schalliol

mrdoug

What say we all nominate Schalliol for almost single-handedly (as if on the shifter) keeping this thread alive? After all, without him as the "fly in the ointment," we'd all be "preaching to choir." I know I'm mixing metaphors here, but this ain't English class! By the way, ask yourself this question: what % of chics you think choose M/T? My guess is very very very few, and what exactly does that tell you? (Yeah, I know that's sexist, but also true.) Later, guys (and some girls, I think?).

schalliol

=> http://www.shoppper.com/Women are smarter? Hahahh, I'm sorry I just had to, you were askin' for it

SteVTEC

OMG!

So I was on the way home from work today and I pulled up to a light from a road where I would have been going a good 40 mph or so (at least 3rd gear) when I suddenly realized that I had NO recollection WHATSOEVER of any manual tranny shifting at all. It had just happened by itself. It did not even register in short-term memory like it would have if it was a conscious thought.

Then I was driving some more and shifting, but I was thinking about this discussion and shifting so that didn't count. But then I had to merge and was cruising in traffic and my thoughts had drifted elsewhere and back to the news and traffic report when I suddenly realized that OMG!! ...did I just shift from 3rd to 4th? Was it premeditated? Did I think about it beforehand? No...it...uh....just sorta happened again!


So all I can conclude is that driving a manual tranny really *IS* like breathing. It's going to happen whether you think about it or not. If you are thinking about it, you do have conscious control over it. But it really is just instinctual and second nature. Just like moving the steering wheel, or pressing on the gas or brake. No difference.


After that I stopped at the grocery store and then on the way home I was listening to this funny news report on the radio about interesting getaway vacations and odd things to see like 22,000 acres of mold or something. I don't recall any of my shifting from the grocery store to home either. It just sorta....happened. :P

fdl

Ya, once you get the hang of it , its all second nature.

IF you had to think so carefully about shifting...that would be an easy solution to stop people from drinking and driving.

algorithm

This long thread is very similar to the Unix vs Mac-before-OSX/Windoze flames we usually read from Usenet. The joy of controlling some crucial aspect of your subject comes at a price: you are increasingly marginalized. I feel your pain.

Another example is from photography: think about the frustration of an SLR guy with those "idiot-proof" cameras (without shutter/aperture/focus/lens controls).

schalliol

Did your key operate the same colored TSX in the parking lot that was an AT? I know you're joking, but thanks for confirming it's not better, you now seem to have an automated system. :P

schalliol

Other than the difference of opinion, I'm not seeing the Win/Mac comparison...they both had the same control, are you addressing that?

Most of the pro cameras still do have an automatic mode, they just don't turn it on. I'm arguing that an SMG vehicle with an automatic mode (only on in heavy traffic, for example) is better than the conventional manual transmission. You still have the control, but with benefits of increased performance and shifting with your hands on the wheel.

Do you still want a conventional transmission over an SMG if the conventional transmission is much less responsive? It's already somewhat less responsive in the market (again with the Aston Martin example), but technology is only going to increase that and allow the technology to filter down to cheaper cars.

SteVTEC

Yeah I have a fully automatic transmission.

It's a manual transmission with some inner part of my brain subconsciously controlling the clutch, gear selection, and shift mapping that is all left to its own devices if you don't think about it. But the really neat thing is that it can all be dynamically re-programmed on the fly instantaneously to my own liking if I choose to intervene via an advanced neural network called "the brain"!


We'll call this advanced "automatic" transmission a "standard"


Now compare that to the latest and most advanced automatic gearboxes. You have no dynamic reprogramming ability to control shift speed or firmness and they are also less efficient. We'll call this an "automatic". The next best thing after that is an "SMG". This utilizes the "manual" architecture and allows you to at least control shift speeds and shift logic through various modes. But the problem is that you cannot control it on the fly through each and every shift. You must manually switch modes via a mechanical switch or lever to indirectly tell the "SMG" what you would like to happen.


The neural network controlled "standard" transmission is far more advanced in this respect allowing instantaneous control over all aspects if you so desire, or simply fully automated sub-conscious default control. It's great to be on the cutting edge. :P

Dan Martin

I would pick SMG over conventional manual any day but I didn't think that was the point of this thread. SMG is faster than MT. Period. I'll take anyone up on this challenge.

akuma007

well, someday, when motors are completely electric, there will be no need for transmissions. no gas or rpms either. it'll be like there was just one long gear. will manual fans feel cheated?

schalliol

Why can't you change the setting on every shift if you really want, it's no more work than going to shift a lever. You forgot to mention that the SMG is more efficient than the conventional manual.

If you like to be slow I guess Why not buy a 4cyl civic or accord?

schalliol

Sweet. The principal question asked was whether the manual transmission is dying, though the original poster did note that few people are buying conventional manuals in his observation. It's nice to have someone backing me up, I know I'm not alone here, but the thread name just screams for people to "defend" the manual tranny. I can see it now, "The manual is dying? Like hell!

