Updated 2016 Accord

[GoCougs]

Dude your premise sucks

Civic, Accord and Focus are definitely better with stickshifts

Rest of the list sucks to drive beyond repair

Cars like the Rustang, 911, corvette, gti still have like 50% manual take rates

You are completely talking out of your ass

Good points on the GTI and 911 (and Corvette (Z06)). Not too long ago an A/T in each of 3 was simply unthinkable and now the take rate is 50% (and let's not forget that the last iterations of the Golf R, 911TT and 911 GT3 have been DSG only).

Premise reconfirmed.

[Byteme]

An Accord with a stick isn't wow cool. Laypeople consider a stickshift to be a liability.

One of the big problems with MT acceptance in the US is that cars bought by couples need to be drivable by both parties. There might be a few people that can still drive stick, but what are the odds that their spouses can too?

If 20% of people drive stick (assuming equal distribution by gender which obv. is an oversimplification), that's 20%*20%=4%.

Both my wife and I prefer manuals over automatics. 

[SJ_GTI]

Uh, what? Just because you're an unthusiast doesn't mean everyone else is.

+1

[12,000 RPM]

Good points on the GTI and 911 (and Corvette (Z06)). Not too long ago an A/T in each of 3 was simply unthinkable and now the take rate is 50% (and let's not forget that the last iterations of the Golf R, 911TT and 911 GT3 have been DSG only).

Premise reconfirmed.

GTI's manual take rate has not budged since the DSG replaced the awful autos, so that's out. First Golf R was stick only, and they are offering a stick for the 2016 model year, so that's out. "Not too long ago".... the 911 got an auto box 26 years ago so I'm not sure what you're talking about there. And the Corvette has always been, to some degree, an old man's car. With HELOC rates being as low as they are jumping up to a Z06 is not unheard of. That is smart business. You might have almost had a point with the Z06 if they made it auto only.

But none of those inaccuracies matter. Your premise- "as cars get more complicated they will be worse to drive with stickshift"- still sucks. Like I showed, demand for certain stickshift cars is still high, and despite modern car complexity there are still plenty of stickshift only cars. Z28, Viper, Fiesta/Focus ST, GT350/R, Civic Si, etc. So clearly people still enjoy them enough that there is a business case to NOT make auto versions of those cars. And exactly what complexities make stickshift cars objectively worse to drive than autos?

[giant_mtb]

Turbo?  AWD?  Manual? 

Those three words in combination are music to somebody's ears around here, especially in the winter. 

[Raza]

Like many of your attacks, this is predicated on a rejectable premise.

Feel free to peruse the top 30 sellers in the USA and do your best to try to convince which cars are "better" with a M/T. I'll give you of course the Accord Coupe V6, and then I'll be generous and give you the Wrangler and maybe the Tacoma, but other than that? Knock yourself out .

As cars get ever more complicated and integrated in design (AWD, turbos, hybrids, self driving/parking, etc.) the worse cars become to be driven with a M/T (ergo, their escalating disappearance, esp. in ultra hi-po cars).

Your premise is wholly and undoubtably false. Therefore your challenge, like most of your contributions to this forum, is completely worthless.

[GoCougs]

GTI's manual take rate has not budged since the DSG replaced the awful autos, so that's out. First Golf R was stick only, and they are offering a stick for the 2016 model year, so that's out. "Not too long ago".... the 911 got an auto box 26 years ago so I'm not sure what you're talking about there. And the Corvette has always been, to some degree, an old man's car. With HELOC rates being as low as they are jumping up to a Z06 is not unheard of. That is smart business. You might have almost had a point with the Z06 if they made it auto only.

But none of those inaccuracies matter. Your premise- "as cars get more complicated they will be worse to drive with stickshift"- still sucks. Like I showed, demand for certain stickshift cars is still high, and despite modern car complexity there are still plenty of stickshift only cars. Z28, Viper, Fiesta/Focus ST, GT350/R, Civic Si, etc. So clearly people still enjoy them enough that there is a business case to NOT make auto versions of those cars. And exactly what complexities make stickshift cars objectively worse to drive than autos?

So, in other words, I was correct, and you confirmed it with your examples, and changing the premise to cars that sell in the hundreds to a few thousand a year in a market of 16.5MM won't help. So in addition to your mention of the GTI, Z06 and 911, let's add other cars that were once unthinkable to have A/T - all Ferraris and all Lambos (I think) and analogous hyper exotics (Porsche 959 -> 918, McClaren F1 -> P1).

