Learning to drive Stick...
09-22-2004, 09:57 AM
#41
i souport publik edekason
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Granada Hills, CA
Age: 53
Posts: 1,310
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by ludachrisvt
on a non argument note I have been driving stick for about 4 years. After reading this post I actually started paying attension to what i was doing. I found that I really DONT know what I am doing. Well I do but the car jerks shifting from Neutral to first to second to third after that there is no jerk. I checked out that driving instruction page posted earlier and it says to "blip" the throttle just a bit. What does that mean? What am I doing wrong? Seems as if i have to ride the clutch (a huge no no) to get a smooth shift ... heeelp meeeee I dont want to ruin my clutch prematurely
A couple things:
- To get a better launch make sure your right heel is planted on the floor as your toe lets the clutch come up... this gives you a permanent base from which to more reliably and consistently disengage the clutch...
- Second make sure (if you're having problems like that to not have any other distractions in the car which prevent you from hearing the revs... (radio, AC blasting, kids, wife... hehe)
Lastly I have found that you seem to get a more predictable launch with VSA turned OFF...
Now with this last point be careful though cuz if you pop that clutch you will "display of speed" = ticket... or impress the chicks...
J/K... Best of luck to you bud...
Salut
09-22-2004, 10:00 AM
#42
i souport publik edekason
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Granada Hills, CA
Age: 53
Posts: 1,310
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by kenny5
Do you think if I don't practice, I would forget how to shift (say in 3 to 4 years)?
although I think that percentage is substantially higher in foreign countries.
although I think that percentage is substantially higher in foreign countries.
You can bet your bottom dollar that it is higher in foreing countries...
Salut
09-22-2004, 10:04 AM
#43
Racer
Originally Posted by flying_dutchman
Find a car rental place in LA/OC that will rent you a nice stick shift car. Then you and your friends won't feel bad about wear and tear on the clutch, pressure plate, syncro mesh's, etc. Practice on a big, flat parking lot, then find a place with a moderate hill to practice standing starts. Once you've mastered those two, you'll be better than the majority of California drivers, 20% of whom don't have a valid license and 33% who don't have car insurance. Good Luck!
Do you know any rental places in LA that rent manuals?
09-22-2004, 11:44 AM
#44
Powered by Guinness
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Stockton, CA
Age: 54
Posts: 1,541
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes
on
2 Posts
Originally Posted by SouthernBoy
TBone2004;
No sir, I'm not mistaken. There are three primary reasons for premature clutch failure, excessive wear, and required replacement.
1. Poor or improper design. The clutch assembly was not properly designed for the vehicle and engine. This almost never happens since a good deal of forethought and design go into this component. It is in the best interests of a manufacturer to use good equipment here in order to avoid warranty claims.
2. Improper installation. Alignment and torque come into mind here. Again you can pretty much rule this one out.
3. Improper operation. This is the one that does virtually all of the damage. The driver.
Clutch assemblies are going to wear because that is what they do and how they work. But you can significantly reduce wear by learning, using, and adhering to proper operating techniques. I would say you could probably double or triple the life of a clutch assembly by using these techniques over someone who does not.
Granted there are a whole bunch of factors that come into play such as living in San Francisco or a very congested urban environment. But even there, you can increase the life of your clutch assembly over those who do not know how to properly operate a manual transmission (this may be the source of your comment, "some pretty blanket statements").
I have known people who have managed to get well into the first 100,000 miles on the original clutch and I KNOW I can easily pass the 200,000 mile mark (assuming the first two factors are met and nothing abnormal happens).
So I stand by my statements and will continue to operate my manual tranny as I have for the past 40 years.
BTW, the clutch installed in the TL feels to me to be a decent unit.
No sir, I'm not mistaken. There are three primary reasons for premature clutch failure, excessive wear, and required replacement.
1. Poor or improper design. The clutch assembly was not properly designed for the vehicle and engine. This almost never happens since a good deal of forethought and design go into this component. It is in the best interests of a manufacturer to use good equipment here in order to avoid warranty claims.
2. Improper installation. Alignment and torque come into mind here. Again you can pretty much rule this one out.
3. Improper operation. This is the one that does virtually all of the damage. The driver.
Clutch assemblies are going to wear because that is what they do and how they work. But you can significantly reduce wear by learning, using, and adhering to proper operating techniques. I would say you could probably double or triple the life of a clutch assembly by using these techniques over someone who does not.
Granted there are a whole bunch of factors that come into play such as living in San Francisco or a very congested urban environment. But even there, you can increase the life of your clutch assembly over those who do not know how to properly operate a manual transmission (this may be the source of your comment, "some pretty blanket statements").
