Recliner wrote:

It's only a matter of time before all cars are automatics: with more
ratios, they're more fuel efficient and perform better than manual
transmissions. In fact, many high performance and almost all Eco cars are
now auto-only. The manual gearbox is going the way of the manual choke,
carburettor, starting handle, etc. It's almost 30 years since I switched to
automatics, and I wouldn't dream of going back.

Finding a US rental car with a manual transmission in the US is near impossible
outside of certain specialist vehicles. This also reflects the private vehicle
market as even cars offered with supposed "manual" transmissions are really
automatics with paddle shift switches.

In the UK, it seems to be quite different and I'm not sure why.

On Sun, 26 Oct 2014 05:07:58 -0600, Arthur Conan Doyle
wrote:

Recliner wrote:

It's only a matter of time before all cars are automatics: with more
ratios, they're more fuel efficient and perform better than manual
transmissions. In fact, many high performance and almost all Eco cars are
now auto-only. The manual gearbox is going the way of the manual choke,
carburettor, starting handle, etc. It's almost 30 years since I switched to
automatics, and I wouldn't dream of going back.

Finding a US rental car with a manual transmission in the US is near impossible
outside of certain specialist vehicles. This also reflects the private vehicle
market as even cars offered with supposed "manual" transmissions are really
automatics with paddle shift switches.

Isn't it still possible to buy at least some sporty cars with
traditional stick shifts in the US? But, certainly, the mainstream
and rental markets abandoned the stick shift a long time ago. I wonder
how many American drivers would be able to use a clutch pedal?


In the UK, it seems to be quite different and I'm not sure why.

Autos are usually more expensive, and traditionally had higher fuel
consumption. As cars and fuel are already much more expensive in the
UK than the US, I suppose this is a significant factor with the small
cars that are more popular here than in the US. But with the pressure
for cleaner, more economical cars, auto transmissions will become the
norm here, too, as computers can control the (larger number of) ratios
better.

On 26/10/2014 11:32, Recliner wrote:

On Sun, 26 Oct 2014 05:07:58 -0600, Arthur Conan Doyle
wrote:

Recliner wrote:

It's only a matter of time before all cars are automatics: with more
ratios, they're more fuel efficient and perform better than manual
transmissions. In fact, many high performance and almost all Eco cars are
now auto-only. The manual gearbox is going the way of the manual choke,
carburettor, starting handle, etc. It's almost 30 years since I switched to
automatics, and I wouldn't dream of going back.

Finding a US rental car with a manual transmission in the US is near impossible
outside of certain specialist vehicles. This also reflects the private vehicle
market as even cars offered with supposed "manual" transmissions are really
automatics with paddle shift switches.

Isn't it still possible to buy at least some sporty cars with
traditional stick shifts in the US? But, certainly, the mainstream
and rental markets abandoned the stick shift a long time ago. I wonder
how many American drivers would be able to use a clutch pedal?


In the UK, it seems to be quite different and I'm not sure why.

Autos are usually more expensive, and traditionally had higher fuel
consumption. As cars and fuel are already much more expensive in the
UK than the US, I suppose this is a significant factor with the small
cars that are more popular here than in the US. But with the pressure
for cleaner, more economical cars, auto transmissions will become the
norm here, too, as computers can control the (larger number of) ratios
better.


The issue highlighted upthread of the potentially astronomical cost of
fixing an automatic if it goes wrong is also a consideration.

On 2014-10-26 12:32:48 +0000, Mizter T said:

The issue highlighted upthread of the potentially astronomical cost of
fixing an automatic if it goes wrong is also a consideration.

True, though if a manual box goes wrong that's also pretty pricey these
days. And some modern autos are closer in design to an H-gate box with
automatic shifters and clutches. Certainly Stagecoach have this type
on most of their newer coaches, as it is more fuel efficient than a
fluid coupling.

Neil
--
Neil Williams
Put my first name before the @ to reply.

On Sun, 26 Oct 2014 12:32:48 +0000, Mizter T
wrote:


On 26/10/2014 11:32, Recliner wrote:

On Sun, 26 Oct 2014 05:07:58 -0600, Arthur Conan Doyle
wrote:

Recliner wrote:

It's only a matter of time before all cars are automatics: with more
ratios, they're more fuel efficient and perform better than manual
transmissions. In fact, many high performance and almost all Eco cars are
now auto-only. The manual gearbox is going the way of the manual choke,
carburettor, starting handle, etc. It's almost 30 years since I switched to
automatics, and I wouldn't dream of going back.

Finding a US rental car with a manual transmission in the US is near impossible
outside of certain specialist vehicles. This also reflects the private vehicle
market as even cars offered with supposed "manual" transmissions are really
automatics with paddle shift switches.

Isn't it still possible to buy at least some sporty cars with
traditional stick shifts in the US? But, certainly, the mainstream
and rental markets abandoned the stick shift a long time ago. I wonder
how many American drivers would be able to use a clutch pedal?


In the UK, it seems to be quite different and I'm not sure why.

Autos are usually more expensive, and traditionally had higher fuel
consumption. As cars and fuel are already much more expensive in the
UK than the US, I suppose this is a significant factor with the small
cars that are more popular here than in the US. But with the pressure
for cleaner, more economical cars, auto transmissions will become the
norm here, too, as computers can control the (larger number of) ratios
better.


The issue highlighted upthread of the potentially astronomical cost of
fixing an automatic if it goes wrong is also a consideration.

In my experience, it's clutches in manual transmission cars that most
often need attention, and that takes a lot of labour. Auto gearboxes
have a very long life.

On 2014-10-27 12:40:05 +0000, Recliner said:

In my experience, it's clutches in manual transmission cars that most
often need attention, and that takes a lot of labour. Auto gearboxes
have a very long life.

