manual or automatic?

On Fri, 29 Jul 2005 17:41:31 GMT, "k. ote" <kote.TakeThisOut@example.com> wrote:

>This is the part where you describe exactly what you mean by
>"incompetently." What, precisely, do people do to their manual
>trannies?

People who use their clutches incompetently ride their clutches, viz.,
they don't fully depress or release the clutches when engaging the
gears. They also frequently depress the clutches at higher speeds (30
mph or so) and leave them depressed while braking rather than engaging
the appropriate gears. Another fun way to ruin a clutch is to rock
the car at a stop light by partially releasing the clutch and
depressing the gas just shy of engaging the gear rather than fully
depressing the clutch and waiting for the light to change before
releasing the clutch and fully engaging first gear. Just a few
examples.
 >> Stay informed about: manual or automatic? 

I assume that clutch can only have chance to be ruined during engaging....
like depress half-way. but when fully depressed during brake, the clutch
plate ain't touched to anything, how come there still could be wear if you
fully depressed?!
"KLS" <xymergy RemoveThis @suds.com> wrote in message
news:u14le15aesheshaqdblg4upmlj73vbsf1d@4ax.com...
> On Fri, 29 Jul 2005 17:41:31 GMT, "k. ote" <kote RemoveThis @example.com> wrote:
>
>>This is the part where you describe exactly what you mean by
>>"incompetently." What, precisely, do people do to their manual
>>trannies?
>
> People who use their clutches incompetently ride their clutches, viz.,
> they don't fully depress or release the clutches when engaging the
> gears. They also frequently depress the clutches at higher speeds (30
> mph or so) and leave them depressed while braking rather than engaging
> the appropriate gears. Another fun way to ruin a clutch is to rock
> the car at a stop light by partially releasing the clutch and
> depressing the gas just shy of engaging the gear rather than fully
> depressing the clutch and waiting for the light to change before
> releasing the clutch and fully engaging first gear. Just a few
> examples.
 >> Stay informed about: manual or automatic? 

On Sat, 30 Jul 2005 01:36:31 -0400, "grape" <j@s> wrote:

>I assume that clutch can only have chance to be ruined during engaging....
>like depress half-way. but when fully depressed during brake, the clutch
>plate ain't touched to anything, how come there still could be wear if you
>fully depressed?!

It won't. His other explanations of excessive clutch wear are correct,
however.

On the other hand, it is perfectly possible to destroy a clutch on a
WRX without doing any of these things, but simply by launching
enthusiastically on a regular basis. This, rather than generating
wheelspin and rubber smoke as with a conventional 2wd car, will fill
the car with the acrid stench of burning clutch material.

Correct technique if you want the clutch to last is to get the car
rolling whilst just on boost and release the clutch before flooring
ithe throttle. This way, you will disappear into the middle distance
just as quickly, but with far less fuss and at far less cost in the
longer term.

As I said previously, lots of people get through the clutch on their
first Rex in as little as 25,000 miles. Those of us who know what we
are doing can make them last 65,000 miles of mixed driving. If one
spent all one's time on freeways, no doubt it could be made to last
longer......or if one drove like an old lady all the time, but then
what's the point of owning a Rex <g>.

David Betts
davidb.DeleteThis@motorsport.org.uk
 >> Stay informed about: manual or automatic? 

This message is not archived
 >> Stay informed about: manual or automatic? 

"DK" <dk.TakeThisOut@no.email.thankstospam.net> wrote in message
news:dcfc68$lih$3@news.doit.wisc.edu...
> In article <ecvge1hk0da8f8pjka383mfds23kcsuad9.TakeThisOut@4ax.com>,
> davidb.TakeThisOut@motorsport.org.uk wrote:
>>On Wed, 27 Jul 2005 12:53:18 -0400, "grape" <j@s> wrote:
>>
>>>plan to own a impreza 2.5rs wagon, never drove a manual before, but 'd
>>>like
>>>to.
>>>
>>>Friends who owned a manual car warned me that in daily commutes, your leg
>>>will be extremely painful if got jammed in traffic... that hesitated me
>>>to
>>>buy a manual car, is that true???
>>
>>No. Anyone who gets leg pain from using a clutch is desperately unfit.
>>Anybody with normal levels of fitness, ie capable of walking a few
>>miles, will have no problems.
>
> Well, as someone who drives manual and loves it, I'd partially
> disagree: Yes, having pain from using a clutch is a sign if a
> pre-existing serious medical condition BUT it does get extremely
> tedious and boring to use clutch in the 20+ min jams. I rarely
> have to endure it but if I were, I'd buy automatic.
>
>>>also, is pre-owned WRX a good option? the price is only around
>>>$21,000(CDN)
>>>where new WRX is about 35000.
>
> Good deal if the car is in great shape.
>
> DK

I've been driving manuals since 1969, so I think I qualify as experienced.

The only time I got leg pain from a clutch was with a 1984 BMW 318i, while
driving through heavy traffic at a German border crossing. Back in those
days, border crossings - even between friendly countries - involved serious
examination of one's passport and questions about one's reason for crossing.
I remember being worried that the border guards might see my leg shaking and
wonder if something was amiss.