I have known people who have managed to get well into the first 100,000 miles on the original clutch and I KNOW I can easily pass the 200,000 mile mark (assuming the first two factors are met and nothing abnormal happens).
So I stand by my statements and will continue to operate my manual tranny as I have for the past 40 years.
BTW, the clutch installed in the TL feels to me to be a decent unit.
09-22-2004, 05:29 PM
#45
Registered Member
To TBone2004
I trust your interesting response was, for the most part, a bit of tongue-in-cheek humor and I shall accept it as such.
You wrote:
"not all clutches are going to last 200K. Will some - sure"
and
"I just wanted to point out that not all clutches last 200k - in fact the majority don't."
I couldn't agree more. Historically American cars with manual transmissions have had far better clutches than those found in European or Japanese cars for the simple fact that (I'm talking serious machinery here) American engines produced a bunch more torque and horsepower than their foreign counterparts. Case in point would be the American supercars (mid-sized coupes such as the GTO, 396 Chevelle, Buick Grand Sport, Olds 442, Plymouth Fury and Satellite, GTX, Road Runner, Ford Fairlane 390 and 427, and on and on). Their engines and drive trains would roast anything coming out of Europe or Japan in terms of strength and longevity.
But this is changing. Foreign cars are using more powerful engines which require stronger drive trains. The gap is closing fast.
As for clutch failure, I've had one failure and one, what I suspected, was a pending failure. The failure was in a 1964 Corvair Spyder. A transaxle seal failed and allowed some tranny oil to get into the clutch assembly. The pending failure was in a 1994 Honda Accord EX. I suspected water intrusion and rust.
As for the statement, "you would be a fool to suggest that the clutch stays the same for 200K", I am not a fool and I've never owned a car for 200K miles.
But at over 83K miles, my 1966 SS396/360 L34 Chevelle would still break traction in all 4 gears and the clutch felt tight and sure (again, an American supercar).
"Maybe your tires are bald too, but you are getting 150k on those - who knows - who cares really."
Nope. I can get pretty good mileage out of a set of good tires, but 150K, I'm quite sure, is not in the cards. 60K to 70K at best with really good rubber and really careful maintenance and driving.
"Let me guess you get 200k on a set of brake pads too and your tires as well?"
Nope again. Best mileage from a set of brake pads was 77,000 miles on my '88 Mustang LX 302CID (front disk/rear drum). There was still maybe 10K miles left on them when I sold the car at 77,000 miles. My aforementioned Chevelle, however, was easily capable of exceeding 100,000 miles on the stock drum brake shoes. There was plenty of meat left in them at 83,000 miles when I sold it. You see, I ordered that car with sintered metallic brake linings ($36.90 option) which were not only the best brakes available at the time on a coupe, but lasted well into the first 100K miles.
It's been my experience over the years when making the statements I have made here that responses which question my statements come from people who have either known other people who have had to replace clutches before the mileage figures I introduced or have had some experiences of their own to give them cause to question my stance. And that's to be expected. But you can get some serious mileage and life from a clutch assembly if you just learn to operate the thing correctly (earlier mentioned assumptions being the case).
So please tell me your response was really tongue-in-cheek.
I trust your interesting response was, for the most part, a bit of tongue-in-cheek humor and I shall accept it as such.
You wrote:
"not all clutches are going to last 200K. Will some - sure"
and
"I just wanted to point out that not all clutches last 200k - in fact the majority don't."
I couldn't agree more. Historically American cars with manual transmissions have had far better clutches than those found in European or Japanese cars for the simple fact that (I'm talking serious machinery here) American engines produced a bunch more torque and horsepower than their foreign counterparts. Case in point would be the American supercars (mid-sized coupes such as the GTO, 396 Chevelle, Buick Grand Sport, Olds 442, Plymouth Fury and Satellite, GTX, Road Runner, Ford Fairlane 390 and 427, and on and on). Their engines and drive trains would roast anything coming out of Europe or Japan in terms of strength and longevity.
But this is changing. Foreign cars are using more powerful engines which require stronger drive trains. The gap is closing fast.
As for clutch failure, I've had one failure and one, what I suspected, was a pending failure. The failure was in a 1964 Corvair Spyder. A transaxle seal failed and allowed some tranny oil to get into the clutch assembly. The pending failure was in a 1994 Honda Accord EX. I suspected water intrusion and rust.
As for the statement, "you would be a fool to suggest that the clutch stays the same for 200K", I am not a fool and I've never owned a car for 200K miles.
But at over 83K miles, my 1966 SS396/360 L34 Chevelle would still break traction in all 4 gears and the clutch felt tight and sure (again, an American supercar).
"Maybe your tires are bald too, but you are getting 150k on those - who knows - who cares really."
