death of the manual transmission

[cockerpunk]

http://detnews.com/article/20100624/AUTO03/6240365/1148/rss25


This is a love letter to the manual transmission. Or perhaps its obituary.

I understand the emotion that a stick and clutch engenders. Passionate drivers often feel they're better connected to a car that can be shifted manually. Others go even further. A fellow once told me, "I'll let go of my stick when you pry it out of my dead, cold hand."

I belong in the lovers' camp: There's something lyrical about a well-executed shift -- clutch in, shift, clutch out, power on. Forget about simultaneously eating, drinking or texting. This is the art of driving.

Yet I recently sat in Ferrari's headquarters in Italy and was told, unequivocally, that the new 458 Italia would never see a manual transmission attached to its screaming V-8. The technology was too slow and outdated, the representative said.

That statement was a death rattle -- the skeleton hand gripping the cue-ball knob and shifting into history.

More than 91 percent of 2009 model-year cars sold in the United States were automatics, according to data from industry researcher Ward's Automotive Group. And while usually associated with meeker and weaker vehicles such as compacts and minivans, these days even most supercars use automated systems.

This is partly due to technology which takes the best from both worlds. "Automated manuals" are different from the traditional torque converter found in rental cars. Instead they have one or two clutches located internally.

Drivers are left with only a gas and brake pedal. The transmission can be left in automatic, or gear shifts may be actuated by shifters behind the steering wheel. Unlike that human-controlled process, single or double-clutch systems change gears in milliseconds, faster than the swipe of a samurai sword.

Of the supercars I've driven lately, including the Lamborghini LP 570-4 Superleggera, Lexus LFA, Bentley Continental Supersports and Mercedes-Benz SLS AMG, not one is available with a stick.

While these technological marvels will speed to 60 miles per hour more quickly, purists argue that they're less fun to drive. Maybe. The 7-speed double-clutch on that 458 Italia is brilliant, rivaled only by the spectacular smartness of the 7-speed on the SLS. Hitting 60 mph in 3.2 seconds in the Ferrari, there was no time to mourn -- I could only hang on.

A bit of good news for holdouts. In the last months I've also tested new cars with manuals, including a Porsche 911, Suzuki SX4, Shelby GT500, Kia Forte and the BMW 5 Series. Arguably, it made them all more fun on the open road. (Traffic jams are something else entirely.)

"Europeans tend to buy manuals on entry models, while Americans view it as an option for enthusiasts," said Willem Rombauts, product manager of the new BMW 5 Series.

In North America, 10 percent of those buying the most powerful 550i will opt for the six-speed manual, he said. The rest will match the top-tier technology like optional night vision with an 8-speed auto.

BMW's corporate little brother, Mini, remains bullish on manuals. According to product manager Vincent Kung, manuals account for 34 percent, the highest rate in the compact and sub-compact segment.

"Manuals lend a special connection to the car, and that's highly appealing to our customers," he said. "Looking at the next generation of the Cooper, we'll continue to see a significant place for the manual."

Technologies like the double-clutch automated manual also cost more, Kung added. Indeed, manuals have endured because they are inexpensive to make and are highly efficient because they have little internal drag -- the resistances within the engine -- offering good gas mileage.

That's changing. Some automatics now offer better gas mileage than their manual counterparts. As carmakers look to improve the efficiency of their fleets, that's big news.

"I think the disparity will continue to grow," said Craig Renneker, Ford's chief transmission engineer. "There are many things we can do to improve the efficiency of automatics, but manual transmissions are already close to optimal."

Renneker said he thinks that the new 2011 5.0-liter V-8 Mustang has one of the best manuals "on earth." (About half the car's buyers are expected to go for the six-speed stick.) "But at this point, we don't know what else to do to improve it," he said.


qq

[guseppe16]

I loathe those 'autostick' cars, but I guess it's a good option for those that want a car with an automatic but still have some option for fun. My current car has a manual transmission, and I hope to always have at least one car in the garage stay that way.

On a side note: best clutch/transmission combo I've ever driven is on a Honda S2000. It is almost telepathic.

[PBChappy]

I love my little mazdaspeed 3 and its 6speed manual.

[sjrtk]

I NEEEED a manual trans. The daily driver is automatic but my mule/truck is a granny gear 4 speed. It is like heaven to drive that beat up half worn out grumpy old mule.

[skife]

i hate flappy paddle gearshifts, the clutch and shifter really make you feel like part of the car.

