[Tpeterson]

I've been skipshifting occasionally for years also.Haven't noticed any negative effects. I did notice the Honda bulletin also mentioned skip downshifting at high RPM's .Since I rev match when doing this,which I do more than skip upshifting, I would guess that would eliminate any abuse of the synchros.

[Viffermike]

Ah yes: I have fond, fond memories of the ones put out by Chilton. Some pages of the one I had for my college car ('74 Beetle) were so oil- and grease-stained they were pretty much unreadable. Sadly, in this day and age of ECU-controlled this and that (not to mention DIY sections of forums such as this one), having a manual doesn't make a whole lot of ... ohhh .... wait ...

... D'oh!



Manuals are fun. But they are obsolete on most vehicles with more than two wheels. Sowwee!

[XutvJet]

Originally Posted by amw896

I don't know, to me it seems that automatics are just a tiny fraction faster but way more boring to drive.

When I was younger, I was way more concerned about buying the fastest version of the model I wanted. Now I'm far more interested in shear driving enjoyment.

Take note on this site about how many wish they went 6mt instead of 8at and no one with a 6mt wishes they went with a 8at. Same thing is played out on all the other forums I'm on.

[Liquidpaper]

I don't think anyone is really making the argument anymore that a manual transmission is faster than an automatic (double clutch, sequential, or just a torque converter) or better in any quantitative way. It simply isn't, and it never will be again.

But that kind of misses the point. Yes, your car will be faster, get better gas mileage, be easier to drive, and be less likely to explode due to user error (money$hift). But for the types of cars that we are talking about here (sports/performance cars), does that really matter?

People don't buy a $1 million hyper car or even a lowly M235i for any practical reason -- you would do just as well buying an economy car with a 4-banger and get better gas mileage (or an electric car, location permitting). The argument for an autobox in a performance/sports car is purely quantitative (and its a strong argument). However, the reason someone purchases that kind of car sort of defies logic -- its not based on quantitative reasoning at all. Its based on how it makes you feel as a driver (or parking super-hard at your local cars and coffee). If the manual makes you feel better, then it is superior. If not, then not. It is as simple as that.

It doesn't matter if these cars get better gas mileage with an auto-box because, lets face it, they aren't eco-warrior cars anyway, and its not like manual cars get crap mileage -- the marginal increase in efficiency is rather small. Yeah, the car is straight up faster with an auto-box, but again, for some people (me included) it just doesn't matter -- the engagement in doing it yourself outweighs the extra speed you would get by having the car shift.

I am a technophile. I like iDrive. I like being able to send directions to my car from my phone. I like backup cameras. I like navigation. I like all of the tech crap that every car manufacturer shoves into cars now and days. On the whole, it makes my life better. On the other hand, my last car was a GTI with the DSG box. It's a quick shifting gearbox -- really quick. Much, much quicker than I could possibly shift with a manual. But, I don't care. It was boring to me. Part of the reason I got rid of the car was I thought it was boring to drive without a manual.

Save the manuals.

[stealthwang]

within a decade the only new car you'll be able to get with a manual will be extremely niche retro throwback products, along the lines of Spyker and the like.

[Kolyan2k]

Even SMG2 was faster most of the time then manual. No surprises here

[krhodes1]

Originally Posted by nvmaddog

None sadly, and it really sucks.

NASCAR, but those hardly count as "modern". But ultimately, I could not care less. I am not out to win races, I am out to maximize my driving enjoyment. And that does not include automatics of any kind. I have yet to drive an automatic that did not annoy me eventually. At best they are unobtrusively boring, at worst they are exceedingly irritating.

[B_Rice]

I'm stick shift for life, but I know dcts and automatics are both faster and more efficient by a large margin compared to rowing your own gears.

[krhodes1]

Originally Posted by stealthwang

within a decade the only new car you'll be able to get with a manual will be extremely niche retro throwback products, along the lines of Spyker and the like.

Which will save me a fair amount of money in car payments!

[Hops128i]

The simplicity is also a plus of a manual transmission, they don't having cooling issues, and are just more reliable (of course providing you're rowing them right!).

I'm little disappointed with the lack of manuals in the 228i and M235i. Given the f22 like the e82, seems to have the small rwd coupe niche almost to itself, you'd think there would be more. The camaro, mustang, brz, mx5 all have so many more.

[Xiaoxi]

Started manual a little over a year ago and can never go back.

[krhodes1]

Originally Posted by B_Rice

I'm stick shift for life, but I know dcts and automatics are both faster and more efficient by a large margin compared to rowing your own gears.

Faster, yes, most definitely. More efficient... Maybe. Definitely so on the highly artificial EPA test. In the real world? With me driving? I doubt it. The big issue is that in the real world, if you need to accelerate a bit it is almost impossible to do it without the auto downshifting which uses more fuel. They do better on the highway steady state in many cases simply because the gearing is taller - if the gearing was the same so would be the highway economy. And not really a dramatic difference either way.

[raleedy]

Originally Posted by krhodes1

Faster, yes, most definitely. More efficient... Maybe. Definitely so on the highly artificial EPA test. In the real world? With me driving? I doubt it. The big issue is that in the real world, if you need to accelerate a bit it is almost impossible to do it without the auto downshifting which uses more fuel. They do better on the highway steady state in many cases simply because the gearing is taller - if the gearing was the same so would be the highway economy. And not really a dramatic difference either way.