Nope. I can get pretty good mileage out of a set of good tires, but 150K, I'm quite sure, is not in the cards. 60K to 70K at best with really good rubber and really careful maintenance and driving.
"Let me guess you get 200k on a set of brake pads too and your tires as well?"
Nope again. Best mileage from a set of brake pads was 77,000 miles on my '88 Mustang LX 302CID (front disk/rear drum). There was still maybe 10K miles left on them when I sold the car at 77,000 miles. My aforementioned Chevelle, however, was easily capable of exceeding 100,000 miles on the stock drum brake shoes. There was plenty of meat left in them at 83,000 miles when I sold it. You see, I ordered that car with sintered metallic brake linings ($36.90 option) which were not only the best brakes available at the time on a coupe, but lasted well into the first 100K miles.
It's been my experience over the years when making the statements I have made here that responses which question my statements come from people who have either known other people who have had to replace clutches before the mileage figures I introduced or have had some experiences of their own to give them cause to question my stance. And that's to be expected. But you can get some serious mileage and life from a clutch assembly if you just learn to operate the thing correctly (earlier mentioned assumptions being the case).
So please tell me your response was really tongue-in-cheek.
09-22-2004, 06:04 PM
#46
The stickiest of the icky
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: the 305
Age: 36
Posts: 451
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
y2jdmbfan, to answer your original question, here is my take:
i learned to drive on an auto, and my first car (the 04tl in my driveway) is an auto. I am very used to an auto, and i love it. with that said, i really really wanted to learn how to drive a stick, so we went to a dealership where my dad has bought a few cars and we talked to our salesman, and he arranged to give me a few lessons on a stick. after 2 lessons with him, i had the basics down, but still couldnt drive really smoothly and was not comfortable driving in an everyday situation, but i could drive fine around an empty parking lot. then, a few months ago, i went to Skip Driver driving school, which was probably the best thing any driver (new or old) can do, regardless of wether or not you can drive a stick. after taking that class, and driving a stick hard, i now have a newfound respect for the manual car. i can now probaly drive one in everyday situations, and i am trying to get my dad to buy a manual car so that i can take it out for some joyrides. it kind of seems to me that some of these responses are a bit biased, so i will give you what is to me an unbiased overall opinion:
manual will take a while (probably 2 or 3 weeks) just to be able to drive it in the city without any stalls or mis-shifts. it is, however, TONS more fun to drive than an auto. in addition, in my experience, women like the manual better than the auto, because it seems like such a manly thing. the auto really looks like the "easy way out." you will get more respect if you drive a manual, at least this is what i have noticed, and i know that i do respect drivers more if they drive a stick.
auto has plenty of benefits, the most obvious being that you can drive it in traffic without problems and minimal stress. the other advantages to me are- with an auto, you can really focus on comfort, you can pay attention to the road and do thing like change the radio, or maybe some
. my friend drives an auto and i was talking to him about what he thinks about the auto vs. manual issue, and he told me that he wouldnt ever give up his auto because he can play wih his ipod and sit with his left foot wherever he wants. it is true, with a manual you get less comfort. also there isthe issue of going out to parties or whatever, if your friends cant drive a stick then you might want to consider, and if you happen to drink and need to drive home a little bit tipsy (obviously the worst case scenario, no flames please, i always organize a des. driver) it might be a little harder in a stick. but on the other side, if you are in a stick and you are tired, a manual might help to keep you awake, since you have to shift at each light and whatnot.
i think the best rule of thumb is this- if it is your only car, get an auto, because then everybody can drive it and a manual can cause a lot of problems in an emergency or whatever. if you have access to an auto, however, then i say go for the stick. it is fun, and if you ever dont feel like driving a stick you can always borrow the auto for the afternoon. this is what i would do anyways, my parents have 3 automatic cars, and i would get a stick in a second, especially knowing if i ever needed one i could borrow an auto.
i learned to drive on an auto, and my first car (the 04tl in my driveway) is an auto. I am very used to an auto, and i love it. with that said, i really really wanted to learn how to drive a stick, so we went to a dealership where my dad has bought a few cars and we talked to our salesman, and he arranged to give me a few lessons on a stick. after 2 lessons with him, i had the basics down, but still couldnt drive really smoothly and was not comfortable driving in an everyday situation, but i could drive fine around an empty parking lot. then, a few months ago, i went to Skip Driver driving school, which was probably the best thing any driver (new or old) can do, regardless of wether or not you can drive a stick. after taking that class, and driving a stick hard, i now have a newfound respect for the manual car. i can now probaly drive one in everyday situations, and i am trying to get my dad to buy a manual car so that i can take it out for some joyrides
. it kind of seems to me that some of these responses are a bit biased, so i will give you what is to me an unbiased overall opinion:manual will take a while (probably 2 or 3 weeks) just to be able to drive it in the city without any stalls or mis-shifts. it is, however, TONS more fun to drive than an auto. in addition, in my experience, women like the manual better than the auto, because it seems like such a manly thing. the auto really looks like the "easy way out." you will get more respect if you drive a manual, at least this is what i have noticed, and i know that i do respect drivers more if they drive a stick.