[nerobro]

I'm a proud owner of a 2006 Mazda 6, v6. Manual. :-) I own exactly one automatic vehicle, and it's a peugeot 103 SP.

Flappy paddles done right are quite good. A flappy paddle done right, is a rare thing indeed.

If manuals are disappearing for DSG's i'm not going to cry to much.

It's the freaking "software manuals" you get in everything with an autotragic these days. Worse yet, typically they have software in them that stops the transmission from doing what you want, and still doing soft shifts when you're driving aggressively. Often slow, and LATE shifts.

Even "real" automatics aren't so bad when done right. The software package audi uses is very nice. and even firms up shifts when you're driving hard.

[going_home]

The standard transmission is here to stay.
Price will cause people to buy standards, even though the numbers sold are smaller.
Price a new Honda , Toyota, or Nissan car with standard and then with automatic.
Quite a difference in price.

;)

[leloup]

They will use price to force those that can't drive stick to pay a little more...kind of an excuss to charge.

For me, my car is an Aveo, manual, and the wife drives an automatic minivan. My philosophy - Automatic cars, you are just steering the car.
manual Transmission, you are driving the car.

Would you rather steer or drive?

[Fred]

Flappy Paddles are boring as hell.

I love my 6spd, and giggle if you think the MS3 has a nice shifter... drive a european car and you'll hate it.

On a side note I started teaching my girlfriend to drive a manual this week, she made it around the block without grinding any gears and only stalled it 3x! :clap:

[VailSkibum]

My Bottom line...
It's easier to smoke the tires w/ a stick.

[snoopay700]

I prefer a manual, for daily driving or for performance. It just seems a lot more challenging to me, and i noticed this happening a while ago. Luckily the one expensive car that i would even think about getting, the exige, is still manual to my knowledge.

[ProblemKinder]

I wanted a manual but settled for the electronic shifter because i fell in love with the mazda 6s i found in my price range. Someday ill have my manual...someday.

[elgalloblanco]

I miss my manual Chevy S-10 from time to time. That is until i remember evacuating for hurricane Rita and making a 50 mile trip in 16 hours. :cry:

[Tunaman]

Flappy Paddles are boring as hell.

I love my 6spd, and giggle if you think the MS3 has a nice shifter... drive a european car and you'll hate it.

On a side note I started teaching my girlfriend to drive a manual this week, she made it around the block without grinding any gears and only stalled it 3x! :clap:
You said it Fred! I have a 2009 Volkswagen Jetta TDI with the 2.0L Diesel with 6 speed Automatic. Test drive one and you will never look back.

[cockerpunk]

MS3 has a terrible manual transmission. clutch is super abrupt and very tight. the shifter is also boarderline too short throw.

couldn't be happier having bought the 2010 GTI over the MS3. GTI has about the best manual i've ever driven, which is acutally quite a lot of them over the years.

[Lohman446]

They will use price to force those that can't drive stick to pay a little more...kind of an excuss to charge.

For me, my car is an Aveo, manual, and the wife drives an automatic minivan. My philosophy - Automatic cars, you are just steering the car.
manual Transmission, you are driving the car.

Would you rather steer or drive?

Or because a manual transmission costs a lot less to engineer, build, and manufacture. Of course, I guess it could just be an excuse, but it could have something to do with actual cost effectiveness.

[FA22RaptorF22]

I daily drive a manual...and always will, even if I have to go to the ends of the earth to find or make another one in my old age....I will !


I cannot explain well enough how stupid it was...whoever the guy was that invented the automatic.

Here is their reasoning...from what I understand:

People: There isn't anything wrong with our transmission..but we want a new one!
Inventor: Alright, Lets make one that costs more but does the work for you.
People: Sounds good.
Inventor: It will boast worse fuel economy, break more often, be less fun, be heavier, remove the feeling of safety and control, and be much more complicated.

People: Great! We are all in!

Me: :ninja: If it ain't broke, don't fix it!

[nerobro]

I feel like i need to make an argument for the auto-tragic transmission. Because it bears repeating, I own exactly one vehicle with an automatic transmission, and that's my moped. I own six other vehicles, and they all have manual transmissions. My 2006 Mazda 6 was found specifically because it had a manual transmission and a v6.

The case for the automatic transmission
Automatic transmissions have many points that make them a good choice for many applications.

First is the torque converter. This viscous coupling that provides several benifits. First, is torque multiplication. As you near the stall speed of a torque converter, the output shaft can see as much as 3x the input shaft torque. This means you can run a taller first gear, and delay the 1-2 shift.

