The decline of manual values

[kambites]

Youforreal. said:

I certainly wouldn’t argue one is better than the other, they just mean different things to different people

Primarily I think they're just good at different things. Automatics are, objectively speaking, "better" in that they generally get the car from A to B with less effort on the part of the driver which is, after all, the primary role of a car. Of course you can say the same about just about all forms of automation, so I view the ever increasing dominance of automatics as another small step along the long path to full automation which, for 99% of people, will be great.

I still want a manual though, for the same reason I want to do my own steering. Whether a computer can do it "better" than me isn't really relevant.

[ThingsBehindTheSun]

Did anyone mourn the following when they were superseded by something better?

Un-assisted steering replaced by power steering
Drum brakes replaced by disc brakes
Points and distributor cap replaced by electronic ignition
Carburettor and choke replaced with fuel injection

Personally for an everyday car I would take an automatic over a manual every time.

[911Spanker]

ThingsBehindTheSun said:

Did anyone mourn the following when they were superseded by something better?

Un-assisted steering replaced by power steering
Drum brakes replaced by disc brakes
Points and distributor cap replaced by electronic ignition
Carburettor and choke replaced with fuel injection

Personally for an everyday car I would take an automatic over a manual every time.

Same here. Looking forward to the day I can have a sleep in the car and it does it all for me.

PH. Sleep matters.

[Baldchap]

ThingsBehindTheSun said:

Did anyone mourn the following when they were superseded by something better?

Un-assisted steering replaced by power steering
Drum brakes replaced by disc brakes
Points and distributor cap replaced by electronic ignition
Carburettor and choke replaced with fuel injection

Personally for an everyday car I would take an automatic over a manual every time.

Depending on the vehicle both PAS and EFI is a step backwards.

[Om]

ThingsBehindTheSun said:

Did anyone mourn the following when they were superseded by something better?

Un-assisted steering replaced by power steering
Drum brakes replaced by disc brakes
Points and distributor cap replaced by electronic ignition
Carburettor and choke replaced with fuel injection

Personally for an everyday car I would take an automatic over a manual every time.

Well PAS replacing unassisted is when it all started to go downhill for steering feel/feedback. Obviously, if you don't care about such things then you probably consider it better, or at least a reasonable trade off.
Brakes and points though, they were just improvements.
Carbs to FI, certainly at the beginning you did lose the sound and the response you got from a carb. But 40+ years later we now have throttle bodies so that can probably be ticked off too.

These and other things smack of the difference between someone who drives a car to travel from A to B compared to someone who drives a car to travel from A to A. The more committed you are to the latter the more likely you are to value some of the things that others will see as either retrograde steps or solved problems (indeed this choice could be made by one and the same person for different circumstances...).

Obviously YMMV, and you drive a Porsche GT car with electric steering and PDK - largely because tyres have got so wide and power so immense that more traditional options are not the best choice. On a Caterham only a fool (with a few exceptions) would look to fit power steering and an autobox.

Personally for an everyday car I would make an individual choice of what was most appropriate for me every time.

[AmyRichardson]

GravelBen said:

I keep reading comments that autos are 'much more efficient' and 'much faster shifting' than manuals. Nobody seems to back it up or quantify it though... if they are measurably better at those things, by how much?

Speed-wise, and as an example, a ZF8 can go from drive engaged in gear X to drive engaged in gear Y (okay, drive is never truly disengaged with a planetary system, but we know what they mean...) in 0.2s. I'm fairly sure I take that long to get the stick across the gate, never mind doing the clutch work! And the ZF is a TC auto, dual clutch affairs manage changes in around half the time.

Efficiency-wise, it's a mixed bag. Real mpg figures definitely favour autos when we're talking about bigger (3.0 or so) engines, presumably because a tall top is a properly useable asset. In smaller cars it can fall either way.

