Why manual transmissions are disappearing...(article)
Discussion
http://peptide.kinja.com/why-manual-transmissions-...
This is quite an interesting article. Makes the point that a DCT or full automatic transmission will always produce less pollution than a manual, and that this is driving the move away from manual.
This is quite an interesting article. Makes the point that a DCT or full automatic transmission will always produce less pollution than a manual, and that this is driving the move away from manual.
kambites said:
Interesting article.
It also mentions in passing why modern cars have significant throttle delays.
Emissions testing has a lot to answer for.
This is something I hate. In most diesels, you expect it. You expect that throttle to feel like mush, and for the car to grunt into life the week after you press the throttle. It also mentions in passing why modern cars have significant throttle delays.
Emissions testing has a lot to answer for.
However, more and more petrol cars are being afflicted with awful DBW throttles. Things like rev hang are becoming more and more common (where the throttle automatically keeps feeding air to the engine after 'demand' closure at the driver's foot, meaning the revs artificially hang in place for a second and burn off the fuel being injected in the cylinder, rather than the exhaust for better emissions), and feel awful to drive with. And so many cars now smooth throttle demand noticeably, in that you never really feel like you're sychronised with the throttle. It's like driving a diesel; you press the pedal and you wait for the engine to get back to you on how it likes your demand.
Baryonyx said:
This is something I hate. In most diesels, you expect it. You expect that throttle to feel like mush, and for the car to grunt into life the week after you press the throttle.
However, more and more petrol cars are being afflicted with awful DBW throttles. Things like rev hang are becoming more and more common (where the throttle automatically keeps feeding air to the engine after 'demand' closure at the driver's foot, meaning the revs artificially hang in place for a second and burn off the fuel being injected in the cylinder, rather than the exhaust for better emissions), and feel awful to drive with. And so many cars now smooth throttle demand noticeably, in that you never really feel like you're sychronised with the throttle. It's like driving a diesel; you press the pedal and you wait for the engine to get back to you on how it likes your demand.
I had an awful time with a company Peugeot 3008 diesel "sport". Come up to a roundabout on trailing throttle, spot a gap and rev-match to the gear below and apply throttle - nothing. The car would burn off the overrev fuel and then do whatever you asked it to do. Thankfully the gaps I went for weren't small, but I could easily see how a driver could get t-boned by going for a gap that would normally be safe, but the car deciding it shouldn't accelerate yet makes it dangerous.However, more and more petrol cars are being afflicted with awful DBW throttles. Things like rev hang are becoming more and more common (where the throttle automatically keeps feeding air to the engine after 'demand' closure at the driver's foot, meaning the revs artificially hang in place for a second and burn off the fuel being injected in the cylinder, rather than the exhaust for better emissions), and feel awful to drive with. And so many cars now smooth throttle demand noticeably, in that you never really feel like you're sychronised with the throttle. It's like driving a diesel; you press the pedal and you wait for the engine to get back to you on how it likes your demand.
It is a sad story.But surely the key to the future of those of us who don't want an auto/automated box is wether the regs applying to new cars also apply to aftermarket modifications.Assuming things stand as they do at present there's nothing stopping aftermarket conversions up to and including manual box conversions and even possibly drive by wire throttle operation being converted to the usual cable operated multiple throttle induction system with aftermarket ECU's with just throttle position load sensing.
IE the issue of the preservation of cars as we know them is more one of the future of the aftermarket tuning industry and wether the eco nazis are allowed to destroy that industry's ability to cater for our requirements.Not the regulations that the car manufacturers have to go by.
IE the issue of the preservation of cars as we know them is more one of the future of the aftermarket tuning industry and wether the eco nazis are allowed to destroy that industry's ability to cater for our requirements.Not the regulations that the car manufacturers have to go by.
RDMcG said:
I fear the trend is irreversible at this stage.. God knows what the next set of emission regulations and safety rules will cause.
Actually, we may see some improvements if the proposed new drive cycle ever gets past the drawing board -> argue with OEMs about targets -> drawing board stages it's going through at the moment.It's long been known that the current NEDC test protocol is a million miles from being representative. Interestingly, in the US they have the same problem but they just apply a correction factor to the values their drive cycle gives, I've no idea why the EU isn't bright enough to do the same but the result is figures that are unattainable for the average driver.