Let's take the GTR. With the high bandwidth torque split front and rear and left to right and sophisticated traction/stability control, it does not want an interruption or variation in power delivery. A M/T in that car would be awful as they'd have to buck down that capability. Wash/rinse/repeat, and that is why most any car of the class or above, does not have a M/T, save for maybe the Z06 (but then again, that proves the point, now that plenty are now sold with an A/T).

[GoCougs]

Your premise is wholly and undoubtably false. Therefore your challenge, like most of your contributions to this forum, is completely worthless.

Well, in your defense, I wouldn't like losing to me either.

[Raza]

Well, in your defense, I wouldn't like losing to me either.

Just because you blow the most hot air doesn't mean you win. This isn't a ballooning forum. You can talk all you want, but that doesn't you've said anything.

[12,000 RPM]

So, in other words, I was correct, and you confirmed it with your examples, and changing the premise to cars that sell in the hundreds to a few thousand a year in a market of 16.5MM won't help. So in addition to your mention of the GTI, Z06 and 911, let's add other cars that were once unthinkable to have A/T - all Ferraris and all Lambos (I think) and analogous hyper exotics (Porsche 959 -> 918, McClaren F1 -> P1).

Let's take the GTR. With the high bandwidth torque split front and rear and left to right and sophisticated traction/stability control, it does not want an interruption or variation in power delivery. A M/T in that car would be awful as they'd have to buck down that capability. Wash/rinse/repeat, and that is why most any car of the class or above, does not have a M/T, save for maybe the Z06 (but then again, that proves the point, now that plenty are now sold with an A/T).

Naw, your premise is still BS, and you are just talkin in circles instead of actually demonstrating its validity. You still haven't demonstrated how the complexities of today's cars make manual transmission equipped cars "awful to drive" (or what "awful to drive" even means objectively/quantifiably). And you are putting your foot in your mouth on other issues with this train of logic. Are N/A engines "awful to drive" compared to turbo engines? Because a lot of the same forces that have pushed manual transmissions to the fringe are at work with the proliferation of turbocharging. GT-R's AWD system is no more sophisticated than that in something like an S4 or the last TL Type-S, which... surprise surprise... came in stickshift. Plenty of cars have sophisticated torque vectoring and multi-stage stability control systems with stickshift.... like the Z06, the GT4, various Lotuses etc. etc. Unlike you, I have actually driven the GT-R.... in my experienced opinion, its transmission worked for the job of getting around a track with minimum distraction, but it did not help at all with making the car fun to drive. U should maybe close your textbooks and spreadsheets and go drive some cars, before declaring what is and isn't objectively "awful to drive".... the R35 GT-R was a major step in the wrong direction in the realm of driving engagement and performance cars at large.

[GoCougs]

Boy, Sporty, you and diversions of premises. I can't keep up any more.

Most cars just aren't very good with a M/T and by the year that includes ever more performance models as they advance in complexity and performance.

[Raza]

Boy, Sporty, you and diversions of premises. I can't keep up any more.

Most cars just aren't very good with a M/T and by the year that includes ever more performance models as they advance in complexity and performance.

Keep sticking to your line, that'll make it true. 

[GoCougs]

Keep sticking to your line, that'll make it true. 

So what vehicles in the top 30 are better in any way to drive with a M/T? Save for my generous and extremely few proffered caveats I challenge you to rationally assert that an F150 or Escape or Soul or Camry or CRV or w/e is in any way better to drive with a M/T.

[MX793]

I've yet to drive a vehicle with an automatic or SMG/DSG gearbox that I preferred over a traditional manual.  Autos, when left to their own devices, rarely behave how I want them to (upshifting the instant the throttle is lifted and then hesitating to downshift again when throttle is reapplied, downshifting mid-corner as throttle is applied, slipping the torque converter instead of running in the appropriate gear).  And I've found manual mode on any traditional slushy to be sluggish.  Not to mention with newer boxes that have 8 (or more) ratios, you're constantly flicking through gears with the inability to skip gears as with a traditional manual.  SMGs/DSGs are slightly better, as they have no torque converter to provide that "slushy" feeling whereby engine speed and road speed aren't really connected, but still have their flaws.  They either don't permit aggressive starts or require you fumble through a veritable rain dance to engage some kind of launch control if they do, and don't generally offer the same level of control.

[MX793]

I will also add that a traditional, 3-pedal manual is superior in the snow, IMO/IME.  Much better control for modulating power to the wheels when trying to take off from a stop.

