The death of the clutch pedal

[henk4]

No, Pieter. I mean if I have the option of a manual I'll get one(or consider having it over other options), even if I don't like the whole of the car that has it (M3, Panamera).

But manual gone, I have no point for going for those mentioned cars, therefore changing my preferences/choices.

My question is, does anyone feel the same, or manual gearboxes are irrelevant for decisions on cars?

so if I understand you correctly, the first thing you want to buy is a manual gearbox, and then you start looking what car is available......but I somehow understad your point, in the sense that when I asked my guy to look for a C5 in Germany I had three conditions: 2.2 biturbo, not black and a manual box. I ended up with a black one manual. The current model is no longer available with a manual....

[fpv_gtho]

I made sure my first car was a manual, but that was bought used and was basically guranteed to be something cheap and old. I wanted a manual then because i knew it would likely be the only thing interesting with the car.

If i was buying a new car though i wouldnt really care. I cant off the top of my head think of a high performance car with a dud auto, manual, DCT or automised manual anyway. If it wasnt a high performance car, i'd likely settle for an auto anyway, which most these days are designed with credible sport modes to have some fun with.

[Ferrer]

Honestly, modern gearboxes and in general electronic controls are exemplars of automotive engineering improvement.
Antipathy towards change is understandable but ultimately backward... who wants un-boosted brakes back? How about drums?

I have always made choices based on the car itself, so the gearbox has been relevant only in that sense. In other words, a luxury car doesn't need (nor should have except in rare examples) a manual gearbox, a sportscar does. In the case of my current drivers, an old VW bus wouldn't be the same with a slushbox even if they were offered that way, and similarly the CSL naturally is right, but so too is our 3.0 CSA... they serve different purposes. And the best of both worlds: Sportomatics don't have a clutch pedal, but still must be shifted in a traditional pattern... that's better than floppy paddles IMO.

But even sticking with autos, they would affect my choice. I mean, I do not want one of those manual with automated clutches. For the most part they seem to be jerky and slow gearboxes. A conventional torque converter auto is much smoother and in some cases faster and a dual clutch gearbox is even smoother and much faster than either.

Ferrer, I think you don't understand the point Henk is making: People who know how to double-clutch see very little difference between a syncho 'box and a paddle shift.

So my point is your question is ridiculous: Sports car drivers didn't didn't switch to luxury sedans when they went from crash 'boxes to synchro 'boxes, why should this transition be any different?

Well, I'd say that the change from clutch pedal to flappy paddle is much greater than non-syncro to syncro, therefore being a more important distinction.

With a syncho'd box you can still do double declutching and you still have to be smooth and fast with your gear changes, whereas in an auto you are only flicking a paddle.

so if I understand you correctly, the first thing you want to buy is a manual gearbox, and then you start looking what car is available......but I somehow understad your point, in the sense that when I asked my guy to look for a C5 in Germany I had three conditions: 2.2 biturbo, not black and a manual box. I ended up with a black one manual. The current model is no longer available with a manual....

Exactly. For me changing gear is an integral part of the driving exprience and I know that, even if autos are definitely much more comfortable, if I didn't have a manual I'd end missing it far too much. So I'd try to stick to manuals as far as possible even if that means buying stupid Porsches or soft M cars.

[VOGUE_MAN]

It'll be sad to see it go, but when it does, I won't lose too much sleep over it. My main objection to auto/paddle gearboxes was that they were slower and compromised the performance of the vehicle. Well DSG has seen to it that manual is slower and I don't think it'll be too long until the longest way around a track/road is to let computers do the changing.

However, I do feel certain that it's only a matter of time until ABS, TCS etc are mandatory and unable to be turned off, this does concern me a little more.

[thebrochureman]

Am i the only one who understands what Ferrer is trying to get at, the reason why i like the BMW 1M is that’s it has a manual. I would still buy a high end sports even if it doesn't have a manual because cars i like don't have a manual and most car i hate do have a manual. Most car are going auto so it wouldn’t affect my chose of sports cars. In the uk only 20% of new cars registered in the UK have a automatic transmission, although in the next few years that will rise.

[Clivey]

We're a looong way away from that yet. - 80>% of new cars sold here have manual 'boxes.

- Some people won't even consider autos - My mother won't even attempt to drive one (she feels uneasy about not being in control of the car). However Albert, I do share your concern that many high-performance cars are losing a manual option. - in certain cars, it's what makes of breaks the driving experience.

For enthusiasts though, there are always options. - We might just have to steer away from the mainstream in future.

