Let’s Admit It: Manual Transmissions Need to Go

[troysavary 2,293]

On ‎2016‎-‎04‎-‎11 at 7:20 PM, tsupersonic said:

/facepalm. You and others in this thread prove that your knowledge in anything related to cars is pretty outdated. Thank god this is a "tech" forum... 

 

Yes, take a look at the fastest cars that are made today. What do they have in common? Hint: it involves an automatic transmission.  It's not all about straight line speed or quarter mile times. A good automatic transmission can shift way faster than any human can w/ a manual. Some of these said cars include the McLaren P1, Ferrari theFerrari (LaFerrari), Porsche 918, Bugatti Veyron, Henessey Venom. Hell even car enthusiasts had a heart attack when a track focused Porsche 911 991 GT3 RS came with PDK only.  

The Henessey Venom GT that set the speed record for a convertible had a 6 speed manual. The paddle shift transmissions in most supercars are built the same as a manual, but the clutch is not activated by the left foot. You will not see a conventional hydraulic coupled automatic in any of the ultra-high performance vehicles.

[troysavary 2,293]

23 hours ago, sc302 said:

never said they were good for towing or for a sports car...but many cars, even some low end sports cars (subaru wrx for example), are coming with them.  

 

cvt may be a pipe dream but if they can get the tq down and get the durability up, it could eventually be a bad assed transmission (no gears to shift, just slides up or down the cones as it needs more/less vs moving a planetary gear into place and having a slight pause between gear changes).   Just like computer controlled valves, if a tuner can control where the band stays at given load/throttle position it could be an unlimited resource (only limit would be the drive train combination). 

CVTs are on their way out in the automotive market. GM abandoned them when they killed off Saturn. I don't imagine Nissan has much enthusiasm left for them after the huge cost of replacing all the defective ones. Being belt driven, they are prone to slipping. The belt expands under heat, making them bad for long, high speed driving, such as highway driving. You can't just take them to your local transmission shop for a re-build when they break. They are more suited to ride-on lawnmowers than cars. You might continue to see them on light, cheap econoboxes, but 8 and 9 gear automatics give pretty much all the benefits with none of the drawbacks, other than being pricy. 

[sc302 1,746]

4 hours ago, troysavary said:

CVTs are on their way out in the automotive market. GM abandoned them when they killed off Saturn. I don't imagine Nissan has much enthusiasm left for them after the huge cost of replacing all the defective ones. Being belt driven, they are prone to slipping. The belt expands under heat, making them bad for long, high speed driving, such as highway driving. You can't just take them to your local transmission shop for a re-build when they break. They are more suited to ride-on lawnmowers than cars. You might continue to see them on light, cheap econoboxes, but 8 and 9 gear automatics give pretty much all the benefits with none of the drawbacks, other than being pricy. 

toyota, nissan, honda, suburu kia, and hyundai have all adopted cvt transmissions. I highly doubt that they are on their way out.  I don't consider gm a innovator or a company really concerned about gas mileage...more of a company looking to increase their c level execs wallets and bonuses while taking tax payers money, but I digress.  it isnt a rubber belt in it (it is a drive chain, not a drive belt), I have had 2 (2010 altima v6 110k miles and 2014 camry hybrid just about to hit 50k, just about all highway on both 80+mph) neither have shown any signs of slipping.  all mid level hybrids (accord, camry, avalon, fusion) are cvt ...hardly cheap econoboxes being the same price as their v6 counterparts. 

 

here is an exploded view of the "belt"

[Solid Knight 512]

The worst part of driving a manual is being on a steep hill at a dead stop before the top.

[adrynalyne 12,423]

43 minutes ago, Solid Knight said:

The worst part of driving a manual is being on a steep hill at a dead stop before the top.

Hill assist is pretty common these days. 

[adrynalyne 12,423]

4 hours ago, troysavary said:

The Henessey Venom GT that set the speed record for a convertible had a 6 speed manual. The paddle shift transmissions in most supercars are built the same as a manual, but the clutch is not activated by the left foot. You will not see a conventional hydraulic coupled automatic in any of the ultra-high performance vehicles.

Speed is one thing, acceleration is another. Acceleration is where an automatic can outgun a manual. Top speed isn't a factor of automatic vs manual unless there is a big horsepower discrepancy. 

