Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Depends on the car. I got maybe 40K miles out of my Z, but that's a heavy clutch.
Really, in a big city with heavy traffic, a manual is more a pain in the ass than anything.
I see your point, as you say, the Z is a slightly more performance oriented vehicle though.
I will say, even at 40k miles, the cost isn't something I'd be overly concerned about.
As for actually having a manual in heavy traffic, I personally don't mind it, changing gears is something I do pretty much without thinking, the only problem in the (now infamous from my posts I suspect) dallas traffic that I had was that the synchro rings on the car I used were getting close to completely shot, going into 2nd, which... was interesting. Other than that though, no problem for me.
What generally bugs me about automatic transmissions (and I'm talking standard ones, with no modification, seeing as it's the only comparable to stock manual transmission) is the inherent "lag" that's often present, I always feel I have to "launch" the car out of any intersection to get it to respond.
That said, I don't think I'd have any big issues with a DSG type transmission, but I do think I'd miss the old left foot pedal more than I'd like.
DCT/DSG transmissions will replace all manuals at some point. I don't really mind so much as they still give me the control I desire from a manual while shifting faster than I could physically do it.
I have driven friend's cars with manual transmissions and its pretty fun, but never actually owned one. Just wondering if anybody has experience driving a car with a manual in heavy traffic and if it is worth getting one if I will be in constant heavy traffic? I'll be in LA, so basically think of driving in your traffic and make it worse and explain how you would feel driving in that with a stick shift
Thanks!
I drove a clutch for three years in San Francisco...not just heavy traffic but it was, um, a little hilly.
No problems...but I've always preferred a clutch and the control it gives you.
I used to have a pickup with a really stiff clutch...it would have been a pain, but otherwise...give me a clutch.
i have to drive my manual tranny car in NYC rush hour traffic from time to time... no worries, you'll be fine. never ever will i buy a car with an automatic transmission again.
I have driven friend's cars with manual transmissions and its pretty fun, but never actually owned one. Just wondering if anybody has experience driving a car with a manual in heavy traffic and if it is worth getting one if I will be in constant heavy traffic? I'll be in LA, so basically think of driving in your traffic and make it worse and explain how you would feel driving in that with a stick shift
Thanks!
Needless to say I encounter a lot of heavy traffic in Chicago. And yes, having a manual can be a PITA in heavy and/or stop-and-go traffic. Two things that can really affect just how much a manual sucks in heavy traffic are clutch effort and low-end torque. Higher clutch effort could mean a very tired left leg. As for the low-end torque situation, I have two cars, one with a 4-cylinder and one with a V6. They can both start from a stop in 2nd gear, but it takes a lot more effort and slip in the 4-cylinder while the V6 does it effortlessly. The V6 also crawls in 2nd gear much better than the 4-cylinder. So when I'm doing stop-and-go in the V6, I can just leave it in 2nd gear and it will keep up with traffic from about 8 mph (below which I have to dip into 1st or just hit the clutch and coast) on up to 30mph. In short, I can manage heavy traffic a lot easier and with a lot less gear-shifting in the V6 versus the 4-cylinder.
Quote:
Originally Posted by iTsLiKeAnEgG
DCT/DSG transmissions will replace all manuals at some point. I don't really mind so much as they still give me the control I desire from a manual while shifting faster than I could physically do it.
While I'd kind of miss having 3 pedals, I'm looking forward to double-clutch manumatics making their way into mainstream cars. I like the driveline precision of having an actual clutch versus a torque converter, the shifting smoothness of the dual-clutch action, the control of being able to select the gears when you're on the open road, and the ability to let the computer deal with it when you're in stop-and-go traffic. IMO they combine the best attributes of manuals and automatics with few of the downsides of either.
Stock automatics are tuned for smooth shifts, as they are considered a luxury item. Most buyers of stock automatics would complain about harsh shifts if the manufacturers sold them in the same form drag racers use.
