Why mostly manual cars in UK

[charadamParticipant @charadam]

My first driving was on Ford/Ferguson tractors, then David Brown and Fordson Dexters. I was nearly 11 years old.

Synchromesh was not fitted. You changed down by stopping. Changing up was not smooth but could be done moving.

The army taught me to double declutch on an Antar, then a 3 ton Bedford RL, then a 16 ton Foden with a dodgy pre- select.

That was 50 years ago.

My Merc SLK with auto/preselect has shown me that progress is a good thing.

[Nick Clarke 3Participant @nickclarke3]

Posted by Mark Rand on 05/12/2019 00:55:49:

I had to train my son to use the handbrake after his driving instructor taught him to sit at junctions riding the clutch…

Just the same when being taught how to drive a manual double decker – always hold on the clutch and WAS it heavy!!!!

[not done it yetParticipant @notdoneityet]

Yes, Mark, we call them aimers and steerers. Certainly not proper drivers these days. If they hold their foot brake on in traffic cues, I respond with main beam into their mirrors. Often works. But it is not only the brain-dead automatic drivers who don't know they have a handbrake – there are plenty of similar manul gearbox drivers, too.

There are also two clearly marked halt signs in the town which are totally disregarded by most motorists (over 85% at one junction). Plod used to enforce, at times,] many years ago. They simply ignore it these days.

Despite plenty of road space many drivers at one junction seem unable to remain on their half of the road at the turn. Pulling out on one’s proper side of the road most certainly gives some of them a severe wake-up fright!

[Perko7Participant @perko7]

Best auto I ever had was the 4-speed in a Morris 1300. You could leave it in D and let it change gears itself, or you could manually select the gears. Lovely car to drive as well. By comparison the 3-speed Borg-Warner in a Ford 6-cyl wagon was a slug.

Agree that autos these days have come a long way, especially those in heavy vehicles and in better quality cars. I drive a 43-seat and a 57-seat bus as a job, both with 6-speed auto and built-in retarder which is a great combination, but I still drive (and prefer) a manual car.

That being said, there is nothing more satisfying to an 'old school' heavy vehicle driver than clean shifts up and down in a non-synchro gearbox.

My greatest peeve with auto drivers is the left-foot brakers who rest their foot on the brake pedal while driving, not realising that their brake lights are on all the time they are doing this. Makes it very hard for following vehicles to know when they are actually braking. I always give these drivers an extra couple of vehicle lengths clear if following them.

[IanTParticipant @iant]

I drove a manual for many years, including (as a young man) an Austin "crash box" 1.5 ton lorry – where even careful double de-clutching didn't always work. I also remember sitting in traffic at Denham (pre-M25) and cursing the constant in and out of gear required not to burn out the clutch…didn't have many sporting thoughts crawling along at 2-3mph for 40 minutes every commuting day…

More recently – I drove a 3litre Alfa 166 with Sportronic gearbox. Not that popular with Alfisti's I might add but I liked it – kept the car for twelve years. You could drive it as a 'relaxing' auto – or push the gear selector over and change gears manually if you felt a bit more sporting (or wanted to hear that wonderful engine 'sing' a bit by holding a gear).

I've currently got an Alfa with a TCT (Twin Clutch Transmission) gearbox – with 'Flappy Paddles' – and it has an extremely smooth power delivery. It's almost impossible to tell when the gears are changing when driving in auto mode, with a very linear power feed. I really like the TCT/paddle combination and wouldn't willingly go back to a manual now – something I confirmed to myself when given a manual (garage) car for the day…

Regards,

IanT

[Gary WoodingParticipant @garywooding25363]

In October 2011 I bought a second hand BMW 320D for which I kept a spreadsheet of the fuel consumption until I sold it in September 2015 after driving 26414 miles. It had a 5-speed manual gearbox and the overall fuel consumption was 45.79 mpg.

