Plenty of brands stopped offering manual variants of plenty of models. IIRC BMW practically begged people to stop asking for manual variants, saying it just does not make any sense to mess with the supply chain and the production line and the car itself just to put an objectively inferior transmission inside it.
On the contrary, it makes no sense to put automatic transmissions into sports cars.
On public roads, you’re not gonna be able to drive them as fast as they can go anyway.
An automatic transmission may offer better performance, but you have 5x as much of that as you can use already.
What a manual transmission offers is the feeling of being in full control.
It’s simply more fun and engaging to drive.
But apparently, cars aren’t made to offer the best experience possible anymore.
Auto transmissions are now cheaper and anyone can drive them, so the potential market is bigger. And that’s what matters, even up to the Lamborghini price bracket.
What a manual transmission offers is the feeling of being in full control.
Being able to maintain a gear selection and being able to directly control the clutch are huge advantages in specific conditions like extreme weather or some off road terrain. A surprise shift during a curve in icy conditions makes me nervous every time for example.
If an automatic system allowed for direct control of gears and the ability to disengage and reingage the clutch on demand it would cover those scenarios.
The company car I get to use has an automatic transmission that drives me mad.
Its shift points are always right above the speeds I usually drive at.
It shifts into third at 40 km/h which is too fast for a speed limit of 30.
It shifts into fourth at 60 which is too fast for a speed limit of 50.
And it shifts into fifth at 80 which is too fast for a speed limit of 70.
So you’re constantly driving with too high rpm’s, burning more fuel and making more noise than you’d have to.
It has a “manual mode” where you can shift by moving the stick up or down. But it doesn’t actually do anything. If you shift at a different point than the automatic would, you just get a “shift denied” message on the dash, even though the rpm’s wouldn’t even get close to being too low.
And when you push the gas pedal just a bit more than half, it shifts down and the engine roars, but it doesn’t actually achieve much cause the car doesn’t have much power.
Internal combustion engines are most fuel-efficient at low rpm’s (<1500) and full throttle, and that’s impossible to do with this transmission. So it only gets 34mpg (7l/100km), and it’s a Diesel hatchback. My old manual car also had a 34mpg rating, but the way I drive I could get 47 (5l/100km), and it had a gasoline engine.
My current car with a stick is able to squeeze 34 MPG highway, 3 over the rated 31. However, the CVT version is rated for 38 highway in the same conditions.
What’s the torque band? Driving a diesel, it’s really high compression and torque is applied low in the rpm range. Gasoline is a lot lower compression and might be twice the rpm to get the most torque. Outside of that torque band and your using more fuel for less movement.
Every engine is the most efficient at max torque, which for a typical car’s gasoline engine would be around 4500 rpm.
But that “efficiency” means fuel burnt per unit of power. At max torque, the engine makes much more power than you need for normal driving, burning more fuel than necessary.
As a rule of thumb, you get the best real-world fuel economy at full throttle just above the low rpm limit where the engine would run “jerky”.
That’s at 1000-1500rpm for a passenger car’s gasoline engine.
At that rev range, you may only get 40 horsepower out of an engine rated for 100 at max torque, but that’s enough. You only need around 10 to maintain your speed against wind resistance, and you don’t actually lose any time accelerating slowly cause you’re gonna be at the next red light soon, anyway.
For reference, when I’m accelerating from a stop to highway speeds, I’ll shift to 2nd gear as soon as I’ve moved one car length, 3rd at 30km/h, 4th at 40, 5th at 50, flooring the throttle the entire time I’m not shifting. Then I’ll stay in 5th unless I’m forced to brake below ~45 again. Up or down a hill I’ll go one gear lower.
In my Diesel van, I regularly drive 40 in 5th gear.
I can’t make you take my word for it, but this is what I learned in a work-sponsored course for fuel efficient driving, and it got me much better fuel economy than the manufacturer’s claim for any car I drove in the past 20 years.
It’s been a while since I regularly used a car, but I remember the automatics my father had having some sort of logic that shifted up when driving at a constant speed, than back down when wanting to accelerate.
Now those where fancy pants Systems (I think they called them 7G-Tronic), but this was also over 10 years ago, and such logic doesn’t strike me as overly complicated, so I’m surprised there’s current cars with static shift speeds.