But if you go to B&M, TCI, Art Carr and others, you can get valve body kits that increase pressures on the bands, change shift points, etc, to make shifts happen faster and firmer. These shift improver kits can make a HUGE difference in how the automatic transmission works, giving you shifting that happens when you want it, instantly. This makes them shift faster than you could ever shift a manual, and allow the engine to make power during the shift (you can do that by "speed shifting" a manual, too, but you run the very real risk of missing the shift and/or damaging your transmission). Combined with a performance torque converter and you end up with an automatic transmission that slips less than you do when slipping the clutch to take off with a manual, and shifts faster than you do at gearchanges, and yet only shifts when you want it to by moving the lever.
Why is it so easy for people to think of all the things they can do to make a car faster or handle better but ignore the transmissions? How much power the car makes stock is only a starting point. How well it handles and stops is only a starting point. But then you think that how an automatic transmission works stock is the only way it can ever work... ?
This is why so many drag racers use built automatics: they shift faster, more consistently, and are actually very often quicker overall than their manual counterparts. I'm not talking new computer controlled transmissions, but such stalwarts of the racing scene as the Powerglide, the TH350 and TH400, C4 and C6, and Torqueflite 727. These are pretty common in cars that are running 7 and 8 second quarter mile times. When Arthur was talking the "big boys" he means cars runing in the fastest Street car Shootout series, like Nick Scavo's 7 second Camaro and the like. Yeah, faster classes, like Pro Stock, have used Lenco transmissions, but that's as far removed from a street manual as anything could be.
Now, why don't road racers use automatics? Pretty simple. In the early days, that's really all there was to choose from. As sports cars tended to become small and light, small engines were preferred. Small engines need to rev to make power, and they end up with fairly narrow powerbands. In order to have the engine in it's powerband over the course of a road racing circuit, you needed a lot of gears, matched to the exact powerband and weight of the car. Manual transmissions provided this in a relatively compact package. And what's more, it was easy to change gear ratios depending on the exact circuit you were racing on. Considering a transmission manufacturer like ZF, hewland, Getrag, or Coletti could have one case and hundreds of eaasily swapped gear ratios, that became very important. It's VERY hard to have multiple gear ratios that are easy to change with an automatic. Withut that ability, it's useless. Add to that the way an automatic does use more power to run, and you can see that a sub 1.5 liter racing engine making under 100 hp simply had to have the flexibility that a manual transmission offered.
But a large car wth a large displacement, high horsepower, torquey engine had more flexibility, and didn't need all those gear ratios. Changing the final drive ratio was enough to retain performance. AND it's easier to use than the rather stiff clutch necessary to handle all that torque.
That's why on dual purpose track/street cars that have high torque figures, I prefer a built automatic. On the track I gain all the benefits of lightning quick shifts, and less chance of missed shifts and breakage, while on the street, there is increased comfort of not dealing with heavy clutch pedals in stop and go traffic.
On small engine cars, I only use manuals. All the cars I've bought new have had manuals. All my small engine race cars have been manuals, and I've gotten a number of trophies in them. I'm not as good as some of the national champions I race with, but I tend to be better than average at shifting. All my Porsches and VWs have been manuals. But my V8 RX7 autocross car had a built AOD, and the modded V8 race cars and street cars i've had used $45 shift kits in them to handle the torque/power, and shift when I wanted them to, instantly.
I have no problem with car control, and I would like someone to come and point out where I didn't have enough control with my RX7 to win. I certainly had fun with it and do with my daily driver BMW, and I'd like someone to come and point out in my commute where shifting is ever done for fun in my manual transmission sports car. In fact, I'd like to see where my RX7 was less fun than say, a stock 5 speed Civic DX or VW Bug. If a manual is always fun, and an automatic always not, that shouldn't be true.
Not to say a good manual transmission isn't a great thing at the right time. I do prefer a good sports car with a slick manual trans. But 90% of the time, I'm not shifting while driving even in a manual transmision car. FUN comes in not slowing down for a corner, or having a bunch of power slamming you back in your seat. It doesn't come from saying, "look at me, I shifted!. Oh, look! I did it again!" And control comes more from brakes and steering. I don't have ABS and yaw control in my race cars for that very reason.
