# What's the transmission in your car?



## monokitty (Jan 26, 2002)

Of those who own your own vehicle - is it a manual or automatic transmission, and why did you choose the one you did; and, if you had no choice, if you did, which transmission would you pick and why?


----------



## MacNutt (Jan 16, 2002)

I currently have four vehicles...plus the regular use of a sports car that is owned by an aged relative.

All but one have manual transmissions. I am considering switching the one with an auto over to a manual. I really prefer to shift my own gears, thank you very much.


----------



## K_OS (Dec 13, 2002)

All my cars are manual, it's just allot more fun shifting your own gears.


----------



## kps (May 4, 2003)

I spent 25 years in the trucking/transportation business, I owned my own trucks with 15speed transmissions...I shifted enough gears to last 100s of life times. That's why all my personal cars are automatics, but it also depends on the car. If I owned a small 4cylinder, I'd go with a manual, if it's a sports car I'd go with a manual...anything else, it'd be automatic.


----------



## MaxPower (Jan 30, 2003)

All my vehicles are currently Automatics.

Up until my recent vehicle I used to own Manuals. Manual Transmissions are fun, but I eventually became lazy and switched to Automatic.

Who knows, maybe someday I'll switch back.

One question though:

Are automatics harder on the transmission than Manuals?

The reason I ask is I had to replace the transmission on my Automatic, and I never had any problems with a Manual. Or is is it just a fluke?


----------



## SINC (Feb 16, 2001)

My 1949 Meteor is so manual that it still has "three on the tree".

For you youngsters, that is the gear shift lever is located on the right side of the steering column.

Neutral is centre, 1st is towards the driver and down, 1st to 2nd is up to neutral, downward pressure and up to 2nd, 2nd to 3rd is all the way down through centre with pressure towards the dash.

Reverse is towards you and up.

Think of it as the standard 3 speed "H" pattern on the side of the steering column.

Cheers


----------



## The Doug (Jun 14, 2003)

I'm a lazy klutz - I'll take automatic over manual anytime.


----------



## Pamela (Feb 20, 2003)

I'll never pay for another automatic transmission to be replaced again. I've learned my lesson the hard way


----------



## monokitty (Jan 26, 2002)

> Are automatics harder on the transmission than Manuals?


Depends if you can drive a manual properly.  I guess a Manual is a bigger strain on the transmission if you can't shift properly.


----------



## Clockwork (Feb 24, 2002)

I like standard. I really have only drove Automatic a few times.


----------



## maximusbibicus (Feb 25, 2002)

Manual here too.

You can't lose with stick.

Better performance, better mileage, better in the snow, and WAY more fun.

Power is nothing without control.

You are part of the driving experience when you drive a manual, but just along for the ride with an automatic.

I'll never own a 4 cyclinder or low displacement 6 cyclinder with an automatic.

I would consider an automatic if i want to buy a big SUV, or a minivan.

Also, if you have transmission problems with a manual, its almost always the clutch. Anywhere from $400 to $800 for a fix, generally.

Blow the auto tranny, be prepared to shell out BIG BUCKS.


----------



## ehMax (Feb 17, 2000)

My previous car was a standard Honda Civic. I loved that little car, and I miss her.  

The time came when I needed a min-van, and I don't know too many min-vans that come in standard. 

It's been over 2 years since I drove a standard, and would really have fun booting around in one. 

Some day if I get a 2nd car, it will be a fun little standard.


----------



## Clockwork (Feb 24, 2002)

Especialy little cars. They just whip by everyone. Everytime I drive an Automatic I dont know what to do with my right hand.


----------



## ehMax (Feb 17, 2000)

This would be a fun little standard car to drive. Stick a little matching iPod mini in there, and you'd be all set.


----------



## MaxPower (Jan 30, 2003)

> This would be a fun little standard car to drive.


Especially if you throw some after market enhancements in it to boost the HP.

Weeeee!


----------



## Clockwork (Feb 24, 2002)

My father in law was telling me that they used to be really afordable cars. Now they seem expensive for such a little thing. I still think there cool though. From the adds it sounds like they have a good sound system.


----------



## Lawrence (Mar 11, 2003)

I miss my old Volvo 4-door wagon with 5-speed overdrive 

The Volvo DL series cars were built like a tank.

Dave


----------



## K_OS (Dec 13, 2002)

> This would be a fun little standard car to drive. Stick a little matching iPod mini in there, and you'd be all set.


The new MINi is a nice car but why have chopped liver when you can have steak. Try getting one of these instead if you're looking to have fun, the new ones just don't have the personality or the soul of the old ones.  








