Manual vs. Automatic?

[empirestate]

I have no desire to own or drive a manual. Why make the act of driving more complicated than it has to be?

Because it's a lot more fun?

Well, that, but for me it also has a practical purpose. If the act of driving itself (as opposed to additional distractions on top of driving) is more complicated, I'm able to focus better on doing it. And manual transmissions require a lot more interaction with the vehicle in traffic situations than automatics do, and traffic situations are where it's helpful to be more actively engaged in driving. (I also find that hitting heavier traffic towards the end of a long, boring drive often helps me wake up somewhat.)

[bugo]

No, the automatic isn't "technically superior" to a manual.  Manuals can do things automatics can't do.  You are wrong.

Bell Labs Princess rotary dial phone

[Crazy Volvo Guy]

Manual.  Automatics are slushed up too much these days, because people don't want to feel the shifts.

Only way to accomplish this is to make the clutches slip more, which heats them up more, and decreases their life.

In other words: automatic transmissions have engineered-in issues anymore, because people are wussies.

Not everyone that drives an automatic wants to "not feel the shifts" and fluids are engineered to combat the slipping of the clutches to reduce the heat and wear.

I attempted to learn manual and learned several things - it's a pain in the behind in my daily commute, I'm not very good at it, very few folks with manuals will let you grind their gears to learn, and not a lot of folks around me own manuals in the first place. But it's all OK - I've survived driving the last 30-plus years with automatics and my manhood is still intact.

All that said - I'm not against offering manuals to those that want them - but I can envision where after decades of charging a premium to have an automatic (despite the take rate being something like 94%), there will be a premium to buy a manual.

I've yet to drive an "automated-manual" like in some VWs and in the new Dodge Dart and Fiat 500/500L.

No, really - the only way to make an automatic shift in such a way that you can't feel it is deliberate slippage of the clutches.  If they don't slip, the shifts will be VERY hard, at any speed or throttle position.

As for automated manuals, I've driven a vehicle with one - a 2006 Volvo VNL64T670 with an Eaton Fuller 10-speed autoshift. 

[kkt]

Manual.

Every situation except stop and go, I'd much rather have a manual.  And extended stop and go sucks no matter what.

[Stratuscaster]

No, really - the only way to make an automatic shift in such a way that you can't feel it is deliberate slippage of the clutches.  If they don't slip, the shifts will be VERY hard, at any speed or throttle position.

Understood. Chrysler's UltraDrive (known later as A604 and 4*TE and now 6*TE) does allow for such slippage - and proper care and feeding requires the use of a specific transaxle fluid to allow for that type of operation. Throw Dexron in one of these (which many QuickieLube places will do - and shouldn't) and because it's a "grabbier" fluid it will cause more wear and tear and will ultimately kill the transaxle.

[Stratuscaster]

No such thing as an "automated manual".  They are automatic transmissions.

Sorry. How about "dual-clutch transmission" or "dual dry clutch transmission"? Both are types of semi-automatic or automated manual automotive transmissions. It's what's used in the Fiat 500, Fiat 500L and in certain models of the Dodge Dart.

And, as noted, they are used in many large trucks as well - including the Ram Promaster (nee Fiat Ducato) cargo van.

[Brandon]

No, really - the only way to make an automatic shift in such a way that you can't feel it is deliberate slippage of the clutches.  If they don't slip, the shifts will be VERY hard, at any speed or throttle position.

Understood. Chrysler's UltraDrive (known later as A604 and 4*TE and now 6*TE) does allow for such slippage - and proper care and feeding requires the use of a specific transaxle fluid to allow for that type of operation. Throw Dexron in one of these (which many QuickieLube places will do - and shouldn't) and because it's a "grabbier" fluid it will cause more wear and tear and will ultimately kill the transaxle.

Yep.  You should only use what the owner's manual tells you to in an Ultramatic.  IIRC, it was ATF-4 fluid (which, interestingly enough is also the power steering fluid).  There have been more than a few reports on Allpar of idiot mechanics who have thrown in Dexron as it was just there.

[tchafe1978]

I prefer a "stick" over an automatic any day, unfortunately, my wife doesn't, so I'm stuck driving automatics. I still miss my 1991 Ford Escort which was a stick, and it's probably been 10 years since I had it.

One way sticks would really be useful is with the problem of texting and driving. It's kind of hard to be tapping on your phone when you have to be using all fours to actually drive the car!

[agentsteel53]

I have no issue with manual but prefer automatic.  that said, when I get a Jeep at some point, I will want a manual transmission in that one for off-road purposes.