auto has plenty of benefits, the most obvious being that you can drive it in traffic without problems and minimal stress. the other advantages to me are- with an auto, you can really focus on comfort, you can pay attention to the road and do thing like change the radio, or maybe some
. my friend drives an auto and i was talking to him about what he thinks about the auto vs. manual issue, and he told me that he wouldnt ever give up his auto because he can play wih his ipod and sit with his left foot wherever he wants. it is true, with a manual you get less comfort. also there isthe issue of going out to parties or whatever, if your friends cant drive a stick then you might want to consider, and if you happen to drink and need to drive home a little bit tipsy (obviously the worst case scenario, no flames please, i always organize a des. driver) it might be a little harder in a stick. but on the other side, if you are in a stick and you are tired, a manual might help to keep you awake, since you have to shift at each light and whatnot.i think the best rule of thumb is this- if it is your only car, get an auto, because then everybody can drive it and a manual can cause a lot of problems in an emergency or whatever. if you have access to an auto, however, then i say go for the stick. it is fun, and if you ever dont feel like driving a stick you can always borrow the auto for the afternoon. this is what i would do anyways, my parents have 3 automatic cars, and i would get a stick in a second, especially knowing if i ever needed one i could borrow an auto.
09-22-2004, 06:22 PM
#47
Shift_faster
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Queens, NY
Posts: 1,965
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ludachrisvt:
Just to add my comments which might help you. You should try and get the car moving slightly without the using the gas, just the clutch. After doing this a few times, you start to get a feel for where the clutch engages in the TL (which could be different from your previous manuals). Once you know what the car is going to do, the trick is to modulate the gas and the clutch so that the transition is as smooth as possible, with as minimal revs as possible. There will be times you stall, but once you get this down pat, everything else (with the exception of downshifting) becomes easier.
It takes practice to make a shift fast and smooth. If you wait too long to release the clutch, the engine loses revs, and the tranny has to bring it back up, which is the reason why you are jerking. If you pop the clutch too quickly, the car will still jerk. All I can say is practice, practice, practice. If after a few sessions of practice (and I mean not driving to the store, or the mall, or the bar, I mean just focusing on your technique) if you don't improve in smoothness, get someone who knows what they are doing to watch you drive and make comments. It is hard to diagnose errors over the net. Good luck and happy shifting.
Of course after you upshift smoothly, then comes the fun part of downshifting smoothly (and I do mean this seriously, downshifting is a lot of fun, once you learn how to do it imperceptibly).
Just to add my comments which might help you. You should try and get the car moving slightly without the using the gas, just the clutch. After doing this a few times, you start to get a feel for where the clutch engages in the TL (which could be different from your previous manuals). Once you know what the car is going to do, the trick is to modulate the gas and the clutch so that the transition is as smooth as possible, with as minimal revs as possible. There will be times you stall, but once you get this down pat, everything else (with the exception of downshifting) becomes easier.
It takes practice to make a shift fast and smooth. If you wait too long to release the clutch, the engine loses revs, and the tranny has to bring it back up, which is the reason why you are jerking. If you pop the clutch too quickly, the car will still jerk. All I can say is practice, practice, practice. If after a few sessions of practice (and I mean not driving to the store, or the mall, or the bar, I mean just focusing on your technique) if you don't improve in smoothness, get someone who knows what they are doing to watch you drive and make comments. It is hard to diagnose errors over the net. Good luck and happy shifting.
Of course after you upshift smoothly, then comes the fun part of downshifting smoothly (and I do mean this seriously, downshifting is a lot of fun, once you learn how to do it imperceptibly).
09-22-2004, 09:41 PM
#48
Registered Member
To add another note, even though the clutch pedal adjustment on my TL allows engagement to begin too close to the floor for my liking, I have gotten used to it and can deal with it. And I find rev-matching during downshifts to be very easy and natural for this car, however because of the lack of an exhaust note, I have to use the tach most always for this manuver.
To SpecialFX;
Either you've read my posts on this topic (downshifting) or you are already schooled in the art. Congratulations. Your description is dead on.
To SpecialFX;
Either you've read my posts on this topic (downshifting) or you are already schooled in the art. Congratulations. Your description is dead on.
09-22-2004, 10:35 PM
#49
i souport publik edekason
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Granada Hills, CA
Age: 53
Posts: 1,310
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by PG2G
Do you know any rental places in LA that rent manuals?