SteVTEC

The bimmerforum guys and my buddy who runs a different German car site are all saying differently.

http://www.bimmerforums.com/forum/sh...ght=SMG+manual

schalliol

The journalists' writing, so highly prized earlier, seem to like it a lot, and my buddy with an M3 SMG (former manual M3 driver) won't ever go back.

…off to do some real driving

Dan Martin

Maybe I'm missing something but they said that SMG was faster overall and more consistant than stick. One guy belives that it is possible to be faster on the 1/4 with a stick but you would be better off in a mustang. This isn't anything new to me...

fdl

Actually I think he may be right about teh SMG being faster. The second gen SMG in the M3 shifts in about 80 ms. Thats pretty dam fast....I may even guess close to f1 speeds. Can a human shift faster? Maybe.

But even still....driving a MT is not just about shift speed. And besides..the smg is still a manual IMO.

SteVTEC

From one of the bimmerforums.com thread, here is a post by SilverStreak, one of the moderators of the site...

I trust that a moderator of a big site like that would tend to be well-informed and know what he's talking about, so take that for what you will.

SteVTEC

All that proves is that your buddy just prefers an SMG.

SteVTEC

They said it was more consistent overall, like an automatic. They did not say that the SMG is quicker from what I read. The software limits how aggressively you can launch which slows it down in the 1/4 mile overall. There is no such limitation in the conventional manual version.

SteVTEC

So if the first gen was slower, that means it's still not as good as a human. Maybe SMGII is in fact as quick if not quicker now. That post I quoted was from 2002 so maybe there is more recent real-world data to look at. I still think a conventional would be quicker though because you are still limited by what the computer says you're allowed to do on launch, which is critical in 1/4 mile racing.

Yes, I agree. I still don't want any sort of electronic brain between me and the machine because my own brain is perfectly capable and willing to do it all myself and enjoy doing it.

fdl

Right...with a conventional manual there is no "software" or "computer" making any decisions for you. I'd say that for the average joe the SMG will get them through the 1/4 quicker. But put the right driver in the MT and I believe he will win. A computer is fast..but its not smart.

SteVTEC

Here is a published article on the subject (not sure this will show up properly)





So the overall conclusion was there is no conclusion, but the manual still did win 2 of the 3 races. And it also won the race with the SMGII using the "Launch Control" which is supposed to give you an optimal launch I guess.


I say, if you want it done right, you've just got to do it yourself.

Dan Martin

Launch control allows for more wheel spin than the traditional launch.

algorithm

Please re-read: it's Unix vs them.

Dan Martin

I still can't see why everyone is hung up on 1/4 mile racing as the defacto standard of how fast a car is. I'm sure you can find a Civic that is faster than an Enzo on the 1/4 if you look hard enough.

I have an M3 SMG at my disposal so if anyone wants to settle this debate, find a standard M3 and we'll swap cars at Mosport. It's only like $300/hr during open sessions.

fdl

Will you swap with a TSX?

schalliol

Whoa, when did this become a BMW M3 SMG II comparison? At least I was contending that we weren't at this inflection point yet, the feedback here shows that this (first mainstream) SMG is showing promise for SMGs.

Ok, so the consensus is that SMGs will be faster, and they will get smarter, but if you want the ultimate control of what the engine does, you can still do a pure manual tranny. My contention is that in fact the manual is in the process of dying and that some people will be holding out, but ultimately the car manufacturers are going to stop offering them. Don't agree? I'd guess a standard un-assisted manual will be a hard find in 2010. You'll be able to get one, but not that many.

BTW, amazing the kind of response this thread gets. I still can't get a response from the thread dealing with an RCA mount for AUX in. sniff sniff

chrisalberts

That's a fair enough point of view, but I would suggest that as long as purchasers want them, they'll be offered by the manufacturers that offer them now.

Of course you might equally say that CVTs will replace regular automatics with torque convertors.

One other point I'd like to make is that in other parts of the world (I'm thinking Europe here) MT is the norm, not the exception. So there'll still be MTs, it'll just be a matter of whether there's sufficient US market demand to import them.

C. <-- still owns vinyl records too, and yes, they sound better than CDs on the right equipment.

larchmont

I don't understand a thing on this thread but I saw this, and I don't think anyone answered it.

If I understand your question right, you've got the facts right, but you're putting them together wrong. When entropy increases, the amount of disorder (so to speak) increases, and you've lost some efficiency. So, with entropy increasing, indeed it is the case that you can't break even, you're always falling behind at least a little bit more.

OK, back to your regularly scheduled program.

Crazytree

Tranny is short for "transexual".

ClutchPerformer

You got it, Larch. Thanks.

Dan, There's many ways to interpret the second law. The most basic statement of it is: heat only flows spontaneously from a body at a hot temperature to a body at a cold temperature. It sounds simplistic, but you really can derive every other statement of the second law from this (including that the total change in entropy for any real process is greater than or equal to zero--what you were getting at, I think). What I said earlier was just a "slangy" interpretation of it. Regardless of the quantity of energy you need to run something, you'll always have to "pay" more to actually run that thing because of things like entropy generation, heat transfer across finite temperature differences, non-conservative forces (like friction), etc. Basically, nothing is perfect and you'll always have to deal with some kind of dissipative loss. The only processes that are truly loss-less are "irreversible" processes and every single one of these requires an infinite amount of time (i.e., they don't happen). The second law is kinda nice. It's way more elegant than the first law. It shows you more about how things work. The "arrow of time" analogy is pretty cool. And most of all: "entropy" sure is a lot easier to define than "energy".

