Blackraven

Here's an outlook as to why Lamborghini has ditched the Manual Stick Shift

SLegacy99

That's because the Mark Zuckerburg's who can afford these don't know how to drive a stick....

bitkahuna

iTrader: (20)

no, it's because driving a beast like a lamborghini with a stick is jerky, difficult, REALLY annoying in traffic (like where zuckerberg is ) and INEFFICIENT.

times have changed...

the only 'sense' a manual makes is for the joy of rowing your own gears on a lower powered car which isn't driven in traffic much.

i enjoyed the stick miata i had (i live in the country), but the acura legend stick i had was awful in atlanta's traffic and i sold it.

Hoovey689

iTrader: (16)

It doesn't bother me either way though I do prefer Auto for the most part, I'm just glad I had the chance to learn to drive on a stick shift and know how now when I encounter MT vehicles

edgeucated

iTrader: (4)

I too agree MT are ancient, but i would still prefer cars to be fitted with a gear ****. A **** just looks so much nicer than a drive dial IMO

STIG

He drives a golf GTI with a stick.

And also manual gearbox is over-rated. the only car you should get with manual is in the cheap econobox with 3 cylinder engine.

Whitigir

It is not hard to make an automatic transmission with stick shifter which allows you to row your gears. Trust me, it is quiet easy. Everyone will love it

SLegacy99

That may be. But, that's what companies like Porsche and Cheverolet have advanced to 7 speed manual technology as means to efficiently deliver power in cars that are becoming increasingly more powerful....I'd like to try one of those.


And FWIW, Zuckberg drives a first gen. TSX.

Blackraven

True.....and AFAIK, they were the first to implement the 7 speed manual stick shift in passenger cars.

However IMHO, the relation between Porsche and the manual gearbox is a bit on-and-off.

I mean, the highest model where it is offered is only on the 911 Carrera 4S and 911 50th anniversary model.

No more than that.

The Turbo S only uses PDK.........and in a surprise twist, Porsche announced that the 911 GT3 will only be available in PDK. Of course, there are new rumors and speculation that the 911 GT3 RS might offer a 7 speed manual transmission as an option.

We'll just have to wait-and-see....

cino

iTrader: (1)

I don't mind dual clutch, but stick shift is still my preferred gearbox. MT is not ancient, far from it.

Lil4X

There's a rather broad dichotomy here between AT and MT enthusiasts. I agree completely that with a small engine in a car with any kind of sporting pretensions, a manual is the only way to go. Your "involvement" with the automobile and the driving experience is much higher with an MT, while an automatic cogswapper is a snooze, or worse, so unpredictable in its shift points as to be bordering on dangerous.



I'm not really a fan of the "manumatics" either. My first car was a '52 Dodge blessed with "Fluid Drive", a fluid coupling ahead of the transmission that "softened" shift points. This was carried to the extreme when the company actually advertised you could come to a stop in gear and drive away, never having to depress the clutch. In my experience, the engine idling in gear with the torque converter absorbing whatever torque the straight six could muster was a recipe for disaster. IMHO it wasn't doing the torque converter any good - it wasn't designed to be so "loose" as to allow the engine to idle with it engaged, and when you foolishly believed the ads, you discovered that the drag of the TC bogged the engine down to around 500 rpm (yes, I had a tach in it, delusions of power, I had.) With the clutch engaged, gear lever in 1st, and the torque converter turning, the idle was rough, and the car shook like a Labrador coming up out of the creek. Releasing the brake and depressing the throttle resulted in a monumental stumble, as acceleration against a full load at that speed was difficult, at best. Once underway it was fine, with shift points softened by the TC. Just the thing for a beginning driver.

I went through a series of British sports cars at college, owned by kind friends and roommates who felt sorry for a guy driving a behemoth sedan. I went from a 232 CID slow-turning 6 to a series of agricultural 4 cylinder engines and four-speeds that produced very little grunt down low. Revs were the answer, and shifting suddenly became an art. Practicing double-clutching into non-synchro low was easy on the Dodge, but difficult on an MG, TR, or Austin-Healey. You learned, amid a bit of gear grinding and missed-rev shifts. . .