[Raza]

So what vehicles in the top 30 are better in any way to drive with a M/T? Save for my generous and extremely few proffered caveats I challenge you to rationally assert that an F150 or Escape or Soul or Camry or CRV or w/e is in any way better to drive with a M/T.

Every single one. I'm assuming. I didn't look at your list, because going by the top 30 sales is totally a beigeist line of argument, and I don't give a fuck about beigeists. It's okay if you are one. Dude, you can be who you are. It's 2015. Gays can marry. Dudes can be chicks and kill people in car accidents and still get the cover of Vanity Fair. Be you, brother, let it out. 

For the record, though, the Escape, Soul, Camry, and CRV would all be better to drive. Don't know about the F150, I don't know anything about pickups. Better to sit in traffic while checking texts and drinking shitty coffee? No, but that's hardly driving.

[GoCougs]

Every single one. I'm assuming. I didn't look at your list, because going by the top 30 sales is totally a beigeist line of argument, and I don't give a fuck about beigeists. It's okay if you are one. Dude, you can be who you are. It's 2015. Gays can marry. Dudes can be chicks and kill people in car accidents and still get the cover of Vanity Fair. Be you, brother, let it out. 

For the record, though, the Escape, Soul, Camry, and CRV would all be better to drive. Don't know about the F150, I don't know anything about pickups. Better to sit in traffic while checking texts and drinking shitty coffee? No, but that's hardly driving.

Trust me when I say I cry out in pain every time I defeat you.

[Raza]

Trust me when I say I cry out in pain every time I defeat you.

I like you Cougs, I really do. I just wish you could see the light and benefit from my guidance rather than staying in the dark. I mean, it's so Plato.

You just keep talking.  If posting while saying nothing of any substance ever is winning, then dude, you're the Charlie Sheen of fuck all. Explain how they're better with automatics. Try not to use "MPG" and "0-60" in your "explanation". Or just avoid answering the question and/or blame the welfare state. Whatever man, it's not my fault you can't accept that you don't belong on a car enthusiast site. You lose, like you always lose, because you insist on thinking every discussion is something to win and that if you just keep talking, you win.

Every single car is better with a manual. If you don't think so, you're wrong. Period. I win.

[Eye of the Tiger]

Every single one. I'm assuming. I didn't look at your list, because going by the top 30 sales is totally a beigeist line of argument, and I don't give a fuck about beigeists. It's okay if you are one. Dude, you can be who you are. It's 2015. Gays can marry. Dudes can be chicks and kill people in car accidents and still get the cover of Vanity Fair. Be you, brother, let it out. 

For the record, though, the Escape, Soul, Camry, and CRV would all be better to drive. Don't know about the F150, I don't know anything about pickups. Better to sit in traffic while checking texts and drinking shitty coffee? No, but that's hardly driving.

My work truck is an F-150. I wish it was a manual. When it is time for a new work truck, I will again ask for a manual.

[MX793]

My work truck is an F-150. I wish it was a manual. When it is time for a new work truck, I will again ask for a manual.

They haven't made an F-150 with a manual gearbox in over a decade.  Chevy and Dodge dropped manuals from their 1/2 tons before Ford did.

[Eye of the Tiger]

They haven't made an F-150 with a manual gearbox in over a decade.  Chevy and Dodge dropped manuals from their 1/2 tons before Ford did.

I know. Maybe I can get a Tacoma crew cab...? I have no idea what is available with a manual, anymore. It is sad

[12,000 RPM]

Boy, Sporty, you and diversions of premises. I can't keep up any more.

Most cars just aren't very good with a M/T and by the year that includes ever more performance models as they advance in complexity and performance.

Lol I answered your claims one by one and brought it all back to your claim that modern cars are objectively horrible to drive with M/Ts due to their complexity.

And now you are moving the goal post by adding performance to your claim, hoping we wouldn't notice.

I'm gonna ask for the 4th time. How do the complexities of modern cars make them horrible to drive? Your GT-R example is not relevant to the top 30 you keep referencing. What is so complicated about a CR-V today, vs one from 10-15 years ago, that makes a theoretical stickshift version "horrible to drive"?

[GoCougs]

I like you Cougs, I really do. I just wish you could see the light and benefit from my guidance rather than staying in the dark. I mean, it's so Plato.

You just keep talking.  If posting while saying nothing of any substance ever is winning, then dude, you're the Charlie Sheen of fuck all. Explain how they're better with automatics. Try not to use "MPG" and "0-60" in your "explanation". Or just avoid answering the question and/or blame the welfare state. Whatever man, it's not my fault you can't accept that you don't belong on a car enthusiast site. You lose, like you always lose, because you insist on thinking every discussion is something to win and that if you just keep talking, you win.

