Why Manual Transmissions are superior

>Only automatics will *never* ever get nearly as simple as the elegant simplicity of the standard 5 speed manuals. <

*5* speed? Is that some new fangled thing? All my manuals were 4-speed,
and I damn well learned to like it. In fact, if you revved it up enough
at a stop, you could start off in 2nd speed instead of 1st, so really
you were only using 2-3-4 speeds.

wrote:
> <<<<Actually, automatic
> transmissions now days are far simpler mechanicly than the ones in the
> past>>>>
>
>
> Only automatics will *never* ever get nearly as simple as the elegant
> simplicity of the standard 5 speed manuals.
>
> How many kids in Iraq had to die so you can drive around with your
> slush box? Slush boxes have killed many people young and old as whole
> cities were leveled to the ground to get more oil for all of your slush
> box cars that consume far more gasoline than if all of those slush box
> cars were standard shifts instead. Not only that but your slush boxes
> need the *petroleum/oil* slush replaced every 20,000 miles. It's a lot
> of oil contained inside too. WAY more oil than the small amount that a
> standard shift box uses. Plus the standard shift doesn't need oil
> changes NEAR as often to begin with.
>
> Not only are you arrogant, but you have also shown your ignorance.

Speaking of showing ignorance... The old 'slush box' thing went out
back by the 80s at least. Modern autos have total lockup with only a
bit of slip during shifts. There is no realistic mpg advantage to
either one when driven for economy.

Harry K

> The grade sensor doesn't cost much, I'm sure.

We in the auto industry try to save *PENNIES* on each piece, because
when you multiply that by 15 million units, it adds up to real money.

When I was back at Chrysler a few years ago, they had a program that
rewarded employees for coming up with cost reduction ideas.

#1 Slush box means the same damn thing as automatic tranny.

#2 Just because slush boxes now have locking torque converters doesn't
mean that they are no longer slush boxes.

As it stands, it is you who are the ignoramous.

#1 Slush box means the same damn thing as automatic tranny.

#2 Just because slush boxes now have locking torque converters doesn't
mean that they are no longer slush boxes.

As it stands, it is you who are the ignoramous.


THIS WAS IN RESPONSE TO:


<<<<Speaking of showing ignorance... The old 'slush box' thing went
out
back by the 80s at least. Modern autos have total lockup with only a
bit of slip during shifts. There is no realistic mpg advantage to
either one when driven for economy.

Harry K >>>>

"Magnulus" > wrote in message
. ..
>
> > wrote in message
> oups.com...
>> You have an auto matic trans in your Volkswagen?! What a sacralige.
>
> What's a sacralige about it? I don't drive manuals. The same is true
> with most Americans. And FWIW, the automatic Volkswagens are just fine,
> thank you.
>
> The grade sensor doesn't cost much, I'm sure. Actually, automatic
> transmissions now days are far simpler mechanicly than the ones in the
> past,
> since they are now computer controlled.
>

a clutch is a heck of a lot cheaper to repair than a malfunctioning
automatic trans.

I've had bad luck with every brand of auto trans I ever had. They fail
mysteriously and often catastrophically.

And, MTs are just more intersting and fun to drive than autos IMO.

Finally someone agrees with me.

Driving a car with an automatic slush box is not driving.

It's not about driving the car; It's about *being* the car.


<<<<a clutch is a heck of a lot cheaper to repair than a malfunctioning
automatic trans.

I've had bad luck with every brand of auto trans I ever had. They fail
mysteriously and often catastrophically.

And, MTs are just more intersting and fun to drive than autos IMO. >>>>

wrote:
> #1 Slush box means the same damn thing as automatic tranny.
>
> #2 Just because slush boxes now have locking torque converters doesn't
> mean that they are no longer slush boxes.
>
> As it stands, it is you who are the ignoramous.

I suggest you actually do some reading and research on manual vs auto
rather than relying on sophmore BS sessions. Most of the stuff you
post about autos is right out of HS BS sessions with people just
learning to drive and urban legends from the 60s.

Manuals are fun to drive in a car that is fun to drive. They totally
suck in the average passenger car in congested traffic.

Harry K

Harry K wrote:
>
>
> Speaking of showing ignorance... The old 'slush box' thing went out
> back by the 80s at least. Modern autos have total lockup with only a
> bit of slip during shifts. There is no realistic mpg advantage to
> either one when driven for economy.

When I converted my car from auto to manual, the mileage
improved by 15% immediately. Also, for motorway driving,
overdrive in the auto was a longer ratio than 5th in
the manual. How do you explain that?

This mans got a point here. Autos slush boxes are real gas guzzlers.
They aught to be banned from being sold. If you are too lazy to shift
gears, THAN DON'T DRIVE! Stay off the road!!! I don't want some lazy
dork with the slush box driving near me. Such idiot drivers are lazy
and inattentive.



<<<<When I converted my car from auto to manual, the mileage
improved by 15% immediately. Also, for motorway driving,
overdrive in the auto was a longer ratio than 5th in
the manual. How do you explain that?>>>>