I believe the Enterprise in Sherman Oaks... (On Van Nuys Between Magnolia and 101)...
had one that I saw a couple years ago...
I believe you can also call the corporate numbers for the big Companies and check which of their local ones close to you might have a stick...
Good luck
Salut
09-22-2004, 11:06 PM
#50
Safety Car
Join Date: Dec 2003
Age: 39
Posts: 4,120
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Just wanted to add my 
I bought my CL almost a year ago, it's my first manual. I'm still learning, trying to get all my shifts smooth.
I drive in traffic quite often (I commute to school) and I definitely wouldn't trade my manual for an auto.
And knowing how to drive a stick has it's perks; the last time my friend was in town, I got to take his new s2k for a spin.
I bought my CL almost a year ago, it's my first manual. I'm still learning, trying to get all my shifts smooth.
I drive in traffic quite often (I commute to school) and I definitely wouldn't trade my manual for an auto.
And knowing how to drive a stick has it's perks; the last time my friend was in town, I got to take his new s2k for a spin.
09-23-2004, 03:14 AM
#51
i souport publik edekason
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Granada Hills, CA
Age: 53
Posts: 1,310
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by 98CLChick
Just wanted to add my
I bought my CL almost a year ago, it's my first manual. I'm still learning, trying to get all my shifts smooth.
I drive in traffic quite often (I commute to school) and I definitely wouldn't trade my manual for an auto.
And knowing how to drive a stick has it's perks; the last time my friend was in town, I got to take his new s2k for a spin.
I bought my CL almost a year ago, it's my first manual. I'm still learning, trying to get all my shifts smooth.
I drive in traffic quite often (I commute to school) and I definitely wouldn't trade my manual for an auto.
And knowing how to drive a stick has it's perks; the last time my friend was in town, I got to take his new s2k for a spin.
THAT'S what I'm talking about...
"Here take my 575 Maranello for a spin... It's a stick..."
"Oh I can't drive stick..."
"Oh Sorry"
Salut
09-23-2004, 11:20 PM
#53
Racer
Originally Posted by SouthernBoy
To add another note, even though the clutch pedal adjustment on my TL allows engagement to begin too close to the floor for my liking, I have gotten used to it and can deal with it. And I find rev-matching during downshifts to be very easy and natural for this car, however because of the lack of an exhaust note, I have to use the tach most always for this manuver.
To SpecialFX;
Either you've read my posts on this topic (downshifting) or you are already schooled in the art. Congratulations. Your description is dead on.
To SpecialFX;
Either you've read my posts on this topic (downshifting) or you are already schooled in the art. Congratulations. Your description is dead on.
09-24-2004, 05:11 PM
#54
Registered Member
Ah, Bridgehampton. That's where Car and Driver road tested a certain American car in 1963 and made some statements after their test that caused the hairs on sports car purists to stand on end.
The subject test car was a 1964 Pontiac Tempest LeMans with the GTO option package (notice I said GTO option package. Pontiac didn't make a "GTO" until 1966). There was some gumbling with purists because Pontiac used the badge GTO which came from the Ferrari GTO 250 as I recall. What Car and Driver said was that the Pontiac would beat ANY Ferrari on ANY American road course.
Boy did they catch if for that. But they were right. Because at the time, the Tempest LeMans with the GTO option package (threre were two for 1964. Both used the 389 CID engine and the basic package was a mild 325 HP single 4-barrel engine with a 3-speed manual tranny. The other option was the 348 HP tri-power engine with a 4-speed). Car and Driver tested the second package. They managed a 0-60 time of 4.8 second as I recall and their quarter mile was in the 13's. I well remember '64 GTO's running 13.08 on slicks. There wasn't a Ferrari that would touch it.. or take the stress of drag racing to boot.
I still remember that article quite well.
The subject test car was a 1964 Pontiac Tempest LeMans with the GTO option package (notice I said GTO option package. Pontiac didn't make a "GTO" until 1966). There was some gumbling with purists because Pontiac used the badge GTO which came from the Ferrari GTO 250 as I recall. What Car and Driver said was that the Pontiac would beat ANY Ferrari on ANY American road course.
Boy did they catch if for that. But they were right. Because at the time, the Tempest LeMans with the GTO option package (threre were two for 1964. Both used the 389 CID engine and the basic package was a mild 325 HP single 4-barrel engine with a 3-speed manual tranny. The other option was the 348 HP tri-power engine with a 4-speed). Car and Driver tested the second package. They managed a 0-60 time of 4.8 second as I recall and their quarter mile was in the 13's. I well remember '64 GTO's running 13.08 on slicks. There wasn't a Ferrari that would touch it.. or take the stress of drag racing to boot.