The systems used in these cars are dual clutch - they always offer (or only have) a manual shift mode, which will hold the gear you’re in until you say when, and only down/upshift if you bang the rev limiter or try to go below minimum RPM.
Technically, yes, there is a little automatic like shifter to let you select PRNDS (S or M for manual shift mode), but would you want to do that? nope.
My bigger q is, why are you doing a clutch kick in a supercar that will probably break if you try that? Most Lambos are 4WD, and 4WD cars will break stuff if you go for a clutch kick.
Not for a clutch kick, for conditions where steering without acceleration OR deceleration is safer. The best I can think of is gradual turns in icy conditions where it felt a lot more grippy in neutral at slow speeds.
Pretty rare, just a curiosity thing and without a pedal to gradually get back in gear it wouldn’t be the same anyway.
Why would coasting in neutral be more grippy? Coasting in a gear provides a safe amount of deceleration without the risk of causing the rear end to slide out. You can also just lightly touch the throttle to keep the same speed.
Well, at low speeds you can do that, it won’t hurt it. Dual clutch cars auto rev match if you don’t have your foot on the gas flat to the floor and there’s no danger of overrevving by being in the wrong gear from N in that case. Some dual clutch tansmissions are built like sequential boxes and can’t skip gears. The KIA dual clutch can in fact skip gears.
I thought I would never possibly want an EV, but the acceleration of the Teslas is impressive enough to tempt me. The guy I know who has one accelerates hard enough to push me back into my seat during city driving. As in, he’s stopped at a red light and then he’s going 30 the moment it turns green. His Tesla goes from 0 to 60 in 3 seconds, as opposed to over 6 in my '08 328i. The M series BMWs can match a Tesla’s acceleration, but the BMWs cost a lot more.
I mean, I’m still not getting an EV. But now I am tempted… Maybe if they had real, physical dials instead of a computer screen?
If the 5th gen Subaru Impreza came as an EV, I would be fine with that. Two analog gauges, a digital display for the fuel, gear and mileage, and another digital lcd for the clock and range. That’s literally it on the gas car. All I need on an EV. Replace RPM with Amperage and I’d be fine.
One of my cars (the only one that isn’t a real manual) has a “sport mode” manual upshift/downshift on its automatic transmission, and it’s FUCKING INFURIATING because there’s this huge almost-a-full-second lag between when you tell it to shift and when it finally gets around to doing it.
I would trade it for a manual transmission – even in stop-and-go Atlanta rush-hour traffic! – in a heartbeat if I could.
That’s fair! I’ve only driven standard in Initial D, and my car is for getting me and my things places so I have no use for a standard transmission. It is fun, I’m sure, but I’d teleport if I could.
My “daily driver” is a cargo bike, so pretty much all my cars are either sporty or 4x4s (and cheap/old/unreliable). The only reason I own the one mentioned above (which is a minivan, BTW) is that my parents insisted that I “need” a car that has more than two seats and actually works, just because I have two kids.
The funny thing is that I find nothing objectionable about the “minivan” part; my entire dislike for that thing is due to the “automatic transmission” part. I have seriously considered importing a manual transmission (and associated bits) from an Asian-market version to fix it.
I’ve always had Asian cars, and they’ve always lasted me amazingly. My Honda hit 230k miles before dying.
Minivans are totally fine with me, especially if their fuel economy is good. I would have one if I wanted kids, but thats not for me. I have a small Japanese hatchback and a nice sound system and I love her.
My partner has a big American SUV? Enclosed truck? they got for under 1k USD five years ago at 300k miles. He’s still kicking. He’s a fuckin champion. Fuel economy isn’t great but WFH means we don’t have to take him out unless we need to haul things.
I’d love a cargo bike but anywhere I need to go to that I can’t walk is a 15-20 minute highway drive and despite the huge health benefits, my time to myself is more valuable than not sitting my my sweet car and jammin for a little bit compared to 3-4 hours a day biking.
What is “best experience” though? It’s such a subjective thing. For you it might be pushing a lever back and forth. For every one person like you, I bet there are hundreds who’d rather leave that menial task to the car. Manual transmission can quickly stop being “fun and engaging” and become a chore, especially if you drive through traffic regularly.
