The death of the manual box on the horizon?

[CHIEF]

First of all unlike most on here I've never ever drove a car with a flappy paddle gearbox or a PDK unit etc so then why do I have such love for the manual box?

I dont know why really, especially when I cant left foot break or blip the throttle on downchanges I am just a normal and I hope reasonably competant driver, I am certainly no Tiff Needell or Chris Harris and never will be.

I totally get flapppy paddle though, Great super quick shifting when your 'on it' without taking your hands off the steering wheel but then great to have in auto lazy mode when your stuck on the M25 or just not in the mood......

but I think it will be a sad day when the last car to harbour a manual box rolls off the production line, I suspect the last cars to have a manual gearchange will be the likes of small cheap shopping cars from South Korea and of course specialist low volume sportscars like Caterham and Westfield.

I personally have never got on with auto's, just not gelled with them, great when being lazy but day to day driving they just aren't for me and again I might have a different opinion if I had a blast in a car with the latest offering of a flappy paddle box but I've always liked and enjoyed changing gear manually and yes its slower but for me a more satisfying drive when I can change gear with my left land.

I wont even discuss if the new 991 GT3 should have been offered with a manual box option because its been done to death, but I was looking at the new fabulous looking F-Type Coupe today and I wondered how good this future iconic car would become if it had an optional manual 6 speed box

Whilst I appreciate the march of technology and cars are becoming simply sensational in their performance, the current crop of sports and GT cars are forever becoming (that abused word) more digital.

When another 500bhp behemoth is launched to the riotous public with its computer controlled suspension, electric non hydrralic steering and then finally comlete with a non manual box a little part of me dies.

When the last car with a manual transmission rolls off the production line it will be a sad day indeed.

Over and out.

[skyrover]

it isn't going anywhere anytime soon

[chris182]

Depends on the application I think. For commuter cars, luxury barges and 4x4s I don't see the point of a manual gearbox, torque converter automatics are the way forward. Sportscars should be manual in my book though, I'm sure the double clutch transmissions are marvelous but I have serious concerns about their reliability and longevity and they take away from the experience of driving IMHO.

[B.J.W]

chris182 said:

Depends on the application I think. For commuter cars, luxury barges and 4x4s I don't see the point of a manual gearbox, torque converter automatics are the way forward. Sportscars should be manual in my book though, I'm sure the double clutch transmissions are marvelous but I have serious concerns about their reliability and longevity and they take away from the experience of driving IMHO.

Slightly disagree with 4x4's that are used for off-road. I shoot most weekends and the flexibility of a manual box (combined with high or low range - where applicable) is much better than an auto-box. Some may argue otherwise, but I like to control the gear I am in on muddy terrain.

[Major Fallout]

I can heel-toe, rev match, double clutch, left foot brake, I prefer the crash Moss box in the D-Type and early E-Type to the synchro gearbox. I can even drive centre throttle and a model T ford.

But give me a auto any day, I love them.

Spanish gearboxes belong in racing cars and weekend lotus 7 atom type of things. Not MPVs saloons and city cars.

I know this will anger people but its only my opinion, and I have no sway with the motor industry so my opinion has no power.

[900T-R]

chris182 said:

Depends on the application I think. For commuter cars, luxury barges and 4x4s I don't see the point of a manual gearbox, torque converter automatics are the way forward.

Except for them attracting a hefty penalty on fuel consumption and thus CO2 emissions, rendering them uncompetitive in most Western European markets, which are literally driven by CO2-related tax breaks. Only the ones with the latest 8- or 9-speeders can keep station with developments, but these are simply too expensive to feature in anything below 'premium' small SUVs/crossovers... The rest has been converted to twin clutch automated manuals a long time ago, and even these only get serious market shares when, through aforementioned tax breaks, they becoem cheaper than the corresponding manual. So far on non-hybrids I believe that's only been the case with stuff like Boxsters over here.

Given the economic and political climate I don't see manual transmissions ending up at much less than the 85% market share they have right now, any time soon.

[Monty Python]

Given some peoples' inability to drive at the best of times, an automatic would at least give them one less thing to think about.

