Is the car culture dying?

[Max Rockatansky]

Not necessarily though. In the Bay Area you need Bart or buses to get to work because the parking fees are big in these areas. Its simply built for public transit. But I think car culture still exists though.

San Francisco ironically is the only western city that has gone through Manhattenization.  It has the second highest population density after NYC, I want to say it's about 20,000 people per square mile if I recall the demographics correct.  So basically you can't have the same level of roadways being built with all that pre-existing infrastructure in place....it's a very old city by west coast standards.  Basically you run into that all over the eastern sea board, a city is small in terms of actual area but the population is very high.  Look at something like Phoenix which is 518 square miles and despite almost having 1.5 million residents has a density of about 3,000 per mile.  Basically cities like Phoenix, L.A., Salt Lake City and Las Vegas largely grew up in an era where the car was the primary form of transportation which is why they were designed with it in mind.

True and also Manhattan is just the same size as Vallejo, CA when you take into account land area. But wait Since I mentioned Vallejo its the city where Solano county people do use their cars but they have to park them at the Vallejo Ferry Terminal and a park and ride spot to go to a bus that goes to San Francisco.

My favorite comparison is to take NYC at 470 something square miles (water included) with a population density of 28k per square mile to something like Phoenix which is 518 square mile but only has a density of about 3k per square mile.  So basically you are literally almost dealing with ten times more people crammed into the same area....so it's pretty obvious to tell which one is going to get around easier by car.

Yeah everyone keeps telling me about the ferries up there in the Bay Area or the trains from San Jose.  For me at my ever advancing age...I feel like mass transit is an undertaking that I'm not up to get into learning about.  But you figure that a lot of kids grow up around those transportation methods...so it's only natural they are more used to them than say someone like me who grew up in a era where mass transit was largely non-existent.

[Duke87]

Honestly, I've noticed the same thing of posters on these forums.  People love to talk roads and highways and such amongst each other, but when it comes to reading and looking up official material, people shy away from it.  Many have no clue how to access transportation documents from their state on the web (some states being better than others, but when you find the info it's amazing the amount of detail some provide).  People love to drive, but when I posted about a volunteer driving opportunity, absolutely no one had any interest from what I could tell.

I don't know that looking up official material would really be the gold standard of non-armchair roadgeeking, since it is after all still done from an armchair or similar piece of furniture unless you're the hardcore type who goes to DOT headquarters or libraries to look up stuff that isn't available online.

And yes, there are some people who like roads but don't enjoy being in a car so they don't do much firsthand exploring. But then there are people who would love to drive all over the place and explore and such, but for one reason or another cannot at present - too young to have a drivers' license, not enough money to pay for a car or long trips, not enough spare time to do any significant roadtripping, etc.

It's a volunteer activity, plain and simple.  And I think much of what you stated is shared amongst the population in general: If I'm not getting anything (especially money) out of it, why should I do it?

Also worth noting that even if someone enjoys driving, that does not mean they enjoy driving on someone else's terms serving someone else's needs.

There has been, for example, more than one occasion where I started to raise my hand that I'd be willing to drive a couple people somewhere, and then put my hand down and said "nevermind" when it was made clear to me that I would be expected to drive directly to the destination and would not be permitted to take six hours to get somewhere that's three hours away by the fastest route as I was intending to.

[8.Lug]

Only people outside of the car culture think it's dying - just like how they think the manual transmission is dying. What they fail to realize is that cars are much cheaper (relatively) than they used to be which means a lot more people are driving them - and this is watering down the numbers. The percentage of car enthusiasts may be lower, but our numbers most certainly are not dwindling.

Car culture won't die until cars are simply outright banned for consumer operation.

[Max Rockatansky]

Only people outside of the car culture think it's dying - just like how they think the manual transmission is dying. What they fail to realize is that cars are much cheaper (relatively) than they used to be which means a lot more people are driving them - and this is watering down the numbers. The percentage of car enthusiasts may be lower, but our numbers most certainly are not dwindling.

Car culture won't die until cars are simply outright banned for consumer operation.

