I have a Scion xB first gen, a Scion FR-S, a Scion iA and a Chevy Silverado Z71 4x4 POS. The first two are manuals and I tried to get the third in a manual. But I usually buy my cars new and drive them into the ground, trading them in for $500. The manuals are hugely beneficial in both of those cars and we curse the automatic constantly in the iA. We have a 1/8 mile driveway with a steep incline at the beginning. Both my wife and i find it necessary to go into manual mode when we climb that hill. The auto just gets too confused and takes too long to make a decision.
Enjoy the benefits of a premium membership!
Upgrade Account
-
TalkBass has been independent since 1998. Add your voice.
Create a free account to reply to discussions, view embedded media, and browse with fewer display ads.
Join free Log in
Want zero display ads or expanded classifieds tools? Compare plans.
To the OP and anyone else. I have driven on and off for years standard. IMHO it's overrated and only fun when the car is fast (WRX). I did it on a 84 Blazer, 98 Wrangler, 99 CRV, another CRV in the 2000's, and my WRX plus other people's cars I had to drive.
Why would a standard be this important to you being that the focus is not a sports car? Also note I heard serious off-roaders especially Wranglers from what I heard prefer automatic.
Why would a standard be this important to you being that the focus is not a sports car? Also note I heard serious off-roaders especially Wranglers from what I heard prefer automatic.
My first car was an 85 S10 Blazer. 4 speed manual. Gigantic piece of junk, second only to my 99 Blazer.
To me it's important I guess because it's been my thing in my cars. I enjoy manually shifting. My daily drivers have been standards since I started driving:
'73 Pinto wagon
'78 Chevy Luv
'90 Grand Am
'02 Tundra 4x4
'07 Civic sedan.
I'd love a sports car, but it's not practical for hauling kids and family and what not. A couple of the coupes I've looked at have had paddle shifters. Kinda cool, but not the same.
'73 Pinto wagon
'78 Chevy Luv
'90 Grand Am
'02 Tundra 4x4
'07 Civic sedan.
I'd love a sports car, but it's not practical for hauling kids and family and what not. A couple of the coupes I've looked at have had paddle shifters. Kinda cool, but not the same.
I mostly concur. Where I disagree is when a car is fairly gutless and you need all the control you can muster. I was warned, when I bought my 2006 Scion xB, that it felt REALLY gutless with an automatic. I test drove both and it was no contest. I went with the manual.
And, again, with our Scion iA, we have to go into "manual" mode to navigate our driveway. Heck, even my 2001 Chrysler 300m with the "sports" package and auto would sometimes annoy me in the way it downshifted to pass. The new auto's are a lot better though.
Well if a car requires a standard just to get it up a hill, it's not a car I want to drive.
Slow learner?
Whoops, sorry, I deleted part of this that I wanted to keep - specifically the part about automatics being better than they used to be.
Yes, mostly, although there are a few glitches (just ask a few folks who own a Jeep Cherokee with the nine-speed AT). There's certainly more variety of types of 'automatic' transmissions available now. CVTs are in fairly common use in smaller cars - they're much less complex (read: cheaper to build) than conventional automatics, and I believe the other attraction is that they have close to the efficiency of a MT. VW and others use DCTs, which are more complex but far more efficient than conventional ATs.
And while it's true that especially in cars that are marginally endowed with power anyway an AT will make the situation worse, the proliferation of gears in the box does at least ensure there's a right ratio for every situation. But really, when does it become absurd? I think the new Odyssey is coming with a ten-speed AT. Why not just use a CVT (besides the fact that the automotive press has made sure buyers will hate them)?
I briefly owned a sporty car that I swore I would not buy with an AT. Then I drove one with a MT and found it terrible for several reasons. Bought the AT and was not sorry. Although it was a conventional five speed AT, nothing special at all about it, it never did anything wrong. I could shift it manually but didn't, because the computer always made good decisions. And I did discover that if I firewalled the go-pedal, the transmission would hold second and third to redline. Well then.
It doesn't. It just is a lot more pleasing experience to have direct control.
Actually, I feel that way about automatics in general. I hate, when I want to pass someone, that pause as it shifts gears, and often goes down one gear more than I want it to.
It's just that our particular driveway exacerbates the problem. It does for our Z71, but it's so powerful it's irrelevant. The driveway climbs 80 feet in about a hundred yards. But the benefit is a pretty amazing view.
One of the things I live about youtube is the videos that can SHOW you how things work. I hit a few regarding both CVT's and AT's and was floored to learn that, yes, an AT really IS fluid drive. That blew my mind. And getting the specifics of how a REAL CVT is built and functions was also very enlightening.Slow learner?
Whoops, sorry, I deleted part of this that I wanted to keep - specifically the part about automatics being better than they used to be.
I first came across this concept when I bought Encarta back in the mid-90's. I watched a CGI video of how a jet engine actually functions and realized that education was about to be radically changed. The clarity and speed of the transfer of information AND COMPREHENSION via that video, compared to a professor trying to explain it with words, pictures, drawings, etc. was a real eye opener for me. I felt like I saw the future of education. I did.
No kidding. I don't want to feel like I have to push, or cheer it on, or something.
A few years ago I bought a 2006 Subaru Outback wagon, just like everybody else's only the ugly green instead of the weird blue. Although I drove the turbo with the MT, I decided to be an adult and bought the NA with the AT. Boooooorrrrriiiiinnnnngggg.