[TurboHatchback]

Manuals will stay around for a while for the simple reason of cost. They are cheaper to make, and that matters in low-end cars. Autos are rationally better in every situation, but the added cost won't be worth it for everybody.

What might kill them off is emissions, it's easier to calibrate an auto to meet regulations when the computer has total control over every aspect of the driveline. Otherwise I believe there will be manual cars offered as long as there are combustion engines to go with them.

[Risonax]

Biggy Stardust said:

TwigtheWonderkid said:

Manuals are slow, thirsty, a pain in heavy traffic (which is only going to get heavier) and need replacement clutches and stuff.

My XF is currently having the gearbox electronics replaced at great expense & delay having been problematic for months.. My manual cars don't have such & are all working just fine.

In the UK, I have a 96 MX5, a 2004 Jag XJ8, and in Thailand a 2014 (I think) Fiesta S auto (notorious Powershift).

The manual box in the MX5 is bullet proof. It has an appetite for cheap slave cylinders, but nothing I can't do myself. After 270k kms, it on its second clutch. I think the clutch will outlive the car.

The Jag has a relatively old fashioned torque converter box. Touchwood, its working fine.

The Fiesta though. The Powershift was pushed on 3rd world markets, where they like autos. Mine had 50k kms on it, when it started juddering and then lost reverse. Its basically an electrically operated manual box. Pity Ford didn't use 3rd world spare parts prices. Its cost me £2k to get it back on the road. It would have been more in the UK, but 9 hours Thai Ford main dealer is less than £90 all in.



Such optimism. Little did they know their Fiestas would reduce them to penury.

And in the few remaining years ICE has left, I don't think anyone is going to bother to make these auto boxes better, more reliable, cheaper to fix etc.

[Leicester Loyal]

Never had an auto but my next car will 100% be one, daily driving a manual is soon going to be a thing of the past, but we're still a few years away from that.

[GravelBen]

AmyRichardson said:

GravelBen said:

I keep reading comments that autos are 'much more efficient' and 'much faster shifting' than manuals. Nobody seems to back it up or quantify it though... if they are measurably better at those things, by how much?

Speed-wise, and as an example, a ZF8 can go from drive engaged in gear X to drive engaged in gear Y (okay, drive is never truly disengaged with a planetary system, but we know what they mean...) in 0.2s. I'm fairly sure I take that long to get the stick across the gate, never mind doing the clutch work! And the ZF is a TC auto, dual clutch affairs manage changes in around half the time.

Good to see a number, thanks. Figures from some internet searching suggest an 'average' manual driver typically takes 0.5-1s up/down the gate and a bit more going across the gate (I presume that's in 'normal driving' rather than actively trying to shift fast), and that an experienced/well practised driver can get down to the 0.1-0.2s range or sometimes better depending on the car.

The point I was getting at earlier about the timing in transient situations is that the auto is mechanically capable of shifting quickly, and in the middle of constant hard acceleration for example I expect it would give its fastest shift more consistently than almost all manual drivers (helping give faster times in standard acceleration tests than a manual), but in more dynamic situations the real 'shift time' should also take into account the response time while the computer processes/decides how to respond to a driver input - which can be quite noticeably delayed as many people have commented. That delayed response is the most irritating aspect of autos for me.

Edited by GravelBen on Friday 10th May 04:53

[Marcodude]

GravelBen said:

Good to see a number, thanks. Figures from some internet searching suggest an 'average' manual driver typically takes 0.5-1s up/down the gate and a bit more going across the gate (I presume that's in 'normal driving' rather than actively trying to shift fast), and that an experienced/well practised driver can get down to the 0.1-0.2s range or sometimes better depending on the car.

The point I was getting at earlier about the timing in transient situations is that the auto is mechanically capable of shifting quickly, and in the middle of constant hard acceleration for example I expect it would give its fastest shift more consistently than almost all manual drivers (helping give faster times in standard acceleration tests than a manual), but in more dynamic situations the real 'shift time' should also take into account the response time while the computer processes/decides how to respond to a driver input - which can be quite noticeably delayed as many people have commented.