I, or rather my left leg, personally do not consider manual transmission as a good experience at all. I also think paying much less for fuel is also a very good experience for my wallet. Though of course I don’t drive a Lamborghini or even a nice M4, so there’s that.
What job, though?
When I’m driving a fun car, I want to actually drive it, not hold the steering wheel and push paddle-shaped buttons that ask a computer to shift for me (if it feels like it).
Because the dual clutch is a lot faster at shifting than the standard manual, and you can put more gears on the dual clutch since you no longer have to deal with a growingly large shift pattern on a stick.
Top tip for dual clutch: You pull the shift lever slightly short of when you want to upshift. Your car will still accelerate while the computer sets up the shift (it has to do or verify the next gear is ready before pulling the trigger on the clutch switchover), and when it shifts, it is so fast the engine even sputters a couple times from the RPMs dropping so fast the timing is momentarily off on one or two ignitions.
All that happens in the span of time it takes for you to kick the clutch to the floor and reach for the stick in a standard manual.
Source: I’ve daily’ed sticks (including my current, and hopefully final gas powered car) and a dual clutch (my previous car). I still prefer the DCT over the stick.
Yes, an automatic transmission with a dual clutch and paddle shifters obviously shifts much faster, has more gears, and lets you accelerate faster.
But my point is, even 200 horsepower in a sports care are already more power than you can legally use on public roads.
And stomping the clutch to the floor, then ramming a shift lever forward is simply more fun.
They shift faster, but shifting in the blink of an eye isn’t the only thing that makes driving fun. A true manual transmission requires you to be more engaged with the car. Vs tapping a flappy paddle or letting the car do it all for you.
The M series cars still have manual as an option, although IIRC the automatic versions have better performance. They’re a bit outside of my price range, so I’m trying to keep my old manual 328i running as long as I can.
Plenty of brands stopped offering manual variants of plenty of models. IIRC BMW practically begged people to stop asking for manual variants, saying it just does not make any sense to mess with the supply chain and the production line and the car itself just to put an objectively inferior transmission inside it.
On the contrary, it makes no sense to put automatic transmissions into sports cars.
On public roads, you’re not gonna be able to drive them as fast as they can go anyway.
An automatic transmission may offer better performance, but you have 5x as much of that as you can use already.
What a manual transmission offers is the feeling of being in full control.
It’s simply more fun and engaging to drive.
But apparently, cars aren’t made to offer the best experience possible anymore.
Auto transmissions are now cheaper and anyone can drive them, so the potential market is bigger. And that’s what matters, even up to the Lamborghini price bracket.
Being able to maintain a gear selection and being able to directly control the clutch are huge advantages in specific conditions like extreme weather or some off road terrain. A surprise shift during a curve in icy conditions makes me nervous every time for example.
If an automatic system allowed for direct control of gears and the ability to disengage and reingage the clutch on demand it would cover those scenarios.
The company car I get to use has an automatic transmission that drives me mad.
Its shift points are always right above the speeds I usually drive at.
It shifts into third at 40 km/h which is too fast for a speed limit of 30.
It shifts into fourth at 60 which is too fast for a speed limit of 50.
And it shifts into fifth at 80 which is too fast for a speed limit of 70.
So you’re constantly driving with too high rpm’s, burning more fuel and making more noise than you’d have to.
It has a “manual mode” where you can shift by moving the stick up or down. But it doesn’t actually do anything. If you shift at a different point than the automatic would, you just get a “shift denied” message on the dash, even though the rpm’s wouldn’t even get close to being too low.
And when you push the gas pedal just a bit more than half, it shifts down and the engine roars, but it doesn’t actually achieve much cause the car doesn’t have much power.
Internal combustion engines are most fuel-efficient at low rpm’s (<1500) and full throttle, and that’s impossible to do with this transmission. So it only gets 34mpg (7l/100km), and it’s a Diesel hatchback. My old manual car also had a 34mpg rating, but the way I drive I could get 47 (5l/100km), and it had a gasoline engine.
My current car with a stick is able to squeeze 34 MPG highway, 3 over the rated 31. However, the CVT version is rated for 38 highway in the same conditions.