I replaced it with an identical model, also second hand, which has an 8-speed auto box, in which I've so far driven 26578 miles with an overall 49.47 mpg.

Neither my lifestyle nor my driving habits have changed (as far as I can tell), so does that show that auto boxes are less efficient than manual boxes?

[John MCParticipant @johnmc39344]

Back in the day 3 speed (sometimes 2 speed with a lock-up) autos did about 25mph/1000rpm in top gear. 4 speed manuals did about 30mph/1000rpm in top, therefore a significant difference in fuel consumption. This difference has narrowed considerably, but a manual will have the (slightly) better fuel consumption because the driver has complete control to drive economically.

My gearbox preference is a manual for open road sporty driving and an auto for city driving.

Slightly off topic, it surprises me just how many drivers are not really that bothered by fuel consumption.

John

[Michael BriggsParticipant @michaelbriggs82422]

Re auto drivers with their foot on the brake in a queue. I have had automatics from Audi, Bmw and now VW, all with electronic handbrakes. The brake lights come on when the car applies the handbrake and you can't turn them off.

[steamdaveParticipant @steamdave]

My automatic car has 3 letters on the gear selector in addition to P: D,N,R.

I had to be told that they didn't stand for Day, Night and Race.

Dave
The Emerald Isle

[Peter G. ShawParticipant @peterg-shaw75338]

I've always used manual, although I have driven auto – and it took some effort to remember that there wasn't a clutch.

However, my present car is a manual petrol Toyota Avensis, bought new and now with 90,000 miles on it. I have to say that for normal day-to-day driving, it is a pleasure to use the manual gearbox, and to, as someone above says, just gently feed it into gear. Unfortunately, the car is also used for towing a caravan and here there is a problem in that either the engine isn't powerful enough ***, although it has always done what's been asked of it, or it's too highly geared, possibly a bit of both, but it does mean that we are constantly changing gear from 6th down to say 4th on even a gentle slope, so much so that we now think an auto might have been better, but, that's life, we only found out when it was too late.

FWIW, neither of us would really be classed as sporty drivers, although "herself" does tend to take the engine up to higher speeds than I do when pulling out of our local lane.

***What has surprised me is that the engine, despite the above comments about power, will pull quite happily from 40mph in 6th with four passengers, much to the surprise of a diesel owner friend! Which means that theoretically, it will run from 40mph to 125mph in 6th. Also, with two up, no caravan, we have climbed a 30% gradient in 2nd!

Peter G. Shaw

[Martin ConnellyParticipant @martinconnelly55370]

Foot on the brake auto drivers do it in modern cars because it stops the engine and restarts it when you ease off the brake. Putting it into neutral or park does not do this, it may stop the engine and then you have to restart it using the key for which you have to press the brake pedal anyway. This delays starting and results in brain dead drivers behind you blasting their horns and putting their main beam on because you haven't moved the instant the lights change and because your brake lights come on when they think you should have just driven off. There is also a delay moving from a fresh start as opposed to an automatic restart as the systems check and set themselves up. With an auto box without a torque converter holding still with the hand brake and the engine running may not trigger the clutch to go completely into neutral resulting in rapid wear of the clutch.

On the subject of engine braking-

If you have a front wheel drive car and use engine braking then as well as not activating the brake lights to let following traffic know you are slowing, differences in torque from the gearbox and steering inputs can result in reduced grip on one wheel and unbalance braking. In slippery conditions this is dangerous. Brakes are balanced to give the correct braking force on all four wheels and should be what you habitually use to slow down. Under used brakes are also at risk of seizing due to lack of the movement they would get if used correctly.

Martin C

Forgot to mention ABS. This does not work with engine braking.

Edited By Martin Connelly on 05/12/2019 11:31:50

[Nick Clarke 3Participant @nickclarke3]

Both keeping the brake lights on and dazzling other road users with main beam are forbidden by the same rule in the Highway Code and the same Road Vehicle Lighting Regulation.

