Car Buyers Falling Back in Love with Manual Transmissions

[2o6]

What is wrong with changing gears?

[Rich]

What is wrong with changing gears?

+1. 

[SVT666]

What is wrong with changing gears?

I'm assuming this was directed at this:

True enough, at 60 mph a family hatchback requires about 25 hp, but at 70 mph it needs 38 hp.  Throw a an incline in there and it increases dramatically.  Can't be changing gears every few minutes just to keep your car moving.  

Do you really want to be driving along at 1000 rpm at 60 mph and then you start up a slight uphill and have to change gears every time this happens?  No way. 

[Raza]

I dunno, I have noticed this with the Mazda 3, and most all subconpacts.



By contrast, the Cruze Eco has around the same power to weight ratio (worse, i believe) and its geared to be much lower at those speeds.

Most all subcompacts have low power.  What does a Corvette spin at 70 in 6th?

[Rich]

I'm assuming this was directed at this:

Do you really want to be driving along at 1000 rpm at 60 mph and then you start up a slight uphill and have to change gears every time this happens?  No way. 

IMO that'd be fun... keep me engaged in the driving experience, even when it's a boring highway slog.

[2o6]

Most all subcompacts have low power.  What does a Corvette spin at 70 in 6th?

My car produces 106HP, and has a curb weight of ~2400lbs.


That's around 22.5lbs per HP.

Cruze Eco has 138HP and a curb weight of ~3000lbs

Just shy of 22lbs per HP.

Jetta V (2.5L) has 150HP and a curb weight of ~3200lbs. Around 21 lbs per HP.



To be fair, my car is designed to be cheaper to make first and foremost. Everything on my car is shared with something else in Toyota's stable, so I'm going to guess and say that fuel economy wasn't actually a #1 priority.

Do you really want to be driving along at 1000 rpm at 60 mph and then you start up a slight uphill and have to change gears every time this happens?  No way. 

If the trade off was better economy, I wouldn't mind.

[Cookie Monster]

I'm assuming this was directed at this:

Do you really want to be driving along at 1000 rpm at 60 mph and then you start up a slight uphill and have to change gears every time this happens?  No way. 

I wouldn't mind.

Then again, I don't mind the fact that my car does 3500 at 70mph either. Although I do think Mazda gave the 6 speed NC Miata some weird ass ratios.

[hotrodalex]

What does a Corvette spin at 70 in 6th?

A Z06 spins at 1500 RPM @ 70 mph.

http://www.insideline.com/chevrolet/corvette/2012/2012-chevrolet-corvette-z06-centennial-edition-vs-2013-nissan-gt-r-premium-comparison-test.html

[GoCougs]

True enough, at 60 mph a family hatchback requires about 25 hp, but at 70 mph it needs 38 hp.  Throw a an incline in there and it increases dramatically.  Can't be changing gears every few minutes just to keep your car moving.  

Why don't CVTs (= instantaneous gear changing) then run at ultra low RPM at cruise?

[SVT666]

Why don't CVTs (= instantaneous gear changing) then run at ultra low RPM at cruise?

Good question.  Why don't you find out for us?

[GoCougs]

Good question.  Why don't you find out for us?

Already done:

weren't you and Rot0r harping on how automakers set gearing for fuel mileage in top gear based on (BSFC?) rather than getting as low an RPM as possible?

Whether or not they voiced the sentiment I'm not sure but it/you are more or less correct. If the best MPG was had by simply running as low an RPM as possible why wouldn't most all cars be geared to loaf along at 1,000 rpm at 60 mph, especially CVTs?

[2o6]

Why don't CVTs (= instantaneous gear changing) then run at ultra low RPM at cruise?

I thought it was because they don't have the gear spread to do so?

[sportyaccordy]

I thought it was because they don't have the gear spread to do so?

No, its cause the motors dont have the power to run at 60 MPH at that engine speed. This is like car 101 guys, even Cougs knows this.

[2o6]

Obviously, if your foot is flat on the floor to keep it at 1K, it's not going to get good economy.

[sportyaccordy]

Obviously, if your foot is flat on the floor to keep it at 1K, it's not going to get good economy.

It would take WOT to keep the car moving in top gear at 1K. Thats the whole point.

[GoCougs]

I thought it was because they don't have the gear spread to do so?

They do; even at cruise well under 60 mph (i.e., gear spread does exist to run at 1,000 rpm) you'll not see a CVT hover at 1,000 rpm even though there is enough power to keep the car moving.