Worse than that, though, is that such an arbitrary drive cycle with only-just-possible emissions targets and draconian fines for not meeting them all combines into forcing OEMs to get the very best NEDC results they can, no matter what. This promotes aggressively optimising the car just for the test, engine maps, throttle response, gearing and all. The problem is that while this might improve the test result, the drive cycle being so far from reality means the customer ends up with a car that's worse to drive on the road.
The proposed new drive cycle is a damn sight better. It includes much harder acceleration, higher-speed running and a nice transient section which simulates country roads. Apart from making the published figures a lot more reasonable, all the effort that goes into optimising for the drive cycle will actually help produce a better-driving car, rather than making it worse.
We can but hope it makes it through, and soon!
To be honest, outside of enthusiasts, I don't see why someone would order a new car with a manual. Modern automatics are such a piece of piss to drive they suit most drivers perfectly. I suppose there's an argument that disengaging drivers from the driving experience leads to inattentiveness but I can't see how you you could prove that or otherwise.
sooperscoop said:
To be honest, outside of enthusiasts, I don't see why someone would order a new car with a manual. Modern automatics are such a piece of piss to drive they suit most drivers perfectly. I suppose there's an argument that disengaging drivers from the driving experience leads to inattentiveness but I can't see how you you could prove that or otherwise.
Plenty of people simply do not like driving an automatic. My wife, for example, gets very annoyed by the lack of engine braking and the tendency of an auto not in "sport" mode to select insanely high cruising gears at every opportunity (which are obviously different manifestations of the same problem). She could fix that by always driving in "sport" mode, but she wouldn't. Driving an automatic actually requires quite a lot more thinking (but less physical effort) if you want to always be in the right gear. It is a lot easier (in terms of thinking) to simply slot between the gears yourself rather than guessing what the box is up to and counteracting its silly habits with throttle inputs, harder braking, etc.
One of the saddest things is that most engines are now designed to work best with auto boxes with loads of ratios. The engine in our 320i is blatantly made for the 8ZF box and is not terribly well suited to the 6 speed manual that we have (not least because it could do with a 7th gear for motorway driving).
Problem is that everyday joe is getting further and further away from the technology. People who understand how a car works make the best drivers.
A population of people who can only drive automatics, and have no idea how to drive manual will have a knock on effect on driving standards.
A population of people who can only drive automatics, and have no idea how to drive manual will have a knock on effect on driving standards.
Baryonyx said:
kambites said:
Interesting article.
It also mentions in passing why modern cars have significant throttle delays.
Emissions testing has a lot to answer for.
This is something I hate. In most diesels, you expect it. You expect that throttle to feel like mush, and for the car to grunt into life the week after you press the throttle. It also mentions in passing why modern cars have significant throttle delays.
Emissions testing has a lot to answer for.
However, more and more petrol cars are being afflicted with awful DBW throttles. Things like rev hang are becoming more and more common (where the throttle automatically keeps feeding air to the engine after 'demand' closure at the driver's foot, meaning the revs artificially hang in place for a second and burn off the fuel being injected in the cylinder, rather than the exhaust for better emissions), and feel awful to drive with. And so many cars now smooth throttle demand noticeably, in that you never really feel like you're sychronised with the throttle. It's like driving a diesel; you press the pedal and you wait for the engine to get back to you on how it likes your demand.
sebhaque said:
I had an awful time with a company Peugeot 3008 diesel "sport". Come up to a roundabout on trailing throttle, spot a gap and rev-match to the gear below and apply throttle - nothing. The car would burn off the overrev fuel and then do whatever you asked it to do. Thankfully the gaps I went for weren't small, but I could easily see how a driver could get t-boned by going for a gap that would normally be safe, but the car deciding it shouldn't accelerate yet makes it dangerous.
If a small throttle delay is the difference between crashing and not crashing, I'd argue that the gap is definitely not safe.colinrob said:
I suppose I am lucky driving my automatic 1997 540 made for global warming, no throttle delay and reasonably quick
BMW actually introduced DBW throttle in the 5 series in 1997 - unless you've got one of the last cable actuated models? I had one of the first 3 series with it fitted (E46 330ci - year 2000 model), and it was about a second between pedal movement and engine response - in fact you could tap your foot up and down in time to the music whilst in first gear in traffic and the car wouldn't respond at all (a party trick to scare passengers).The same problem can exist with a cable throttle.
My wife's old Punto had a cable and still had about a second of lag between opening the throttle and the engine doing anything (as you say, I could push the pedal to the floor and release it in neutral without the engine responding at all). I guess even with the throttle open, nothing happens until the ECU wakes up the injectors.