A problem with these lights is that, along with most others on modern cars, they are far far brighter than the design of cars and the rules relating to it were ever intended to cope with. If a car is approaching when you are waiting at a T junction, particularly when the road curves to shine the dipped beam in your eyes, it can be quite hard to see if a front indicator is flashing. So is the car turning in to your road or going straight on, so is it safe to pull forward or not?

Even legally adjusted lights can cause dazzle because they are just so bright today.

Don't think there is much that can be done, but it is an extra hazzard to have to cope with when driving nowadays.

[Peter G. ShawParticipant @peterg-shaw75338]

Martyn,

Having experienced brake fade when towing (caused by using pattern parts rather than OEM), brake failure fortunately when not towing but with family on board, and brake failure in a works van, I now always engage a lower gear when going down steep hills. I work on the basis that hopefully the engine will control the descent leaving the brakes in reserve for if I need them. Believe me, it is frightening to suddenly find that the brakes don't work!

In respect of stopping the engine, your first paragraph, my daughter tells me that on her car, it is possible to disable that feature, whilst on a friends car, it appeared to only activate after maybe 30 secs. On a personal basis, I always apply the handbrake, or what passes for a handbrake these days, and if it results in a slight delay in getting away, so what, people just have to learn to be patient.

I read a letter sometime ago in our local rag which neatly encapsulated the selfishness of modern drivers. The writer was castigating people for driving at 50mph on a single carriageway main road where the speed limit is 60mph. Said road is hardly the best for speed involving as it does, hills, bends & junctions, and, I'm sorry to say, has a bad accident record. Although not one of the 50mph drivers, I do consider that these drivers have every right to drive at that speed.

Peter G. Shaw

[Mick B1Participant @mickb1]

Posted by Nick Clarke 3 on 05/12/2019 11:34:28:

Both keeping the brake lights on and dazzling other road users with main beam are forbidden by the same rule in the Highway Code and the same Road Vehicle Lighting Regulation.

…

If a car is approaching when you are waiting at a T junction, particularly when the road curves to shine the dipped beam in your eyes, it can be quite hard to see if a front indicator is flashing.

…

I think the design of lighting clusters is at least equally to blame for this, with indicators placed immediately adjacent to, or even inside, clusters of other bright lights.

Designers ought to get the sack for this, and cars where a driver with standard eyesight can't distinguish a flashing indicator from other lights on the vehicle at, say, 100 m at night in the worst conditions, ought to be forced to undergo suitable modification.

But then, this thread's just turning into another road rage pet hates thread…

[Martin ConnellyParticipant @martinconnelly55370]

For information purposes, driver's manual instructions for a DSG Tiptronic gearbox car.

With selector lever in any position (except P) the vehicle must always be held with the foot brake when the engine is running. This is because an automatic gearbox still transmits power even at idling speed, and the vehicle tends to "creep" . The accelerator pedal must on no account be pressed inadvertently when a gear is engaged with the vehicle stationary. The vehicle could otherwise start moving immediately (in some cases even if the parking brake is engaged) resulting in the risk of an accident.

Unless you select P every time you stop in traffic you should be using the foot brake, makes no difference then if the engine stops or not or if you select neutral. If you select P then you have to press the brake pedal to allow the selector lever to move away from P. The result is a lot of brake light dazzle to following drivers whatever you do.

The law for lights used to be based on lamp wattage but that doesn't work for LED lights. A 5W incandescent lamp is nowhere near as bright a 5W led. This is why modern car lights can be brighter than the older types. I don't know what limits are applied now but I'm sure the manufacturers work as close as possible to the maximum.

Martin C

[Peter LayfieldParticipant @peterlayfield]

It has been most enjoyable reading the posts ,agreeing with all the views as a driver of both manual and automatic

gearboxes, gaining pleasure from both, but one question haunts me, why do we need driverless cars? the vast amount of money and resouces that car manufactures are pouring into their development leaves me cold.