Actually in terms of pace of inflation they are way more expensive than ever before but it hasn't outpaced something like the cost of a college tuition let's say.  I'm talking even the cheaper cars too....say you took $4,000 dollars in 1969 that comes out to $26,271 dollars today.  Could you imagine the 2016 Camaro SS being had for 26K instead of an entry of of 39k?...damn there would be a lot more on the road.  So basically unless you are getting in through the used car market the entry level price of car culture just isn't what it once was.  I wouldn't go as far as to say the manual transmission is going to die out but it certainly won't ever see 10% of the market ever again.  It's pretty telling how far manual transmissions have really fallen behind automatics with multimatic technology when makers like Ferrari won't offer them anymore. 

[kalvado]

  I wouldn't go as far as to say the manual transmission is going to die out but it certainly won't ever see 10% of the market ever again.  It's pretty telling how far manual transmissions have really fallen behind automatics with multimatic technology when makers like Ferrari won't offer them anymore.

More than 10% in the US  - maybe.
Worldwide, it is more like 50%. Don't try to rent a car in Europe if you don't drive manual...
http://www.statista.com/statistics/204123/transmission-type-market-share-in-automobile-production-worldwide/

Maybe that can be related to US car culture evolving a different way?

[vdeane]

Manuals are definitely dying out in the states, outside of perhaps a few models.  Even in models that offer them, they don't make many... when I got my Civic, it was the ONLY manual Civic on the entire lot (didn't check the other models, so it may have been the only manual period).  Many makes/models don't offer manual transmission at all any more, and that number will only increase as self-driving cars emerge.  Soon, I predict that those of us who want a manual but don't need or want a fancy sports car are going to have nowhere to go.

[Max Rockatansky]

Wasn't the buying rate for manual transmissions down to 6.7% in the U.S. back in 2010?...someone correct me if I'm wrong or please feel free to share a number from 2014/2015.  I'd like to point my finger at the Interstates opening up having something to do with the automatic catching on so quickly state side..but more or less that's just speculation on my part.  The last pure manual I owned was my 02 Mustang GT.....and while shifting around on a mountain road might have been fun it sucked on city surface streets or in a traffic jam.  So for me when I look at something like the Challenger I just bought it's even more difficult to justify the purchase of the manual especially when I get two extra gears and a computer that can shift things way faster than I can...even when I use the taps.  But that's the thing, almost every level of car offers some level of multimatic for manual shifting.  Why anyone would want a pure manual outside of a car built for race duty kinda of mystifies me...lest we forget automatics typically are pulling better EPA fuel economy figures pretty regularly over manuals these days.  But then again that's just my perspective on the U.S. market, what's going else car wise in the world asides from Canada really isn't some I interact with all that much.  But it would be interesting to find out if there is a similar wave of disinterest in cars that's growing in the European and Asian car markets...I would speculate that answer probably is a no for Asia given the automotive boon there in the last decade.

[Takumi]

All three of my current cars are manual. My next two (newer daily driver and JDM import once it's old enough) will be, too.

[Max Rockatansky]

All three of my current cars are manual. My next two (newer daily driver and JDM import once it's old enough) will be, too.

Seems like almost every JDM car that I've seen floating around is a manual.  I can't ever recall off the top of my head seeing an automatic JDM even at car shows...I sure there must have been but it really isn't my scene.   

[7/8]

My younger brother got a used manual Volkswagen Jetta a year ago. I'm not sure if I'd buy one since it would be crappy using it in traffic, but I can see why they'd be fun to drive. I've only driven it once so far, but I think I would enjoy using it on road trips

[briantroutman]

I think the death of "car culture"  has been greatly exaggerated.

First–I dispute that the love of cars-gratia-cartis was ever as pervasive as many claim. For every budding teenage George Barris in the '60s, there were a dozen plain Ednas and nerdy Eugenes whose slant six Valiants and bone-stock Volkswagens were simply transportation appliances–a way to get to after school jobs at Korvettes and chess club meetings. For Baby Boomers whose parents had isolated them in newly minted suburban housing tracts, the car was often the only way they could meet up with friends or even keep in touch with the outside world. Except perhaps the phone, which the family likely had only one, maybe two of...and definitely not in the teenager's room.

Today, kids are constantly in touch with one another...except when they're in the car (hopefully). And at the same time, there seems to be less enthusiasm about physically being together with friends. Anytime I see young people together, they're all staring off in different directions, silent, on their phones. Ironic.

But even if America's total car dependence is fading somewhat, it still has a long way to fall. The per capita vehicle miles traveled, currently just under 10,000, could drop by half and would still be well ahead of where it was in 1960. Take a look at the most transit-oriented nations on earth, and you'll still find active subcultures of die-hard gearheads. In a transit-embracing America, "car culture"  would have merely lost the people who were forced to drive a car because it was the only way to get home from marching band practice.