Just to keep it on topic the '72 Mini above has a 4 speed manual transmission


----------



## TroutMaskReplica (Feb 28, 2003)

if i have to get another car it will be a standard.

my current car ('95 Chrysler Cirrus with fake leather seats) is automatic, and i can feel the transmission starting to go. the shifting is really sloppy, but what can you expect from a chrysler? it's a nice looking piece of crap...good thing i only paid two grand for it a year ago when it seemed to be in perfect condition. now it may last another year, or might not last through the week.

i hate cars.


----------



## monokitty (Jan 26, 2002)

Has anyone driven a standard vehicle _without_ a tachometer and just "shifting by the ear?" (or how many of you even look at the RPM level when shifting?)


----------



## elmer (Dec 19, 2002)

TroutMaskReplica, that sounds like my 95 Corsica.



> Has anyone driven a standard vehicle without a tachometer and just "shifting by the ear?"


Yep - used to have a 93 Tercel, and that's the way I always shifted. Not just by ear, though - by intuitive speed/grade/torque estimation.

No I did not consult a tachometer. To those who would, I say, "You must unlearn what you have learned". "Try not. Do. Or do not. There is no try". "Beware of the dark side. Anger...fear...aggression". "You must feel the Force around you". "If you choose the quick and easy path...you will become an agent of evil". "Size matters not". "Control. Control. You must learn control". "Mind what you have learned. Save you it can". "That is the way of things...the way of the Force".


----------



## K_OS (Dec 13, 2002)

> Has anyone driven a standard vehicle without a tachometer and just "shifting by the ear?" (or how many of you even look at the RPM level when shifting?)


when I 1st get into a car that I don't know I look at the tach but after a while I roughly know the speed and the shift points of the car I no longer look at the tach.


----------



## Clockwork (Feb 24, 2002)

Our old hyundai did not have a tachometer. That was my first car as well. I just learned by ear it is really easy after a bit. I dont really look at it too much. You just learn where the shift points are. There is a bit of a difference in the shift points with our new car and the old one though.


----------



## Irie Guy (Dec 2, 2003)

My 73 VW Westy has no Tach and I shift by ear. It's pretty easy to tell on the old beast.


----------



## BigDL (Apr 16, 2003)

[QUOTEHas anyone driven a standard vehicle without a tachometer and just "shifting by the ear?" (or how many of you even look at the RPM level when shifting?) [/QUOTE] 

You don’t have to shift gears by anything but your own good judgement. If you are going down an incline you can skip gears. If want to “rev” up your vehicle and shift you may do that. Basiclly the only thing you can’t do with a standard transmission is ‘lug” the vehicle meaning that you let the engine speed drop to a point where phyisics takes over and stalls the engine.

Having said that if you have a tach and operate the engine between the recomended power band (low rpm high rpm) you will extend the life of your powertrain. If you get use to using a tach, to shift and drive you really don’t have to rely on the speedometer very much. 

Lars not only do I shift with out a tachometer I can shift without using the clutch. But that skill come after years of driving trucks for a living. It is much easier to shift (without using the clutch) when you have a tachometer than without a tach but I some time shift my Hyundi Elantra (no tach) without using the clutch.

Sinc I had a 1979 Chevy full size pickup inline six and three in the tree. It was a good truck I was sorry to sell it. We went from from 2 to 5 in no time flat. The kids came along quickly between 1979 and 1982.


----------



## PosterBoy (Jan 22, 2002)

I do not currently own a car, but the two I have owned were both standard. I learned on a standard, too. The logic behind this was that in an emergency, I'd be able to jump into pretty much any car and drive it if need be.

I don't mind automatics, they have their place. Minivans, boring sedans and the like. City driving can be a bit annoying with a standard transmission, especially in stop and go traffic.

However, if the car your driving is designed to go really fast (read: a sports car) or really slow (read: a big pick up truck or other 4 wheel drive machine), a standard transmission is pretty much the only choice in my mind.

They're better on gas, too. Double trouble!

*Lars said:

Has anyone driven a standard vehicle without a tachometer and just "shifting by the ear?"*

What's a tachometer?









Seriously though, I've only ever used the tachometer the first couple of times I drive a new car. Otherwise, I pretty much never use it. On quiet cars, I shift by feel, if you can believe that.

Power shifting and double clutching are also good skills to learn, and I have.


----------



## used to be jwoodget (Aug 22, 2002)

I've never owned an automatic but my wife likes them (she's had Windstars and currently a V6 Tribute). I like both but I also like to be able to push the acceleration from time to time. Automatic transmissions in sports cars are pretty good, with lots of kick-down response. But they just seem lazy.

The Cooper S has 163 horses, is supercharged and a has 6 speed Getrag transmission. Packing in more oomph might end up with it becoming an unintentional off-roader.... 

In the UK last week I rented a Smart Car from Hertz. It was amazingly spacey inside (I'm 6'1") but feels like you are strapping on a backpack with wheels. I actually parked it at 90 degrees to the road several times as it was basically a square. It had a 600 cc, turbo charged engine and an auto transission with a crappy semi-automatic mode. I got 80 mph out of it (although rounding corners needed strategic leaning.....).


