Should the RC F Get a Stick Shift?
08-19-14, 10:22 PM
#61
Dont hate manual, I just know when to let the sun set on it. Great to learn on, you can learn a lot from it but in the end, I'll take modern AT/DCTs. Fast AT fits the bill for 95% of users out there. DCT shows on the track but honestly how many people track their cars, very few. I track casually, but the 8AT is very potent. Weakest link in the car is still me, not AT vs DCT. Even the Z06 is coming with an 8AT not DCT. BMW likes to charge you $3-4k for the upgraded tranny anyways when it should be standard on a model like that.
This thread is comedy from start to finish. First, it will never happen. Period. Toyota and manual are two things that don't go together and haven't for many years. Just look at the MkIV Supra numbers - the autos outsold the manuals by a ridiculous ratio despite the incredibly durable design of the V-160 (Getrag 233). In 2014, manuals don't sell.
Let's add to this - I have both the 6 speed Supra and the IS-F in my garage. I have over 150k miles on the Supra, and I can heel toe just fine. The F NEVER makes a mistake shifting. Ever. It's never tired, it's never slow, it's never distracted, it just shifts gears and rev matches better than any human ever could. Every single time. No one here can claim the same driving a manual. Oh, yeah, I learned to drive a manual in the barnyard when I was 6 years old. That was 48 years ago. I do have a little seat time with manuals.
Let's see any of you guys claiming "lt takes away from the driving experience" drop down a gear in mid-turn with the car approaching the limit of traction. I did this with ease in my IS-F in turn 11 at CMP. I would never, ever consider something so foolish with a clutch - I'd be spinning through the grass in a half second before I could move the shifter. So to me, all this hand wringing about "they have to do it to prove they are serious" makes as much sense as punching a hole through the nose so you can crank the engine over by hand. I'm sure there were similar debates when the electric starter made its debut, but even Harley Davidson dropped their kick starters after it was pretty clear no one (statistically) wanted them anymore. But I'll bet there are Harley forums for those who lament the loss of being able to start your bike with a leg stroke instead of pushing a button because "it adds to the riding experience."
Straight comedy. Join the 21 Century and depart that spinning plate in space where people fall off the edges. It's where the rest of us are.
Let's add to this - I have both the 6 speed Supra and the IS-F in my garage. I have over 150k miles on the Supra, and I can heel toe just fine. The F NEVER makes a mistake shifting. Ever. It's never tired, it's never slow, it's never distracted, it just shifts gears and rev matches better than any human ever could. Every single time. No one here can claim the same driving a manual. Oh, yeah, I learned to drive a manual in the barnyard when I was 6 years old. That was 48 years ago. I do have a little seat time with manuals.
Let's see any of you guys claiming "lt takes away from the driving experience" drop down a gear in mid-turn with the car approaching the limit of traction. I did this with ease in my IS-F in turn 11 at CMP. I would never, ever consider something so foolish with a clutch - I'd be spinning through the grass in a half second before I could move the shifter. So to me, all this hand wringing about "they have to do it to prove they are serious" makes as much sense as punching a hole through the nose so you can crank the engine over by hand. I'm sure there were similar debates when the electric starter made its debut, but even Harley Davidson dropped their kick starters after it was pretty clear no one (statistically) wanted them anymore. But I'll bet there are Harley forums for those who lament the loss of being able to start your bike with a leg stroke instead of pushing a button because "it adds to the riding experience."
Straight comedy. Join the 21 Century and depart that spinning plate in space where people fall off the edges. It's where the rest of us are.
^^ Not all cars have power steering. MR2's and MR2 Spyders came with manual steering due to the engine location and light weight. I believe the Lotus Elise also comes with manual steering for the same reason. I'm sure there are a few other lighter MR european cars like the Renault Clio V6 that similarly have manual steering and are sold as road cars. Any car with the engine in the front... all power steering equipped. And newer Lamborghinis since Countach owners complained about the pain of parking their cars in tight spaces with manual steering. Now a low-speed power steering system is available as a retrofit for the Countach (which shuts off after about 15mph to preserve the original steering feel).