The torque converter also provides a disconnect between the transmission input shaft and the engine. This means that the vehicle can still be in gear, and providing tractive effort, without the vehicle being in motion. An example of where this is beneficial is sitting on a hill in traffic.

This also means you're not limited by engine idle speed for minimum forward speed. This is a big advantage in traffic, and for many low speed applications.

The torque converter is also a driveline fuse. shock loads on the drive wheels are not directly transmitted to the engine.

Automatic transmissions are generally built on planetary gearsets. These have a very big advantage when you consider the strength of the gearbox. Instead of applying force to the gearbox casing, it applies force to the ring gear, and spiders. And instead of applying force to one pair of gears, it's applied to four, six, or more gear tooth surfaces.

This is not a benifit that is exclusive to automatics, as there are some special application manual transmissions that use planetary gearsets, but they are rare.

Because automatics have separately engageable gearsets you can engage more than one. This means you can combine ratios to get "other" ratios.

Automatics are also consistent. Because they have an automatically controlled, or computer controlled valve body, the transmission will behave the same no matter who's driving. This leads to consistent results, and consistent maintenance needs. And consistent fuel economy. And if you're the racing sort, consistent 1/4 mile times.

Modern automatic transmissions also have low pump demands, so are nearing manual transmissions for energy losses.

Automatics rock. I also don't like them for daily driving, or having fun while driving. ;-)

[going_home]

Older Nissan pickup standard 5 speed.
I like it and have gotten used to it after not having anything but automatics for over 30 years.
But it sure was easier to talk on the phone, drink coffee, write, surf the net on me handy dandy smart phone, and drive, all at the same time.....when driving an automatic.

:rolleyes:

[Lohman446]

I daily drive a manual...and always will, even if I have to go to the ends of the earth to find or make another one in my old age....I will !


I cannot explain well enough how stupid it was...whoever the guy was that invented the automatic.

Here is their reasoning...from what I understand:

People: There isn't anything wrong with our transmission..but we want a new one!
Inventor: Alright, Lets make one that costs more but does the work for you.
People: Sounds good.
Inventor: It will boast worse fuel economy, break more often, be less fun, be heavier, remove the feeling of safety and control, and be much more complicated.

People: Great! We are all in!

Me: :ninja: If it ain't broke, don't fix it!

You do realize, in your "reasoning" that the model T transmission, aside from hydraulic controls, far closer resembled todays automatic than today's manual right?

[nerobro]

forget his reasoning. the Model t transmission uses planetary gears, bands, and a clutch.. much the same as a modern automatic. Just no torque converter.

[cockerpunk]

well there simply is no doubt that an automatic CAN be faster, more effienect and better then a manual transmission. the new dual clutch electronic manuals shift in 1/10 a second, and with the right shift points, dominate manual transmissions. there is also still a lot to be gained in terms of effienecy too. the primary reason why manuals were more effienect for so long was simply that they had more gears (5 vs 3 or4), which means closer to the effienecy point. and now with CVTs, those are just better in every possible way.

the sadness comes for me not becuase autos are pretty much better in every way, it comes to me becuase the driving experience to me, includes a manual transmission. just like its more fun to play paintball with a mech or pump gun, its just more fun to drive with a manual transmission. i don't really care that a DSG can boost my 0-60 time, i want a manual to feel a part of the car when driving it.

[skife]

well there simply is no doubt that an automatic CAN be faster, more effienect and better then a manual transmission. the new dual clutch electronic manuals shift in 1/10 a second, and with the right shift points, dominate manual transmissions. there is also still a lot to be gained in terms of effienecy too. the primary reason why manuals were more effienect for so long was simply that they had more gears (5 vs 3 or4), which means closer to the effienecy point. and now with CVTs, those are just better in every possible way.

the sadness comes for me not becuase autos are pretty much better in every way, it comes to me becuase the driving experience to me, includes a manual transmission. just like its more fun to play paintball with a mech or pump gun, its just more fun to drive with a manual transmission. i don't really care that a DSG can boost my 0-60 time, i want a manual to feel a part of the car when driving it.


if i were to throw together a drag car, automatic all the way.
same thing for a mud truck.

but for anything else, no thanks.