I still remember that article quite well.
09-24-2004, 05:31 PM
#55
Registered Member
Oh, BTW.. I have an original copy of the November 1965 issue of Car and Driver with an article that is perhaps the most quoted article in performance automotive history.
The featured article was "Battle of the 427s", really two separate articles. The cars? A 1966 427 L72 Corvette (425 HP/460 lb/ft torque single 4-barrel solid lifter engine) and the 1966 427 Shelby AC Cobra (485 HP/480 lb/ft torque dual 4-barrel solid lifter engine).
Now keep in mind these cars were tested with street tires and at that time, they didn't put a whole lot of biased ply rubber on the road. So first gear was all wheel spin as was most all of second gear. This and the fact that the tested 427 Corvette (God I love the term "427".. it's magic) had a high rear end at 3.36:1. A lower 3.70 or lower still 4.11 would have been better for acceleration. The Cobra had a 3.54:1 rear.
The Cobra managed a 0-60 in 4.3 seconds and a quarter mile of 12.2 @ 118 MPH. The Corvette's times were 0-60 in 5.4 seconds and the quarter in 12.8 @ 112 MPH.
What Car and Driver didn't tell you was that there were actually three 427's offered for the Corvette that year. The two that were advertised were the 390 HP hydraulic lifter engine and the 425 HP solid lifter engine. The third one was the L74. Rated at 450 HP, this baby was a monster in 1966. The Cobra would have met its match with this one because it was actually putting out over 500 HP. I saw one run at Capital Raceway in Maryland that same month and he was turning in the high 10's. I ordered one of these babies but 8 days after I placed my order, my step-father talked my mother out of signing for the loan (I was underage at the time). So I never got the car, but it did come in 7 weeks later and was sold. I wound up with a 1966 SS396/360 HP L34 Chevelle.
Oh well, memories of fun times.
The featured article was "Battle of the 427s", really two separate articles. The cars? A 1966 427 L72 Corvette (425 HP/460 lb/ft torque single 4-barrel solid lifter engine) and the 1966 427 Shelby AC Cobra (485 HP/480 lb/ft torque dual 4-barrel solid lifter engine).
Now keep in mind these cars were tested with street tires and at that time, they didn't put a whole lot of biased ply rubber on the road. So first gear was all wheel spin as was most all of second gear. This and the fact that the tested 427 Corvette (God I love the term "427".. it's magic) had a high rear end at 3.36:1. A lower 3.70 or lower still 4.11 would have been better for acceleration. The Cobra had a 3.54:1 rear.
The Cobra managed a 0-60 in 4.3 seconds and a quarter mile of 12.2 @ 118 MPH. The Corvette's times were 0-60 in 5.4 seconds and the quarter in 12.8 @ 112 MPH.
What Car and Driver didn't tell you was that there were actually three 427's offered for the Corvette that year. The two that were advertised were the 390 HP hydraulic lifter engine and the 425 HP solid lifter engine. The third one was the L74. Rated at 450 HP, this baby was a monster in 1966. The Cobra would have met its match with this one because it was actually putting out over 500 HP. I saw one run at Capital Raceway in Maryland that same month and he was turning in the high 10's. I ordered one of these babies but 8 days after I placed my order, my step-father talked my mother out of signing for the loan (I was underage at the time). So I never got the car, but it did come in 7 weeks later and was sold. I wound up with a 1966 SS396/360 HP L34 Chevelle.
Oh well, memories of fun times.
09-24-2004, 09:25 PM
#56
Racer
Yes, the good ole days. I can definitely appreciatre the muscle cars of the late 60's and (very early) 70's. While I like the old Chevy's my heart really beats for a Mopar. I''d love to get my hands on a nice, original charger or challenger. Or an original hemi Superbird or 'Cuda convertible. Nothing fancy, mind you.
But I really think the good ole days are now. Look at the power and performance we have available to us now. All with reliabilty and refinement the old cars can't touch.
Have we thoroughly highjacked this thread yet?
But I really think the good ole days are now. Look at the power and performance we have available to us now. All with reliabilty and refinement the old cars can't touch.
Have we thoroughly highjacked this thread yet?
09-24-2004, 11:55 PM
#57
10th Gear
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Silver Spring, MD
Age: 43
Posts: 11
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
by the way, is it bad for the transmission or engine if you are in a higher gear than u should ideally be in? For example, say you are in 5th gear when only going 28-35 mph on a flat road. Reason I am asking is because I like to make semi-sharp turns in 3rd gear sometimes. Thanks. 