[Dr Frankenstein]

Well, that, but for me it also has a practical purpose. If the act of driving itself (as opposed to additional distractions on top of driving) is more complicated, I'm able to focus better on doing it. And manual transmissions require a lot more interaction with the vehicle in traffic situations than automatics do, and traffic situations are where it's helpful to be more actively engaged in driving. (I also find that hitting heavier traffic towards the end of a long, boring drive often helps me wake up somewhat.)

Ladies and gentlemen, the main reason why I drive manual.

Also because it's less boring.

[PHLBOS]

Since all but one of my vehicles have been full-sizes (four of them being true land-yachts); I've only owned automatics.  Although, the owner's manual for my first car (a 1969 Ford LTD) lists available manual transmissions; those were for the bare-bones Custom/Custom 500s models or the sport-oriented XL model.  I did once see an eBay ad for a '71 Ford LTD convertible that was equipped w/a 4-speed manual; (photos showed a floor-mounted shift and the clutch pedal).  So a big, full-size car could be equipped w/a manual prior to the mid-1970s.

However, about a year after getting my license (1983); I did learned to drive a manual on my father's 1972 Ford Pinto wagon that he paid $300 for (his '79 Ford Econoline van was stolen and his '72 BMW Bavaria needed engine work).  I guess he figured, if I initially grind the gears, the car was essentially throw-away transportation to begin with.  I eventually got the hang of it.  I've since driven his '83 Escort (which ultimately replaced his Pinto) that had a 4-speed manual and my brother's '86 Escort L that had a 5-speed.

My biggest issue/challenge w/a manual is when one's stopped on an incline.  One needs to be really quick on their feet when proceeding to prevent rolling back (and possibly into the vehicle that may be behind you).  One time while driving a friend of mine's 1989 Dodge Dakota pick-up that had a manual.  After stopping for a red light at the intersection of Bishop Ave. & Baltimore Pike in Springfield/Upper Darby PA; I came close to rolling into the vehicle behind me when the light turned green, fortunately I didn't.  It was several years since I drove a manual at the time.

For those that don't know the area, Bishop Ave. south of Baltimore Pike is a steep incline towards the intersection.

Bishop Ave. looking north towards Baltimore Pike:
http://goo.gl/maps/fjilu

IMHO, cars w/manual transmissions should have a nameplate/decal that states such mounted on the back trunk or hatch.  That way an approaching vehicle will know to give a little extra space behind it; which is an issue in many urban/developed areas.

For those that think the above is outlandish; once upon a time, many small cars equipped w/automatics (back then, such was a minority) had an Automatic nameplate mounted on the back.  The old VW bugs equipped w/automatics were an example of such.

- Party Line 
(for you, bugo  )

[briantroutman]

...the owner's manual for my first car (a 1969 Ford LTD) lists available manual transmissions; those were for the bare-bones Custom/Custom 500s models

In my experience, Ford was notorious for offering an incredibly wide array of component options (including many outdated components, such as a three-speed manual column shift as late as the mid '80s on trucks) while also allowing buyers to strip even the most expensive models down to poverty spec. You'd see "AM Radio - May be deleted for credit." even on LTD brochures.

My biggest issue/challenge w/a manual is when one's stopped on an incline.

I don't know if this has been brought up yet, but this is a simple matter. Just hold the car with the hand brake while you let out the clutch and ease down on the accelerator. As someone who owns a manual and lives in San Francisco, I know this maneuver well. There are also several cars that have a "hill hold" feature that will keep the car from rolling back on an incline until you start going.

For those that think the above is outlandish; once upon a time, many small cars equipped w/automatics (back then, such was a minority) had an Automatic nameplate mounted on the back.  The old VW bugs equipped w/automatics were an example of such.

That was because an automatic (particularly on a small or foreign car) was something of a bragging point in the way that "Turbo" or "Symmetrical AWD" might be viewed today. My dad's 1975 Super Beetle had "FUEL INJECTION" across the deck lid as it was the first year VW put the Bosch L-Jetronic in the Beetle. It was actually pretty early for fuel injection in general, particularly for a small, inexpensive car.

Ironically enough, a "Manual Shift" badge might have even more snob appeal today, but for a different reason.

[1995hoo]

Regarding the handbrake trick....my first car when I was 16 was a four-speed manual with a pedal-operated parking brake! Big steel bumpers, too, so I didn't much worry about not being able to do the handbrake trick.

I think starting on a hill becomes second nature very quickly. The only time in recent memory I remember feeling like I might have a problem was in Montreal. I turned around in my seat, caught the eye of the guy behind me, and gestured to him to back up. He immediately did. I'd wager most Americans would have no idea what I was trying to signal. I did indeed roll back that time. I seldom do, but that particular hill was tough.