Yep, auto's are definitely better in almost all aspects. Apart from when it goes wrong (thinking DSG boxes here), and you are left with an eye watering bill, sometimes as much as half the worth of the car.

Tbh buying a used DSG/CVT etc with more than 50-60k this would be my main worry.

If i wanted a reliable workhorse i think i would pick a manual.

[Pit Pony]

LuS1fer said:

Autos are boring and uninvolving and for as long as manual cars are made, I will continue to buy them.

Autos

Are less stressful in stop start traffic.

Allow you to concentrate on steering and braking

Are helpful if you have calcification of your left shoulder joint, meaning that changing gear or using a manual hand brake is painful. (When I say painful, imagine going for a drive and having to take the next day off work)

Can be just as involving if you get the right one.

Are essential if you have need of a new hip or are missing a leg.


After a particularly painful trip from Cardiff to Merseyside which took 3 times longer than my fastest ever time, I decided an auto with cruise control was the only way forward in my driving career. Still got the manual MX5 and it's great to have no electronic aids or automation.
(There's no airbag, no ABS, no central locking etc) but it's not a great car for everyday)

That said, your auto needs enough power. Wife has a 1.6 115 bhp Astra Auto and I have a 1.4T 140 bhp astra GTC auto. The point you spot the difference is in cruise control on the motorway, if there's a slight slope. The 1.6 will decide that the additional load caused by the hill is enough to warrant a down change. Not something you'd bother doing in a manual, and not something the 1.4T does. Apart from that quirk, which wouldn't effect my wife, as she's never used the cruise control in 5 years, both are no worse than the equivalent manual version, and in many respects are better.

[MC Bodge]

heebeegeetee said:

No, I suspect that car geeks greatly exaggerate their skills and indeed the skills required to simplify change gear. Somebody mentioned double de-clutching, which has been completely unnecessary for decades.

The modern synco gearbox has removed all of the skills of changing gear and imo greatly inflates the egos of many, ie those who actually think they are responsible for their smooth gear changes.

I mentioned double de-clutching on down-shifts. No, it is not necessary and I did not claim It to be. It is however a skill that is satisfying to master and helpful in the event that I drive a very old car or lorry.

Even with synchromesh, many people are still able to make ham-fisted gear changes -through their timing, their lack of rev matching and their lack of a smooth control of the clutch and/or accelerator. Heel &toe might offend the IAM fundamentalists and not interest the vast majority of people, but done well it is a very useful skill for assisting smoothness in driving.

Given that some people do make smoother gear changes than others, I'm not sure that the driver has as little responsibility for it as you are suggesting.

[americancrx]

ThingsBehindTheSun said:

Did anyone mourn the following when they were superseded by something better?

Un-assisted steering replaced by power steering
Drum brakes replaced by disc brakes
Points and distributor cap replaced by electronic ignition
Carburettor and choke replaced with fuel injection

Personally for an everyday car I would take an automatic over a manual every time.

I miss unassisted steering and brakes - to the point where I'm now cycling more than driving.

[cerb4.5lee]

americancrx said:

ThingsBehindTheSun said:

Did anyone mourn the following when they were superseded by something better?

Un-assisted steering replaced by power steering
Drum brakes replaced by disc brakes
Points and distributor cap replaced by electronic ignition
Carburettor and choke replaced with fuel injection

Personally for an everyday car I would take an automatic over a manual every time.

I miss unassisted steering and brakes - to the point where I'm now cycling more than driving.

I'm happy enough to walk or run, but no chance am I risking cycling in this day and age though. We live in too much of an "I'm alright Jack" world now for me, and most folk wouldn't think twice about knocking you off your bike now I reckon(deliberate or not).

No way am I brave enough to share the roads with cars/vans/buses/lorries on a bicycle now for sure(I did used to do it 30 odd years ago though in fairness).