[snoopay700]

well there simply is no doubt that an automatic CAN be faster, more effienect and better then a manual transmission. the new dual clutch electronic manuals shift in 1/10 a second, and with the right shift points, dominate manual transmissions. there is also still a lot to be gained in terms of effienecy too. the primary reason why manuals were more effienect for so long was simply that they had more gears (5 vs 3 or4), which means closer to the effienecy point. and now with CVTs, those are just better in every possible way.

the sadness comes for me not becuase autos are pretty much better in every way, it comes to me becuase the driving experience to me, includes a manual transmission. just like its more fun to play paintball with a mech or pump gun, its just more fun to drive with a manual transmission. i don't really care that a DSG can boost my 0-60 time, i want a manual to feel a part of the car when driving it.
This is exactly my opinion on manuals, and a lot of others. This is really what i think companies should pay attention to, because most consumers don't care about performance because they aren't interested in racing. Hell, i am interested in racing but that's only because it's fun and it is no longer fun when i'm only pressing two pedals, it feels like driving a go kart.

[Lohman446]

forget his reasoning. the Model t transmission uses planetary gears, bands, and a clutch.. much the same as a modern automatic. Just no torque converter.

It always amuses me when people take a "road of knowledge" when going off about how things "used to be" and are wrong about how they used to be.

[nerobro]

jeremy clarkson managed 40mpg in an automatic, v8, a8. Obviously he wasn't going very fast, but he was going highway speeds most of his trip.

think about that.......

Now the benefit of a manual versus an automatic really doesn't come from selection of ratios. though it might, with a really piss poor set of ratios, and a poor torque converter match. the big benefits come from the computer between your ears. "YOU" know the amount of power you need available to you right now. "You" know that you don't need to downshift to get up the hill. And "You" know you can jump straight from the top of first gear, to 5th gear because you tore out of that stoplight and are doing 40mph already.

the corvettes had a 3-4 lockout for a long time, because using 3rd and 4th gear shot the fuel economy to Hades. that's definite evidence for "more ratios being better" falling apart. :-)

Be careful talking about DSG as automatics. They share none of the benefits of automatics, and all of the follies of a manual. and most of the benefits of a manual. But that's another hill of beans.

CVT's still suck. (my automatic.. has a cvt...)

[Lohman446]

jeremy clarkson managed 40mpg in an automatic, v8, a8. Obviously he wasn't going very fast, but he was going highway speeds most of his trip.

think about that.......

Now the benefit of a manual versus an automatic really doesn't come from selection of ratios. though it might, with a really piss poor set of ratios, and a poor torque converter match. the big benefits come from the computer between your ears. "YOU" know the amount of power you need available to you right now. "You" know that you don't need to downshift to get up the hill. And "You" know you can jump straight from the top of first gear, to 5th gear because you tore out of that stoplight and are doing 40mph already.

the corvettes had a 3-4 lockout for a long time, because using 3rd and 4th gear shot the fuel economy to Hades. that's definite evidence for "more ratios being better" falling apart. :-)

Be careful talking about DSG as automatics. They share none of the benefits of automatics, and all of the follies of a manual. and most of the benefits of a manual. But that's another hill of beans.

CVT's still suck. (my automatic.. has a cvt...)

The problem is most of the people who think they know, really don't

[Thordic]

My GF's car has a CVT. Talk about a weird driving experience.

I use an auto, have always used an auto, and have no plans to ever get a stick. I don't need more stuff to do while driving, and living in NJ I spend enough time in traffic that a stick would just be a hassle. Most dealerships around here barely carry any sticks to begin with, it seems like 90% of cars on a lot are autos around here.

[FA22RaptorF22]

It always amuses me when people take a "road of knowledge" when going off about how things "used to be" and are wrong about how they used to be.

Whoa, easy there. I never bothered looking that far back...and I will admit that I have no knowledge of the model T.

However, even the syncroless tranny's were good in their time. They still have applications today (crashbox / dogbox).

Thinking about this with a sane mind,
Doesn't it makes sense that the best transmission is one that is 1) Reliable and 2) made with the least amount of parts?

IMHO, that screams manual transmission.

[teufelhunden]

You guys are missing the point.

It's really tough to text and drive around town with a stick. Duh.

(That said, my knee steering is impeccable :p )

[nerobro]

Whoa, easy there. I never bothered looking that far back...and I will admit that I have no knowledge of the model T.

However, even the syncroless tranny's were good in their time. They still have applications today (crashbox / dogbox).

Thinking about this with a sane mind,
Doesn't it makes sense that the best transmission is one that is 1) Reliable and 2) made with the least amount of parts?