For me at my ever advancing age...I feel like mass transit is an undertaking that I'm not up to get into learning about.  But you figure that a lot of kids grow up around those transportation methods...so it's only natural they are more used to them than say someone like me who grew up in a era where mass transit was largely non-existent.

I don't think that's necessarily the case. I grew up in a small city where busses were the only form of public transit, and the only people who used them were the elderly, the abject poor, and the moderately poor who had racked up multiple DUIs. I used a city bus just once in my hometown and felt as if I had been an interloper in a milieu where I did not belong. Absolutely everywhere I went as a child and for years after was in a private automobile.

Fast forward through a decade and a couple hundred thousand miles of driving, and I've learned to embrace transit. You see, I love cars and truly enjoy driving, and I think it would be a tragedy if I grew to hate driving simply because I put myself in a position where I was forced to drive everywhere, particularly in urban areas where driving is unmitigated hell. I endured several soul-crushing months of that living in Los Angeles. Never again.

Why anyone would want a pure manual outside of a car built for race duty kinda of mystifies me...

Speed has nothing to do with it. It's the graceful choreography of clutch in...clutch out...shifter forward...shifter back... that becomes both fun and familiar once you've mastered it. Yes, it can become a pain in heavy traffic, but as I indicated above, if I'm spending my life in heavy traffic, I'm living wrong.

[Scott5114]

But I think it's a culture shift with society more in general than just cars.  Look at how Milennials operate...they are all social butterflies (I had maybe 3 or 4 good friends in high school), they all want to live in urban environments (as opposed to my generation who viewed them as crowded hell holes) and they tend to grow up a lot slower...especially from career or economics.  I remember wanting to leave the house so badly when I was 18 that I joined the military to fund it, there is this whole trend with people staying with the parents until they are in their mid-20s now.  I think a lot of this is being driven buy the net based culture and social media frenzy that people grow up in nowadays.

I don't want to get this too political or off-topic, but as a borderline millennial myself it irks me when people look at us and say "the kids these days, they don't have the jobs or the houses, it's cause of the technologies!" The millennials started entering the workforce in 2008 or later. That was when the big recession hit. The workforce contracted due to the poor economic conditions, and in many businesses, staff was let go and the remaining employees were required to take on more work to make up for it.

Since then, employers have gotten complacent and used to one employee doing the work of two or three. They get away with posting positions that require numerous years of experience for entry-level pay. A lot of companies are still carrying on in this way even though it's not 2008 anymore and they're not in any imminent danger of going under any time soon.

So this is the world the millennials walked into and are tasked to adapting to. When you have a college degree and can't get a job with it, you're forced to economize. Some choose to do this by staying with their parents. Others do it by eschewing the car and the attached gas, maintenance, and insurance costs.

[Max Rockatansky]

For me at my ever advancing age...I feel like mass transit is an undertaking that I'm not up to get into learning about.  But you figure that a lot of kids grow up around those transportation methods...so it's only natural they are more used to them than say someone like me who grew up in a era where mass transit was largely non-existent.

I don't think that's necessarily the case. I grew up in a small city where busses were the only form of public transit, and the only people who used them were the elderly, the abject poor, and the moderately poor who had racked up multiple DUIs. I used a city bus just once in my hometown and felt as if I had been an interloper in a milieu where I did not belong. Absolutely everywhere I went as a child and for years after was in a private automobile.

Fast forward through a decade and a couple hundred thousand miles of driving, and I've learned to embrace transit. You see, I love cars and truly enjoy driving, and I think it would be a tragedy if I grew to hate driving simply because I put myself in a position where I was forced to drive everywhere, particularly in urban areas where driving is unmitigated hell. I endured several soul-crushing months of that living in Los Angeles. Never again.

Why anyone would want a pure manual outside of a car built for race duty kinda of mystifies me...

Speed has nothing to do with it. It's the graceful choreography of clutch in...clutch out...shifter forward...shifter back... that becomes both fun and familiar once you've mastered it. Yes, it can become a pain in heavy traffic, but as I indicated above, if I'm spending my life in heavy traffic, I'm living wrong.