Turns out this was a good decision, as those turbo engines were not reliable at all in those years. And I did great on resale... but I did sell the car within three years. The engine and the transmission *hated* each other. And four gears was at least one too few. There was a particular stretch of street on my usual route home that was the last straw. This street was heavily patrolled by cops with radar, so speeding much over the 25mph limit was simply not going to pay. It was a very gradual uphill turning into a more serious but still not steep uphill, followed by a short steep bit. The first part was ok in 3rd, but not by much - and then when it got steeper, nope. So the car would shift to 2nd, and immediately back to 3rd, then... yeah, it would hunt for half a mile, until it had to use 2nd. I could solve this by switching to 'sport' mode, which had the effect of nothing more than causing the computer to hold whatever gear the transmission was currently in another 500rpm longer. So it would stay in 2nd all the way up the hill. Fine. This worked. But I shouldn't have had to do it.
They weren't all like that. A family member had the weird blue version, same model year, and it had similar issues but not to the degree. She made the dealer reprogram the TCU, and that helped a tiny bit more. The 2008 models were fine, but really, that car truly needed another 20hp and one more gear.
Years later, I discovered that my 1973 Volvo 1800ES (with a MT) would go up the hill, the entire hill, even the steep part of the hill, in 3rd gear at 27mph without complaint. That's all of 112hp. Yeah.
That right there NAILS the issue we have with the iA. In our case, it stays in second when it really needs to downshift. It eventually does after coming almost to a stop. We have no problem anywhere else except that first stretch of our driveway. My wife just flips the "sport" switch. I just slip it into manual and first gear.
But we shouldn't have to do it.
I ended up getting a '17 Mazda CX-5 Touring. They don't come in manual trans anymore, but it's much more fun to drive than the other crossovers I've driven (Forrester, RAV4, CR-V, Tucson). Also it's naturally aspirated and it's NOT a CVT. The extra room for hauling gear will be nice, it's AWD, and the wife likes the ride height, so important boxes ticked.
Congrats. It is also more sporty looking than the others. I may also be purchasing a CX-5 at the end of this year.
EDIT: I really like the redesigned front end, plus the all new interior layout for the 2017's.
Zoom, zoom, zoom.
Last edited:
A manual trans is a dealbraker where i live because of traffic
Amen! Moved here with a little Mazda pickup on a stick ... my clutch foot was always sore after my commute homeAnd if you're parked in traffic on a daily commute in a typical city, auto is the only way to go.
Fortunately I gave that up when I left Seattle.
Congrats OP! NCD
enjoy
Gaolee
Official leathers tester and crash dummy
Terrible waste of a perfectly lethal '59 Chevy. It's a death trap by modern standards, it has brakes made of balsa, an engine that turns fuel into pollution but little else, and you may as well be riding a bicycle when it comes to crash protection. Those take endless maintenance to keep up. It's may be easy maintenance as long as you don't mind doing something or another every few weeks. But, I would still love to have a '59 Chevy, especially a station wagon. The only thing better would be a '59 Caddy hearse. My wife has better taste and fewer dumb ideas, which means I'll be sticking to the '02 van for hauling duty. And whenever it dies, it will get replaced by another modern van with absolutely no entertaining style points.
Gaolee
Official leathers tester and crash dummy
Dunno when you left, but it has only gotten worse. I like it here, but I sure don't enjoy driving at all. My wife's Prius C is just about the perfect car for this place. It does what it does and no more. But in traffic, it's never challenged. If Toyota made a Prius that could pull a trailer full of PA equipment and had enough room for an upright, drum kit, and Acoustic 360, and four other band members, I would be all over it. Unfortunately, the only vehicle that answers that description is a full sized van. Maybe a Mercedes Matris, but those are expensive and there aren't cheap used ones around yet.And if you're parked in traffic on a daily commute in a typical city, auto is the only way to go.
Fortunately I gave that up when I left Seattle.
The SUV discussion amuses me. As a person who grew up driving British roadsters, I think low mass is its own reward if you want to enjoy driving. I don't any more, because there's nowhere to really drive. So, I switched to motorcycles.
And as a person who has had pickups and vans for professional reasons, I understand what makes a vehicle useful and what doesn't. I had a station wagon for a while for the same reason. An SUV generally doesn't do very well in any of those categories. It takes up too much room and is too tall, unlike a station wagon. It has a long snout, unlike a van. You have to crouch and load it from the back like a van. It doesn't have the payload of either a van or a pickup. So, it combines the disadvantages of just about everything with the advantages of nothing. Sure, you can get AWD. That's just a way to burn more fuel, because the few times you actually need AWD, tire chains will probably do better for you. Or you are driving on the beach and part time four wheel drive is a better option. So, all the disadvantages, and absolutely no redeeming qualities. But they are popular. I don't get it. I'm also a crank. So take this for what it's worth. For another cup of coffee, I'll give you my opinion on something else.
I watched an old skateboarding video where the kids took a 59 caddy and cut off the fins, the oval holes became access to two nicely padded "rumble seats" that sat one. dangerous as anything, but extremely cool.
When I was a kid we drove a 1959 Oldsmobile 98. Metalic purple and white. In it's day it was an AMAZING car. My father worked on the analog computers on B-52's and when he drove onto the bases they just assumed he was top brass.
A little about how security has changed. He would park the car under the wing of whatever B-52 he was working on, usually in a hangar.
