Why do you drive an automatic (unless you don't)?

[SentraSE-R]

Originally Posted by Thymeclock

Reliability is not the issue. Both are reliable.

Originally Posted by Thymeclock

One has maintenance needs and costs, the other doesn't. That you choose to ignore.

Your "maintenance needs" issue goes back to the reliability issue that you claim you don't use. First you claim clutches are reliable. Then you imply they're not, the one day in ten years they're down for maintenance.

As for costs, your automatic cost you the price of two clutch jobs the day you chose an automatic transmission on your options list, and it costs you the additional price of a clutch job every year in decreased fuel efficiency compared to a hypermiled manual transmission version of your car. There are no clutch maintenance costs compared to automatics. There's only a net clutch cost advantage - an advantage that only goes up when another 2003 Accord or 2001 Civic's AT bites the dust, another Plymouth/Dodge Caravan/Voyager joins the long list of AT failures, etc. When the AT on my '87 Chevy Astro died, it cost me more than I've spent on clutch replacements for all my MT cars put together, and the transmission shop said all those GM 4L60-E transmissions failed, typically before 100k miles.

Originally Posted by Thymeclock

When did I ever say that "they're all wrong"?

When you ignore what the rest of the world drives. Your metropolitan driving conditions occur world-wide. You've chosen to deny that other posters in Seattle, San Francisco, and LA can get >30k miles out of their clutches. You've made claims about the advantages of automatics and the inferiority of clutches that are not supported by real-world usage patterns.

[user removed]

Originally Posted by dcb

Curious, it does take a 3% hit on the hiway, but a couple Qs re: CVT

do you have the option to control the ratio? i.e. a ratio lever?
Can you control lockup?
Does it have a neutral?

I checked the 2010 Altima coupe EPA figures and the 31-32 highway MPG figures were reversed (compared to 2008) with the manual getting 31 and the CVT 32. Most of the manual 4 cylinders are the strippers. It would have been neat to get a manual (aside from the fact the wife couldn't or wouldn't drive it, which complicates things greatly). Probably could have gone past 40 MPG with a manual, but it sure is a pain in the stop and crawl you can get stuck in here on occasion.

I just get 80+ on the bikes when the weather is better.

Sentra, your wife can't drive and auto (your statement), and my wife won't drive a manual. It was cheaper for me to own one car with an AT instead of one with a manual and one with an AT so she had something to drive when I need to do some service on her car.

This thread should have specified the type of AT, which seems to be basically the older 3 speed non lockup converter types. My monthly mileage distance has dropped by close to 50% since getting my patent and both of us combined still are using less than $200 a month in fuel, which we can easily afford and probably is the difference in property taxes and housing costs compared to places where those monthly costs are high.

Is a dual clutch 6 speed automated manual an AT or a MT?
How about a CVT with a low speed lockup converter, or a clutch?

Does ecomodder not wish AT owners to try to improve their mileage through better driving habits?

I don't remember any place where this forum excludes people who own gas hogs like a Sentra SER, or even Surburbans, or God help us even a Hummer.
I thought the objective was to reduce the fuel consumption of every type of driver in any type of vehicle.

I can guarantee you one thing, a young mother of 3 young children, is not going to be hypermiling a 96 Honda Civic around downtown Manhattan.

Are they excluded as members?

regards
Mech

[dcb]

Originally Posted by Old Mechanic

...
I can guarantee you one thing, a young mother of 3 young children, is not going to be hypermiling a 96 Honda Civic around downtown Manhattan.

Are they excluded as members?
...

what a stupid question, anyone is welcome, but when people say they "need" certain things, they really don't know how subjective that statement is. I could say I need all the money and gasoline in the world, it would be complete crap though.

i.e. compared to an automatic transmission, what do these folks "need"?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wg7OsZyHMX4

[cfg83]

SentraSE-R -

Originally Posted by SentraSE-R

...

When you ignore what the rest of the world drives. Your metropolitan driving conditions occur world-wide. You've chosen to deny that other posters in Seattle, San Francisco, and LA can get >30k miles out of their clutches. You've made claims about the advantages of automatics and the inferiority of clutches that are not supported by real-world usage patterns.

I got my 1999 SW2 used at 36K miles. At 115K miles I needed a new quill bearing (throwout bearing?!?!), so I replaced the clutch at the same time. Dealer quoted $1800, but I got it done by my previous mechanic for $1100. I am now at 205K miles. If the same thing happens as in the past, I *should* need a new clutch at 230K miles.

Here's an expansion on my previous theory :

In all countries it's cheaper to run a taxi cab fleet where all the transmissions are the same.

In first-world country "X" (USA) :

- The majority of the population drive automatics (which leads to ...)
- If you have a fleet of auto-tranny taxi cabs, then you have a larger pool of drivers that you can hire.
- Labor costs more, so you want a large labor pool to drive down the wages.

In first-world country "Y" a majority-stickshift driving population will lead to manual tranny taxi cabs.

In third-world country "Z" :

- The majority of drivers drive manual (which leads to ...)
- If you have a fleet of manual-tranny taxi cabs, then you have a larger pool of drivers that you can hire.
- Also, in third-world countries the cost of labor is low, but the MPG benefits of the manual increase the likelihood that they will be used by a taxi cab fleet.

CarloSW2

[user removed]

Originally Posted by dcb

what a stupid question, anyone is welcome, but when people say they "need" certain things, they really don't know how subjective that statement is. I could say I need all the money and gasoline in the world, it would be complete crap though.

i.e. compared to an automatic transmission, what do these folks "need"?

greater life expectancy

[cfg83]

Old Mechanic -

Originally Posted by Old Mechanic

greater life expectancy

Yeah, that occurred to me. The YouTube is from the Philippines :

One very overloaded and underpowered motorbike and sidecar in Toboso, Occidental Negross, Philippines. Thia is an everyday normal occurance in the poorer outlying villages in the Philippines.

On average we outlive them by 6.6 years (71.8 in the Philippines and 78.4 in the USA). The per-capita traffic-related death rate appears to be a contributor :

List of countries by traffic-related death rate - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Road fatalities per 100,000 inhabitants per year :
USA           12.3
Philippines   20.0

CarloSW2

[dcb]

I didn't mean for everyone to go all wet nurse on the Philippines.

[user removed]

Ah you're all a bunch of wusses unless you drive a 1937 Ford in today's traffic.

With 73 year old cable operated mechanical brakes .

regards
Mech

[slowmover]

Originally Posted by Old Mechanic

Ah you're all a bunch of wusses unless you drive a 1937 Ford in today's traffic.

With 73 year old cable operated mechanical brakes .

regards
Mech

Ha! My '22 Dodge only has them on the REAR wheels . . . .

[user removed]

Originally Posted by slowmover

Ha! My '22 Dodge only has them on the REAR wheels . . . .

HaHaHaHaHa. You got me there .

regards
Mech