09-25-2004, 01:30 AM
#58
.:KCCO:.
i love driving manual... but when i drove the TL's manual, i was purely dissapointed. honestly, the tranny set up for auto on a civic feels better then the TL's. absurd, i kno. but its just my opinion. i know of a lot of people who were readily dissapointed after they drove the stick. i even know an acura sales manager who is trading in his stick for an auto, same everything. hes had the car since feb (about 7 months) and when i asked him how long it took him to get used to the TL's stick? he replied with "i stalled on my way home last night". so needless to say, i have the AT. i drove the a4 in MT couple days before i got the TL and i loved the way the A4 felt. too badd it wasnt in the TL
09-25-2004, 07:03 AM
#59
Registered Member
To SpecialFX;
The mid-60's were truly the "good 'ole days" for serious gearheads and serious American iron. I, too, was a strong Chevy man (boy?) back then and as I said, I had one of the original, honest American supercars. Dollar for dollar, there was no car made anywhere in the world that could compete with the American supercars in terms of bang for the buck, strength, and durability. The car companies weren't stupid. They knew who was buying these cars and what they were doing with them. The old adage, "win on Sunday, sell on Monday" was true. The cars that cleaned the country's drag strips (most were GM products) were the ones that sold the best during the week. Believe me, these cars were made of strong parts and good stuff.
But I also agree with you about today's products. There are so many good cars out there for gearheads to buy and play with. We really have some excellent choices now. And one of the best things is the performance sedan. Here you have a car that can wear multiple hats, thereby serving multiple purposes.
And we're seeing small 6-cylinder engines in cars like the TL and the Altima and the Maxima and the 3-series BMW turn in some serious numbers on the track. Low 14's in a family hauler is not bad at all!
Now what I would really like for the TL is a larger engine, say 240 cubic inches (that's just about 4 liters for you liter-lovers). Tune it to put out 300 HP and 280 to 300 lb/ft of torque. Acura did a superb job tuning the engine and ECU to deliver excellent throttle response, but 238 lb/ft of torque from our little 196 cubic inch engines is lacking a little. I would like a bit more torque.
It's a great car among a whole bunch of other great cars. Yep, we're back to the "good 'ole days" for sure.
The mid-60's were truly the "good 'ole days" for serious gearheads and serious American iron. I, too, was a strong Chevy man (boy?) back then and as I said, I had one of the original, honest American supercars. Dollar for dollar, there was no car made anywhere in the world that could compete with the American supercars in terms of bang for the buck, strength, and durability. The car companies weren't stupid. They knew who was buying these cars and what they were doing with them. The old adage, "win on Sunday, sell on Monday" was true. The cars that cleaned the country's drag strips (most were GM products) were the ones that sold the best during the week. Believe me, these cars were made of strong parts and good stuff.
But I also agree with you about today's products. There are so many good cars out there for gearheads to buy and play with. We really have some excellent choices now. And one of the best things is the performance sedan. Here you have a car that can wear multiple hats, thereby serving multiple purposes.
And we're seeing small 6-cylinder engines in cars like the TL and the Altima and the Maxima and the 3-series BMW turn in some serious numbers on the track. Low 14's in a family hauler is not bad at all!
Now what I would really like for the TL is a larger engine, say 240 cubic inches (that's just about 4 liters for you liter-lovers). Tune it to put out 300 HP and 280 to 300 lb/ft of torque. Acura did a superb job tuning the engine and ECU to deliver excellent throttle response, but 238 lb/ft of torque from our little 196 cubic inch engines is lacking a little. I would like a bit more torque.
It's a great car among a whole bunch of other great cars. Yep, we're back to the "good 'ole days" for sure.
09-25-2004, 07:56 AM
#60
7th Gear
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Brighton, MA
Age: 51
Posts: 7
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by ayethetiense
i love driving manual... but when i drove the TL's manual, i was purely dissapointed. honestly, the tranny set up for auto on a civic feels better then the TL's. absurd, i kno. but its just my opinion. i know of a lot of people who were readily dissapointed after they drove the stick. i even know an acura sales manager who is trading in his stick for an auto, same everything. hes had the car since feb (about 7 months) and when i asked him how long it took him to get used to the TL's stick? he replied with "i stalled on my way home last night". so needless to say, i have the AT. i drove the a4 in MT couple days before i got the TL and i loved the way the A4 felt. too badd it wasnt in the TL
What exactly did you not like about it? The clutch? The engagement point? What? IMO if someone has this car for 7 months and is still stalling it, they do NOT know how to drive a manual.
09-25-2004, 08:48 AM
#61
Registered Member
As for the best clutch/tranny combos I have ever owned in a car, I would say for me, four come to mind right away (I have only owned one personal vehicle with an automatic, all the rest being manuals).