Every single car is better with a manual. If you don't think so, you're wrong. Period. I win.

I'd pay some decent coin to see you of all people try to muscle about a Suburban with a M/T .

[MX793]

Lol I answered your claims one by one and brought it all back to your claim that modern cars are objectively horrible to drive with M/Ts due to their complexity.

And now you are moving the goal post by adding performance to your claim, hoping we wouldn't notice.

I'm gonna ask for the 4th time. How do the complexities of modern cars make them horrible to drive? Your GT-R example is not relevant to the top 30 you keep referencing. What is so complicated about a CR-V today, vs one from 10-15 years ago, that makes a theoretical stickshift version "horrible to drive"?

For someone who isn't very good at driving stick, or even just proficient at it, it probably is fairly horrible to drive versus a modern automatic.  There are plenty of people out there who "know how to drive stick", but aren't necessarily good at it.  There's a big difference between being able to get from A to B without stalling and being good at it.  By "good at it", I mean being proficient at rev matching, double-clutching, and clutchless shifting (not recommended practice, but if you lose the master cylinder it's a skill that comes in handy).

When I test drove a 2015 Mustang GT earlier this year, I was chatting with the salesman who mentioned he generally preferred autos, but knew how to drive a stick and recently picked up a used WRX (which was MT-only).  During the drive, I took off from a stoplight in 2nd gear just as smoothly as if I was in 1st (no excessive clutch slip or bucking/sputtering or anything).  The car had 3.73s and I was on a slight downhill, so a 2nd gear launch was actually smoother.  I do it pretty frequently in my V6, which has very similar gearing, and the added grunt of the 5.0 made it that much easier.  Salesman was actually paying attention and remarked with some surprise that I had just taken off so smoothly in 2nd.  When I responded that it was intentional, given the power and short gearing, he then replied that he'd never seen anyone do that before.

[GoCougs]

Lol I answered your claims one by one and brought it all back to your claim that modern cars are objectively horrible to drive with M/Ts due to their complexity.

And now you are moving the goal post by adding performance to your claim, hoping we wouldn't notice.

I'm gonna ask for the 4th time. How do the complexities of modern cars make them horrible to drive? Your GT-R example is not relevant to the top 30 you keep referencing. What is so complicated about a CR-V today, vs one from 10-15 years ago, that makes a theoretical stickshift version "horrible to drive"?

You make me cry out pain too if it helps.

You tried to bring hi-po cars into and it defeated your premise, and I then I added to it by using the GTR (and pretty much all cars over ~$100,000) as example of why those cars would suck with a M/T and thus why they are not available that way.

As to more plebeian affairs (Camry, CRV, Escape, w/e) what is the value of a M/T? The cars aren't any fun really to begin with (though I wouldn't mind giving a 6.2L Silverado M/T a go) and then you make it slower and get less MPG by saddling it with a M/T.

[MX793]

Do autos truly get better mileage in real-world driving, or just in EPA tests in which automakers program the shift points to suit the test?

[12,000 RPM]

I'd pay some decent coin to see you of all people try to muscle about a Suburban with a M/T .

Do you know how a manual transmission works? What does the size of a car have to do with its shifting mechanism?

You make me cry out pain too if it helps.

You tried to bring hi-po cars into and it defeated your premise, and I then I added to it by using the GTR (and pretty much all cars over ~$100,000) as example of why those cars would suck with a M/T and thus why they are not available that way.

As to more plebeian affairs (Camry, CRV, Escape, w/e) what is the value of a M/T? The cars aren't any fun really to begin with (though I wouldn't mind giving a 6.2L Silverado M/T a go) and then you make it slower and get less MPG by saddling it with a M/T.

Im not going in circles with you anymore. Now you are taking points I made and claiming them as your own lol. And after all those keystrokes you still haven't answered the question. Only person who takes being wrong worse is r0tor.

[12,000 RPM]

Do autos truly get better mileage in real-world driving, or just in EPA tests in which automakers program the shift points to suit the test?

Cougs doesn't believe in real world fuel economy data, or EPA fuel economy testing, unless they validate his predetermined beliefs.

[MrH]

Do you know how a manual transmission works? What does the size of a car have to do with its shifting mechanism?

Well, in his defense, you are the one who said your civic is hard to take off with from a stop

[Eye of the Tiger]

If I had bought either of my current vehicles with an automatic, I would eventually realize what I did and kill myself.