I think another coming argument other than the manual transmission debate will be for or against servo-operated steering systems versus a well designed conventional hydraulic system. Infiniti has not had stellar reviews of its Q50's electronic/servo steering system. Maybe that's because it's the first of its type but it doesn't sound like something I would want to option when the brochure clearly states it is designed to remove what is commonly referred to as "road feel" or "steering feel". I love manual transmissions but I think communicative steering and road feel through the wheel are far more important things when driving a car.
I think another coming argument other than the manual transmission debate will be for or against servo-operated steering systems versus a well designed conventional hydraulic system. Infiniti has not had stellar reviews of its Q50's electronic/servo steering system. Maybe that's because it's the first of its type but it doesn't sound like something I would want to option when the brochure clearly states it is designed to remove what is commonly referred to as "road feel" or "steering feel". I love manual transmissions but I think communicative steering and road feel through the wheel are far more important things when driving a car.
08-20-14, 10:41 AM
#62
The last manual transmission in a Toyota car was downright awful. How many people here have actually driven a IS250 with the MT? I owned one for 3.5 years, and the improvement when I replaced it with another IS that had an AT was remarkable.
Yes, shifting gears is kind of fun. But the RC isn't a race car. It's not even a weekend car. It's intended to be a car you drive daily, and therefore, an AT is what it will have. If you want a weekend car with that lets you change gears yourself, look elsewhere. That's not the product archetype of a Lexus. They may add a DCT... manual, unlikely. And given their limited recent experience with manuals, and their last effort, I'd say the car will be the better for it.
Yes, shifting gears is kind of fun. But the RC isn't a race car. It's not even a weekend car. It's intended to be a car you drive daily, and therefore, an AT is what it will have. If you want a weekend car with that lets you change gears yourself, look elsewhere. That's not the product archetype of a Lexus. They may add a DCT... manual, unlikely. And given their limited recent experience with manuals, and their last effort, I'd say the car will be the better for it.
08-20-14, 10:44 AM
#63
^^ Not all cars have power steering. MR2's and MR2 Spyders came with manual steering due to the engine location and light weight. I believe the Lotus Elise also comes with manual steering for the same reason. I'm sure there are a few other lighter MR european cars like the Renault Clio V6 that similarly have manual steering and are sold as road cars. Any car with the engine in the front... all power steering equipped. And newer Lamborghinis since Countach owners complained about the pain of parking their cars in tight spaces with manual steering. Now a low-speed power steering system is available as a retrofit for the Countach (which shuts off after about 15mph to preserve the original steering feel).
I think another coming argument other than the manual transmission debate will be for or against servo-operated steering systems versus a well designed conventional hydraulic system. Infiniti has not had stellar reviews of its Q50's electronic/servo steering system. Maybe that's because it's the first of its type but it doesn't sound like something I would want to option when the brochure clearly states it is designed to remove what is commonly referred to as "road feel" or "steering feel". I love manual transmissions but I think communicative steering and road feel through the wheel are far more important things when driving a car.
I think another coming argument other than the manual transmission debate will be for or against servo-operated steering systems versus a well designed conventional hydraulic system. Infiniti has not had stellar reviews of its Q50's electronic/servo steering system. Maybe that's because it's the first of its type but it doesn't sound like something I would want to option when the brochure clearly states it is designed to remove what is commonly referred to as "road feel" or "steering feel". I love manual transmissions but I think communicative steering and road feel through the wheel are far more important things when driving a car.
08-20-14, 04:34 PM
#64
And not all cars have AT either. The new Alfa Romeo 4C has neither an AT nor power steering There's a product being offered that fits the bill for what people in this thread desire - a high performance sport coupe with a MT. The 4C is even mid-engined and so should rotate in a turn nicely. All brands do not have to offer a product for all niches.
I'm Italian and love Italian things, but I have to believe that you will be seeing Guido the mechanic alot. Go for the Lotus Exige if you want a small, light ride.
Are you a prior F owner? If so, the 4c may be a rude awakening for you. The 4c is far from a best-it-can be ride. The IS-F is a near perfect car--we're all spoiled.
I believe we can count on the same near-perfect engineering from the RCF--a HUGE differentiator in its class.
Last edited by ISF001; 08-20-14 at 04:38 PM.
08-21-14, 07:28 AM
#65
The Alfa 4c does a 4.5 and tops off at 155. It has 240 hp and weighs in at 2,100. A fun ride...sure. But OMG...The steering is dull and gives the driver little info at tight medium-speed corners. Ergo, you have a questionable sense of control. The steering and brakes are lacking in accuracy and resolve respectively.