[bugo]

...the owner's manual for my first car (a 1969 Ford LTD) lists available manual transmissions; those were for the bare-bones Custom/Custom 500s models

In my experience, Ford was notorious for offering an incredibly wide array of component options (including many outdated components, such as a three-speed manual column shift as late as the mid '80s on trucks) while also allowing buyers to strip even the most expensive models down to poverty spec. You'd see "AM Radio - May be deleted for credit." even on LTD brochures.

This is true.  My dad had a 1983 Ford F100 with a 300 six and a 3 on the tree.  It was quite fun to drive and was peppy.

For those that think the above is outlandish; once upon a time, many small cars equipped w/automatics (back then, such was a minority) had an Automatic nameplate mounted on the back.  The old VW bugs equipped w/automatics were an example of such.

That was because an automatic (particularly on a small or foreign car) was something of a bragging point in the way that "Turbo" or "Symmetrical AWD" might be viewed today. My dad's 1975 Super Beetle had "FUEL INJECTION" across the deck lid as it was the first year VW put the Bosch L-Jetronic in the Beetle. It was actually pretty early for fuel injection in general, particularly for a small, inexpensive car.

The Volkswagen Automatic Stickshift was utter garbage and the fuel injection was half baked.  I wouldn't want an air cooled VW without a 4 speed manual and a carburetor.

[vdeane]

That way an approaching vehicle will know to give a little extra space behind it

Technically, you're supposed to give that space to ALL cars, not just because of manual rollback, but because you'll create a traffic jam if the vehicle in front of you stalls out or something if you don't have room to maneuver around.

[AsphaltPlanet]

Regarding the handbrake trick....my first car when I was 16 was a four-speed manual with a pedal-operated parking brake! Big steel bumpers, too, so I didn't much worry about not being able to do the handbrake trick.

I think starting on a hill becomes second nature very quickly. The only time in recent memory I remember feeling like I might have a problem was in Montreal. I turned around in my seat, caught the eye of the guy behind me, and gestured to him to back up. He immediately did. I'd wager most Americans would have no idea what I was trying to signal. I did indeed roll back that time. I seldom do, but that particular hill was tough.

When sitting at a light on a hill, I usually start to roll back when a vehicle approaches me from behind to signal that I am driving a manual and need a bit of extra space.  That usually does the trick for me.

Of course, I have driven manual long enough, that even on the steepest inclines I can start off from the hill without rolling back any significant distance without using the handbrake.

[empirestate]

Of course, I have driven manual long enough, that even on the steepest inclines I can start off from the hill without rolling back any significant distance without using the handbrake.

Well, not to discredit your skills, but that has as much to do with your car and the hill itself as it does with your prowess.

In Pittsburgh there was a saying about using the handbrake: it's not "cheating", it's "technique".

[1995hoo]

Yeah, I sometimes roll back deliberately as well. It FREAKS OUT the high school kids who don't know manual shifts exist. (There have been times when I've jumpstarted the RX-7 and then just left it running without locking the doors while I put away the other car. The high school kids in our neighborhood wouldn't be able to joyride because it seems none of them know how to drive a manual.)

I don't see any reason for manual cars to be labelled. It's the following driver's responsibility to leave space. But the problem is the average automatic driver has no clue that a manual driver might roll back. Having a label wouldn't inform them they need to leave room.

[DaBigE]

Isn't leaving space or labeling a manual transmission car moot anyways? If there would be a collision, wouldn't the driver of the manual be at fault since they failed to properly control their vehicle?

All I do know is this was a topic that was never discussed when I took drivers' ed (leaving space was, but not with regards to a manual transmission car). How much space is appropriate to leave? Three feet? Half a car length?

[empirestate]

Isn't leaving space or labeling a manual transmission car moot anyways? If there would be a collision, wouldn't the driver of the manual be at fault since they failed to properly control their vehicle?

If they properly failed to control it, then possibly so. However, on a steep incline, it's perfectly possible for a manual transmission to roll somewhat while still being properly controlled. A corollary would be braking: you can bring you car to a stop having full and proper control, but your stopping distance will still be greater than zero.

All I do know is this was a topic that was never discussed when I took drivers' ed (leaving space was, but not with regards to a manual transmission car). How much space is appropriate to leave? Three feet? Half a car length?

Enough so that the car in front doesn't roll into you if it's being properly controlled. That will depend on the hill, mostly.

I should add that I, too, often roll back deliberately to indicate that I'm likely to do so when starting off. So far, I haven't seen anyone behind me take any course of action based on that info, but at least they have it.

[Crazy Volvo Guy]

All I do know is this was a topic that was never discussed when I took drivers' ed (leaving space was, but not with regards to a manual transmission car). How much space is appropriate to leave? Three feet? Half a car length?