Okay so it's just not me that gets that weird feeling on mass transit.    I honestly just get this vibe that it's unapproachable for whatever reason.  About the only one that I ever kind of found somewhat easy to use was the trains on the east coast, it felt almost identical to going to the airport but with a much more laid back and quicker process.  Funny thing is that I find major train stations be really good places to park even if I don't use the train.  I used to park at Union Station in D.C. and walk to whatever I had to do.

That's just it though, a lot of these people with manuals DO live in heavy traffic.  You see it all the time down in Los Angeles, watching someone flip through the gears in a traffic jam (when did we start calling it congestion now that I think about it?) since it stands out so much against the automatics.  I could see someone wanting a manual for performance reasons out in a mountain state...I don't know, I guess to each their own.  What I don't understand is how the overwhelming majority of the U.S. Market is automatics but on cars that offer both types for some reason the manual which is much lower in volume somehow is the base transmission while the automatic costs you usually a grand.....really? 

But I think it's a culture shift with society more in general than just cars.  Look at how Milennials operate...they are all social butterflies (I had maybe 3 or 4 good friends in high school), they all want to live in urban environments (as opposed to my generation who viewed them as crowded hell holes) and they tend to grow up a lot slower...especially from career or economics.  I remember wanting to leave the house so badly when I was 18 that I joined the military to fund it, there is this whole trend with people staying with the parents until they are in their mid-20s now.  I think a lot of this is being driven buy the net based culture and social media frenzy that people grow up in nowadays.

I don't want to get this too political or off-topic, but as a borderline millennial myself it irks me when people look at us and say "the kids these days, they don't have the jobs or the houses, it's cause of the technologies!" The millennials started entering the workforce in 2008 or later. That was when the big recession hit. The workforce contracted due to the poor economic conditions, and in many businesses, staff was let go and the remaining employees were required to take on more work to make up for it.

Since then, employers have gotten complacent and used to one employee doing the work of two or three. They get away with posting positions that require numerous years of experience for entry-level pay. A lot of companies are still carrying on in this way even though it's not 2008 anymore and they're not in any imminent danger of going under any time soon.

So this is the world the millennials walked into and are tasked to adapting to. When you have a college degree and can't get a job with it, you're forced to economize. Some choose to do this by staying with their parents. Others do it by eschewing the car and the attached gas, maintenance, and insurance costs.

It's not to say that I haven't had people under the age of 25 that have worked me that haven't been quality people.  In fact there was a guy who just moved on since he got his BA that probably would have been one of the top three people that ever worked for me.  But I would be remiss to not mention he went through the military and was out using the G.I. bill...so I don't know if it's an apples to apples comparison.  But then again I've known guys my age that had that exact same situation that screwed it all up.  Every age group has their people who have success, fail or generally just float around somewhere in the middle.  I guess it's really no different than someone like my baby boomer parents looking at my generation and saying we would all be screw ups because of boom boxes, MTV or a Nintendo....something.  Could be that's just a sign that the previous generation is getting "old" when they don't understand things the younger generation is into.

One positive that did come out this recession...at least in my eyes (and this might not be depending where you are in life) is that work experience and known job history really took over in importance than a college degree.  When I was growing all that ever got beaten into my head was a college degree and really at the time that's all an employer wanted.  I think that had a lot to do with the baby boomers wanting to shift out of blue collar work and projecting that onto their kids...which was fine at the time.  If I had to weigh who is usually a better employee it's typical the one who has been doing something for a longer period of time rather than someone just entering the field...degree or not, the colleges really aren't teaching you a lot that applies to real life.  That's not to say that having AA, BA or MA isn't something that isn't helpful but I would think that in today's atmosphere it's better to do school part-time to get the work history going and accumulate the education over time, with things like online schooling it seems to be a lot easier to juggle both.  What has happened in the four year colleges is a huge outpacing of inflation for tuition, books and pretty much anything that goes along price wise to a major "name" college. 

[formulanone]

Why anyone would want a pure manual outside of a car built for race duty kinda of mystifies me...lest we forget automatics typically are pulling better EPA fuel economy figures pretty regularly over manuals these days.

Go over to the economy/compact car segment, where the automatic transmissions are usually a decade or two behind the times, so having 5-6 gears instead of four makes a noticeable difference in performance compared to the slushbox. If the car is only equipped with a little over 100 horsepower, every little bit counts. (In my car, first and second gear is a good deal shorter than the automatic gearset; in tests, this means a bit over a second to 60mph.)