I'm Italian and love Italian things, but I have to believe that you will be seeing Guido the mechanic alot. Go for the Lotus Exige if you want a small, light ride.
Are you a prior F owner? If so, the 4c may be a rude awakening for you. The 4c is far from a best-it-can be ride. The IS-F is a near perfect car--we're all spoiled.
I believe we can count on the same near-perfect engineering from the RCF--a HUGE differentiator in its class.
I'm Italian and love Italian things, but I have to believe that you will be seeing Guido the mechanic alot. Go for the Lotus Exige if you want a small, light ride.
Are you a prior F owner? If so, the 4c may be a rude awakening for you. The 4c is far from a best-it-can be ride. The IS-F is a near perfect car--we're all spoiled.
I believe we can count on the same near-perfect engineering from the RCF--a HUGE differentiator in its class.
08-21-14, 12:38 PM
#66
Driver School Candidate
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: CA
Posts: 7
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The last manual transmission in a Toyota car was downright awful. How many people here have actually driven a IS250 with the MT? I owned one for 3.5 years, and the improvement when I replaced it with another IS that had an AT was remarkable.
Yes, shifting gears is kind of fun. But the RC isn't a race car. It's not even a weekend car. It's intended to be a car you drive daily, and therefore, an AT is what it will have. If you want a weekend car with that lets you change gears yourself, look elsewhere. That's not the product archetype of a Lexus. They may add a DCT... manual, unlikely. And given their limited recent experience with manuals, and their last effort, I'd say the car will be the better for it.
Yes, shifting gears is kind of fun. But the RC isn't a race car. It's not even a weekend car. It's intended to be a car you drive daily, and therefore, an AT is what it will have. If you want a weekend car with that lets you change gears yourself, look elsewhere. That's not the product archetype of a Lexus. They may add a DCT... manual, unlikely. And given their limited recent experience with manuals, and their last effort, I'd say the car will be the better for it.
Even if most will daily these cars like they do with BMW M cars... at the end of the day the 1 / 3 / 5 and all M series cars all come in stick shift... leaving BMW the only choice for consumers like myself (who loves the essences and character of Japanese cars, but aren't being given products I would buy). I know so many people who loved RX-7's, Supra's, 3000gt's, NSX's that all ended up in M cars or Porsche's because of this.
08-21-14, 02:15 PM
#67
Liquid Bra Champion
Perhaps... yet every single video marketing Lexus F cars represent them blowing triple digits down a rack track, full fledged drifts in the corners and smokey burnouts.
Even if most will daily these cars like they do with BMW M cars... at the end of the day the 1 / 3 / 5 and all M series cars all come in stick shift... leaving BMW the only choice for consumers like myself (who loves the essences and character of Japanese cars, but aren't being given products I would buy). I know so many people who loved RX-7's, Supra's, 3000gt's, NSX's that all ended up in M cars or Porsche's because of this.
Even if most will daily these cars like they do with BMW M cars... at the end of the day the 1 / 3 / 5 and all M series cars all come in stick shift... leaving BMW the only choice for consumers like myself (who loves the essences and character of Japanese cars, but aren't being given products I would buy). I know so many people who loved RX-7's, Supra's, 3000gt's, NSX's that all ended up in M cars or Porsche's because of this.
08-21-14, 04:28 PM
#68
I'm not sure that I understand the context of your response. I presume you are saying sticks are a part of antiquity--unfortunately, this is becoming a reality.
Future cars will obey your commands with minimal physical interaction. I view paddles as a moderate migration in the inevitable direction the industry will pursue.
Future cars will obey your commands with minimal physical interaction. I view paddles as a moderate migration in the inevitable direction the industry will pursue.
08-21-14, 04:37 PM
#69
Perhaps... yet every single video marketing Lexus F cars represent them blowing triple digits down a rack track, full fledged drifts in the corners and smokey burnouts.
Even if most will daily these cars like they do with BMW M cars... at the end of the day the 1 / 3 / 5 and all M series cars all come in stick shift... leaving BMW the only choice for consumers like myself (who loves the essences and character of Japanese cars, but aren't being given products I would buy). I know so many people who loved RX-7's, Supra's, 3000gt's, NSX's that all ended up in M cars or Porsche's because of this.