It sounds like you may not have spent a lot of time in a zf8-equipped car. Even with the N20 engine, it is not quick to downshift, given the flatness of the torque curve. If I want to drop a gear or two quickly in my F10, I have to move the lever left first.

Not that I'm defending the zf8 -- my new 228i is a 6-speed and I like it a lot. But it will never get the mileage the zf8 gets, especially on the highway.

[krhodes1]

Originally Posted by raleedy

It sounds like you may not have spent a lot of time in a zf8-equipped car. Even with the N20 engine, it is not quick to downshift, given the flatness of the torque curve. If I want to drop a gear or two quickly in my F10, I have to move the lever left first.

Not that I'm defending the zf8 -- my new 228i is a 6-speed and I like it a lot. But it will never get the mileage the zf8 gets, especially on the highway.

A solid month plus of rentals of various 228is and 328is with that transmission. So I have driven plenty of them. With the manual, I can be in sixth gear at 30mph and accelerate seamlessly to whatever speed I want without dropping a gear (even in my relatively torqueless N52 for that matter). Won't happen with the ZF unless you want to accelerate at 1mph/minute or something.

There is nothing magical about how the ZF does slightly better on the highway - it is taller geared. If sixth in the manual was the same as 8th in the ZF, with the same final drive they would get the same highway mpg. If anything, in the real world the manual would then likely beat the automatic on the highway. Why BMW puts such short top gears in these cars baffles me - a friend's new 1.4T Jetta turns nearly 1000rpm less at 85 in top gear than my M235i, and is still plenty flexible in gear. The acceleration of the M235i in sixth is really kind of ridiculous - it should simply be taller geared - what's the point of a manual if you never actually have to shift the thing?

[krhodes1]

Originally Posted by Hops128i

The simplicity is also a plus of a manual transmission, they don't having cooling issues, and are just more reliable (of course providing you're rowing them right!).

I'm little disappointed with the lack of manuals in the 228i and M235i. Given the f22 like the e82, seems to have the small rwd coupe niche almost to itself, you'd think there would be more. The camaro, mustang, brz, mx5 all have so many more.

Don't blame BMW, blame the buyers. I see it around here again and again - oh, I like manuals but I drive in traffic so I got an automatic. Waaaah! If you want one and there isn't one on the local lot - order one. Do Euro Delivery for the cherry on top!

[Kolyan2k]

I personally don't care about MPG numbers my car gets, faster drag times are cool and ability to get the perfect shift and gear everytime, but manual is obviously more rewarding to drive. If I had automatic, I would probably end up using it in auto mode and forget about paddle shifters. I have IS350 and dont have a slight desire to drive it in manual mode.

[amw896]

Originally Posted by Kolyan2k

I personally don't care about MPG numbers my car gets, faster drag times are cool and ability to get the perfect shift and gear everytime, but manual is obviously more rewarding to drive. If I had automatic, I would probably end up using it in auto mode and forget about paddle shifters. I have IS350 and dont have a slight desire to drive it in manual mode.

Funny. I had a second gen IS250 for almost 4 years and thought I needed more power so I upgraded to a 350, automatic of course. Even with the power boost and slick shifting auto it was amazing how quickly I was bored of that car. My 235 replaced it in about a year :

[Beartato]

Originally Posted by red-sauerkraut

Furthermore, a Manual does not "Hold Boost" through it's shifts, like a AUTO does !

If you don't know how to drive, yeah.

[siwo]

FWIW, I bought a 6 speed manual transmission to keep it alive. I had to do a special order. Not to mention, no dealerships stock RWD either. It's gonna be fun.

[dalrx]

My friend always owned or drove manuals. His first bmw ended up being a 428i coupe but was zf 8 speed. He couldn't keep telling me how boring it was...so 18 mths later he now owns a m235 6 speed and all is well. I'd never do auto unless forced to....hence no audio or merc for me.

[Viffermike]

Originally Posted by krhodes1

Don't blame BMW, blame the buyers. I see it around here again and again - oh, I like manuals but I drive in traffic so I got an automatic. Waaaah! If you want one and there isn't one on the local lot - order one. Do Euro Delivery for the cherry on top!

This is not entirely true. Manuals still outsell automatics in most countries in Europe on vehicles on which both are available. So that argument kind of goes out the window on a global scale -- and manuals are being phased out globally, not just in the U.S.

This is a multifaceted decision that's primarily economic, with governmental, environmental, and sociological factors. The point one poster made about lessening development costs by only offering one tranny is a really good one in this day and age of hypercompetition, razor-thin margins, and parts sharing between models and marques -- as is the fact that autos are more complex and cost that much more to repair/replace, making it a potential source of revenue for an automaker.

Another important factor to consider is that many transmissions aren't even designed or built by the automaker itself. Our 2 Series BMWs use a Getrag manual and a ZF auto, both of which are used in other models as well as other marques -- particularly the ZF, versions of which are used in everything from Dodge Ram pickups to Maseratis. If you were a business relying on third parties to supply critical pieces of hardware for your products, wouldn't you want to minimize that reliance as much as possible since you largely can't control 1). the hardware produced, and 2) the profit margin of said hardware? I sure as heck would.

[Viffermike]

Originally Posted by krhodes1

NASCAR, but those hardly count as "modern".

No kidding. I've always thought it hilarious that NASCAR insists on this in a country where the auto tranny rules.

:: putting flame suit on ::

It's one of the many reasons I think today's NASCAR is a crock of crud ...

... but I digress ...