Fuel economy is usually a negligible difference, because programmed shift logic will upshift at 2500-3000 rpm during most driving, avoid first gear during partial-open throttle starts, and reach for the tallest gear as soon as it detects a lack of hurry-up from the driver.

Lastly, it's a bit more engaging to have a lever which makes it inexplicably more fun.

[mariethefoxy]

From what I can tell, its a case of people not being able to afford cars, or wanting to live in San Fran or NYC because its "trendy" or percieved as more LBGT friendly. I tell people, I wouldn't mind a cabin in the middle of New Hampshire away from the crowds and hustle and bustle, but that's just my preference since I enjoy the quiet of the outdoors.

Tho lot of my friends in my age group (late 20s early 30s) have cars, albeit older models. I also know quite a few car guys and one or two car girls also. Subaru seems to be really popular among people I know.

[Takumi]

All three of my current cars are manual. My next two (newer daily driver and JDM import once it's old enough) will be, too.

Seems like almost every JDM car that I've seen floating around is a manual.  I can't ever recall off the top of my head seeing an automatic JDM even at car shows...I sure there must have been but it really isn't my scene.   

They're out there. There's a company here in Richmond that imports JDM cars like Nissan Skylines, and some of them have automatics.

[Max Rockatansky]

Why anyone would want a pure manual outside of a car built for race duty kinda of mystifies me...lest we forget automatics typically are pulling better EPA fuel economy figures pretty regularly over manuals these days.

Go over to the economy/compact car segment, where the automatic transmissions are usually a decade or two behind the times, so having 5-6 gears instead of four makes a noticeable difference in performance compared to the slushbox. If the car is only equipped with a little over 100 horsepower, every little bit counts. (In my car, first and second gear is a good deal shorter than the automatic gearset; in tests, this means a bit over a second to 60mph.)

Fuel economy is usually a negligible difference, because programmed shift logic will upshift at 2500-3000 rpm during most driving, avoid first gear during partial-open throttle starts, and reach for the tallest gear as soon as it detects a lack of hurry-up from the driver.

Lastly, it's a bit more engaging to have a lever which makes it inexplicably more fun.

Last two sub-compacts I had were the current Chevy Sonic and a Ford Fiesta.  That Fiesta was a beast on fuel economy with that twin clutch automatic, I averaged usually 42-44 MPG most trips on the car and 42.4 through 49,000 miles when I had to take the battery out.  That thing shifted HARD though and pretty deliberately, a lot of people who rode in it thought it had a bad transmission.    If I recall correctly the manual Fiesta had 37 MPG rated on the highway and the it was 38 MPG for the twin-clutch.  Basically I wouldn't call that transmission anything advanced but it was built for economy and it was actually pretty friggin robust considering I put 143,000 miles on that car mostly on mountain roads over the roughly 3 years I had it.

That Sonic on the other hand is a more conventional 6 speed auto and it feels like it.  It doesn't shift anywhere near as hard as the Fiesta but averages maybe 38 MPG in the same driving conditions I illustrated above.  The shifts are slow and I often put it into multimatic for grades in excess of 6% since it doesn't want to find a gear quickly on it's own. 

From what I can tell, its a case of people not being able to afford cars, or wanting to live in San Fran or NYC because its "trendy" or percieved as more LBGT friendly. I tell people, I wouldn't mind a cabin in the middle of New Hampshire away from the crowds and hustle and bustle, but that's just my preference since I enjoy the quiet of the outdoors.

Tho lot of my friends in my age group (late 20s early 30s) have cars, albeit older models. I also know quite a few car guys and one or two car girls also. Subaru seems to be really popular among people I know.

Just my observation but it seems like NYC really has dropped out the whole "trendy" part of modern culture.  I remember in the 1980s that was the place to be, it was all over the place and the setting in a whole lot of movies.  Now it kind of feels like...old money...I suppose, seems like Boston is the more popular of the cities these days on the east coast. 

I'm an outdoors guy too...I'm about 20 years from retirement but I'm trying to figure out what mountain state build my isolationist "cabin in the woods."  So far I got the list down to Nevada, Arizona, Wyoming, Colorado and Montana.

All three of my current cars are manual. My next two (newer daily driver and JDM import once it's old enough) will be, too.

Seems like almost every JDM car that I've seen floating around is a manual.  I can't ever recall off the top of my head seeing an automatic JDM even at car shows...I sure there must have been but it really isn't my scene.   