I would be one that would be listening to the engine ( or electric motor) and making a grab for the wheel, pleasures

of life in driving cars will disappear, progress?

[not done it yetParticipant @notdoneityet]

Because they can!

So that anyone can use a car.  no driving test required.  Don't need to own a car.  Business to make money for someone.  Etc etc

Edited By not done it yet on 05/12/2019 14:20:51

[Mick B1Participant @mickb1]

Posted by not done it yet on 05/12/2019 14:18:49:

Because they can!

…

Edited By not done it yet on 05/12/2019 14:20:51

Well, that actually does still remain to be seen…

[RMAParticipant @rma]

Posted by Martin Connelly on 05/12/2019 11:30:02:

Foot on the brake auto drivers do it in modern cars because it stops the engine and restarts it when you ease off the brake. Putting it into neutral or park does not do this, it may stop the engine and then you have to restart it using the key for which you have to press the brake pedal anyway. This delays starting and results in brain dead drivers behind you blasting their horns and putting their main beam on because you haven't moved the instant the lights change and because your brake lights come on when they think you should have just driven off. There is also a delay moving from a fresh start as opposed to an automatic restart as the systems check and set themselves up. With an auto box without a torque converter holding still with the hand brake and the engine running may not trigger the clutch to go completely into neutral resulting in rapid wear of the clutch.

Martin C

Forgot to mention ABS. This does not work with engine braking.

Edited By Martin Connelly on 05/12/2019 11:31:50

Absolutely correct!

Instead of having ago at drivers using their automatic stop/start cars as designed, why not have a go at the car manufactures who year on year seem to add another row of rear lights/brake lights!

I was unfortunate to follow a new car of Eastern origin the other night on a crowded motorway. There were two rows of bright LED strips right across the car plus another row of high level brake lights. Volvo have put those ridiculous vertical rear arrays on the recent vehicles, and most manufacturers seem to compete as to how many bright LED running lights they can fit onto the front of a car! There is a thread on here about the world going mad, this subject would also fit that title.

Year's ago there were standard positions for lights on cars and lights were effective and fit for purpose. Ah well!!!

[RMAParticipant @rma]

Driverless cars? Well the car could take the wife shopping while we stay in the workshop!

[VicParticipant @vic]

Posted by Peter Layfield on 05/12/2019 14:17:08:

It has been most enjoyable reading the posts ,agreeing with all the views as a driver of both manual and automatic

gearboxes, gaining pleasure from both, but one question haunts me, why do we need driverless cars? the vast amount of money and resouces that car manufactures are pouring into their development leaves me cold.

I would be one that would be listening to the engine ( or electric motor) and making a grab for the wheel, pleasures

of life in driving cars will disappear, progress?

Given the number of road deaths and serious accidents world wide it’s clear that humans simply aren’t up to the job. If you take car ownership away from people completely it will not only cut deaths on our roads but free up time for what many drivers really want to do – look at their phones. It would also cut car crime and reduce pollution. I would expect that fully autonomous cars will be cheap to hire so all those that can’t afford to buy a car would have access to cheaper reliable transport. I could also mention noise pollution and other anti social driving from the chav’s that every area seems to have. Governments know all this and they can monitor where everyone is at any given time so you may not like it, and many won’t but it’s coming at some point whether the public like it or not. From what I’ve read though many young people already dislike the prospect of spending a large part of their income on a metal box that spends 95% of its time outside their house or workplace. Attitudes change but it’s often the elderly that get so stuck in the past they can’t see the future. Don’t panic though, you’ll likely be long dead before fully autonomous transport rules the roads!

[Nick Clarke 3Participant @nickclarke3]

Working with young people who have visual impairments or who are blind – they are as keen as anyone else in wishing to have personal transport and many cannot wait for such vehicles to become available.

Also I think far too many car accidents are caused by a simple mechanical problem – the nut behind the steering wheel!