IMHO, that screams manual transmission.Go look up the model t transmission. You'll be amused ;-)

I think a modern 4-5 speed auto-tragic might actually beat out a modern manual for parts count. Between syncros, shims, snap rings, dogs, etc...

"low parts count" isn't always the best thing to sort this sort of thing on. As the automatic has more bearing surfaces, and doesn't produce side load on the shafts. That side load is what causes manual transmissions to fail. And DSGs... Automatics balance forces and keep everything contained. That does mean "if" they fail, they just eat themselves. Automatics don't really eat themselves very often without something else critical failing first.

[Lohman446]

Whoa, easy there. I never bothered looking that far back...and I will admit that I have no knowledge of the model T.

However, even the syncroless tranny's were good in their time. They still have applications today (crashbox / dogbox).

Thinking about this with a sane mind,
Doesn't it makes sense that the best transmission is one that is 1) Reliable and 2) made with the least amount of parts?

IMHO, that screams manual transmission.

I think you are overstating the reliability of a stick and understating the same of most autos. Some of the Jeep manual transmission were disastors if I recall correctly, and as such they made me a lot of money.

Don't get me wrong, manual transmissions have a place, but to state they are unequivically the best option, and the logic resulting in the auto was skewed is not accurate.

With the odd exception most automatic transmissions in todays vehicle are as reliable as a manual, and don't use a routine replacement wear item (clutch). That being said, even today's manual clutches last.

Chosing to drive a manual is a choice. It certainly does not speak of a higher degree of enlightenment. This thread pretty much proves that :p (yes, that emoticon was appropriate there)

My personal opinion is if it doesn't have at least a high and low range its not a real manual anyways :) .

[nerobro]

WE spotted a trucker!

[cockerpunk]

jeremy clarkson managed 40mpg in an automatic, v8, a8. Obviously he wasn't going very fast, but he was going highway speeds most of his trip.

think about that.......

Now the benefit of a manual versus an automatic really doesn't come from selection of ratios. though it might, with a really piss poor set of ratios, and a poor torque converter match. the big benefits come from the computer between your ears. "YOU" know the amount of power you need available to you right now. "You" know that you don't need to downshift to get up the hill. And "You" know you can jump straight from the top of first gear, to 5th gear because you tore out of that stoplight and are doing 40mph already.

the corvettes had a 3-4 lockout for a long time, because using 3rd and 4th gear shot the fuel economy to Hades. that's definite evidence for "more ratios being better" falling apart. :-)

Be careful talking about DSG as automatics. They share none of the benefits of automatics, and all of the follies of a manual. and most of the benefits of a manual. But that's another hill of beans.

CVT's still suck. (my automatic.. has a cvt...)

at the same time, the benfeit of the auto over the manual is the computer that runs it acutally knows how to the run the engine better then you do. the problem most autos have performance wise is that that they are tuned for fuel economy, so the shift points are much to low for sporty driving. this has been rectified somewhat by "sport" modes and other sch tuning systems.

but the simple fact is, that a computer is better at running the engine then you are, provided your goal, and the goal of the computer program are the same ;)

CVTs are a whole new world for cars. the abilty to run the engine at its max torque, max effienecy, and max power points through all the speeds the car will see makes them easily the best transmissions out there period.at least theoretically. it will take several generations of them in cars to deal with unique problems, but CVTs are here to stay my friends. yes, this will make driving even more boring, however it will make your car more effienect or faster.

[Lohman446]

I think the ball is in the air on CVTs. They are a fairly old concept that has not yet proven itself in the automotive world. We will see but I would not be surprised to see something better find its way in before they are "perfected" to the point of being accepted by the majority. I haven't seen them in anything but the lowest end of the automotive spectrum myself, and I wonder if there is a reason for that.

[nerobro]

CVT's just have torque handling problems now. But even when that is solved they'd still have the auto-tragic issue where the software has no idea what you need to have happen. And the belt ones can't handle back torque.

That's why you only find them in the "low end" cars. If a car has any sort of performance it will smoke a CVT . (That's a problem with my moped too.. if any water hits the belt it will spin the drive pully)

I don't see the manual transmission dieing for a while yet. :-)

[cockerpunk]

I think the ball is in the air on CVTs. They are a fairly old concept that has not yet proven itself in the automotive world. We will see but I would not be surprised to see something better find its way in before they are "perfected" to the point of being accepted by the majority. I haven't seen them in anything but the lowest end of the automotive spectrum myself, and I wonder if there is a reason for that.