They're out there. There's a company here in Richmond that imports JDM cars like Nissan Skylines, and some of them have automatics.

Interesting, I'll have to look into that more.  I wouldn't mind trying to import something like a Falcon...specifically a 73 XB GT for some special modifications of course. 

[bing101]

Not necessarily though. In the Bay Area you need Bart or buses to get to work because the parking fees are big in these areas. Its simply built for public transit. But I think car culture still exists though.

San Francisco ironically is the only western city that has gone through Manhattenization.  It has the second highest population density after NYC, I want to say it's about 20,000 people per square mile if I recall the demographics correct.  So basically you can't have the same level of roadways being built with all that pre-existing infrastructure in place....it's a very old city by west coast standards.  Basically you run into that all over the eastern sea board, a city is small in terms of actual area but the population is very high.  Look at something like Phoenix which is 518 square miles and despite almost having 1.5 million residents has a density of about 3,000 per mile.  Basically cities like Phoenix, L.A., Salt Lake City and Las Vegas largely grew up in an era where the car was the primary form of transportation which is why they were designed with it in mind.

True and also Manhattan is just the same size as Vallejo, CA when you take into account land area. But wait Since I mentioned Vallejo its the city where Solano county people do use their cars but they have to park them at the Vallejo Ferry Terminal and a park and ride spot to go to a bus that goes to San Francisco.

My favorite comparison is to take NYC at 470 something square miles (water included) with a population density of 28k per square mile to something like Phoenix which is 518 square mile but only has a density of about 3k per square mile.  So basically you are literally almost dealing with ten times more people crammed into the same area....so it's pretty obvious to tell which one is going to get around easier by car.

Manhattan is really if the entire population of the San Fernando Valley lived in Vallejo.  But Then again we need both public transit, bikes and cars at the same time.


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vallejo,_California


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Manhattan

[vdeane]

Looks like the idea of even driving is going to go by the wayside soon... Israel has stated its intent to outlaw driving in favor of self-driving cars: http://www.jpost.com/Business-and-Innovation/Tech/By-2040-people-wont-be-allowed-to-drive-on-Israels-roads-459514

[GCrites]

Why anyone would want a pure manual outside of a car built for race duty kinda of mystifies me...lest we forget automatics typically are pulling better EPA fuel economy figures pretty regularly over manuals these days.

Go over to the economy/compact car segment, where the automatic transmissions are usually a decade or two behind the times, so having 5-6 gears instead of four makes a noticeable difference in performance compared to the slushbox. If the car is only equipped with a little over 100 horsepower, every little bit counts. (In my car, first and second gear is a good deal shorter than the automatic gearset; in tests, this means a bit over a second to 60mph.)

My 2012 Colorado and my 1987 IROC-Z have essentially the same transmission, the 700R4/4L60-E. I like the transmission in the IROC which is modified to make 400ft-lb of torque, but hate it in the Colorado with its 180ft-lb. It always tries to grab 2 gears when I don't want it to in the truck, but pretty much does as I command in the car. This means I often avoid accelerating as fast as I want in the truck to avoid having to immediately let off to let it slide back into 1st or 2nd and discombobulate the vehicle. People have been involved in asphalt racing hate it when things don't happen smoothly and the vehicle is unsettled. In the car, the trans does have a shift kit and according to the guy I bought it from a "Corvette servo". Nonetheless, I don't feel installing those things in the truck would make me like the transmission better. They might make me hate it more in the truck, actually. That truck really needed a five or six speed auto to be current in 2012 or even 2007.

I still would way rather have a T56 manual in the IROC though. I might have one put in over the winter.

[PHLBOS]

If by car culture, we're referring to usage as opposed to enthusiasts or gearheads; it certainly hasn't died... at least in terms of overall traffic. 

In some areas, there indeed seems to be an increase in traffic on the roads.  Recently, I made several trips to eastern MA (to visit my mother who was injured in car accident over a month ago) and I have noticed that more highways in the Greater Boston area have more traffic now than such did even just a year ago; and I'm not just referring to rush-hours.

Example: I-95/MA 128 between I-93 (Woburn) and US 1 (Peabody) seems to be jammed w/traffic except during late night hours... even on weekends.  This wasn't the case about a year ago.  Both my older brother & I have noticed such.