What’s the torque band? Driving a diesel, it’s really high compression and torque is applied low in the rpm range. Gasoline is a lot lower compression and might be twice the rpm to get the most torque. Outside of that torque band and your using more fuel for less movement.
Every engine is the most efficient at max torque, which for a typical car’s gasoline engine would be around 4500 rpm.
But that “efficiency” means fuel burnt per unit of power. At max torque, the engine makes much more power than you need for normal driving, burning more fuel than necessary.
As a rule of thumb, you get the best real-world fuel economy at full throttle just above the low rpm limit where the engine would run “jerky”.
That’s at 1000-1500rpm for a passenger car’s gasoline engine.
At that rev range, you may only get 40 horsepower out of an engine rated for 100 at max torque, but that’s enough. You only need around 10 to maintain your speed against wind resistance, and you don’t actually lose any time accelerating slowly cause you’re gonna be at the next red light soon, anyway.
For reference, when I’m accelerating from a stop to highway speeds, I’ll shift to 2nd gear as soon as I’ve moved one car length, 3rd at 30km/h, 4th at 40, 5th at 50, flooring the throttle the entire time I’m not shifting. Then I’ll stay in 5th unless I’m forced to brake below ~45 again. Up or down a hill I’ll go one gear lower.
In my Diesel van, I regularly drive 40 in 5th gear.
I can’t make you take my word for it, but this is what I learned in a work-sponsored course for fuel efficient driving, and it got me much better fuel economy than the manufacturer’s claim for any car I drove in the past 20 years.
It’s been a while since I regularly used a car, but I remember the automatics my father had having some sort of logic that shifted up when driving at a constant speed, than back down when wanting to accelerate.
Now those where fancy pants Systems (I think they called them 7G-Tronic), but this was also over 10 years ago, and such logic doesn’t strike me as overly complicated, so I’m surprised there’s current cars with static shift speeds.
The systems used in these cars are dual clutch - they always offer (or only have) a manual shift mode, which will hold the gear you’re in until you say when, and only down/upshift if you bang the rev limiter or try to go below minimum RPM.
Can they be put in neutral at high speed and switched back to a gear at speed?
Technically, yes, there is a little automatic like shifter to let you select PRNDS (S or M for manual shift mode), but would you want to do that? nope.
My bigger q is, why are you doing a clutch kick in a supercar that will probably break if you try that? Most Lambos are 4WD, and 4WD cars will break stuff if you go for a clutch kick.
Not for a clutch kick, for conditions where steering without acceleration OR deceleration is safer. The best I can think of is gradual turns in icy conditions where it felt a lot more grippy in neutral at slow speeds.
Pretty rare, just a curiosity thing and without a pedal to gradually get back in gear it wouldn’t be the same anyway.
Why would coasting in neutral be more grippy? Coasting in a gear provides a safe amount of deceleration without the risk of causing the rear end to slide out. You can also just lightly touch the throttle to keep the same speed.
Well, at low speeds you can do that, it won’t hurt it. Dual clutch cars auto rev match if you don’t have your foot on the gas flat to the floor and there’s no danger of overrevving by being in the wrong gear from N in that case. Some dual clutch tansmissions are built like sequential boxes and can’t skip gears. The KIA dual clutch can in fact skip gears.
EVs don’t do any shifting and usually have a low center of gravity, even better for suspect road conditions!
I thought I would never possibly want an EV, but the acceleration of the Teslas is impressive enough to tempt me. The guy I know who has one accelerates hard enough to push me back into my seat during city driving. As in, he’s stopped at a red light and then he’s going 30 the moment it turns green. His Tesla goes from 0 to 60 in 3 seconds, as opposed to over 6 in my '08 328i. The M series BMWs can match a Tesla’s acceleration, but the BMWs cost a lot more.
I mean, I’m still not getting an EV. But now I am tempted… Maybe if they had real, physical dials instead of a computer screen?
That, unfortunately, is the tendency for the entire auto industry. It’s not an EV-specific thing, although admittedly Tesla is the worst offender
If the 5th gen Subaru Impreza came as an EV, I would be fine with that. Two analog gauges, a digital display for the fuel, gear and mileage, and another digital lcd for the clock and range. That’s literally it on the gas car. All I need on an EV. Replace RPM with Amperage and I’d be fine.