I don't have a degree in physics, but I do have one in mechanical engineering (we care more about thermodynamics than anyone because energy conversion is our thing), and I'm working on more. But I digress....

schalliol

Yup, economics will rule. If a current Scion xB is what everyone wants in 10 years, they'll sell it just as it is.They may. The sales are up quite a bit and I think people are getting used to the idea of a CVT. It's a strange experience for many (probably not unlike the experience of an MT driver that has never driven AT). This brings me to a story I remember from a while ago (true, but strange): A girl had grown up in a family of MT drivers and at 15 she took driver's education. The cars they had at the school were ATs, so when the guy told her to pass a car to see how she would change the lane and speed up, since she knew her parents did something (shifted) when they wanted to pass, so did she…into "P" (for passing)! Of course this destroyed the transmission. A very ignorant kid, but it shows that people exposed to something they haven't been exposed to before (CVT or SMG?) may not know how to react. Of course an A to B driver will be most likely not to understand these changes. What's going to happen with fuel cells and electric cars? Time will tell what the preferences of the mass are, but if cars can be produced that cover fixed and marginal costs, they will be offered.Makes sense, the U.S. might make a change like this first - or last.[/QUOTE]C. <-- still owns vinyl records too, and yes, they sound better than CDs on the right equipment.[/QUOTE]As one of our friends noted, "you're preaching to the choir." I am an audiophile myself (started the #1 Yahoo A/V Club…back in '98). The sample rate and word depth of CDs isn't sufficient to handle full resolution sound, and vinyl can sound better, given that the vinyl material can be made to handle the full resolution analog sound. However, it can also sound terrible, if people aren't taking good care of the equipment and records. I wish that Acura dropped in a multi-channel SACD player instead of the standard CD (SACD players play CDs). The future will be hard computer based players (an iPod can play slightly better than CD quality audio for example (16-bit/48KHz AIFF), though currently not to the SACD level - not that people have a good way to offload SACD or DVD-A content). I am not happy with the low-grade MP3 movement, it's a step backwards in sonic performance, but the portability is nice (they could at least use higher smpling rate rates than 128kbit MP3/AAC/WMA). Oops, that was long and only sort of on topic. </rant>

Dan Martin

Thanks guys, it's been a few years since I learned anything about thermodynamics. Interesting stuff....

biker

Since you're setting the record for a lengthy thread I thought I might as well add to it.
First to answer the physics/electrical issue. While the alternator in any car may put out the same voltage the extra current taken by actuating an SMG puts a greater load on the engine. The extra current does not come free - yes it's a very small extra load on the engine but it's there.
Now as for the demise of the conventional manual. Has anyone noticed that the new TL is available with one? I'd venture to guess that over the past 30 years the percentage of manual cars in the US has actually gone up or has been steady. But for the engineering and marketing of the big three US car makers in the 60s and 70s the US would also be like the rest of the world where a MT is the norm. Unfortunately this issue will not be solved/driven by consumers as much as by bean counters and marketing types. Even if everyone on this board jumped up and down, screamed and yelled, wrote to their congresssman asking for a MT, if Honda doesn't forsee making money on it they will do away with it. There's more money to be made from an AT, both at time of the sale and during the lifetime fo the car.
I started driving and have owned nothing but MT cars and therefore always look for one when it comes time for a new one. This is not because of what I'm used to (I drive my wife's AT Civic almost as much as my car - which is very little since I'm usually on the two wheeled MT variety of vehicle) or the control, but because I'm a very practical person who will probably keep a car for 10 years and during that time I don't any transmission problems. While I might swallow hard and accept an SMG as a manual substitue, anything with more complexity and parts is liable to break down sooner - so I rather not if possible.
Given the rather lackluster sales numbers it's rather unfortunate that this forum will probably disappear before the MT does when Honda pulls the plug on the TSX. I hope my wife gets an MT Accord loaner when she takes her Civic in for service at the local Swiss Honda dealer.

larchmont

Great, great first post. Welcome, biker!

ClutchPerformer

Not really.....

Lackluster TSX sales? "This forum will probably disappear before the MT does when Honda pulls the plug on the TSX"? What planet are you on?

Welcome to the board, anyway, biker.

fdl

OK, I gotta get some clarification on this. Can someone say for sure whethere this is true or not? So if I am drivign with my radio loud, my seated heats on, etc...and am drawing extra current...will my car be slower? Or less responsive? I've never heard this before.

:shakehd:

provench

I guess the 140% sales target number means the TSX is doing much worse than Acura expected?

In either case ... long live the MT ... I love it ... fun, fast, control.

larchmont

Funny, I was assuming that part was totally tongue-in-cheek/ironic humor.