The Allure Of A Manual Tranny

I recently went shopaholic and bought a '99 Infiniti G20T manual tranny
car. I used to drive a '70s Honda Civic with a manual and have been
pining for a taste of what it's like to drive a stick again.

While it's been fun, all three of us are having difficulty understanding
the people who defend the manual tranny to the end.

Perhaps you could share why you would choose to never drive an auto
tranny and will shift till your dying day? I'm still enjoying the
experience of shifting, but can see tiring of it in a month.

What keeps you manual's from moving to the "dark side" lol of auto
bliss?

 

(ravelation) decided to join the conversation on 14
Aug 2004 with message

Seems like with a manual transmission, you KNOW it's going to need to be
fixed every so often (clutch related parts wearing out) ... If something
is wrong with it, they can fix just that part..

With automatics, if something is wrong, seems like the whole damn thing
needs to be rebuilt .. and you never know when that's gonna happen, and
it's hella expensive.

With MT, I can get better acceleration from a stop.. For example, when
turning left across oncoming traffic.. In my AT car, I punch the gas and
hope and pray it won't lurch forward like it's in 2nd gear or something.

MT cars don't usually need a jump.. just roll-started

I like having control over when I shift as opposed to having a computer
predict when I want to shift based on the position of the gas pedal.

All car thieves know how to drive an automatic.. Not all know how to
drive a stick Take this article, for example:
http://tinyurl.com/68fjo

 

Wanna bet?

Ah, in the days before computerized everything. There isn't a car built
today that can be roll-started.

Strike 2.

So get one with the manual shift control, like just about every major
auto trans has nowadays--like Chrylser's AutoStick.

Strike 3...

 

If done properly (rev and either side-step or quickly slip
clutch), manuals are faster. In part since they are more
efficient, also they tend to have have tighter ratios (but not
always now with 6-speed autos). But for normal driving, you can
probably be faster with an auto since they torque multiply.

Yeah, but the majority (though not all) of them don't hold a gear,
they'll upshift when at redline. Some even before. And they also
tend to shift pretty slowly. None of these slushbox automanuals
are as good as a manual. More lossy. Slow shifts. I haven't
found an automanual I like.


It all, I think, comes down to that feeling of one-ness with a
car. And of mastering skills such as heel-toeing (which I'm
half-a**ed at) and rev-matching. I drive both and I far-prefer a
manual for any sporting car.

 

sure. find someone with a 96-00 civic dx hatch, auto tranny. no mods.
guaranteed ill outaccellerate them.

auto trannies are getting better, more gears, etc. but you cant rev to
the sweet spot and drop the clutch like a good ol fashioned stick.

im sure mr bone will be around to school you some more.

i just roll started a 98 corolla the other week. bad (OEM!)battery, girl
had to get home. its got FI, and OBD2. no problems, she made it home,
and her hubby changed the battery.

seems like youre whiffing, so far.

yeah- that gimmick is going the way of LCD dashboards and voices saying
"your door is ajar". its good for the pooseys that buy porsches but dont
know how to drive stick- makes em feel like theyre "doing something".

come back when you have some real-world experience, and try again.

 

1. Manual is a minimum of $500 cheaper on a new car.

2. Repair costs of a manual transmission are lower. I think.

I'll switch to Automatic transmission when I'm elderly.

 

yeah- that gimmick is going the way of LCD dashboards and voices saying
"your door is ajar". its good for the pooseys that buy porsches but dont
know how to drive stick- makes em feel like theyre "doing something".[/QUOTE]

That you don't *prefer* to control your shift points that way has
nothing to do with the fact of controlling your shift points.

YOu said you like having control over your shift points. Here's a
mechanism that does that.

If you'd take the time to get your head out of your ass, maybe you'd
state what you really mean: you *prefer* a stick shift for no more
reason than that you prefer a stick shift. It has nothing whatsoever to
do with controlling your shift points; if that were a reason, then you'd
be happy with any system that allows you to control your shift points.

But like so many others, you can't simply say "I prefer that". No, you
think you have to come up with bullshit justifications, and then act as
if your preference is an objective fact based on your bullshit
justifications.