[SillyOldDufferModerator @sillyoldduffer]

Posted by Peter Layfield on 05/12/2019 14:17:08:

… one question haunts me, why do we need driverless cars?

…pleasures of life in driving cars will disappear, progress?

Ah progress – when cars arrived, equine pleasures were forced off the road, and no-one cared then about horse huggers.

The advantage of driverless cars is no-one needs to learn how to drive. Anyone can have a car, whether disabled, blind, drunk, foreign, nervous, clumsy, uninsurable or underage. No need to find car parking in a strange town; instead the car will drop you off and return when needed – it can sort itself out.

No bad drivers clogging up the roads, fewer accidents, better traffic flow, and goods and people delivered without having to pay White Van Man or talk politics with opinionated taxi drivers. No-one will race ambulances, block junctions, miss traffic lights, overtake stupidly, get road rage or have panic attacks. Joyriders won't be doing doughnuts outside your house at 2AM and the car will stop safely as soon as Mr Policeman asks it to. Stealing a car inclined to drive home on its own will be difficult. Men won't have to argue with their wives about stopping to take directions.

Best of all, caravan owners will be able to stay in them for their entire holiday. No need to sit in a car during the journey! Instead ride in the van, make tea, watch TV, snooze, and wave at the queue behind. And married couples will be free to have really long meaningful conversations about feelings, colour schemes, fashion and family matters. Marital bliss!

No problem – I own a push-bike.

Dave

[BazyleParticipant @bazyle]

…..and the driverless car will know exactly where you went and who else got in just before you asked it to go to the quiet leafy lane and which pedestrians and cyclists it saw on the way and when not 'on hire' cruise around to check up on any roads not recently photographed.

When the eco warriors finally wake up to the fact that the real problem is overpopulation the driverless car will be able to take unsuspecting non essential people to the power station.

[Nigel McBurney 1Participant @nigelmcburney1]

I need a 4wd vehicle,high low transfer box, high towing capacity,for my hobby –stationary engines, in recent years a manual Discovery 3 was a disaster,unreliable ,manual g/box which I prefer was a nightmare in conjunction with an electric hanbrake which is either on,and I mean full on or off,a nightmare with a heavy trailer going up hill in stop start traffic,a manual handbrake can be held just on to prevent rolling back,let the cluch in and it takes off,with just a little bit of handbrake held on until the drive takefully up, the electric brake takes too long to release and and makes drivind smoothly difficult. Next a Nissan ,a manual good motor until yiu tow a trailer worst trailer tower I have owned in over 50 years,ultimatum from the other half,get a new Discovery 4,I was a bit reluctant as it was only available with auto g/box,never owned an auto before,and had only driven my mother aut austin 1100 many years ago MOT and back,awful car. I got used to the Discovery auto surprisingly quickly,it is superb with a trailer no risk of running back going uphill and do not use the hand brake in normal driving.But and a big but despite it being made by land rover it is b—y awful off road ,it would be a lot better with manual box ,with a manual you can pick the right gear for the conditions and hold that gear for the best wheelgrip ,my old manual v8 mk1 range rover was far far better off rd I can understand why a lot of drivers still prefer manual,lot better in tricky conditions,more likely to go expensivly go wrong, though I can see after 10 years of a multi gear auto why they are like by far more drivers particularly in dense traffic. years ago autos were usually 3 speed,a bit clunky ,cost more and used a lot more petrol,plus did noget good prices when trading in. One annoyance with my discovery auto is the hassle involved to get the g/box oil changed,or I should say partially changed as unless the box is completely dismantled it is impossible to completely change the oil,all that can be done is drain the oil ,then refill ,run so that the new oil mixes with some of the oil thats left in the box,then drain again and refill,plus draining on the discovery involves removing a chassis crossmember to drop the bottom pan to get at the oil filter,or buy an after market pan which saves disturbing the cross member,plus its best to go to a specialist,as getting the fill wrong would be vey expensive,

[Author]

Posts