Even if most will daily these cars like they do with BMW M cars... at the end of the day the 1 / 3 / 5 and all M series cars all come in stick shift... leaving BMW the only choice for consumers like myself (who loves the essences and character of Japanese cars, but aren't being given products I would buy). I know so many people who loved RX-7's, Supra's, 3000gt's, NSX's that all ended up in M cars or Porsche's because of this.
That does not mean that you should not want a stick shift - you should buy only exactly what suits you, it is your money and your decision absolutely.. but at the same time, it does not mean there are many people wanting stick shift in high performance vehicle - in fact, miniscule number of buyers do.
08-21-14, 05:22 PM
#70
Liquid Bra Champion
I'm not sure that I understand the context of your response. I presume you are saying sticks are a part of antiquity--unfortunately, this is becoming a reality.
Future cars will obey your commands with minimal physical interaction. I view paddles as a moderate migration in the inevitable direction the industry will pursue.
Future cars will obey your commands with minimal physical interaction. I view paddles as a moderate migration in the inevitable direction the industry will pursue.
Look at BMW, they think piping sound thru the speakers makes for an "engaging" experience.
08-26-14, 12:18 AM
#71
Driver School Candidate
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: CA
Posts: 7
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
you do realize that both BMW and Porsche have stated publicly how low their stick shift production numbers are for M cars?
That does not mean that you should not want a stick shift - you should buy only exactly what suits you, it is your money and your decision absolutely.. but at the same time, it does not mean there are many people wanting stick shift in high performance vehicle - in fact, miniscule number of buyers do.
That does not mean that you should not want a stick shift - you should buy only exactly what suits you, it is your money and your decision absolutely.. but at the same time, it does not mean there are many people wanting stick shift in high performance vehicle - in fact, miniscule number of buyers do.
In my own e63 M6? 10% were made in stick (only available for US market), a phenomenal number for a vehicle of this class.
e9x M3? (sedan, coupe, convertible)? A whopping 37.3% globally, 44.1% for US/Canada market.
Pure stats, google it as I didn't pull them out of thin air.
My argument is pure apples to apples. RC-F should be offered in stick shift. For every 4/10 M3's sold, they were sold as stick.
I never claimed it was better or faster. I concur this is living with "technology in the past". Just because you offer a stick doesn't mean you can't "move forward", but you open up a market for another type of buyer ( in BMW's case more than 1/3 of the buyers!!!)
08-26-14, 04:56 AM
#72
Pole Position
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: NSW, Australia
Posts: 240
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Please do share these numbers! (And really? Porsche? Please do check how many 911's, Boxsters, and Cayman's you see that AREN'T stick)
In my own e63 M6? 10% were made in stick (only available for US market), a phenomenal number for a vehicle of this class.
e9x M3? (sedan, coupe, convertible)? A whopping 37.3% globally, 44.1% for US/Canada market.
Pure stats, google it as I didn't pull them out of thin air.
My argument is pure apples to apples. RC-F should be offered in stick shift. For every 4/10 M3's sold, they were sold as stick.
I never claimed it was better or faster. I concur this is living with "technology in the past". Just because you offer a stick doesn't mean you can't "move forward", but you open up a market for another type of buyer ( in BMW's case more than 1/3 of the buyers!!!)
In my own e63 M6? 10% were made in stick (only available for US market), a phenomenal number for a vehicle of this class.
e9x M3? (sedan, coupe, convertible)? A whopping 37.3% globally, 44.1% for US/Canada market.
Pure stats, google it as I didn't pull them out of thin air.
My argument is pure apples to apples. RC-F should be offered in stick shift. For every 4/10 M3's sold, they were sold as stick.
I never claimed it was better or faster. I concur this is living with "technology in the past". Just because you offer a stick doesn't mean you can't "move forward", but you open up a market for another type of buyer ( in BMW's case more than 1/3 of the buyers!!!)
BMW was actually a similar story. I was there last weekend to have a look at the M4 (just got released in Australia), and they sold 3, all DCTs.
One thing that I haven't seen mentioned (although haven't read every post) is that in China, autos/DCTs/PDKs etc overwhelmingly sell far far far more than manuals. And virtually every luxury/sport marque knows that's where the money is and is moving design to suit that market. Lambo is a good example, where the Hurracan was "softened" up to meet the demands that their dealers in China had made. As the market continues to move in this direction, there really is zero point continuing to offer manuals in anything except the most niche of vehicles.