Though that's one of the many cases where car manufacturers don't
design for easy maintenance, as they can gain from it being more
expensive. Otherwise an easier to replace clutch might have been
designed.

That said, your point is correct - you have to drive a car more
carefully to avoid wearing the clutch out if it's a manual. An auto
will look after itself.

Neil
--
Neil Williams
Put my first name before the @ to reply.

On 27/10/2014 12:40, Recliner wrote:
[...]
Autos are usually more expensive, and traditionally had higher fuel
consumption. As cars and fuel are already much more expensive in the
UK than the US, I suppose this is a significant factor with the small
cars that are more popular here than in the US. But with the pressure
for cleaner, more economical cars, auto transmissions will become the
norm here, too, as computers can control the (larger number of) ratios
better.

The issue highlighted upthread of the potentially astronomical cost of
fixing an automatic if it goes wrong is also a consideration.

In my experience, it's clutches in manual transmission cars that most
often need attention, and that takes a lot of labour. Auto gearboxes
have a very long life.

Perhaps (?) that's because your experience over the years has been with
higher end automatics?

I'm by no means an expert on any of this - a quick google brings up all
sorts of differing 'expert' opinion (of which the world of motoring has
a particular surfeit of), including varying views on fuel consumption
(though plenty sticking with the traditional 'autos drink more fuel'
line), but the potential expense of repairs to automatics does seem to
feature significantly.

The other significant thing of course being the higher initial purchase
price.

Note that I've no particular dog in this race! Ultimately I'd say
whatever is most economical with fuel consumption is the way to go, and
if autos are now starting to better manuals then that's all good.

Mizter T wrote:
On 27/10/2014 12:40, Recliner wrote:
[...]
Autos are usually more expensive, and traditionally had higher fuel
consumption. As cars and fuel are already much more expensive in the
UK than the US, I suppose this is a significant factor with the small
cars that are more popular here than in the US. But with the pressure
for cleaner, more economical cars, auto transmissions will become the
norm here, too, as computers can control the (larger number of) ratios
better.

The issue highlighted upthread of the potentially astronomical cost of
fixing an automatic if it goes wrong is also a consideration.

In my experience, it's clutches in manual transmission cars that most
often need attention, and that takes a lot of labour. Auto gearboxes
have a very long life.

Perhaps (?) that's because your experience over the years has been with
higher end automatics?

Yes, that's true. In fact, with my current car, there wasn't even a manual
option, as there would be no demand for one. And with with one of my
previous cars, there was no manual option because they didn't have one that
could handle the torque.


I'm by no means an expert on any of this - a quick google brings up all
sorts of differing 'expert' opinion (of which the world of motoring has a
particular surfeit of), including varying views on fuel consumption
(though plenty sticking with the traditional 'autos drink more fuel'
line), but the potential expense of repairs to automatics does seem to
feature significantly.

Yes, if you're unlucky enough to have an auto box fail outside the guaranty
period, it's very expensive. Fortunately, they tend to last a long, long
time if they didn't have any manufacturing faults which normally show up
early.

The other significant thing of course being the higher initial purchase price.

Yes, that's certainly true, though with higher end cars, the resale value
is much worse with a manual box, so they actually work out more expensive
to own. But it's certainly a factor with cheaper cars.


Note that I've no particular dog in this race! Ultimately I'd say
whatever is most economical with fuel consumption is the way to go, and
if autos are now starting to better manuals then that's all good.

I don't think torque converter gear boxes are more economical than manuals,
though the extra gear ratios of the latest boxes probably mean they
approximately equal them. But dual clutch autos are certainly more
economical than manuals as well as torque converter autos, though they're
not quite as nice to drive as a classic slush box auto.

I've always had the latter, and just love the smooth, seamless gear
changes (you can only detect a gear change if you watch the tach) and easy
driving in stop-start traffic. Mine only has six speeds, but the latest
model of my car has eight, and the next will probably have nine and I
suppose ten won't be far away. That certainly helps the fuel consumption,
which is the main factor behind the increase in the number of ratios. I
don't think car manual gear boxes are likely to go beyond six speeds, so
there's less chance of being in the optimum ratio.

On 2014-10-26 11:32:55 +0000, Recliner said:

Autos are usually more expensive, and traditionally had higher fuel
consumption. As cars and fuel are already much more expensive in the
UK than the US, I suppose this is a significant factor with the small
cars that are more popular here than in the US. But with the pressure
for cleaner, more economical cars, auto transmissions will become the
norm here, too, as computers can control the (larger number of) ratios
better.

TBH I think it will go one further than that - there will be a move to
series hybrids, which have electric transmission just like a
diesel-electric locomotive, with added regenerative braking to charge
the batteries. No ratios at all needed then (other than one fixed one,
obviously).

Neil
--
Neil Williams
Put my first name before the @ to reply.

TBH I think it will go one further than that - there will be a move to
series hybrids, which have electric transmission just like a
diesel-electric locomotive, with added regenerative braking to charge
the batteries.

The obvious approach would be to put motors in the wheels, like they
do on electric streetcars. But apparently motors are heavy, and that
would make the unsprung weight of the car undesirably high, so they'd
have to put the motors in the body, with fiddly universal joints to
connect them to the wheels. But unless they are a lot more fuel
efficient than current hybrids I wouldn't bother. I have the US
hybrid version of the Ford C-Max, which gets about 48 mi/G (imperial
gallon), and the UK non-hybrid version is rated at 55.

Do electric trolly buses have motors in the wheels like streetcars?
I'd think that the greater overall weight would make the unsprung
weight issue less important.