[chris182]

B.J.W said:

chris182 said:

Depends on the application I think. For commuter cars, luxury barges and 4x4s I don't see the point of a manual gearbox, torque converter automatics are the way forward. Sportscars should be manual in my book though, I'm sure the double clutch transmissions are marvelous but I have serious concerns about their reliability and longevity and they take away from the experience of driving IMHO.

Slightly disagree with 4x4's that are used for off-road. I shoot most weekends and the flexibility of a manual box (combined with high or low range - where applicable) is much better than an auto-box. Some may argue otherwise, but I like to control the gear I am in on muddy terrain.

I think there are arguments for both. A good auto like the one in my Jeep can be locked into whatever gear you like just like a manual but also has the advantages of no clutch slipping and no rollback, which is very good for crawling and starting on steep hills. The auto is gentler on the drivetrain too so there is less chance of snapping axles and breaking stuff. The auto can also change gear with no gap in power to get bogged down. Couple that with low range and a traction system that can send all the torque to just one wheel that has traction it makes crossing terrain very easy and stress free.

The manual on the other hand is better for rocking, probably more reliable and would be my choice if I was trekking across the Sahara but for all the off-roading I am like to do the auto is superior.

900T-R said:

Except for them attracting a hefty penalty on fuel consumption and thus CO2 emissions, rendering them uncompetitive in most Western European markets, which are literally driven by CO2-related tax breaks. Only the ones with the latest 8- or 9-speeders can keep station with developments, but these are simply too expensive to feature in anything below 'premium' small SUVs/crossovers... The rest has been converted to twin clutch automated manuals a long time ago, and even these only get serious market shares when, through aforementioned tax breaks, they becoem cheaper than the corresponding manual. So far on non-hybrids I believe that's only been the case with stuff like Boxsters over here.

Given the economic and political climate I don't see manual transmissions ending up at much less than the 85% market share they have right now, any time soon.

I worded that badly, what I meant was I would rather have an auto in those applications. I can see the point of a manual for cost, reliability and fuel economy reasons but I would pick the auto because in such vehicles changing gear is just a chore.

Conversely in a sports car or hot hatch where a DCT might actually be advantageous for performance, economy ect I would rather have the manual because changing gear is part of the fun and experience.

Edited by chris182 on Wednesday 20th November 12:19

[Terminator X]

If nothing else the PDK or similar makes them much quicker. I attended a 30-130 day in my 450hp Impreza and was by the pace of a 400hp Audi TTRS ... when you look at the trace of his time there was simply no pause when he changed gear vs about 0.5s each time I changed. Amazing kit albeit a tad sad to see the manual on its way out.

TX.

[Catatafish]

How about an automated gearbox with an analogue control

I don't mind either really, but after a long time with an auto, even a brief spell in a manual $hitbox, low- power banger/rental car is really good fun.

Manuals should always be used to reduce weight, if that's the point of the particular car in question.

[Hub]

I can't say I'm completely averse to the idea of an auto for day to day driving, as I do a lot of urban driving. However, traditional torque converter autos sap power, are slow to respond and are less economical, and the main reason I haven't gone down the dual clutch (dsg etc) route is that there is more to go wrong and would be expensive if it does!

[zeppelin101]

Hub said:

I can't say I'm completely averse to the idea of an auto for day to day driving, as I do a lot of urban driving. However, traditional torque converter autos sap power, are slow to respond and are less economical,

Not true any more, depending on what segment you're buying in.

[MitchT]

I'm surprised it hasn't happened already. Car manufacturers generally pander to the masses and the masses can't really be bothered changing gear. They only do it because traditional autos usually cost more and are less economical. I'm really quite surprised that some kind of automated gearbox with settings to maximise economy or performance hasn't been implemented in all new cars of all sizes with, maybe, paddle shifts remaining just in enthusiasts' cars and the 'stick' disappearing altogether.

[willisit]

I like both, but a Manual is, and always will be, my preference.

It depends on application more than anything - what will it be used for? These millisecond changes are great for "being on it" as has been mentioned, but I'd say that 99% of the time, it's not needed or wanted. Similar story for big power - nice to have, nice to use - but nominally not required when stuck on the car parks we call motorways.