[Ferrer]

A few years ago I read an article which said that 86% of new cars sold in Spain were manuals (altough I'm sure that figure is lower now), which was one of the highest figures in Europe. The figures tend to be lower as you move up north. It seems us, the lunatic latins, can't understand technology. I too know plenty of people who can't fathom and automatic gearbox, both young and old.

However the fact of the matter is, wheter we like it or not, the manual is a dying breed. Especially in mid-sized and big cars as well as high performance vehicles. In a economy and small cars it will take a lot longer to disappear, I agree.

[thebrochureman]

I think as good as they are we need to accept that manuals are dying out. I think other gearboxes are likely to be great fun, take the Ferrari FF for example, it has a Seven-speed DCT, it's probable a great gearbox, but i doubt if any of us on UCP and most of the world has used one, so how do we know what some of these gearboxes from Ferrari and other supercars are really like. I think we shouldn't dismiss them just because they not manuals.

[Fleet 500]

We're a looong way away from that yet. - 80>% of new cars sold here have manual 'boxes.

- Some people won't even consider autos - My mother won't even attempt to drive one (she feels uneasy about not being in control of the car). However Albert, I do share your concern that many high-performance cars are losing a manual option. - in certain cars, it's what makes of breaks the driving experience.

For enthusiasts though, there are always options. - We might just have to steer away from the mainstream in future.

I didn't realize that you can't be in control of a car if it has an automatic. What about those who run their cars with an auto on a track (like autocrossing)? They are not in control of their cars?

Changing gears is basically the same with an auto or manual. With one, it's done automatically (although it can be manually shifted); with the other it's manually done.

Anyway, regarding the topic of this thread, it wouldn't matter to me if manuals were phased out (though I don't think they will be). Of my four cars, only one was available with a manual transmission and I would have picked the automatic anyway because it is an excellent transmission (Torqueflite). If I buy a new car, I would choose one with an automatic, anyway.

If I ever buy a car with a manual, it would be a '60s muscle car, so no problem there... it would just be a matter of searching the ads and finding what I want.

[pimento]

I don't have any stats, but I'd say most new cars here are auto as would be in the US.

Fleet, I'd say most track runners would prefer a manual as with full manual control of the gear change process comes better control of engine braking and the like. It's not just about the gear selection. I know that you can select your own gears with an auto, but the torque converter can make things a little sloppy. Obviously nowadays they're much better though. Also, historically manuals have had more gears to choose from, which is usually a good thing on a track.

[Fleet 500]

I don't have any stats, but I'd say most new cars here are auto as would be in the US.

Fleet, I'd say most track runners would prefer a manual as with full manual control of the gear change process comes better control of engine braking and the like. It's not just about the gear selection. I know that you can select your own gears with an auto, but the torque converter can make things a little sloppy. Obviously nowadays they're much better though. Also, historically manuals have had more gears to choose from, which is usually a good thing on a track.

You make some good points.
However, I have engine braking in my cars, too; I just shift into a lower gear.
I don't see how a torque converter makes things "sloppy." I do know it does multiply the torque of an engine in each gear which helps acceleration.

[pimento]

I dunno, it just seems to be in a bunch of autos I've driven that the engine speed doesn't directly correlate to drive shaft speed.. you stomp the loud pedal, the engine roars and then the drive shaft catches back up (assuming no gear shift). My old Rover was particularly bad for that.

[f6fhellcat13]

My parents have two '09 Civics, almost identical save the transmission. When driving the manual on the freeway response is noticeably more immediate. Admittedly, those cars are far from the cream of the crop, but my experience in them mirrors what other limited experience I've had.
EDIT: Both are 5 speeds, but I have no idea if the ratios are the same.

[Fleet 500]

I dunno, it just seems to be in a bunch of autos I've driven that the engine speed doesn't directly correlate to drive shaft speed.. you stomp the loud pedal, the engine roars and then the drive shaft catches back up (assuming no gear shift). My old Rover was particularly bad for that.

A lot would depend on the car, of course. When I am going about 50 mph in my '66 Plymouth or '69 Cadillac and I open up the throttle (not enough to cause a downshift), both cars respond almost immediately. 70 or 80 mph comes up in a short time.

[vanessalane]

I dunno, it just seems to be in a bunch of autos I've driven that the engine speed doesn't directly correlate to drive shaft speed.. you stomp the loud pedal, the engine roars and then the drive shaft catches back up (assuming no gear shift). My old Rover was particularly bad for that.

i am not agree with you. its depends on your car who efficient your car is