Blackraven

Manual/stick shift is indeed a skill. Oh and it is needed when driving in Europe (because most rental cars are stick). If you can't drive stick, you're screwed over there (so your only choice is to take public transportation).

Btw, there's one thing I don't get:
1) How come you need to apply proper throttle manipulation procedures when in 1st gear and Reverse? I thought the only time a clutch pedal is needed is if you're changing gears. (?)
2) Why does the vehicle roll back on a hill?

rkyat

I wonder where MMarshall is and his infamous pic in manual-related threads?

geko29

You need to use the clutch anytime you're engaging or disengaging a gear. Starting off in 1st or reverse counts as engaging a gear. You're trying to go from neutral (from a driveline perspective, not necessarily from a gear lever perspective) into a driven gear without stalling the engine. If you're truly in neutral and just try to force the lever into 1st or reverse, it won't go (and makes really ugly noises). So you push the clutch, which disengages the transmission from the engine. Now it's easy to put the lever in the desired gear.

So now your transmission is disengaged, but in gear. How do you get rolling? Well, you could just sidestep the clutch pedal, which would cause the car to hop and (provided you're not driving some mythical V12 stickshift) the engine to stall. You want to take off smoothly. How do you do this? By easing out the clutch and into the throttle. No jarring, and you gradually let the resistance between the transmission's inertia, which wants to make the engine stop; and the engine's inertia, which wants to make the transmission go the same speed it is. After a few seconds, the engine and transmission are rotating at the same speed, and the clutch is fully engaged. Voila! you're off.

See above. When the clutch is in, the engine and transmission are not connected. Therefore you are essentially in neutral. If an automatic was in neutral, it would roll back on a hill, and for the same reason. There is nothing preventing the drive wheels from moving (aside from the brakes, if applied). Though it wears the clutch, you can get a manual to hold its position on a hill by letting the clutch out partway. Provide enough friction, and the car won't roll.

This is essentially the same way the torque converter on an automatic works, minus the wear component. the output shaft of the engine is attached to a fan blade, and the input shaft of the transmission is as well. These are bathed in transmission fluid, where the engine turns the fluid, and the fluid exerts pressure on the transmission. This is why, on a modest incline, an automatic won't roll backwards in drive. There's enough friction transmitted from the engine to the transmission via the transmission fluid that halts the car's tendency to roll backwards. But get on a steep enough hill, and this isn't the case, and an automatic will still roll backwards, because this resistance isn't strong enough to overcome gravity.

The torque converter is also the reason that manuals were typically more efficient than automatics. With a manual, the engine and transmission are always either directly connected or totally disengaged except for a very brief period when starting out and changing gears. With a torque converter, the engine and trans are partially engaged all the time, until the vehicle reaches cruising speed and the TC "locks"--those two fan blades touch, and one drives the other directly. So at a stop, the engine is always fighting the inertia of the driveline (vs. spinning freely under no load with the manual), and when accelerating, there are power losses involved in the engine-->trans fluid-->input shaft interface that aren't present in the direct engine-->input shaft interface. But more gears, better programming, and faster locking torque converters have improved the efficiency of the more advanced automatics to the point where they're on par with, or in some cases superior to, manuals on the same car.

ArmyofOne

BEST description of how to drive a manual, ever.

mmarshall

I've already posted in this thread....on the first page.

mmarshall

More likely, Paul, onto cars themselves.

Good point. I hadn't considered that.

Big Andy

It's not a difficult skill to master driving a manual - it takes about half an hour though I do concede that Americans are going to find it more difficult given you're driving on the wrong side of the road, sitting on the wrong side of the car, and trying to change gear with the wrong arm. That's bound to make it more complicated.

geko29

Well the majority of us are right handed, so I'd argue the changing gears with the wrong arm. The others are certainly open to debate, but I have no opinion.

rkyat

I dunno man. If i hop in the passenger seat and try to shift (car parked obviously) with my left hand, it's quite a wtf moment.

rkyat

Ah, yes you have. Didn't recognize you without that heavy rush hour pic of yours lol.

Big Andy

Actually, you make a very good point for me - surely it's better to have your dominant (right) arm in control of the steering at all times? Add that to my list.

geko29

In the short time it takes to shift, only gross motor control is needed on the wheel (vs. a fairly precise movement on the shifter), so it's a nice balance. I don't know about you, but I don't often change gears halfway through a decreasing-radius turn (which would be nearly impossible no matter which hand you're using). Usually you're going straight or relatively so, and you almost don't need a hand at all, let alone your dominant one.

Big Andy

I'll chuck this into the mix as well; studies suggest that countries that drive on the left have fewer accidents because most humans are right-eye dominant. When you drive on the left side of the road, you use your right eye more than your left eye, which allows you to see better than if you are primarily using your non dominant left eye.

I always knew it was a bad French idea to drive on the right..

Lexmex

When I was in Mexico, people handled the stick with ease.

bitkahuna

iTrader: (20)

by that standard - all fast cars are just useless too, since doing 2, 3, 4 times the speed limit has no legitimate (legal) purpose on public roads.

just because it's useless to you or anyone, shouldn't make it 'unethical' (per thread title), unavailable, etc.

if someone wants to drive a bugatti veyron - a really 'useless' car, i think they should be allowed to, without being considered unethical, irresponsible, or otherwise penalized for doing so. if they have the cash and want to do it, they should be equally as allowed to do so as someone buying a prius.

'usefulness' shouldn't enter into it.

and as for the op article about whether having a stick is unethical because it might use more gas - smh...