"Manual Transmission Could Be Forced Into Retirement"

[R11]

Just to clarify, I never said the safety features lead to less safety. Im just saying getting rid of manual transmissions to accomplish safety doesn't mean it will be safer. As there have been studies showing manuals lead to less distracted driving. All im trying to say...

I think this is the main issue: That article never stated the phase-out of manuals was because of the implementation of safety features. In fact, it repeatedly made the point that demand is killing the manual, like so many have pointed out, and automakers just don’t think it’s worth developing safety features for the stick because on the whole, so few people want it.

I agree with what you're saying. But why couldn't the auto makers add safety features to the manuals, rather than get rid of them completely? Also, i never said getting rid of manuals "is more dangerous".... where did you get that from?

They could. I think your question is actually ‘why don’t they’, and I get your fristration, but that is answered by the article: basic lack of demand for manuals.

Government regulation mandating safety features will also inevitably increase, serving as a similar but independent influencer (to consumer demand for safety features).

Sponsored

 

[BR0NCO]

Now let me address the MT topic. I too am getting a MT. Having not had one in years I am excited! But, I also have really grown fond of automatic start on my F150. I really want automatic start in my Bronco, but alas, I will not due to the safety police not trusting in me to put my Bronco in neutral and apply the emergency brake!

Edit: Which, by the way will have a start in gear feature! So, technically all I have to do is apply the emergency brake! Which, if you think about it, with an electric emergency brake they could just program the damn thing to apply automatically when the vehicle is killed!

It has a start in gear feature but the vehicle will start moving, you probably don’t want that unless you have a really long driveway.

 

[Efthreeoh]

why would you want to disengage the clutch when it’s far better to cut throttle and keep the car in gear?

If the engine is engaged with the transmission it is still adding torque to the drivetrain. It's better to take the engine torque out of the drivetrain to slow the vehicle down. The brakes have less energy to dissipate if the energy from the engine is removed from the equation.

 

[RoLyMa27]

It has a start in gear feature but the vehicle will start moving, you probably don’t want that unless you have a really long driveway.

Ok, I'm being stupid! Start in gear with the clutch engaged! DOH!!!

 

[IROCnRoll]

Another reason that manuals are going away, is that modern automatics are just plain better

Yes, I said it.

And this is coming from someone that has driven nothing but manuals since the day I got a license.

It used to be that a manual gave you:

• better mileage
• more reliability
• more performance

And a modern dual clutch box beats it in every one of those categories. That's not to say that every single automatic is better (looking at you Nissan, with your cvt), but the compelling arguments putting one as the clear winner are just no longer there.

I'm still glad that a handful of mfrs will cater to us petty enthusiasts tho (Ford, VW, BMW), because even if it is better, I do still enjoy rowing the gears. It makes driving fun

I agree with most of what you are saying. Though, why do you say more reliability?

The Bronco with the crawler gear will be cool. Even if I never use it, I can still point to the "C" on the shift knob and try to make people figure out why it's there. Might be the last of something like this we can get which may be worth it just because of that.

I'm not sure how much BMW is catering to us manual folks anymore. As an example, you should be able to get a manual on an M3 but not a 340i. Ford is one of the heroes in this space with both the Bronco and across most of the Mustang range (since that's the only "car" they make anymore). Subie is also pretty good.

 

[BFizzy]

The unintended consequence of automation is that when (not if) technology fails, people won’t be ready to operate manually.

 

[Deleted member 18388]

I think this is the main issue: That article never stated the phase-out of manuals was because of the implementation of safety features. In fact, it repeatedly made the point that demand is killing the manual, like so many have pointed out, and automakers just don’t think it’s worth developing safety features for the stick because on the whole, so few people want it.



They could. I think your question is actually ‘why don’t they’, and I get your fristration, but that is answered by the article: basic lack of demand for manuals.

Government regulation mandating safety features will also inevitably increase, serving as a similar but independent influencer (to consumer demand for safety features).

You're able to convey my thoughts and frustration better than I was able to haha.

 

[BR0NCO]

Ok, I'm being stupid! Start in gear with the clutch engaged! DOH!!!

They all do that. I just means you can start it in gear without depressing the clutch (most likely low range only) and start driving. My Jeep does that, handy when wheeling and you don’t want to roll back off an obstacle if you have to restart engine.

 

[RoLyMa27]

They all do that. I just means you can start it in gear without depressing the clutch (most likely low range only) and start driving. My Jeep does that, handy when wheeling and you don’t want to roll back off an obstacle if you have to restart engine.

Ok. Then why can't a Manual have automatic start?

