Comment by Grishnakh | Hacker News Reader

Comment by Grishnakh | Hacker News Reader

Parent Full thread

The love of manual transmissions isn't irrational, it's merely outdated. Manual transmissions were indeed more efficient than automatics up until about 10 years ago.

Governments aren't exactly famous for being completely up-to-date on everything. The driving handbook you're complaining about was probably written 30 years ago... Back then, automatics really did suck badly.

With modern cars, automatics do get better fuel economy than manuals according to all the official fuel-economy tests I've seen. One big difference between the two that I've noticed is that in automatics, they tend to have taller gearing overall, and cruise at lower rpms (because of a taller final gear). This is most likely because it's so fast and easy for an automatic to downshift when it needs to, unlike a stick; this is especially important when using cruise control on the highway. The main problem with automatics (but not DSGs like VWs have) is the inefficiency of the torque converter. But modern automatics have worked around that really well with TCs that lock up and unlock very readily, so they're really not much different than a manual with its slipping clutch.

Luckily, here in the US, for all the things we do wrong with cars and drivers' licenses, there's no automatic restrictions I've ever heard about. I've heard of some states having such a thing on their licenses, but in reality I've never heard of them actually sticking that on someone's license if they took the driving test in an automatic. Almost anyone is allowed to jump in and drive a stick any time they want.

> The driving handbook you're complaining about was probably written 30 years ago

No, it's continually updated, and featured lots of other modern facts about cars. For example, from a safety perspective, it urged people to stay the fuck away (maybe not using those words) from cars manufactured before 2000, because safety ratings increased a lot between 1990 and 2000, across the whole board.

The eco-driving requirements are 10 years old, at the most, but the manual still states facts about automatic transmissions that were true 30 years ago.

It's also important to remember that getting a license in European countries is generally a lot harder than in the US, so the eco-driving requirements results in people having to spend time learning the "theory" behind it, spending valuable driving lessons with an instructor to learn it, practice it, and getting evaluated on it during your final road test, and failing to drive "eco-friendly" will result in you failing the test.

So it's a big deal, it affects a lot of people, and it's mostly been obsoleted by technology. The gains from forcing people to learn eco-driving are minuscule, and the whole piece of shit could be replaced with one simple sentence: "Please buy a modern car". The last 10-15 years have seen crazy efficiency gains, and buying a new car will do more for the environment than a lifetime of eco-driving in an older one.

And that grinds my gears. :-)

> Almost anyone is allowed to jump in and drive a stick any time they want.

Fortunately that is pretty self-regulating, because it's incredibly hard to drive a manual if you haven't had practice and training. :-)

>Fortunately that is pretty self-regulating, because it's incredibly hard to drive a manual if you haven't had practice and training. :-)

Exactly. Why bother regulating this at the DMV when people who can't drive a stick simply aren't going to try anyway (unless they're trying to actually learn and a friend is teaching them)?

That's weird about the handbook. You're exactly right: if you want to drive economically, the easiest thing to do is simply buy a newer car (and of course do things like not do full-throttle acceleration from stoplights, but that applies equally to all cars). Automatics in the last 5 years have surpassed manuals.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com