheel.
Edit: by the way, I looked up the ZF8 and it's available in a bunch of configurations. One of them is a wet clutch instead of a torque converter, which I imagine has to operate like an electronically controlled manual transmission. There's even an option to have an electric motor instead of a torque converter for hybridization!
Have you driven one of the new automatics or an electric car? The best engagement happens when you don't have to think about what gear you're in, or plan for the downshift lag.
That's true engagement! My plugin hybrid minivan with an e-cvt knocks the socks off of my old 5-speed Subaru wagon. A Minivan!
(Edit) The reason why is that it takes me about a second to shift gears. A modern automatic can rev up before I'd even move the shifter, let alone before I'd get the clutch back in. An electric car doesn't need the gears at all.
Don't get me wrong, I enjoy stick. But the arguments you make are nonsense.
Well if you're an experienced stick-shifter and familiar with the car you don't have to think about what gear you're in. Combination of revolutions, engine noise, speed and gearshift position make this and planning for the downshift lag as natural as breathing air.
Only time I think about gears is in low range, when I'm in an off-roader.
For many people, myself included, engagement with the transmission and engine speed is part of the "engagement" we want when driving. If you're more interested in the handling dynamics, etc. I could see how an automatic could remove other distractions.
I drive the Pacifica EV hybrid and the ride is almost flawless, except it uses the ICE when you floor the pedal which is odd since the electric has more boost in it. Can’t wait until the super capacitors become common.
I wish they did a smaller engine and a larger battery. I suspect the battery just can't deliver enough amperage for full acceleration.
Frankly, I wish it was completely electric... Also, I hate to say this... The minivan is just overpowered. I hardly press the accelerator and it's like driving a rocket. At least when I drove a Leaf I had to push down a bit when I wanted to go fast
The same reason I love(d) driving motorcycle. It's a full body engagement. Both hands, both feet, and super alertness and focus on everything around you.
"You've got more control over the car because you're shifting your own gears instead of waiting for the car to shift for you," from the article sums it up. I recently bought my first car with cruise control, still manual transmission, and while I find it useful at times, it also makes the driving experience more relaxed, and not necessarily in a good way.
However, I'm all for the aspect of automatic transmission changing gears at the right moment to get as much power out of the engine as possible. But it doesn't weigh up the disconnected feeling they provide on my behalf.
> Driving a manual car isn't about efficiency. It is about driver engagement.
Speak for yourself. I have a manual (actually, I've never driven an automatic, come to think of it), and I couldn't care less about "connectedness with the car". My car is a device that takes me, and sometimes my family, from A to B as safely and conveniently as possible. It's a car, I'm not in a relationship with it.
Some people really like engagement and fine control in their things. There has to be something in your life, like coffee or operating systems, where you can understand this.
Sure. Just saying that deriving great satisfaction from owning and/or driving cars isn't some universal trait in humans. For many of us, it's just a means to an end.
Sorry, can you connect what you’re saying for someone who hasn’t driven manual? Are you saying you only drive manual because it’s safer and more convenient? Or that there’s no difference and you happen to drive a manual out of habit?
The second. In my country (perhaps I should have said in my previous post that I don't live in the USA) manual transmissions are the norm, although automatics are certainly becoming more popular.
I don't have anything against automatics per se, I can well see myself getting a car having one in the future.
Having just come back from Hockenheim with my racing license, I can tell you that driving a manual car very fast is much harder and more demanding than doing the same with an automatic. That's precisely why I drive a manual: it's more challenging and makes me learn more about race driving techniques, not to mention controlling the car. It demands of me to be an ever better driver. I have to be at least twice as good as other participants with automatics. I like that.
You can get into a slide easily by disengaging the clutch temporarily. Few dual clutch cars can do this e.g. Porsche GT3. You also can do heel-toe downshift without unbalancing the car's weight distribution, if you do it right. Newer cars blip the throttle for you so you don't miss it, but that's kind of missing the point.
I drive both a manual and an older (mid 2000s, 5 gears) automatic CVT. The CVT always seems to get me annoyed as if shifts very conservatively. When going up a slope it feels like the engine is having a hard time. Or it's upshifting in the middle of an overtake at 70 kmh when the gearbox is not in 5th. Always makes me switch to manual in those situations. I've also driven a DSG which works great until you have to drive down a mountain road with tight curbs.
A choke gets used once upon start, a shift happens dozens of times per drive, it's not the same thing. And no paddle replaces the sheer joy of rowing your own.
A choke gets used once upon start, a shift happens dozens of times per drive, it's not the same thing.
It's still "increasing engagement" which is what GP claimed to want. How about a persistent pull to the right in the steering? That's continuous and increases engagement. How about occasional "death wobble" as found in many Jeeps? That will really sharpen your focus and keep you engaged.
And no paddle replaces the sheer joy of rowing your own.
Not to be a jerk, but there's a big difference between a Dodge Dart and a Dodge Viper or a Chevy Cruze and Chevy Corvette. Cars that are designed to provide the driver with mechanical feedback and tight handling are not something that manufacturers are concerned with in most of their vehicles.
Even among sports cars with "automatic" transmissions (most likely dual clutch), the transmission is programmed very differently from the regular models. Take an automatic BMW M4 for a spin and compare it to a regular 4 series. The M4's transmission will be far jerkier and rougher shifting despite having mechanically identical components. It's programmed for faster shifts for better performance while sacrificing comfort.
You're correct but I'm going to be the ass that points it out: the M4 has a 7-speed getrag DCT yeah but all other versions come with the ZF 8 speed traditional auto (which is really good, mind you). BMWs with DCTs other than M cars are really really rare (only one that comes to mind is the Z4 35i/35is).
I agree with the engagement aspect, but I'm sure dual clutch equipped cars are just as fun to drive. I rode a motorcycle with an auto-shifter, I didn't miss using the clutch (on up-shifts) one bit.
I traded a dual-clutch sports car for a manual after two years because the disengagement is real. If you want to play a driving video game, just play a video game. :)
Now I have two cars, one for rough traffic trips. I realize this isn't practical, though, so I don't hate anyone for their automatics.
I think if you drive a manual the OP sees it as being _more_ involved in driving and more aware.
There are some situations where driving a manual incorrectly is more dangerous (clutch coasting) but others where the extra control is better (Ute off-road).
I can’t speak for others but I personally find driving a manual does help prevent accidents. Driving an automatic feels a bit mundane. Just hold the gas pedal in the same spot the whole time. It’s easy to slip into a boredom state (zone out) and not focus on the road. Even more so when tired.
A manual car sort of kicks you in the butt every now and then: “hey, you’re in the wrong gear. Stay sharp, and upshift!”
This is the kind of thing I was talking about elsewhere. You need to take responsibility for maintaining mental engagement regardless of the transmission. Using a manual transmission as a crutch for mental focus is a terrible idea.
And I'm saying that is, in and of itself, a huge problem. To be blunt, if you require a shifter in order to stay engaged while operating a two ton hunk of metal, you have no business being behind the wheel in the first place.
My wife insisted on an automatic car because she doesn't drive much and wanted to keep it simple. I was a bit hesitant, because when I first got my driver's license I really liked driving my parent's manual car. Now I've really come to enjoy driving an automatic. The two main benefits are when I drive in heavy traffic and either have to switch lanes or when I'm in a slow moving queue; in both situations there's one less thing to think about. I'm sure it makes it easier for me to focus on the surrounding traffic because there's less stuff on my mind.
Other benefits, when I think about it, are that an automatic frees up one foot and one hand. I can drive with my cup of tea or coffee without having to shift, which is great. I don't know if it directly helps with awareness, but it helps me stay awake.
But yes, if there is a smoking gun for the death of the manual in America, it would be our crumbling, congested roads and absurdly long daily commutes.