11-15-14, 09:13 PM
#74
Adding this to the thread since it does explain why any manual offering would have undoubtedly been even more trouble for Lexus engineers on top of redesigning the V8 engine for emissions compliance:
http://peptide.kinja.com/why-manual-...42547/+Kyosuke
"Why Manual Transmissions Are A Challenge For Automotive OEMs
Many hard-core automotive enthusiasts (and not a few curmudgeons) decry the dwindling availability of conventional manual transmissions in today's cars. There are a number of reasons for this, many of which relate to human factors ("are there enough buyers of a manual, in this car, to make such an option profitable") , but there is another factor that you may not have considered: engine exhaust emissions. And how, you ask, could the type of transmission have an effect on emissions? The one-word answer: transients. Yes, the very act of shifting your beloved old-school manual transmission makes life harder on OEMs than developing something as complex as an automatic transmission.
State of the Art
But before we dig into the effect that transients have on emissions, let's discuss a little background. Having developed the application code for, and calibrated, automatic transmission controllers, I can relate to you that this is no small affair, but it pales in comparison to engine controller development. An engine controller typically has about three times the code (upwards of 8 megabytes of executable application code and calibration data which, for an embedded controller, is a lot), with more algorithmic control functions and much more in the way of "look-up" based calibration. Transmission control software, particularly the projects I have been involved with, are more "state machine"-type of applications, with algorithms for things like fluid temperature compensation, clutch-pack engagement control and similar gradient-based functions. Engine controllers, on the other hand, have many more gradient functions, such as spark timing, fuel-air management, fuel vapor management, speed control and a host of others.
So...the scale of working with engine software is very large, even for the simplest, most steady-state control items. This complexity has been partially mitigated through a quiet, very nerdy revolution: the advent of model-based ECU development. Model-based development allows an engineer, working within their core competence, such as mechanical engineering or chemistry, contribute to electronic control system development by modelling the desired behavior, and then using a tool to turn the model into microcontroller code. This process has a number of benefits, including the inclusion of non-programmers into the development team and, generally, better code.
Random Shift Generator
This background information is cool (and by "cool", I mean industry-insidery-boring), but how does this relate to transients, and why does it mean that I can't get a manual transmission in any car that I darned well please? The answer is that transients are difficult to model, difficult to cope with in code and create a surprising amount of tailpipe emissions. And a human, shifting a manual transmission, creates rather unpredictable transients, which create more emissions than a nice, predictable automatic transmission.
Today's automatic transmission control systems, whether for planetary or for "dual-clutch" equipment, measure inputs such as driver torque demand, RPM, temperature and vehicle speed which allow the engine controller to derate the engine, if needed, and control the fuel-air ratio (F/A) in such a way as to prevent a spike in emissions. Even "floppy-paddle"-equipped automatics, with their ability to accept input at the driver's whim, still have a little processing time (partially because of now-ubiquitous "drive-by-wire" throttle control systems, which isolate engine air intake from the driver's foot) time to cope with the upcoming change in engine load, and the resulting changes need in fuel and spark. Not so with a conventional manual, where a shift can come at an time and without the same degree of "foreknowledge" of the rate of load change.
This fact makes conventional manual-equipped cars more labor-intensive to develop, because you can only model and dyno-test so well and, at the end of the day, you're going to have to have people drive around with instrumented cars, tweaking the calibrations and retesting the results. The obvious question that most people ask during this discussion is "but it's still easier than than calibrating an automatic", to which I respond "it's additional work, because it's not an either/or situation...the OEM is going to offer an automatic AND a manual, not the other way around".
The other, and larger problem, is that manual-equipped cars, based on the above, will produce more tailpipe emissions, all other things being equal. This creates additional difficulties for OEMs due to the fact that cars must not only pass "per-car" standards, but also contribute to a "fleet average", which is exactly what it sounds like - an average "pollution component per mile" calculation, where each model and drivetrain combination influences the average. Combinations that are at the higher end of the per-vehicle limits drive the average upwards, and typically need to be offset somewhere else...which compromise the combinations that get earmarked to help offset the "dirtier" cars.