[+suprNOVA 177]

On 3/24/2016 at 10:13 AM, MikeChipshop said:

A lot of people enjoy driving as a hobby. For them automatic gearboxes just are never going to recreate the same feel.

Manual doesn't "Need" to go any where. 

THANK YOU! I love driving manual during my days off and and love taking cars to the the track. Why would I ever want to take an automatic to the track

[sc302 1,746]

1 minute ago, adrynalyne said:

Speed is one thing, acceleration is another. Acceleration is where an automatic can outgun a manual. Top speed isn't a factor of automatic vs manual unless there is a big horsepower discrepancy. 

there are cars that are hitting the max speed that these supercars are in a 1/4 mile with automatics...hitting between 250 and 300 mph

[Solid Knight 512]

10 hours ago, adrynalyne said:

Hill assist is pretty common these days. 

Doesn't seem particularly effective.

[adrynalyne 12,423]

9 minutes ago, Solid Knight said:

Doesn't seem particularly effective.

You would be the first person I've heard say that. What vehicles have you tried it in?

[Solid Knight 512]

1 minute ago, adrynalyne said:

You would be the first person I've heard say that. What vehicles have you tried it in?

'm speaking from witnessing cars roll back into another and it's always a manual (from when I lived in San Francisco). Yes, I'm aware that it's not a valid way of determining the effectiveness of the feature in and of itself--more along the lines of not stopping people from being slow to get themselves going thus allowing them to roll back into another car anyway.

[Tomo 577]

11 hours ago, Solid Knight said:

The worst part of driving a manual is being on a steep hill at a dead stop before the top.

Just takes practice.

[adrynalyne 12,423]

1 minute ago, Solid Knight said:

'm speaking from witnessing cars roll back into another and it's always a manual (from when I lived in San Francisco). Yes, I'm aware that it's not a valid way of determining the effectiveness of the feature in and of itself--more along the lines of not stopping people from being slow to get themselves going thus allowing them to roll back into another car anyway.

How do you know those cars had it?

 

 

[Mando 5,117]

i say leave it as a choice, not everywhere is suitable to tiptronic or fully auto cars, you can prize my manual gearsticks from my cold dead hands

 

full auto boxes are for grandads 

[Solid Knight 512]

9 minutes ago, adrynalyne said:

How do you know those cars had it?

I assume its a standard feature by now.

[Mando 5,117]

12 hours ago, Solid Knight said:

The worst part of driving a manual is being on a steep hill at a dead stop before the top.

thats why you learn clutch control  it aint hard and is taught when you learn to drive in the UK. 

 

rolling back into cars isnt the manual gearboxes fault, its the driver who cant learn a simple process of riding the clutch at its bite point for hill starts.

[adrynalyne 12,423]

Just now, Solid Knight said:

I assume its a standard feature by now.

It may be, if everyone buys new cars. I've not checked every brand. 

[The Evil Overlord 18,442]

On ‎11‎/‎04‎/‎2016 at 4:04 PM, adrynalyne said:

You drove your sister? How was the handling?

 

 

 

There was something 'familiar' about this ride...

[The Evil Overlord 18,442]

On ‎11‎/‎04‎/‎2016 at 4:35 PM, adrynalyne said:

Nah.

 

MPG estimates (or whatever measure you prefer) are lower for manual because autos are programmed for the most efficient shift points.  You can of course override these between drive modes, manual shifting, tunes, etc, but if  you let the car do what its designed to do, it will be more efficient than a manual. There are almost no (if any)  drivers that can match the consistency of a computer. Not to mention that autos use zero fuel on a downhill grade. I am unsure if manuals are the same.

 

Not knocking manuals, but its just a fact.

I was hoping to drop out of this conversation, but I can actually disagree on a point made here, as I've driven 2 rental Honda civics, one was an auto, over 260 miles in each (basically, from north of Birmingham to London, and back) and the manual returned better fuel economy than the auto, holding a steady (driver operated, and not cruise control) 49 miles per hour I used way less fuel in the manual as the auto kept changing gears, engine idle at approx. 1800 rpm.