The Elise has a (very small) delay too, although you only really notice it driving it back to back with a car on carbs.
My wife's old Punto had a cable and still had about a second of lag between opening the throttle and the engine doing anything (as you say, I could push the pedal to the floor and release it in neutral without the engine responding at all). I guess even with the throttle open, nothing happens until the ECU wakes up the injectors.
The Elise has a (very small) delay too, although you only really notice it driving it back to back with a car on carbs.
Edited by kambites on Monday 17th November 09:31
kambites said:
The same problem can exist with a cable throttle.
My wife's old Punto had a cable and still had about a second of lag between opening the throttle and the engine doing anything (as you say, I could push the pedal to the floor and release it in neutral without the engine responding at all). I guess even with the throttle open, nothing happens until the ECU wakes up the injectors.
My wife's old Punto had a cable and still had about a second of lag between opening the throttle and the engine doing anything (as you say, I could push the pedal to the floor and release it in neutral without the engine responding at all). I guess even with the throttle open, nothing happens until the ECU wakes up the injectors.
My Elise (VVC Rover engine) actually had a very small lag, but it wasn't enough to negatively affect the driving experience. My old E46 330ci on the other hand, at 1 second, corresponded to about 18 metres at a typical B road cornering speed of 40mph, so you'd pretty much be coasting around every corner. The most alarming thing was the delay coming off the throttle, so in the wet if you got a little wheelspin then you couldn't do anything about it for a whole second, or if the traffic lights turned red up ahead you actually had to brake to start slowing down - just backing off did nothing for several metres.Both my current cars (a Lotus 2-Eleven with a Toyota engine and my BMW 320d with a diesel engine), have instant throttle response, which is curious, especially on the part of the Lotus (does SVA remove the need for emissions control? It does smell quite racing car like at idle...). The Lotus Evora has a small lag, so I guess it could be SVA.
McSam said:
ctually, we may see some improvements if the proposed new drive cycle ever gets past the drawing board -> argue with OEMs about targets -> drawing board stages it's going through at the moment.
It's long been known that the current NEDC test protocol is a million miles from being representative. Interestingly, in the US they have the same problem but they just apply a correction factor to the values their drive cycle gives, I've no idea why the EU isn't bright enough to do the same but the result is figures that are unattainable for the average driver.
Worse than that, though, is that such an arbitrary drive cycle with only-just-possible emissions targets and draconian fines for not meeting them all combines into forcing OEMs to get the very best NEDC results they can, no matter what. This promotes aggressively optimising the car just for the test, engine maps, throttle response, gearing and all. The problem is that while this might improve the test result, the drive cycle being so far from reality means the customer ends up with a car that's worse to drive on the road.
The proposed new drive cycle is a damn sight better. It includes much harder acceleration, higher-speed running and a nice transient section which simulates country roads. Apart from making the published figures a lot more reasonable, all the effort that goes into optimising for the drive cycle will actually help produce a better-driving car, rather than making it worse.
We can but hope it makes it through, and soon!
The only true way to do this is to switch to a public jury style system where the governing body selects 100 daily drivers at random and they drive the car for a month and this data is used to calculate all sales and taxation data. It's long been known that the current NEDC test protocol is a million miles from being representative. Interestingly, in the US they have the same problem but they just apply a correction factor to the values their drive cycle gives, I've no idea why the EU isn't bright enough to do the same but the result is figures that are unattainable for the average driver.
Worse than that, though, is that such an arbitrary drive cycle with only-just-possible emissions targets and draconian fines for not meeting them all combines into forcing OEMs to get the very best NEDC results they can, no matter what. This promotes aggressively optimising the car just for the test, engine maps, throttle response, gearing and all. The problem is that while this might improve the test result, the drive cycle being so far from reality means the customer ends up with a car that's worse to drive on the road.
The proposed new drive cycle is a damn sight better. It includes much harder acceleration, higher-speed running and a nice transient section which simulates country roads. Apart from making the published figures a lot more reasonable, all the effort that goes into optimising for the drive cycle will actually help produce a better-driving car, rather than making it worse.
We can but hope it makes it through, and soon!
Any of the static solutions are too easy to game.
Autos are already superior to manuals in every way when it comes to economy and performance. Once they are significantly cheaper than manuals then there will be no reason for manufacturers to offer a manual and they will be gone. Then as more gears are added the rev range will become generally more restricted as the box keeps the engine always in its most efficient operating area and soon we are all driving around in even more soulless utility boxes for the masses.
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff