If the US made the standard, standard
 

What do you think would happen to the average fuel economy, and gas prices in the United States if the standard transmission were the standard? It can go either way, I feel like the general population would focus more on power than economy, always keeping the engine right in that powerband, and never releasing a pedal... either on the brake, or on the gas... but never coasting or lightly on the gas.
However, a standard transmission is so much more efficient just in its mechanical factors, and there are those people that can hypermile out the ass to offset it a bit.
Thoughts? Do you think that the mindset of the United States would counteract the mechanical advantages, or do you think that people would take advantage of the ability to drive properly?

I think it wouldn't work. Math and physics are not Americans' forte, and I think it would be too hard to explain to most people which gear is the correct gear to use. Getting a mass driver education program in itself would be difficult, nevermind having people understand it.

From what I've seen, people who drive manual tend to think that there is an optimum rpm range that you should always stay in, and won't shift up at low speeds, although my sample size is very small heh. But if you listen to the sports cars (which tend to be the only manual transmission cars rolling on the streets these days) rolling around town, often times their exhaust note indicates they're running at a pretty high rpm, so I think my observation is not far from the truth.

With the traditional gearboxes in most US vehicles you're using a lot more fuel.
If they were changed over to manuals, it could save quite a bit.

Swapping them over for dual-clutch transmissions, you could be as good or better than with the manuals - especially with drivers that aren't used to manuals ;)

On the Euro NEDC, these automated manuals are starting to get better mpg numbers than their manual counterparts.

Dunno. If we are talking about a national fleet of new vehicles, seems the new a/ts are pretty much the equal of m/ts as far as EPA tests go.

So then the big variable is the driver... so many of them with their heads up their.... they're better off with a/ts; then the slightly better than average driver might have equal mpg with either one; then the slim minority that are hypermilers or near hypermilers would be the ones to really make the m/ts shine.

So as a national fleet, with the current crop of dumb motorists, I think a/ts might have the edge.

The only reduction in fuel usage would be from persons not able to drive m/t vehicles and not driving. Another mind exercise would be if power steering was no longer an option would it reduce the size and weight of vehicles on the road thus improving mpg?

Someone needs to make a simple no frills car with manual windows, a manual trans, manual mirrors etc and etc.

Todays cars are filled with so much gadgetry it adds more weight and distractions to the driver. May be the ABS can stay and HID headlights would be good -with other LED lights. All wheel drive would be nice if I lived in the snow belt/North.(-but this would sacrifice gas mileage. )

This is what Germany did with the VW bug. The peoples car. Something almost everyone could afford.

The Mazda I bought 6 years ago has power seats. I did not want power seats. You set the position once and then what? I carry the weight of those little motors and wiring with me everywhere I go -same with power mirrors. You set them once and leave them alone. This gadgetry makes no sense.

Unfortunately Americans are lazy and want their conveniences.

Autos are now being equipped with 6 speeds so driven right, can get good gas mileage.

I could see it going numerous ways.

People driving manuals:
Might "race" around more
Be more aware of their running vehicle's status (checking all the gauges)
in addition to ^, be more in tune with how they're driving.

People driving autos:
Less aware of their vehicle's status, less in tune
Punch it and go
On the other hand, feel less of a speed racer and just cruise.



Thats what the 1LE Camaro used to be. A/C delete, Radio delete etc. Sadly the new one wont carry the similar options.

Lotus Elise/Exige seems to fit the bill, it doesn't even have power steering, ABS, or cruise control :P Too bad we don't get the base model here in the US, that thing gets some SERIOUS mpgs, especially with the new Valvematic engine.

heh... asking people to give up automatic transmissions... :D

Debonair -

I rue the day when an auto gets same/better MPG than a manual (in the hands of an Ecomodder, that is).

Looked it up. Pretty neat.

CarloSW2

In the good old days,
Manuals were more efficient and more reliable.
In these new days manuals are still the same, but automatics have come a long way in their efficiency and reliability, while manuals are pretty much as they were.
The fact that they are still a little more reliable is a moot point, because of all the electronics that have been thrown at the engine it will likely let you down before either the auto or manual does.
I am old school manual, so I still think they are better, but it is getting much harder to argue the point these days, and besides that, in the near future there may not even be an argument as more and more models are coming out without the manual option at all.

Tesla -

100% agreement. In the hands of an Ecomodder the manual can win almost every time. But if you don't want to make the effort, a modern thrifty auto makes life easier.

Historically manuals have also had a repair cost advantage. However, with fewer cars offering them, that cost advantage may also erode, :( .

CarloSW2

People care about the cost of repairing things? I thought it just all went to the landfill after a short period of functionality.

If people really cared about the repairablility of cars, cars would be simpler, not loaded down with "luxuries" a.k.a. stuff, parts would be cheap, readily available anywhere, and easy to install at home... like they used to be. :( I don't think people care about that anymore. They just run to the repair shop to hire a mechanic to get their wiper arms changed. If consumers gave manufacturers a strong... very strong signal they valued durability and value above fashion and planned obsolescence, vehicles today would be very different from what they are.

We definitely live in a world dominated by desire and if we can buy freedom from care, we will. We don't want a car that promises longer reliability, we expect every car to last until our lifestyle changes - and we expect our lifestyle to change every 3-7 years. The pressure becomes greater if you have some reason, or believe you have some reason to benefit from the judgment of others. I drove an old Tempo around for a few years, and it was tremendously economical - but its disintegration made a statement of poverty about me rather than a statement of thrift. I replaced it with a decidedly unthrifty luxury SUV, whose dual-zone climate control system is broken (and the by-the-book repair? 12.5 hours labor plus $368 parts) ... I was pretty happy with the A/C in the Tempo, it worked rather well. To offset the fuel cost, I bike to work whenever possible. This sends a message of thrift rather than poverty for some reason... well, OK - neat, and maybe i get a less droopy ass out of the deal or something :thumbup:

From CNG Tempo to SUV... what a sad day. :(

On a bigger-picture scale, this is "From a 16mpg multifuel SUV + a 25mpg multifuel car, to a 18mpg multifuel SUV + a bicycle" - All of which are/were greater than 8 years old and remain maintained & in service. The tempo was sold to a neighbor who's now using that commute instead of her K5, and the other SUV (the blazer in my signature) is going on ebay tonight.

In my eyes, this should result in a net reduction in my already not-embarrassing ecologic impact, in spite of appearances. :thumbup:

Oh.. and I kinda wish my bicycle had an automatic transmission :D:D

OK, the additional context does help some... me, I feel stupid riding around in such things and I often ask myself "Doesn't that guy (in x SUV, PU, Hummer, open pipe chopper, etc.) feel like the biggest douche on the planet?"

And speaking of CNG, found a place not too far from me that sells it for $1.50/gge. Might throw a system on my Cadillac so I keep the look of success while not going broke:p

Or something like that:D

Of course not. Douches have no feelings. That's why they're douches:p

Lol!

C'mon Frank, you know that the first rule of Big Douchery is "unplug brain and conscience"

Second Rule is "No Filter Required"

Sure, but we all necessarily make some impact.

It would be valid to argue that another (existing) life form on Earth could hypothetically become as prolific as us - at the expense of the planet's ecology - but it wouldn't be burdened with a conscience and therefore would simply consume and adapt until the literal limits of the ecosystem reigned it in. At no point would it feel like a douche. When seen in that context, it's a little douchey of the universe to expect me to individually take any responsibility at all, when a wildly successful species of fungus could just eat up the whole planet without even the slightest pang of guilt.

I know how the above represents me, but I still believe it's a valid point.

To that end, I drive a v8 powered SUV. At face value, it burns a lot of gasoline when I drive it and someone in a Yaris has probably pointed at me and said "Check out that douche!". Sure, but it's hardly the whole story. It's 10 years old and with good care I'll get another 10 out of it, reducing the impact of disposal, manufacture and shipping another new vehicle or two in that timeframe. And that's still not the whole story - we live in a multifaceted world.

How many hypermilers have ecomodded their babymaker? :thumbup: :D

Not modded... but adjusted the nut behind the wheel?!? :eek:

I feel that in the very near future there will only be a few models left in production available with true manual transmissions. Everything is going automatic or semi-automatic with those stupid paddle-shifters.

To me, driving a manual is the only option. Never have, and never will own and automatic. Sure its nice to just cruise without having to worry about shifting, but I do not get bothered by driving. Driving is not a chore to me. I get a certain joy out of operating any kind of motor vehicle and its only fully experienced when I can feel and control every inch of the car, including the powertrain.

The up and coming generation will likely kill the group we know as gearheads. Kids these days worry more about posting to twitter than they do about how many valves per cylinder their engine has or if a lower final drive ratio will help their 1/4 mile times. And I beleive ecomodders are part of the gearhead group because the focus is all about the cars, but with different goals.

I hear this a lot from shift enthusiasts, but none of them seem to like my idea of eliminating the ECU and just manually firing off the fuel injectors and spark plugs with steering wheel mounted trigger switches. :confused: You could even have a remote shock reservoir built into a Kegel wedge that lets you control shock damping on-the-fly!

Worst thing about Kids These Days® is how they're always on my lawn, makin' me miss Matlock and such. :thumbup:

I believe this is what churches teach- do whatever the heck you want; as long as you believe and repent it'll be OK in the end? :confused: :rolleyes:

That's a pretty cool "out" though- I think I will adopt it and apply it to whatever I find convenient, such as: Hmmm, I think that x person is too dumb to live and I will remove him from the living. Why not? It's OK in the animal kingdom! :thumbup:

When I saw the title, I thought this was a 'metric vs SAE' thread. And I thought "Oh no! I use metric bits even on standard sizes cause at least they make sense."

It bears mentioning that I'm here and have demonstrated both interest and participation in impact-reduction behaviors - and can be safely assumed I carry this with me everywhere I go. It's nonetheless important for us to understand how our behaviors scale, and what is or is not realistic.

If you're celibate, eat municipal waste and pass pure oxygen, throw all the stones you want. :thumbup:

So in the really real world, people won't give up automatics. Nor should they - instead of suggesting we take a step backward on transmission design, why don't we suggest eliminating the transmission entirely? I don't see much development happening on external combustion engines which don't care what fuel they burn/discharge/accumulate, don't require any sort of transmission whatsoever, and should require far fewer parts (and less weight) than the powertrains we're accustomed to in our cars today. Commenting that people "should" be able to operate a manual transmission is comparable to commenting that they "should" be able to saddle a horse or program a VCR to record America's Funniest Home Videos...

As to the OPs question, fuel economy would go down overall if everyone drove manuals. I consider my dad above average in operating a manual, but even he revs higher, and holds gears longer than efficiency would dictate.

Quite well said. I'm always amazed at how much effort people are willing to to expend trying to force a change in others behavior, and at how little effort is given to changing their own.

Fact: Not a single thing is "sustainable". Given that change is inevitable, the best human effort can achieve is to alter the duration of whatever it is we wish to sustain. Even a person living the most meager of existences in a mud hut will kill trillions of organisms and consume enormous resources in a lifetime. Are they too, "douche bags"?

I LOLed.

Which church have you been attending Frank? I've yet to see a doctrine of "do whatever the heck you want" preached by any religion or government. Generally speaking, the whole aim of religion and government is to define what actions are permissible. Perhaps you were thinking of the atheist philosopher Nietzsche, who said you should strive to become who you are. In other words, do what you want and don't feel bad about it.

So which is it; we are governed by the same laws that the animal kingdom are bound to, or we are held to some sort of moral code?

I prefer driving a manual as well, but newer AT trannys are outpacing manuals for mpg. I've driven my wifes '10 VW Jetta TDI with an AT on 55+ mpg trips. Effecient 6 speed manual transmissions are here to stay and I have a feeling that most manuals are going to get tossed out the door by auto makers.

What I would really like to buy is a regular cab, 2wd, 1/2 ton pickup with an I4 diesel, manual trans, cloth bench seats, manual windows/doors/seats/etc, has 15" steel wheels, that retails for $25k. It should be reliable and easy to get 30+ mpg out of. You can't tell me that GM couldn't build something like this...because they figured it out in the '80s with a V8 6.2l.

You couldn't detect the sarcasm so I fixed it for you.

Thank you, but I did notice it was satire. Please correct me if I'm wrong, but from your satire I drew 2 theses.

1. "Churches" teach a doctrine of do whatever the heck you want, and are therefore disreputable ethical institutions.

2. The laws which govern the animal kingdom are insufficient for humans because we are something special or different from "mere animals".

In thesis 1, I point out that practically no organized religion condones "anything goes" behavior.

In thesis 2, you seem to be alluding to an alternate source for a moral compass, but stop short of defining it. My inelegant response was intended to illicit that source from you, but more than that to have other readers ponder that question for a moment; what is a reasonable moral compass?

I lumped religion and politics into the same category because I see no practical distinction between them. They both define a code of conduct, reward for adhering to it, and punishment for breaching it. The foundational principles of US law are even rooted in Christianity!

We are clearly incapable of being our own moral compass since we tend to agree that anarchy is to be avoided. You have ruled out "churches" and I have so closely related religion and politics that you cannot throw one out without applying the same reasoning to the other.

The question remains; what is the valid moral compass that empowers one to point the finger at another, and with certainty declare "you are clearly the douche"?

This is going quite off topic, but I find the "why" question of ecomodding even more interesting than the "how".

Average MPG would go up and eventually the EPA would fix the biased rating system to match real world mileage. The EPA adjusted MPG ratings in 2008 now favor automatics even though manuals still score better in the Euro and JPN cycle. Manuals were beating automatics in the past but now it's not unusual to see a manual with far shorter gearing getting the same MPG as the more ideally geared automatics even dry clutch autos. Progress?

I don't believe this is true. My guess would be that a large majority of people will handily arrive at a sustainable sort of behavior on their own, through exposure to family, community and the experiences most of us either glimpse or live - like resource shortages, loss, the effect of another's greed, the effect of carelessness, etc.. - basically if you have an imagination at all and if you care at all about someone other than yourself, you can imagine what a dead-end most "bad", or wasteful, or unsustainable behaviors are and act in a way that (according to your imagination) seems sustainable.

I don't subscribe to the practice of anarchy, as probably do many other people not subscribe to it, because I recognize that while most of us are reasonable and possess the above learned morals - those who cannot or will not learn those morals can cause significant harm (to us, to the stability of the future we imagine for ourselves, to those about whom we care) if granted the freedom to exercise their selfish or careless acts. Because we recognize this threat, we concede some liberty for the sake of stability. This is a concession made without need for a church or a "moral leader" - both of which seem always to be corrupt anyway.

I'm no longer clear on what any of this has to do with manual transmissions, except that I just don't see them saving the world. Unless operating the clutch lowers sperm counts or something.

They still do, but apparently you didn't buy one.

Yep, the "people's car" was something every NAtional ZocIalist could love...

Then why did you buy it?

I bought an Aveo for my wife for her daily commute to work: manual windows, manual mirrors, manual seats, no climate control, minimal electronic gadgetry, it's a no frills car. But we did want (and bought it with) A/C and A/T because driving in NY City is intolerable without those amenities. If a product isn't what I want, I don't buy it.

No, actually Americans don't know really what they want and/or are persuaded to buy things they don't want or need (just as you admit you did). But no one put a gun to anyone's head to buy these things - it was achieved through mass media brainwashing.

We just can't escape Godwin's law can we?

I heard that Adolf Hitler breathed air, so breathing air is clearly something only a Nazi would do. If you're not a Nazi, you should stop breathing air immediately.

This is not about Godwin's law; in citing that, you are quick to make a supercilious remark in attempt to appear clever. In this case my mention of it is citing historical fact, not hyperbole. You obviously are ignorant of the history of Nazi Germany and how Volkswagen was founded. Here, (quoted from Wikipedia) is the history of the origins of Volkswagen, which is undeniable. You might learn something from it and not be so quick to 'shoot from the lip'.

It's totally Godwin's law. Mention was made of basic, affordable transportation and because one of the many things that came out of Germany during the Nazi regime was basic, affordable transportation you felt it necessary to bring the concept of Nazis into this. That's pretty much dictionary definition Godwin.

Obviously. Did I mention my mother was born in Stuttgart in 1936 and lived there through the '50's?

So here we have it, both of us thinks the other is a little slow. You Godwin'ed, I accused you of doing so without merit. You responded, I responded.

Wanna get a beer? :thumbup:

No, originally mention was made of "the people's car", and in response I pointed out that that is a socialist concept with its roots in NAZI Germany. The rest is history, and it is relevant to the origins of the idea. I seem to have touched a nerve with you for having mentioned it.


You did now. But why are you telling us that and why should anyone care? Perhaps that is why you are so touchy about anyone mentioning anything to do with the National Socialist regime.

I don't think you are "slow" at all. I think your problem is a different one.

Nope. I'm not an enthusiast of beer or biergartens, or of the "people's car".

Clearly in response to your baseless accusation of ignorance, directly under which it appeared in my post. It was intended as a reminder that none of us knows enough about each other to say "obviously you are ignorant".

The nerve you've touched has nothing to do with German history, but rather that many a good idea gets debased by someone trying to associate it with a universally negative idea. The concept of a simplified car made affordable really does have merit, and there is no positive reason for it to be dismissed by association with some unpopular political group from the past who also happened to express that idea.