Probably the sturdiest clutch I've ever owned was on a 1976 Pinto.
Everything else on the car was falling apart or rusting away, but the clutch
survived a lot of friends and relatives taking their first lessons with a
manual, and was still going strong when I traded the car in.

I've had four Subaru - all with manual. The 1984 GL was noisy, cramped,
underpowered, difficult to handle (no power steering), and rust-prone. But
there was something comfortable about it, like an old pair of boots that you
just fit into so well. Even with years of hard use, the clutch did fine. I
sold it to my BIL who used it to deliver mail. He drove it until the engine
was worn out beyond repair, but the clutch was still doing fine. My 1990
Legacy and 1996 Outback both needed new clutches before they hit 60K miles.
I think I can confidently say this was not the result of being driven
improperly. My 2003 Outback seems to be doing well with 40K miles. Maybe the
hydraulic clutches are better that way.

I just got back from a two-week vacation in the UK. I drove a Ford Focus
over there. You tend to have a lot of things on your mind when trying to
adjust to driving on the other side of the road, but the car was reassuring
and responsive. Getting into reverse seemed to be more of a challenge than
usual - it often needed double-clutching to get the gears to mesh - but
everything else was good. When I got back to the States, I rented a Taurus
for the trip back from the airport. This was a terrifying experience. It was
big, it gave me no sense of where I was on the road, and the transmission
seemed like it was just choosing gears at random.

As a practical matter, I have to concede that there's no good reason to own
a manual anymore. Automatics (my own experience with the Taurus
notwithstanding) are more reliable, more economical, and probably cost less
to own. I've been through the routine with dealers so many times. When
buying: "Oh, so you want a manual. That will be hard to find. It's going to
cost you.." When selling: "Oh, so you have a manual. That will be hard to
sell. It's going to cost you." In spite of it all, I'll keep driving manuals
until either they stop making them or I'm too uncoordinated to handle them.
I only hope that they're still around when my kids start driving.
 >> Stay informed about: manual or automatic? 

"grape" <j@s> wrote in message news:cpKdnXzOeLdiJnrfRVn-gQ@mycybernet.net...
> plan to own a impreza 2.5rs wagon, never drove a manual before, but 'd like to.
>
> Friends who owned a manual car warned me that in daily commutes, your leg will be
> extremely painful if got jammed in traffic... that hesitated me to buy a manual
> car, is that true???
>
> also, is pre-owned WRX a good option? the price is only around $21,000(CDN) where
> new WRX is about 35000.

It depends where you are. My current car is an automatic in So. Calif with lots of
stop and go traffic even on the freeways the auto is much easier. I can control the
speed of the car from stopping to moving with the motion of one foot. The right hand
is always free to enjoy your spouse instead of the stick shift.

You can get used to the manual transmission and in some instances it has an
advantage, but once you try the auto transmission,at least here in S. Cal, you don't
want to go back.

Adam
 >> Stay informed about: manual or automatic? 

there are a few reason why I'd like to own a manual..
firstly, I've heard it's almost matianance-free, there are no fragile parts
like an auto tranny has.... people told me you don't have to worry about the
tranny in the car life time.

2ndly, it 's gass economic. auto tranny eats up gas too quick..

3rdly, I always liked machanics and me likes to play around with all kinds
of things...(my camry has been treated almost like a manual.), and I liked
sports, gears, and circuits, also I used to be an amateur athlete so my legs
are at least strong enough to tolerent the stop&go traffic with clutch.

the last reason is that it's a bit fun to drive, even though I don't like
race or whatsorta of *fun*.
> I've been driving manuals since 1969, so I think I qualify as experienced.
>
> The only time I got leg pain from a clutch was with a 1984 BMW 318i, while
> driving through heavy traffic at a German border crossing. Back in those
> days, border crossings - even between friendly countries - involved
> serious examination of one's passport and questions about one's reason for
> crossing. I remember being worried that the border guards might see my leg
> shaking and wonder if something was amiss.
>
> Probably the sturdiest clutch I've ever owned was on a 1976 Pinto.
> Everything else on the car was falling apart or rusting away, but the
> clutch survived a lot of friends and relatives taking their first lessons
> with a manual, and was still going strong when I traded the car in.
>
> I've had four Subaru - all with manual. The 1984 GL was noisy, cramped,
> underpowered, difficult to handle (no power steering), and rust-prone. But
> there was something comfortable about it, like an old pair of boots that
> you just fit into so well. Even with years of hard use, the clutch did
> fine. I sold it to my BIL who used it to deliver mail. He drove it until
> the engine was worn out beyond repair, but the clutch was still doing
> fine. My 1990 Legacy and 1996 Outback both needed new clutches before they
> hit 60K miles. I think I can confidently say this was not the result of
> being driven improperly. My 2003 Outback seems to be doing well with 40K
> miles. Maybe the hydraulic clutches are better that way.
>
> I just got back from a two-week vacation in the UK. I drove a Ford Focus
> over there. You tend to have a lot of things on your mind when trying to
> adjust to driving on the other side of the road, but the car was
> reassuring and responsive. Getting into reverse seemed to be more of a
> challenge than usual - it often needed double-clutching to get the gears
> to mesh - but everything else was good. When I got back to the States, I
> rented a Taurus for the trip back from the airport. This was a terrifying
> experience. It was big, it gave me no sense of where I was on the road,
> and the transmission seemed like it was just choosing gears at random.
>
> As a practical matter, I have to concede that there's no good reason to
> own a manual anymore. Automatics (my own experience with the Taurus
> notwithstanding) are more reliable, more economical, and probably cost
> less to own. I've been through the routine with dealers so many times.
> When buying: "Oh, so you want a manual. That will be hard to find. It's
> going to cost you.." When selling: "Oh, so you have a manual. That will be
> hard to sell. It's going to cost you." In spite of it all, I'll keep
> driving manuals until either they stop making them or I'm too
> uncoordinated to handle them. I only hope that they're still around when
> my kids start driving.
>
 >> Stay informed about: manual or automatic? 