These new 8 speeds in BMWs and the like are lovely - I keep navigating back to the E92 M3 and think I'd have a hard time justifying the manual over the auto - but who knows if I were really buying. Which one makes most sense? Probably the manual for me...

However, whilst some manuals can be clunky (my Monaro is great for building muscle), it's more often that autos can be bad - I drove an auto Camaro in the US and it was woeful - the manual being a far better box. Again, application.

I can't see manuals disappearing any time soon - and I really hope they don't. Choice is king after all.

[RDMcG]

I will hang on to my manual cars permanently,but no doubt all future cars will be some form of DSG or full auto. It's over for the manual in the next very few years.

[900T-R]

MitchT said:

I'm surprised it hasn't happened already. Car manufacturers generally pander to the masses and the masses can't really be bothered changing gear.

Probably but given enough mileage covered it's not something you actually waste any conscious effort on unless the gearbox/clutch of the car concerned is so dreadful as to attract attention to itself. I just spent almost two hours extra on the motorway this morning due to three of four lanes being closed, and I don't remember thinking on arrival 'gosh, am I tired from all that gear shifting'. It's something you do subconsciously in traffic just like making your morning coffee/tea and without it I'd probably have been even more bored than I already was.

MitchT said:

They only do it because traditional autos usually cost more and are less economical. I'm really quite surprised that some kind of automated gearbox with settings to maximise economy or performance hasn't been implemented in all new cars of all sizes with, maybe, paddle shifts remaining just in enthusiasts' cars and the 'stick' disappearing altogether.

That'll be because of the extra cost, then. Oh, and for those of us who don't get a new car every 3 or 4 years the certainty of a big bill somewhere down the line for a transmission rebuild, very probably at the point where it's touch and go whether the car will be rednered uneconomical to repair. Just doesn't seem worth the bother for the sake of automating something that doesn't take any conscious effort. For me personally, a commuter/taking things to the dump/toting stuff home from B & Q etc. car can't be simple enough, really...

[LeoSayer]

skyrover said:

it isn't going anywhere anytime soon

As long as manufacturer's can continue to change £1000+ for an autobox option, they will continue to do so.

[900T-R]

RDMcG said:

I will hang on to my manual cars permanently,but no doubt all future cars will be some form of DSG or full auto. It's over for the manual in the next very few years.

Unless the economic climate is drastically changing over the next years, I can't see it happening. Simply put, we're not rich enough as a whole - I'd wager to suggest that we'll actually see some serious decontenting in new mass-market cars in that period (which is already happening. Look at the success of Dacia and the Toyota/Peugeot/Citroën triplets, at the new wave of cars that look like a midsized saloon at first glance but are in fact superminis underneath - Skoda Rapid, Seat Toledo et al) at VW reverting to torsion beam rear suspension in all Golf versions below 140 PS, et cetera).

[HustleRussell]

900T-R said:

Unless the economic climate is drastically changing over the next years, I can't see it happening. Simply put, we're not rich enough as a whole - I'd wager to suggest that we'll actually see some serious decontenting in new mass-market cars in that period (which is already happening. Look at the success of Dacia and the Toyota/Peugeot/Citroën triplets, at the new wave of cars that look like a midsized saloon at first glance but are in fact superminis underneath - Skoda Rapid, Seat Toledo et al) at VW reverting to torsion beam rear suspension in all Golf versions below 140 PS, et cetera).

Interesting. Also, good word!

[egor110]

900T-R said:

That'll be because of the extra cost, then. Oh, and for those of us who don't get a new car every 3 or 4 years the certainty of a big bill somewhere down the line for a transmission rebuild, very probably at the point where it's touch and go whether the car will be rednered uneconomical to repair. Just doesn't seem worth the bother for the sake of automating something that doesn't take any conscious effort. For me personally, a commuter/taking things to the dump/toting stuff home from B & Q etc. car can't be simple enough, really...

Define somewhere down the line.

I've got a '96 mazda bongo camper with auto box, the atf gets replaced every 3 years and it works fine.