I think OEMs that make the effort, and bear the expense of development of manuals are to be commended, and I would suggest that people that love them should buy them while they can - it's probably just a matter of time that the return on investment will demand the extinction of row-it-yourself cars."
http://peptide.kinja.com/why-manual-...42547/+Kyosuke
"Why Manual Transmissions Are A Challenge For Automotive OEMs
Many hard-core automotive enthusiasts (and not a few curmudgeons) decry the dwindling availability of conventional manual transmissions in today's cars. There are a number of reasons for this, many of which relate to human factors ("are there enough buyers of a manual, in this car, to make such an option profitable") , but there is another factor that you may not have considered: engine exhaust emissions. And how, you ask, could the type of transmission have an effect on emissions? The one-word answer: transients. Yes, the very act of shifting your beloved old-school manual transmission makes life harder on OEMs than developing something as complex as an automatic transmission.
State of the Art
But before we dig into the effect that transients have on emissions, let's discuss a little background. Having developed the application code for, and calibrated, automatic transmission controllers, I can relate to you that this is no small affair, but it pales in comparison to engine controller development. An engine controller typically has about three times the code (upwards of 8 megabytes of executable application code and calibration data which, for an embedded controller, is a lot), with more algorithmic control functions and much more in the way of "look-up" based calibration. Transmission control software, particularly the projects I have been involved with, are more "state machine"-type of applications, with algorithms for things like fluid temperature compensation, clutch-pack engagement control and similar gradient-based functions. Engine controllers, on the other hand, have many more gradient functions, such as spark timing, fuel-air management, fuel vapor management, speed control and a host of others.
So...the scale of working with engine software is very large, even for the simplest, most steady-state control items. This complexity has been partially mitigated through a quiet, very nerdy revolution: the advent of model-based ECU development. Model-based development allows an engineer, working within their core competence, such as mechanical engineering or chemistry, contribute to electronic control system development by modelling the desired behavior, and then using a tool to turn the model into microcontroller code. This process has a number of benefits, including the inclusion of non-programmers into the development team and, generally, better code.
Random Shift Generator
This background information is cool (and by "cool", I mean industry-insidery-boring), but how does this relate to transients, and why does it mean that I can't get a manual transmission in any car that I darned well please? The answer is that transients are difficult to model, difficult to cope with in code and create a surprising amount of tailpipe emissions. And a human, shifting a manual transmission, creates rather unpredictable transients, which create more emissions than a nice, predictable automatic transmission.
Today's automatic transmission control systems, whether for planetary or for "dual-clutch" equipment, measure inputs such as driver torque demand, RPM, temperature and vehicle speed which allow the engine controller to derate the engine, if needed, and control the fuel-air ratio (F/A) in such a way as to prevent a spike in emissions. Even "floppy-paddle"-equipped automatics, with their ability to accept input at the driver's whim, still have a little processing time (partially because of now-ubiquitous "drive-by-wire" throttle control systems, which isolate engine air intake from the driver's foot) time to cope with the upcoming change in engine load, and the resulting changes need in fuel and spark. Not so with a conventional manual, where a shift can come at an time and without the same degree of "foreknowledge" of the rate of load change.
This fact makes conventional manual-equipped cars more labor-intensive to develop, because you can only model and dyno-test so well and, at the end of the day, you're going to have to have people drive around with instrumented cars, tweaking the calibrations and retesting the results. The obvious question that most people ask during this discussion is "but it's still easier than than calibrating an automatic", to which I respond "it's additional work, because it's not an either/or situation...the OEM is going to offer an automatic AND a manual, not the other way around".
The other, and larger problem, is that manual-equipped cars, based on the above, will produce more tailpipe emissions, all other things being equal. This creates additional difficulties for OEMs due to the fact that cars must not only pass "per-car" standards, but also contribute to a "fleet average", which is exactly what it sounds like - an average "pollution component per mile" calculation, where each model and drivetrain combination influences the average. Combinations that are at the higher end of the per-vehicle limits drive the average upwards, and typically need to be offset somewhere else...which compromise the combinations that get earmarked to help offset the "dirtier" cars.
I think OEMs that make the effort, and bear the expense of development of manuals are to be commended, and I would suggest that people that love them should buy them while they can - it's probably just a matter of time that the return on investment will demand the extinction of row-it-yourself cars."