[vdeane]

But how many of those people genuinely enjoy driving?  In my experience, most people drive only because self-driving cars haven't been invented yet and view driving as a chore.

[Max Rockatansky]

But how many of those people genuinely enjoy driving?  In my experience, most people drive only because self-driving cars haven't been invented yet and view driving as a chore.

I do....but people these days think that it's weird as all hell.  Given that someone on here was surprised that I enjoy a casual day off drive I would suspect a lot of people on here think the same.  Even commuting....sometimes it's fun to find the alternate route since the main one usually gets boring really fast.  NOW....I don't enjoy freeway driving...to me that's commuting in it's purist and more inanely boring form. 

Interestingly though...I think a lot of young people in general don't have as much interest in being outside or exploring their surroundings.  I would be interested to see some sort of study on things like National Park visitation among age groups and how that has changed over the last half century.  I would suspect that if such a survey existed it would show a gradual decline through to modern times.  It's like I've said repeatedly already, there are so many social outlets and generally more things to do these days that the older forms of entertainment are going to have to take a reduced share of the interest....including car hobby culture.

And...I'm sorry, I don't think anyone can convince me to hand over the reigns of driving to a Cylon.  It's not a distrust thing...at least not a big one, I just don't like the idea of something I for the most part enjoy being automated.  What the hell am I supposed to do with all that time the car drives itself?

If by car culture, we're referring to usage as opposed to enthusiasts or gearheads; it certainly hasn't died... at least in terms of overall traffic. 

In some areas, there indeed seems to be an increase in traffic on the roads.  Recently, I made several trips to eastern MA (to visit my mother who was injured in car accident over a month ago) and I have noticed that more highways in the Greater Boston area have more traffic now than such did even just a year ago; and I'm not just referring to rush-hours.

Example: I-95/MA 128 between I-93 (Woburn) and US 1 (Peabody) seems to be jammed w/traffic except during late night hours... even on weekends.  This wasn't the case about a year ago.  Both my older brother & I have noticed such.

Most of that increased traffic has more to do with the increase in population nationwide though.  You were looking at roughly 180 million people in 1960 country wide as opposed to the 320 something million that here now.  And for what it's worth I always thought this thread pertained to "gear heads" specially state side ones. 

[7/8]

But how many of those people genuinely enjoy driving?  In my experience, most people drive only because self-driving cars haven't been invented yet and view driving as a chore.

I do....but people these days think that it's weird as all hell.  Given that someone on here was surprised that I enjoy a casual day off drive I would suspect a lot of people on here think the same.  Even commuting....sometimes it's fun to find the alternate route since the main one usually gets boring really fast.  NOW....I don't enjoy freeway driving...to me that's commuting in it's purist and more inanely boring form. 

Interestingly though...I think a lot of young people in general don't have as much interest in being outside or exploring their surroundings.  I would be interested to see some sort of study on things like National Park visitation among age groups and how that has changed over the last half century.  I would suspect that if such a survey existed it would show a gradual decline through to modern times.  It's like I've said repeatedly already, there are so many social outlets and generally more things to do these days that the older forms of entertainment are going to have to take a reduced share of the interest....including car hobby culture.

And...I'm sorry, I don't think anyone can convince me to hand over the reigns of driving to a Cylon.  It's not a distrust thing...at least not a big one, I just don't like the idea of something I for the most part enjoy being automated.  What the hell am I supposed to do with all that time the car drives itself?

I enjoy driving too, though my older brother hates it! It's funny how that happens.

My fear is that the future will be like "Red Barchetta" by Rush, where they'll prohibit certain cars (in our case, human-operated cars) and only allow self-driving cars. I know logically it would be safer, but I would miss driving too much

[Darkchylde]

I've noticed something  about a lot of Millennials as an extra-late X'er that's been into cars and racing for over 20 years. They'll watch a lot of car videos on the internet, hang out on Jalopnik and its sister sites, play Forza/Gran Turismo/NFS, talk about Ken Block but won't buy a cool/fun car even if they can afford it. They still drive some boring stock Civic/2000s pickup truck/hand-me-down-from-grandma 2000s Impala/Scion or not even own a car and take transit or walk. So they have knowledge about various car models but don't participate.

Pretty much this in my case, but there's an additional reason: utility. There's no way I'm packing everything I own into a Mustang or Camaro. So my next vehicle will be a pickup truck (but NOT something as new as a 2000), a van, or a larger SUV like a Suburban.