You should be able to see the tires meeting the pavement plus a few feet of pavement thereafter.  If you can't, you are too close.  This was drilled into my head in driver's ed.  Every time I stopped close enough that I couldn't at least see the tires of the vehicle in front meeting the ground...I got yelled at by the instructor.

My observation is that absolutely nobody has a fucking clue when it comes to proper following distance...stopped or not.  When moving...what is so GD hard to understand about a 2-second minimum following distance?  I don't get it.  Sorry, that's for another thread...I'll stop ranting now.

[corco]

Same- it's just good practice to leave a few feet behind the car in front of you. Beyond the possibility that they have a manual, that six or seven foot buffer has saved me from getting rear ended on a couple occasion. If I'm stopped somewhere, and the car behind me isn't paying attention and isn't going to be able to slow down in time, I can roll a few feet forward as they jam their brakes, increasing the likelihood that they'll have room to stop.

[vdeane]

Isn't leaving space or labeling a manual transmission car moot anyways? If there would be a collision, wouldn't the driver of the manual be at fault since they failed to properly control their vehicle?

Some rollback, depending on the hill, is inevitable with a manual.  This is a fundamental difference between the transmissions.  An automatic transmission is ALWAYS applying some torque to the wheels.  Not so with a manual.  With neither the brakes nor the gas applied, the wheels on a manual flow freely and at the whims of gravity.  This is also why a manual can stop so much faster from coasting alone.  With no gas applied, only inertia keeps the car moving.  An automatic still has forces pushing it forward in this state.  In a manual, it is never needed to use the brakes to slow down for a slower speed limit if the MUTCD is followed (unless you're on a downhill grade, that is).  In an automatic, they are mandatory regardless.  This is also why automatics play the creeping game at red lights but manuals rarely do.  With an automatic, you can do it with a lazy foot.  With a manual, it takes more effort than standing still, and is bad for the transmission.

[DaBigE]

All I do know is this was a topic that was never discussed when I took drivers' ed (leaving space was, but not with regards to a manual transmission car). How much space is appropriate to leave? Three feet? Half a car length?

You should be able to see the tires meeting the pavement plus a few feet of pavement thereafter.  If you can't, you are too close.  This was drilled into my head in driver's ed.  Every time I stopped close enough that I couldn't at least see the tires of the vehicle in front meeting the ground...I got yelled at by the instructor.

Oh...I thought you guys were referring to some extra distance necessary for manuals, beyond what you're supposed to leave in general.

My observation is that absolutely nobody has a fucking clue when it comes to proper following distance...stopped or not.  When moving...what is so GD hard to understand about a 2-second minimum following distance?  I don't get it.  Sorry, that's for another thread...I'll stop ranting now.

Simple answer: short attention span. From what I've witnessed, most drivers today are only concerned about themselves and cannot handle space/time logic. They think all the bells and whistles they added onto their car will allow them to do anything they want. It only becomes evident to them that this is not the case either when someone invades their space or there's a crash. Generally, I've noticed that they: are overconfident in their skills, think 4WD negates the laws of physics, their time is more precious than anyone else's, and common sense is something that was tossed out the window with their cigarette butt.

I am convinced that many driver's heads would explode if they ever tried to learn how to operate a manual given how overwhelmed they appear with all the other surrounding stimuli.

[PHLBOS]

You'd see "AM Radio - May be deleted for credit." even on LTD brochures.

What year was that LTD brochure that stated such?  I could see that being the case if the LTD model in question was a 1975 vintage or newer (up to 1982), the base LTD (as opposed to the Brougham, Landau and later Crown Victoria) was considered the bottom-feeder model by that time; the Custom 500 by then was a fleet/Canada-only.   

My biggest issue/challenge w/a manual is when one's stopped on an incline.

I don't know if this has been brought up yet, but this is a simple matter. Just hold the car with the hand brake while you let out the clutch and ease down on the accelerator. As someone who owns a manual and lives in San Francisco, I know this maneuver well. There are also several cars that have a "hill hold" feature that will keep the car from rolling back on an incline until you start going.

Personally, I never heard of a so-called hill hold feature; but then again, the newest vehicle I drove w/a manual was the fore-mentioned 1989 Dodge Dakota.

Oh...I thought you guys were referring to some extra distance necessary for manuals, beyond what you're supposed to leave in general.

^^This.  I can't speak for the others here but I was personally referring to additional space and in a more urban/developed setting where vehicles are typically stopped closer together at stop lights.  It may not be right, but that's reality.  Similarly, I live in an area that despite the numerous DO NOT BLOCK INTERSECTION signs placed at several signalized intersections, stopped vehicles will indeed block them; but that's another thread for another day.