 

[Nickp]

The unintended consequence of automation is that when (not if) technology fails, people won’t be ready to operate manually.

I mean you could say that about ABS brakes and traction control too. Doesn’t mean we shouldn’t add the tech.

At the end of the day a lot of these points are pretty big “what ifs.” We trust our technology to a pretty damn high degree, especially in cars. The idea that my steering could go out or my brakes stop working just aren’t even considerations because it’s such an extreme rarity. But it could happen... it’s just not something we worry about. Worrying about automatic emergency braking not working when you need it most is just hard to calculate the odds of and to me really not worth worrying about.

 

[Efthreeoh]

Humans have always sought means to make life easier.

Automatic take rate is massive because there is no earnest effort in this country to ensure driver quality, just driver quantity. Everyone with a pulse is effective deemed competent to operate machinery that can kill your entire family and an automatic transmission keeps the barrier to entry as low as possible. If car theft rates are any indication as to the barrier-to-entry, when 1 generation into the pussification of drivers fleetwide adoption of automatics you now have car thieves who can't drive a manual and there's no market for them.

This may be a rant, but I also believe automatic transmissions to be a material contributor to gridlock traffic. From enabling distractions, and removing compression braking, to forcing the constant use of brakes (and therefore brake lights) and the slow erosion of driving comprehension (such as understanding gearing and your current speed/velocity for a given situation), automatic transmissions have had the unintended consequence of forcing the inchworm effect of gas/brake/gas/brake/gas/brake because the automatic transmission prevents the driver from controlling that via simply letting off the gas or maintaining a constant low speed.

FWIW: after owning an automatic transmission equipped car as a daily driver for the first time in my life, the manual transmission was a deal-breaker for my next purchase and in shopping all bakers-dozen of manual transmission equipped cars available to me today, Bronco came out the winner (M3 was close, but they aren't fast enough to be a proper sports car and I don't want a car that expensive).

Perfectly, precisely, and utmost accurately said. Well done!

"I also believe automatic transmissions to be a material contributor to gridlock traffic." I say the EXACT same thing and the people look at me as if I am a lunatic. I'm glad to know there is at least one more soul on the planet that understands traffic like I do.

Thank you.

 

[MaverickMan]

More safety features does not make the world “scary” to me.

Seatbelts, airbags, crumple zones, ABS, evasive steering systems, brake pre-load… bring it on.

From a public health stand point they’ve prevented countless needless deaths.

That is until the safety systems gets hacked and parameters changed just enough to get people hurt randomly. Making things easier is not how to make Americans better or safer at it. We thrive in adversity and take advantage of anything easy. If you want cars to be safer take out the screens, dont let it start the engine if there is a phone in the driver area, take out the heated and cooled surfaces and aroma therapy candles, and put in a stronger cage structure. And yes make manuals the industry standard, to buy an automatic you would need a handicap designation.

 

[HotdogThud]

I agree with most of what you are saying. Though, why do you say more reliability?

good point, maybe I should have framed not as 'more reliable', but instead as 'broke less often'

VW is still stuffing manual into the GTI and golf R, as well. yet Audi won't even put them in anything with an S in the model.

 

[ZackDanger]

That is until the safety systems gets hacked and parameters changed just enough to get people hurt randomly. Making things easier is not how to make Americans better or safer at it. We thrive in adversity and take advantage of anything easy. If you want cars to be safer take out the screens, dont let it start the engine if there is a phone in the driver area, take out the heated and cooled surfaces and aroma therapy candles, and put in a stronger cage structure. And yes make manuals the industry standard, to buy an automatic you would need a handicap designation.

 

[Efthreeoh]

I think you are confusing emergency braking with normal braking wherein one can use the engine to assist in slowing down, while continually downshifting to maintain the proper gear for the speed. I used to do this until it was explained that wear on brake pads is cheaper than wear on the transmission.

For an emergency stop, it has been explained clearly why you do not want to leave the transmission engaged in a high gear while quickly stopping. Regardless, the friction of the brakes during an emergency stop will far exceed the friction of the transmission. You are simultaneously getting no stopping benefit while also subjecting the transmission to unnecessary harm or wear. Bonus prize: by the time you've stopped, you've managed to stall the engine as well.

Engine braking is only affective until the engine speed and gear speed (i.e. road speed) match. Once the engine speed goes below the gear speed match, the engine again starts to push the vehicle, but lacks the torque to push effectively, thus the "bucking" you mentioned earlier. The fastest and most controlled method of stopping a vehicle is to put the drivetrain in neutral and apply maximum brake power without losing tire grip (i.e. threshold braking).

Sponsored