CVTs will do just fine. the design is 50 years old on smaller engines, there isn't any reason why they wont solve the design issues they had 5 years ago (already for the most part solved). CVTs are really the solution to the whole problem of a transmission in the first place, no more power band, no more VVT to try to flatten the torque curve, just run at the efficiency point, and you will have the most efficient engine, run at the peak HP point, and you will have the highest performance point. solves the turbo problem, which means more efficient power.

CVTs are the future, make no mistake about it.

[Dark Side]

I lean more towards the manual transmission myself. I feel more a part of the machine than with an automatic. But the only manual vehicle that is in the household is my car which very few people will ever drive. Not for the fact that they can or can not but for the fact of what it is. You just don't come across 67 Mustang Fastbacks very often.

[Lohman446]

CVTs will do just fine. the design is 50 years old on smaller engines, there isn't any reason why they wont solve the design issues they had 5 years ago (already for the most part solved). CVTs are really the solution to the whole problem of a transmission in the first place, no more power band, no more VVT to try to flatten the torque curve, just run at the efficiency point, and you will have the most efficient engine, run at the peak HP point, and you will have the highest performance point. solves the turbo problem, which means more efficient power.

CVTs are the future, make no mistake about it.

See, I see other options that could result in the same goal. Hydrostatic ala large equipment. True hydraulic drive ala the old Case small system. I think that there are other options that might end up being more useable than the CVT system, or at least viable alternatives if CVT proves to have too many issues to overcome. Maybe on a CVT, I guess I am not as certain as you. Then again, when you say CVT I assume belt or chain driven CVT, you might mean any number of ways to get to CVT.

The other issue is time. Transmission drive (in most vehicles) is likely not going to be around forever. I beleive that we will see, before too long, "hybrid" gas engine with electric motors at the wheels become the preferred method of drive as efficiency is improved over time. This is what will shorten the "window" or improvement and acceptance of alternative transmission drive systems.

[FA22RaptorF22]

I think you are overstating the reliability of a stick and understating the same of most autos.

How does one overstate the reliability of a manual transmission? When used in the proper way, they are very reliable. Its when you abuse them that they are prone to failure. That is also why clutches get replaced often.

And don't use a routine replacement wear item (clutch).

Its not a routine item. Most people who have owned a manual from day one of purchase never changed the clutch to 200 - 250, 000 miles and some not even the tranny fluid.

My personal opinion is if it doesn't have at least a high and low range its not a real manual anyways :) .

Well yeah, you are right there


I don't know. To me, a clutch is a necessity. It gives you a sense of confidence because you know that you can get the car moving...one way or another. That is not necessarily true of autos.

With an auto, you have to hope that it will go into gear....and if its broken...it may very well leave you stranded....whereas with a clutch...you can get moving even on a dead battery...and even if the clutch is dead...you can still drive.

I do prefer one main dry clutch to many small wet clutches.


Go look up the model t transmission. You'll be amused ;-)


Dude I did...and that is so cool! Directly bolted to crankshaft....so awesome.

[nerobro]

I prefer one wet clutch. Ideally with eight or ten plates...............

[Lohman446]

I don't know. To me, a clutch is a necessity. It gives you a sense of confidence because you know that you can get the car moving...one way or another. That is not necessarily true of autos.

With an auto, you have to hope that it will go into gear....and if its broken...it may very well leave you stranded....whereas with a clutch...you can get moving even on a dead battery...and even if the clutch is dead...you can still drive.

I do prefer one main dry clutch to many small wet clutches.



Dude I did...and that is so cool! Directly bolted to crankshaft....so awesome.


Really? What about a broken mainshaft or countershaft, or bad bearings on the support (it happens)? Stranded. Manuals break, I rebuild a lot of them on the bench, granted they are easier than an automatic, but still. This concept that they will never leave you stranded is misinformed.

Choice. The right choice for you, probably. The choice of the "more enlightened" hardly. There is a reason the engineers of major performance companies are going to automatic style transmissions.

[Fred]

Audi offered a CVT transmission in the A4... I want to say the B6 years... never really followed it but the tuners had a hell of a time keeping them from going splode.

[Lohman446]

Audi offered a CVT transmission in the A4... I want to say the B6 years... never really followed it but the tuners had a hell of a time keeping them from going splode.

Ditto Honda in the mid 90's, though it really wasn't a true CVT from what I could tell (It had shift points). I never opened one up, they concerned me.