My 1966 SS 396/360 L34 Chevelle rates very high, mostly for the strength of the parts. The Muncie 4-speed transmissions were perhaps, the best manual transmissions ever made for any car anywhere in the world.. then or now. Just superb. I had the M21 version and my shfter was stock Chevy made by Inland Steel Corporation. Those of you who have owned cars with Muncies will certainly know what I am talking about here. Just the best.
My 1988 Mustang LX 302CID used the Borg-Warner T5 tranny. Very nice. The shifter was a direct unit, which means it mounted directly on top of the back of the transmission. This made shifts very precise and tight. And it also meant you had to be careful when speed shifting because there was very little room for error. The clutch was excellent. The best buy of the eighties.. Ford did it right with this one.
My 2000 SVT Contour clutch and tranny was excellent. Over-engineered for the car (like most everything else with the SVT). The transmission shafts and gears rode on roller bearings, the flywheel was lightened by 2 pounds, and the clutch had 1400 pounds of clamping pressure. A sheer joy to operate.
And my TL. The only thing I don't like too much is the fact that the clutch pedal begins clutch engagement too close to the floor. When you couple this with a short engagement travel and takeup, it's too easy to stall the engine at lights or stops until you get used to it. But now I'm used to it so I don't have any problems and get by quite well with it.
My 1966 SS 396/360 L34 Chevelle rates very high, mostly for the strength of the parts. The Muncie 4-speed transmissions were perhaps, the best manual transmissions ever made for any car anywhere in the world.. then or now. Just superb. I had the M21 version and my shfter was stock Chevy made by Inland Steel Corporation. Those of you who have owned cars with Muncies will certainly know what I am talking about here. Just the best.
My 1988 Mustang LX 302CID used the Borg-Warner T5 tranny. Very nice. The shifter was a direct unit, which means it mounted directly on top of the back of the transmission. This made shifts very precise and tight. And it also meant you had to be careful when speed shifting because there was very little room for error. The clutch was excellent. The best buy of the eighties.. Ford did it right with this one.
My 2000 SVT Contour clutch and tranny was excellent. Over-engineered for the car (like most everything else with the SVT). The transmission shafts and gears rode on roller bearings, the flywheel was lightened by 2 pounds, and the clutch had 1400 pounds of clamping pressure. A sheer joy to operate.
And my TL. The only thing I don't like too much is the fact that the clutch pedal begins clutch engagement too close to the floor. When you couple this with a short engagement travel and takeup, it's too easy to stall the engine at lights or stops until you get used to it. But now I'm used to it so I don't have any problems and get by quite well with it.
09-25-2004, 11:31 AM
#62
.:KCCO:.
Originally Posted by burma
That's surprising to me and the first I hear of it. Out of all the manual cars I've owned (Mustang Cobra, Passat, and A4), I find my 04TL to be the EASIEST to drive and also the smoothest. Each clutch has a different feel and a lower or higher engagement point, but that's something you get used to in a day if not less. I don't know, I just find the clutch very, very easy to work. And the stick is awesome! Short throws and ZERO transmission vibrations felt through it like I would feel in the Passat or A4.
What exactly did you not like about it? The clutch? The engagement point? What? IMO if someone has this car for 7 months and is still stalling it, they do NOT know how to drive a manual.
What exactly did you not like about it? The clutch? The engagement point? What? IMO if someone has this car for 7 months and is still stalling it, they do NOT know how to drive a manual.
i had already questioned if i should be gettin manual on a 'near luxury' IMO 'luxury' car. the only type of car around and above 40g's should be a porsche or higher. not a 4 door sedan
09-26-2004, 05:07 PM
#63
10th Gear
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Sacto-cAL
Posts: 12
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
IMO everyone should have to learn how to drive a stick before they drive anything else. You learn so much more about inertia, breaking, corning, correct speeds to take corners, down shifting and tons of other stuff... ANd everyone should have to learn to break without ABS in rain and snow!
All of these automatic systems make more and more dangerous retards on the road.
A big reason for stop and go traffic is because of automatic transmissions. Lots of people think GAS = GO Break = STOP and that's all there is too it.
If everyone would just slow down put it in 2nd or 3rd and cruise without hauling arse up on the guy in front of you and then slamming on your breaks it would cut down on that nasty 80 mph ==> 15 mph B.S.
k.. i'm done venting after a nasty day driving in SF!
All of these automatic systems make more and more dangerous retards on the road.
A big reason for stop and go traffic is because of automatic transmissions. Lots of people think GAS = GO Break = STOP and that's all there is too it.
If everyone would just slow down put it in 2nd or 3rd and cruise without hauling arse up on the guy in front of you and then slamming on your breaks it would cut down on that nasty 80 mph ==> 15 mph B.S.
k.. i'm done venting after a nasty day driving in SF!
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
Mugen TSX
Eastern Canada
0
09-01-2015 11:05 PM