My car has a gear shifter setting and it’s automatic, no clutch tho.
Same! I love my auto-standard combo! It’s fun to play with when I want, and not insanely annoying in traffic.
One of my cars (the only one that isn’t a real manual) has a “sport mode” manual upshift/downshift on its automatic transmission, and it’s FUCKING INFURIATING because there’s this huge almost-a-full-second lag between when you tell it to shift and when it finally gets around to doing it.
I would trade it for a manual transmission – even in stop-and-go Atlanta rush-hour traffic! – in a heartbeat if I could.
That’s fair! I’ve only driven standard in Initial D, and my car is for getting me and my things places so I have no use for a standard transmission. It is fun, I’m sure, but I’d teleport if I could.
My “daily driver” is a cargo bike, so pretty much all my cars are either sporty or 4x4s (and cheap/old/unreliable). The only reason I own the one mentioned above (which is a minivan, BTW) is that my parents insisted that I “need” a car that has more than two seats and actually works, just because I have two kids.
The funny thing is that I find nothing objectionable about the “minivan” part; my entire dislike for that thing is due to the “automatic transmission” part. I have seriously considered importing a manual transmission (and associated bits) from an Asian-market version to fix it.
I’ve always had Asian cars, and they’ve always lasted me amazingly. My Honda hit 230k miles before dying.
Minivans are totally fine with me, especially if their fuel economy is good. I would have one if I wanted kids, but thats not for me. I have a small Japanese hatchback and a nice sound system and I love her.
My partner has a big American SUV? Enclosed truck? they got for under 1k USD five years ago at 300k miles. He’s still kicking. He’s a fuckin champion. Fuel economy isn’t great but WFH means we don’t have to take him out unless we need to haul things.
I’d love a cargo bike but anywhere I need to go to that I can’t walk is a 15-20 minute highway drive and despite the huge health benefits, my time to myself is more valuable than not sitting my my sweet car and jammin for a little bit compared to 3-4 hours a day biking.
What is “best experience” though? It’s such a subjective thing. For you it might be pushing a lever back and forth. For every one person like you, I bet there are hundreds who’d rather leave that menial task to the car. Manual transmission can quickly stop being “fun and engaging” and become a chore, especially if you drive through traffic regularly.
I, or rather my left leg, personally do not consider manual transmission as a good experience at all. I also think paying much less for fuel is also a very good experience for my wallet. Though of course I don’t drive a Lamborghini or even a nice M4, so there’s that.
They quit offering sticks because they use dual clutch transmissions, which do the job better.
What job, though?
When I’m driving a fun car, I want to actually drive it, not hold the steering wheel and push paddle-shaped buttons that ask a computer to shift for me (if it feels like it).
Because the dual clutch is a lot faster at shifting than the standard manual, and you can put more gears on the dual clutch since you no longer have to deal with a growingly large shift pattern on a stick.
Top tip for dual clutch: You pull the shift lever slightly short of when you want to upshift. Your car will still accelerate while the computer sets up the shift (it has to do or verify the next gear is ready before pulling the trigger on the clutch switchover), and when it shifts, it is so fast the engine even sputters a couple times from the RPMs dropping so fast the timing is momentarily off on one or two ignitions.
All that happens in the span of time it takes for you to kick the clutch to the floor and reach for the stick in a standard manual.
Source: I’ve daily’ed sticks (including my current, and hopefully final gas powered car) and a dual clutch (my previous car). I still prefer the DCT over the stick.
We’re not on the same page here.
Yes, an automatic transmission with a dual clutch and paddle shifters obviously shifts much faster, has more gears, and lets you accelerate faster.
But my point is, even 200 horsepower in a sports care are already more power than you can legally use on public roads.
And stomping the clutch to the floor, then ramming a shift lever forward is simply more fun.
They shift faster, but shifting in the blink of an eye isn’t the only thing that makes driving fun. A true manual transmission requires you to be more engaged with the car. Vs tapping a flappy paddle or letting the car do it all for you.
The M series cars still have manual as an option, although IIRC the automatic versions have better performance. They’re a bit outside of my price range, so I’m trying to keep my old manual 328i running as long as I can.
They also offer it on the Z4 with the Handschalter package. Pretty sure this will be the last year of the Z4 tho.