But your "justifications" remain nothing more than bullshit.

 

Absolutely!

But I just read someone the other day asking about modifying a Honda
minivan to have a manual transmission--for no other reason than he and
his wife have always driven manual transmissions, and they see no reason
to change that now--DESPITE the fact that they're now driving a minivan.

They have no concept of tools and appropriateness. They don't have a
clue about anything.

 

a few points:

1. If you spend a great deal of your day in stop-and-go traffic, get back
over into the dark side, or a hybrid CVT car if circumstances allow.

2. The shift points of auto's are set by their engineers for a best guess
for most drivers and environments. Performance driving, twisty curvy
mountain roads demand that you decide onthe shift points. You know the
exact amount of efficiency or performance you want from one second to
another and no automatic transmission can anticipate you gunning the motor.

3. When going down proper hills, a manual tranny takes the heat off of the
brakes by giving u access to the engine friction.

4. I believe modern manual cars can still be push started. I do it every
morning rolling down the hill of my parking lot in my '97 Jetta TDI.

5. Those fake auto-shift type transmissions are no good imho. There is a
loss of energy when the linkage is not direct; you loose the engine braking
thing down hills, (I suspect, but am not certain that) you cannot push start
them, and they are more expensive.

regards,
KL

 

Please explain revelevance.
Any good reason a van driver shouldn't have a stick?

Or is this based on your preconceptions of van drivers?

 

"Elmo P. Shagnasty" <> decided to join the
conversation on 14 Aug 2004 with message @text.usenetserver.com:

Well, if i were to hold the brake down while pushing the gas, then
releasing the brake.. I guess I could get the same acceleration

 

The point is, it doesn't come from the manufacturer that way. So be it.
How much of a freak do you have to be to want to modify the car to that
degree, just to get a stick shift in a car that's not sporty (as the
previous poster mentioned, a proper stick in a sporty or sports car is a
good thing) and whose mission in life is to haul around kids and stuff
from Sam's Club?

That's a serious, serious modification to make just to satisfy something
silly like that. If you can't accept the van for what it is, and see
the benefits of the overall package, and if you insist on focusing on
"it doesn't have a stick, we demand manual shift in everything we drive
no matter what," then you're a weirdo.

 

Huh?

People here are obviously dolts. You do NOT lose the engine braking
when going down hills.

Next time you're going down a hill, shift your auto trans into 2. See
what happens. LOTS of engine braking.

 

Oh.

I see.

So...

"No, no good reason that people shouldn't modify their cars to suit
themselves",
other that it seems to bother an anonomous USENET poster?

 

Manual advantages:

Better fuel economy.
Faster acceleration.
Lower cost.
Less expensive repairs (clutch vs. rebuild automatic transmission).
For Hondas, better reliability (look for threads about Accord, TL, and
Odyssey automatic transmissions failing).

Manual disadvantages:

Difficult or impossible for a person with disability to drive.

 

The DSG in some VW/Audi cars and the SMG in some BMW cars have more direct
linkages without torque converters. However, most automatic transmissions
with enhanced manual shift control do have torque converters, which would
be the main negative point for those who don't like the (real or perceived)
"slushiness" of torque converters.

 

No, not at all.

But the return on investment is very low, realistically speaking,
compared to accepting that it's a family truckster with a certain role
to play in life.

A roofer probably has some great nailing equipment. But when he needs
to put a screw in, does he pull out all his nailing equipment--hammers,
etc--and pound away?

No. He finds a screwdriver.

The minivan is a screwdriver. Quit trying to make it be a wrench.
Those that do, those that simply can't accept it, are weirdos.

Some things simply are, and to change them requires much, much more than
what you get out of changing them. A minivan is--a minivan. Deal with
it.

 

seems like your little gay-ass "3-strikes" comment was a bullshit
justification, but since you got soundly spanked you dont want to admit
to it.

 

and if i held the gas and clutch down, then released the clutch quickly?
you wouldnt.

 

I agree modifying the minivan is not a practical idea. At the same
time I would prefer an MT in an Odyssey. Don't assume what a minivan
only goes to Sam's Club. They also are good camping vehicles for
hilly, curvy terrain, another place where the MT shines.