----------



## Clockwork (Feb 24, 2002)

On my way home yesterday I realised one thing I do not like about standard. When your in stop and go trafic. It is not that bad but can sometimes get annoying.


----------



## SLaw (Jun 5, 2004)

Automatic - as my wife don't know how to shift manual gear.

also, need my right hand to hold a cup of coffee, shave, comb my hair, blow my nose, flip newspaper, most important - reach to the glove box to search for insurance paper when I bump into someone's rear end.

Regardless, I like automatic


----------



## ernestworthing (Jun 10, 2004)

BigDL, how does one switch gears without the clutch?
Won't that damage the gears? (through sheer friction?)

(the clutch is for triggering the actions of coupling and uncoupling gearwheels... I cannot imagine how it is optional)

I am very interested to learn more about this....


----------



## Pamela (Feb 20, 2003)

it's called double clutching. It doesn't ruin anything if you do it right. It's matter of listening to your engine and understanding timing and rpm's.

My ex boyfriend's dad was at one point a truck driver and he taught my boyfriend to do this on his mustang.

boys will be boys.


----------



## Pelao (Oct 2, 2003)

Automatic on both cars.
Manual is a lot more fun, with more control and feel etc.

But I spent too many years in Europe with manuals, in increasing levels of traffic. Now I live in the GTA and my routes to and from work involve a lot of slow, stop-start traffic. This is just not practical for a manual. The advantages just disappear.


----------



## Britnell (Jan 4, 2002)

Double clutching and shifting with out a clutch are not the same thing.

I currently have an auto, but have had manual trannies. A manual is too much of a pain in Toronto/GTA traffic, especially with needing sales notes, and getting cell calls.

Also, a stick gets in the way of a "dirty weekend", if one is so inclined. 

As for the automatic transmission problems, how many people have remembered to change the fluid and filter? How many have had the darn thing "tuned up"?

I've never had an auto fail, but I have had the cables on a manual snap (try driving using only 2nd and reverse), and I have inherited a burned out clutch.

Manual is more fun to drive, but in T.O. traffic is really not practical.


----------



## (( p g )) (Aug 17, 2002)

If it were up to me (and only me), all my cars would be stick-shift. I say this because my wife is adamant that she can't learn to drive with a manual transmission. 

The convenience of automatic comes nowhere near the fun of a manual transmission. Three key advantages: improved fuel economy, longer brake life (if you gear down when coming to a stop), and peppier pick-up in the passing lane. 

That said, my vote for manual vs auto rests mainly on the make of the car. I find that Honda, Toyota and VW each makes a superb gearbox, making manual a real joy. I can't say the same about Ford or Chrysler (the latter of which can't even make a reliable tranny, if you ask me). I've never driven a GM standard tranny, so I'll reserve opinion for others who may have owned one.


----------



## SINC (Feb 16, 2001)

> it's called double clutching. It doesn't ruin anything if you do it right. It's matter of listening to your engine and understanding timing and rpm's.


Nope. Wrong. Double clutching still involves using the clutch pedal. It was devised many years ago to allow shifting non sync transmissions a bit quicker without severe gear grinding at higher RPMs.

Clutchless shifting is just that. Shifting without the use of the clutch.

It involves putting the vehicle in 1st gear WITH the clutch and getting it rolling. Then a skilled driver can shift up through the gears as well as back down WITHOUT ever using the clutch again.

I did this many years ago on the farm with many vehicles and do so today with my 1949 Meteor.

It involves knowing the RPMs and understanding the release points of pressure on the transmission and drive line to shift exactly at the neutral position of the whole drive train without ever grinding a gear. 

With today's full syncro transmissions, it should be a piece of cake to do. Too bad I don't have a modern manual tranny vehicle to give it a go.

Cheers


----------



## PosterBoy (Jan 22, 2002)

Power shifting (clutchless shifting) worked pretty well on the two cars I owned, but it took a bit of getting used to. It isn't something I'd recommend trying unless you know your car pretty well.

On my cars, normally it was easy to accomplish just by rolling off the gas and pulling out of gear after a second or two of coasting, tapping the gas and then _just afer_ pulling back into gear.

It should be noted that both the cars I owned were pretty crappy (I paid a grand total of 1000$ for both of them), so I didn't so much mind abusing them to learn how to do it right. Neither of them were sync'd transmissions.

I've also heard more about clutchless shifting on motorcycles these days than cars.

Double clutching, by contrast, requires using the clutch twice for each gear change, and while great on some vehicals, is somewhat useless on others.

Double Clutching


----------



## MacNutt (Jan 16, 2002)

Motorcycle trannies are a bit different, really. They are all "ratchet-type". This requires that you go all the way through the gears when up or downshifting, the same as most race cars. 