[snuffy]

bad company said:

Slightly off topic but a bit of an oddity imo. Someone passing their test in an automatic gets a licence that precludes driving manuals, fair enough. An American tourist who’s probably never driven or even travelled in a manual car can arrive in the UK, show their American licence and legally rent/drive a manual.

A few years ago we were in Southampton for 1 night. I happened to be just leaving the hotel for a walk, when I saw this car attempting a 3 point turn in the hotel's entrance road. He slowly approach the kerb at 90 degrees to it and then just sat there for ages. What on earth is he doing? After a while, he opened the door and beckoned me over and asked me for some help. He was American, just hired it, and could not work out how to get it into reverse. I leant over, stuck it into reverse (whilst he had his foot on the clutch). "How on earth did you do that?" I explained most cars you either push the gearstick down or there's a collar that you lift (which this car had). I offered to reverse it for him, but he declined, saying he had to get used to doing it himself.

Which then has always make me think, like you have just said, that he's possibly never driven on the other side of the road, and equally possibly never driven a manual before, and yet he's legally allowed to drive on the road in the UK, on his own (I.e. without supervision), because he has a driving licence from another country, that do those two thing completely differently to us.

[Bobupndown]

Geffg said:

Probably be another 30yrs for vans to ditch manual.
Vans seem to be so far behind cars in tech. I couldn’t believe when one of our vans was off the road and a hire van got dropped off, was a new vauxhall vivaro and didn’t have ac, parking sensors and just a big standard display for the radio Even the transits come in pauper spec for most of them, no electric mirrors etc, which between those 2 vans mentioned I’m not sure any car doesn’t have those things now.
I remember I got a new caddy off work in 2015 and it had windy windows! When the kids seen it they wondered how you opened the windows!

Our kids loved getting into a car with wind up windows, it amazed and entertained them, much the same as the first time I was in a car with electric windows. (Renault 18, early to mid 80s)

[Granadier]

snuffy said:

bad company said:

Slightly off topic but a bit of an oddity imo. Someone passing their test in an automatic gets a licence that precludes driving manuals, fair enough. An American tourist who’s probably never driven or even travelled in a manual car can arrive in the UK, show their American licence and legally rent/drive a manual.

A few years ago we were in Southampton for 1 night. I happened to be just leaving the hotel for a walk, when I saw this car attempting a 3 point turn in the hotel's entrance road. He slowly approach the kerb at 90 degrees to it and then just sat there for ages. What on earth is he doing? After a while, he opened the door and beckoned me over and asked me for some help. He was American, just hired it, and could not work out how to get it into reverse. I leant over, stuck it into reverse (whilst he had his foot on the clutch). "How on earth did you do that?" I explained most cars you either push the gearstick down or there's a collar that you lift (which this car had). I offered to reverse it for him, but he declined, saying he had to get used to doing it himself.

Which then has always make me think, like you have just said, that he's possibly never driven on the other side of the road, and equally possibly never driven a manual before, and yet he's legally allowed to drive on the road in the UK, on his own (I.e. without supervision), because he has a driving licence from another country, that do those two thing completely differently to us.

That's a fair point. I can understand allowances being made for foreign visitors to drive here on holiday, but there are risks attached, as you say. What surprised me more was learning that people settling here from various other countries are allowed to simply exchange their foreign licence for a British one without any sort of test or training requirement. Which countries are allowed depends on whether there's an agreement between them and us, not on a judgement of whether the driving conditions are similar. Eg someone from Zimbabwe told me they are part of this scheme and admitted that the driving culture is very different there.

[kambites]

americancrx said:

I miss unassisted steering and brakes - to the point where I'm now cycling more than driving.

I still have a daily driver with unassisted steering and brakes (although the brakes are discs not drums!).

[TwigtheWonderkid]

Pit Pony said:

That said, your auto needs enough power.

No they don't. I've driven quite a few sub 1 litre autos and they're just fine.