[MX793]

Obviously, if your foot is flat on the floor to keep it at 1K, it's not going to get good economy.

Actually, it will likely get better economy than partial throttle.  Your engine is more efficient at WOT.  A tip I've read from some hypermilers is to use WOT, but keep the RPMs as low as possible when accelerating (so WOT, but short shift through the gears).

[Raza]

My car produces 106HP, and has a curb weight of ~2400lbs.


That's around 22.5lbs per HP.

Cruze Eco has 138HP and a curb weight of ~3000lbs

Just shy of 22lbs per HP.

Jetta V (2.5L) has 150HP and a curb weight of ~3200lbs. Around 21 lbs per HP.



To be fair, my car is designed to be cheaper to make first and foremost. Everything on my car is shared with something else in Toyota's stable, so I'm going to guess and say that fuel economy wasn't actually a #1 priority.


If the trade off was better economy, I wouldn't mind.

You're not refuting my point.  Compacts and subcompacts are traditionally city cars, so it makes sense that they wouldn't have a really tall top gear. 

[sportyaccordy]

Actually, it will likely get better economy than partial throttle.  Your engine is more efficient at WOT.  A tip I've read from some hypermilers is to use WOT, but keep the RPMs as low as possible when accelerating (so WOT, but short shift through the gears).

Maybe if you're accelerating, but if you have to keep the throttle pinned at WOT IDK

[565]

I've got a long ass rant about how manual transmissions need to die, but I'll spare you guys.


But outdated manuals need to die.  Dual clutch for everything.

[sportyaccordy]

I dont think they need to die. But I think the marginalization/demonizing of folks who don't choose stickshift is silly. If someone wants PDK in their GT3, nothing wrong with that.

[ifcar]

I've got a long ass rant about how manual transmissions need to die, but I'll spare you guys.


But outdated manuals need to die.  Dual clutch for everything.

Do you like driving a car or do you like getting the best performance numbers? As long as there are people in both camps, there's room for both types of transmission.

[Eye of the Tiger]

No, its cause the motors dont have the power to run at 60 MPH at that engine speed. This is like car 101 guys, even Cougs knows this.

Car 101: it doesn't take more than 20-30 HP for most cars to cruise down the highway. Almost any econobox will do that by 2000 RPM at part throttle.

[Raza]

I've got a long ass rant about how manual transmissions need to die, but I'll spare you guys.


But outdated manuals need to die.  Dual clutch for everything.

You should go to a forum for people who don't like cars. 

[2o6]

I've got a long ass rant about how manual transmissions need to die, but I'll spare you guys.


But outdated manuals need to die.  Dual clutch for everything.

Until they can solve longevity and smoothness issues, I can't agree.

[GoCougs]

I've got a long ass rant about how manual transmissions need to die, but I'll spare you guys.


But outdated manuals need to die.  Dual clutch for everything.

Unenthusiast loser.

See, if you ain't rowing the gearbox better suited for a '48 Ford, if you ain't driving RWD without any sort of electronic nannies, if you otherwise ain't driving from the pre-approved 'SPIN list of "enthusiastic" vehicles - anything from a Focus wagon, to a Jetta, to 125 hp Miata, you by definition are an unenthusiast.

[ifcar]

Unenthusiast loser.

See, if you ain't rowing the gearbox better suited for a '48 Ford, if you ain't driving RWD without any sort of electronic nannies, if you otherwise ain't driving from the pre-approved 'SPIN list of "enthusiastic" vehicles - anything from a Focus wagon, to a Jetta, to 125 hp Miata, you by definition are an unenthusiast.

No, there are just different types of enthusiasts. How is arguing that there should be no manual transmissions any different from arguing that there should be no automatics?

[2o6]

In other news, I think CVT development should go even further.

[GoCougs]

Until they can solve longevity and smoothness issues, I can't agree.

True; it's what steered me away from the scant few DSG cars available in the class/size I was looking at (S4). Wanted one but couldn't trust it.

Philosophically, traditional M/Ts it's older, inferior, less-performing technology.

Once upon a time though, slushie A/Ts were to traditional M/Ts as DSGs are to traditional M/Ts (and slushie A/Ts) today. Another 5-7 years and DSGs should be golden.

[Eye of the Tiger]

Transmissions are for unthusiasts. I want my goddamn drive wheels mounted to my crankshaft.