The Healey was a little weird with an electric OD on top of third and fourth gear. Pull out to pass in third, and as you come alongside your quarry, flick that long toggle on the dash just inside the steering wheel arc, and the OD would snap off a speed-shift into 3 OD that was a wonder to behold. Played through an Abarth exhaust, a Healey could produce some pretty music, indeed. The trouble was that 3rd OD was about the same gear as 4th direct, so you stayed in OD for your 3-4 shift - if for no other reason that to avoid confusing yourself with needless up and down shifts. If you lose your place in the shift regimen, you can pull off some serious neck-snappers.

I understand the reasoning behind Lamborghini's "shift" to manumatics - they're able to take advantage of a boatload of electronic technology that can leave a conventional manual or automatic in the dust. But that's what concerns me about a dual-clutch transmission - although I've never driven one. As a spectator they look like they're pretty rough. The N-1 shift looks particularly gnarly. going from neutral into first gear with a few revs on the counter to ensure a decent get-away, you're likely to find your head in the back seat . . . if you have one. With no torque-converter to smooth out the engagement of the next gears, things get rather sporty, even on the way to the grocery store. I don't think that's all so necessary I suppose if you want to pull off quick, F1-style, fully automated double clutching, rev-matching shifts every time, this is a good way to do it without the learning curve or the concentration required for doing the same thing manually. The downside of that is that you'll be spending a lot of money on your chiropractor.

mmarshall

Here in the U.S., it took the domestic auto industry too long, IMO, to fully-synchronize their manual transmissions. As late as 1968 (and perhaps later), Chrysler three-on-the-trees still had an unsynchronized first gear. Even with the clutch pedal fully depressed, you had to come to an almost complete stop to safely drop that lever down into first without crunching. Other competitors went fully-synchro a little earlier.

But the development of synchros was pretty much necessary. Double-clutching (or heel-and-toe action on downshifts) just doesn't come natural to some people, so the automakers had no choice, if they wanted to sell manuals, to make it easier to shift. (In addition, the design and location of the brake pedal in some cars also makes it difficult to heel-and-toe). When I review a car, I usually comment on the brake pedal's location relative to the gas pedal....even if it is with an automatic transmission instead of a manual, a poorly-located brake pedal, too high and close to the gas, can make it difficult for big feet/shoes when lifting off the gas and going for the brake.

FrankReynoldsCPA

I had a hard choice to make when i bought my Fusion. 4 cylinder engine with a manual? Or 6 cylinder engine with an automatic? I wanted a manual really bad, but did not want to drive a four cylinder. In the end I sacrificed the manual.

Sent from my Nexus 4 using IB AutoGroup

Lil4X

Good choice! Manuals are fine in a car with at least some possibilities of performance, but a real pain in larger, heavier cars that are going to struggle in a downhill, decreasing radius turn (my personal favorite is on US 290W just West of Brenham, TX. where it joins 290/36). You're going to be tempted to carry too much speed into the turn because you won't have a whole lot for the merge at the bottom of the ramp. While a MT is often fun to play with in these situations, there is the matter of handling that can remove the grin from your face with surprising alacrity.

I had a '72 Opel and a '75 Pinto wagon (company car) at the same time. The two were about the same size, had 4-speed MTs, and while the Pinto was a good deal heavier and slightly more powerful, it suffered from handling dynamics that compared to the adroit balletic moves of the Opel, heeled over like a sailboat in a gale under 'way too much canvas. Excessive weight carried by a truly miserable suspension will do that. The greater power was easily offset by the Pinto's weight penalty of about 800 lbs. I won't even comment on the putrid green color. My subsequent upgrade to a Caprice Classic wagon (with an AT) was much appreciated.

GSteg

iTrader: (15)

Whenever I hop back into my automatic car, I find myself reaching for the non-existing clutch pedal.