Rick Courtright wrote:
> Tom Reingold wrote:
>
>
>>clutch. Most automatics don't ever need replacement.
>
>
> Hi,
>
> You're excluding American autos? I've known a lot of Ford and Chevy
> owners who might disagree with you.
>
> Rick


Oh. I didn't know that. Good reason not to buy one of those brands then,
huh?

Tom
 >> Stay informed about: manual or automatic? 

Speaking of all this clutch wear, my 16 year old daughter is about to
learn to drive. I have a 2000 Subaru Legacy L wagon, and my wife's car
is a 1998 Honda Civic hatchback. Both have manual transmissions. Which
clutch is my daughter more likely to trash? And which repair is likely
to be costlier?

The Honda is rated at 106 hp. It's a light car. The clutch feels light,
but given the engine's low power and the car's low weight, the clutch
may be durable.

Thanks.

Tom
 >> Stay informed about: manual or automatic? 

grape wrote:
>>Used Subarus are also a bit risky due to the problems they had
>>with clutches, head gaskets and piston slap. New models are
>>supposted to be better (I'm counting on it).
>
>
>
> err.... so it's risky to own a Sub in general? I've heard a blowing
> headgasket is expensive.
>
>


Every car has its Achilles' heal.

Tom
 >> Stay informed about: manual or automatic? 

Rent a manual trans for the first day of those lessons. After that, go with
the Honda.

-John O
 >> Stay informed about: manual or automatic? 

In article <TpCdnQ5TGrEcyXHfRVn-vQ.TakeThisOut@mycybernet.net>, grape <j@s> wrote:
>there are a few reason why I'd like to own a manual..
>firstly, I've heard it's almost matianance-free, there are no fragile parts
>like an auto tranny has.... people told me you don't have to worry about the
>tranny in the car life time.

Not true. A manual transmission (like most other things on cars) requires
maintenance. For example, the clutch in my Subaru is currently in need of
replacement of its hydraulic fluid.

Also, manual transmissions can also have fragile parts, depending on how
they're built and designed. Two common failures I know of with manual
transmissions involve gear synchros and the gears themselves (typically
2nd gear - though I don't know why that is).

As for not having to worry about the transmission for the car's lifetime,
I'd say it's more common that transmissions that are treated nicely last
for good long times while those that are "abused" fail more quickly.
Whether the transmission is automatic or manual has nothing to do with
this.

>2ndly, it 's gass economic. auto tranny eats up gas too quick..

While this was true back in the day, today's electronically-controlled
transmissions do a much better job of minimizing this. So, keeping in
mind that there are still cars sold without electronically-controlled
transmissions, I'd say there is no longer a real reason to choose a
manual transmission over an automatic solely based on fuel economy.

>3rdly, I always liked machanics and me likes to play around with all kinds
>of things...(my camry has been treated almost like a manual.), and I liked
>sports, gears, and circuits, also I used to be an amateur athlete so my legs
>are at least strong enough to tolerent the stop&go traffic with clutch.
>
>the last reason is that it's a bit fun to drive, even though I don't like
>race or whatsorta of *fun*.

Agreed.

Eugene Moon
 >> Stay informed about: manual or automatic? 

In article <3l71qsF11f5dmU1.DeleteThis@individual.net>,
Tom Reingold <tlr.usenet.0525.DeleteThis@spambob.net> wrote:
>Speaking of all this clutch wear, my 16 year old daughter is about to
>learn to drive. I have a 2000 Subaru Legacy L wagon, and my wife's car
>is a 1998 Honda Civic hatchback. Both have manual transmissions. Which
>clutch is my daughter more likely to trash? And which repair is likely
>to be costlier?
>
>The Honda is rated at 106 hp. It's a light car. The clutch feels light,
>but given the engine's low power and the car's low weight, the clutch
>may be durable.

I'd say you answered your own question.

I can't really say that I know which repair would cost more, but I'm
going to take a stab at it and guess the Subaru because I'm assuming
there would be more labor involved because of the AWD. Since YMMV and
all that, I think you'd be best off just hitting a local shop and getting
quotes for both cars.

Eugene Moon
 >> Stay informed about: manual or automatic?