Edited April 14, 2016 by The Evil Overlord
edit for a typo and missed key point

[The Evil Overlord 18,442]

On ‎11‎/‎04‎/‎2016 at 6:32 PM, troysavary said:

The engine doesn't shut off during a downhill, so it does NOT use zero fuel. If the engine shuts off, you would lose hydraulics for the power steering and power breaks, as the belt would no longer be driving the pump. Don't try to present "facts" if you have no clue what you are talking about.

No, the engine doesn't shut off, but the ecu does tell the injectors to stop sending fuel to a long decelerating (engine braking, or a long over run, whatever you prefer) engine, so if one was engine braking from a highway speed to a gradual stop, over I'm guessing 2000 rpm, as I don't have the actual figure to hand, there will be no fuel sent to the engine, which is why when some engines over this type of deceleration, and the driver steps on the clutch, the engine almost stalls out before recovering.

Edited April 14, 2016 by The Evil Overlord

[adrynalyne 12,423]

20 minutes ago, The Evil Overlord said:

There was something 'familiar' about this ride...

LOLOL!

[adrynalyne 12,423]

15 minutes ago, The Evil Overlord said:

I was hoping to srop out of this conversation, but I can actually disagree on a point made here, as I've driven 2 rental Honda civics, one was an auto, over 260 miles in each (basically, from north of Birmingham to London,) and the manual returned better fuel economy than the auto, holding a steady (driver operated, and not cruise control) 49 miles per hour I used way less fuel in the manual as the auto kept changing gears, engine idle at approx. 1800 rpm.

Maybe its limited to higher performance vehicles then.

 

I average 22mpg with my GT with city only driving. I've not met anyone with a manual yet who can match that. 

[The Evil Overlord 18,442]

On ‎11‎/‎04‎/‎2016 at 11:55 PM, troysavary said:

If fuel is cut off, engine stops. The more you try to sound like you know what you are talking about, the less you actually appear to. You would get a pretty severe engine breaking effect if the forward motion of the vehicle was what turned the engine during downhill coasting.

Um, not really, I've tried this in my V6 Omega, engine braked in 2nd, from 45 miles an hour,

once regular engine braking

once turned off from ignition key with no accelerator

and once turned off by key, and then floored the accelerator, didn't notice any real difference (hell, if any) in the overall time taken for the vehicle to chug to a halt, apart from the one where the engine was still running at the time

[The Evil Overlord 18,442]

On ‎11‎/‎04‎/‎2016 at 0:09 AM, adrynalyne said:

Oh really?

http://www.popularmechanics.com/cars/hybrid-electric/a5977/coasting-in-neutral-fuel-economy/

http://mechanics.stackexchange.com/questions/816/can-coasting-in-neutral-damage-an-automatic-transmission

http://www.mercurynews.com/mr-roadshow/ci_25868854/roadshow-despite-dry-conditions-some-drivers-flip-cigarette

http://www.caranddriver.com/features/gas-pains-mileage-myths-and-misconceptions-when-coasting-to-a-stop-do-not-shift-into-neutral-page-3

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy-efficient_driving

 

 

 

 

Learn something.

This'll teach me, I should read the thread before posting on the fly

Something I never learn  

[The Evil Overlord 18,442]

On ‎11‎/‎04‎/‎2016 at 0:25 AM, sc302 said:

never said they were good for towing or for a sports car...but many cars, even some low end sports cars (subaru wrx for example), are coming with them.  

 

cvt may be a pipe dream but if they can get the tq down and get the durability up, it could eventually be a bad assed transmission (no gears to shift, just slides up or down the cones as it needs more/less vs moving a planetary gear into place and having a slight pause between gear changes).   Just like computer controlled valves, if a tuner can control where the band stays at given load/throttle position it could be an unlimited resource (only limit would be the drive train combination). 

This is the thing dude, I'm not an auto hater, I'm just passionate about the things I happen to be passionate about, (in this case pros vs cons in their relation to auto and manual transmissions) Any manual car, truck, whatever, can be all things to all people, autos have come a long way, no doubt, but auto car, is in no way, a 'jack of all trades' answer like a manual is currently, when autos rival manuals in being able to take the pressures manuals have to (especially concerning abuse workloads <towing more than the vehicle is capable of, and so on>) I'll take it back