Sorry, been racing for a couple decades, and this is a pet peeve of mine: the unfounded hatred of automatic transmissions and the "automatic" labeling of people with automatics as "non drivers" and automatic equipped performance cars as a waste. It simply isn't true.
I only have issues with people who think that all automatics are the same as their mom's stock Accord or their grandpa's Oldsmobile,a nd that they can never be different. It's kind of like thinking all VWs are only as fast as an old Rabbit Diesel. Some automatics are fun, have as much control, and are quicker than most manuals. Some automatics suck bigtime (like the stock automatic in the PT Cruiser... there is almost 4 seconds difference 0-60 between the automatic equipped ones and my 5 speed version! I don't know HOW they got it to suck that bad!).
But there are a number of manual trans cars that are simply not fun, either, no matter how much you have to shift them.
I know when you're young and learning to drive stick that every time you shift, you're getting better. you notice it, and you are happy with your skills. But even though I love good manual trans cars, it won't be much longer until that shifting is second nature to you, and you won't notice it. At that point, the shifting isn't done for fun, but because the car needs to be shifted. You no longer go, "wow! Look at that! I shifted! And look there! I did it again!" at every shift. Your friends aren't impressed anymore, and it just becomes something you do as part of driving. And then you start to notice all the times when it's just a chore. That's when you get to the point I'm at: shifting is fun when you do it consciously for fun: a perfectly executed heel and toe downshift while going around the corner onto the entrance ramp for the highway. But most of the time, it's just in the way. And you realize that in most driving situations, you can not only have just as much fun without moving your left foot, but in some cases it's MORE fun because you aren't being bothered by a chore you have to do constantly.
I have been saying basically the same thing for years now on this board.
Both types of transmissions do the same thing... change into a different gear. One is done manually and the other is done automatically. It's not really that big of a deal. I am just as interested in the engine. I mean something like a '71 MG has a manual transmission but only about 70 horsepower. I'd much rather have something like a 375 hp '69 Dodge Charger with an automatic.
I owned a '66 Dodge Dart GT V-8 for many years. An automatic trans with a shift kit (B&M). It was quite fun to drive. Would easily get rubber in 2nd gear, sometimes in 3rd gear.
My recently bought '66 Plymouth Fury (383-4 bbl) had a shift kit added about 2 weeks after I bought it. Also easily chirps the tires. The Mopar automatic trans is tough and well-built. With the shift kit, gear changes are very fast. Faster than a car with a manual trans in most instances. Even my '69 Cadillac Fleetwood Brougham has a shift kit!
I also agree with what you said, just because a performance car has an automatic, does not make it a "non-drivers" car.
...But most of the time, it's just in the way. And you realize that in most driving situations, you can not only have just as much fun without moving your left foot, but in some cases it's MORE fun because you aren't being bothered by a chore you have to do constantly.
I've driven manual cars every day for 6 odd years now, non of them particularly powerful, and I still enjoy, or not think about it, it's never a chore, it's part of what I like about driving.
Reading this thread has brought so many memories of driving back!
My Dad tried to teach me shifting on a 4 speed column. Kept telling me it was like an "H". I just couldn't "get it". Of course I was only 8 years old too at the time. I could drive an automatic but wanted to learn standard too. I was a failure until my b/f's friend got a standard on the floor and I took to it like a duck to water! I remember Dennis saying "you drive like a race car driver!" From the floor, a column was a piece of cake. I then graduated to 15-18 gears occasionally. I was told I was a "natural" with my listening to the engines and knowing when to shift. Alas I had to give up driving sticks in my 30's because of my MS and being paralyzed in my left leg for months and couldn't drive because it was a standard! I am confined to automatics now but I do remember the rushes I used to get when shifting and clutching.
Thanks for the memories and pardon me for inserting this woman's little story.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I am confined to automatics now but I do remember the rushes I used to get when shifting and clutching.