Example: You can go from first to third on pretty much any manual car tranny. You have to go from first to second to third on a bike. No other option. (you can usually do this without using the clutch, if you choose to, without any signifigant damage to the mechanism).

"Speed shifting" on a manual car trans means matching engine speed with the speed of the rearend and transmission gears. You don't even touch the clutch. Usually with the throttle mashed to the floor. Do it right, and you get an instant and smooth transition of power. Very cool stuff.   

Do it wrong and you will trash a bunch of expensive stuff...and you will be walking for a few days while your vehicle is in for repairs.

"Double clutching" means pressing in the clutch, then shifting into neutral, then letting out the clutch, then pressing in the clutch again and shifting into the desired gear, then letting the clutch out and proceeding on your way.

It's about as far from "Speed shifting" as you can get. But you HAVE to do it if you don't have a synchromesh transmission (most cars from the sixties on up have synchro manual trannies).

In my personal experience (American muscle cars and trucks) an automatic transmission will easily outlast the original motor. Manuals will NOT. Autos cost about the same as manuals to rebuild, unless you have an import car. Manual trannies also require clutches (autos don't)...and you will likely go through a few clutches before the trans or motor finally give up the ghost. Clutches can be rather expensive to replace, depending on the vehicle.

If you are lucky enough to have a GM vehicle from several decades ago that has a Turbo 400 3 spd automatic...then it will probably outlast you AND your children. With zero maintenance.

But I'd STILL rather shift my own gears.


----------



## Jordan (Jul 20, 2002)

I had a Turbo 400 in my '70 Impala Coupe, rebuilt the whole car except the tranny. Had that car for 8 years and still after all that time and the body with a few more dents and rust that tranny was still strong.

Anyways, '91 Subaru with standard with 4WD excellent, '92 Mitsubishi Galant 4cyl with automatic - love it, still with enough power to easily get going and decent fuel mileage [our travel car, luxury]

Next car, The Smart car from Mercedes.


----------



## talonracer (Dec 30, 2003)

I have owned 4 cars so far - 
Toyota Camry: Standard
2 Eagle Talons: Standard
1 BMW 320i: Automatic

I could not believe how disconnected I felt driving the 320. Felt as if I wasn't part of the driving experience at all. That was just one of the many reasons I sold it after 6 months, replacing it with my second Talon. There's just too much joy to be had from shifting properly, matching it to your current mood...

Now I want to go for a drive!


----------



## rollee (Feb 26, 2003)

i drive standard since day 1 and enjoy that even in stop and go traffic without a/c.
its a matter of getting used to manuel, in times when i am in an automatic (rental) vehicle, i find myself playing with D, N, '3' & '2' non-stop.


----------



## MacNutt (Jan 16, 2002)

My cherished American Musclecar...an extremely rare and horribly powerful 1971 Monte Carlo SS 454..is equipped with the aforementioned GM Turbo 400 3 spd auto trans. It came stock with a radical shift package and a very cool stirrup style floor shifter mounted in a nifty console. It also has a tachometer. From the factory.

I shift every damn gear in that puppy. By hand. Even though it's an auto. And it gets about twenty feet of serious rubber in the first-to-second shift. A major bark in the second-to-third, as well.   

It will also smoke the tires from a standing start. Heck...it'll wrinkle the pavement and shake windows a mile away if I want it to. It's a monster.

And both the motor and Turbo 400 trans were assembled more than thirty years ago. They have not been touched ever since (other than the odd tuneup).

Neither shows any signs of failure. This stuff was built to LAST!  

I jest _LOOOVE_ my monster motored Monte Carlo!!   

Even though it's an auto.


----------



## MacNutt (Jan 16, 2002)

With you 120% Talonracer!  

There is nothing like actually _ENJOYING_ the trip from point A to point B. It makes the whole day worthwhile!  

Driving a fine piece of machinery with an automatic trans is kinda like poonin a truly beautiful lady while wearing hip waders and heavy kitchen mitts.  

You've BEEN there...you can tell everyone you've BEEN there...but the whole experience was somehow muted and distant when you really think about it.

And not a lot of fun, when all is said and done.  

Gimme a manual trans any day of the week. No contest.


----------



## talonracer (Dec 30, 2003)

Hahahahahaha!!!

_Excellent_ analogy! I nearly fell out of my chair laughing so hard!


----------



## ekcondon (Jun 9, 2002)

Well, only being 17 and having my licnece for just over a year, I can say that nothing vents pent-up rage, like reving the engine in my parents Subaru Impreza (God I love that car!). We do have 2 other automatic vehicles (I have a '97 Ford Taurus), but I love driving the Subaru around the city  , plus I like the fact of my controlling my car, and actually 'driving' it, not just steering it in a direction (not to offend any lovers of the automatic transmission).


----------

