Make cars too, please.
Manual transmission (actual stick and clutch, not silly paddles), minimal ECUs, disableable seatbelt chime, cigar lighter, and so forth. You know, less cyber.
Manual transmission (actual stick and clutch, not silly paddles), minimal ECUs, disableable seatbelt chime, cigar lighter, and so forth. You know, less cyber.
Most important: This is completely detached from the manufacturer spying on you, or preventing cheap repairs by not selling you necessary parts or withholding information.
Sort of like the original VW Beetle sales model.
Off the top of my head, they probably wouldn't meet:
FMVSS 126 (ESC), FMVSS 111 (rear camera), FMVSS 138 (TMPS), FMVSS 226 (occupant ejection mitigation)
Although, like the beetle, you could sell them in countries with lower safety standards. I'm pretty some joint ventures in China are/were actually done with old tooling from western automakers.
The touchscreen revolution in cars is a dumpster fire. Literally every aspect of the controls on my last couple of cars has been a regression.
Officially automatics and manuals are a wash for mileage, but I think driving style can make manuals the winner.
All that kinetic energy getting dissipated by brakes instead of turning the engine and all of its accessories in autos.
I’m quite surprised auto manufacturers haven’t implemented engine braking for émissions, reducing brake wear, and quicker « free » cabin heat in cold conditions.
Everything you can do, a machine can do better.
Sure, a good driver in the manual version of a car might achieve better mpg than the auto version, but that requires skill and focus and effort. And realistically, a human driver won't deliver 100% of the time, so the auto version will beat the manual version over the long haul, no matter the driver.
The reason to drive a stick is to drive. Anyone who's never tried it, try it! You become an essential part of the experience, both hands and feet involved and synthesizing related tasks, while you look ahead, anticipate, plan, breathe. You don't need music or the phone or a fridge in the glove box. It doesn't have to be a sports car, anything with a stick will do.
We are in a privileged moment. How long ago was it that cars didn't even exist? How long since they have been really excellent, dynamic, safe(er), powerful, reliable? I'd argue late 80s to about now is the entire window. Already, 2/5 of our appendages are useless to the task, and soon it will be 5/5.
Smoke 'em if you've got 'em!
It used to be an argument for stick shifts, that they had better mileage. When I got my license 7 years ago, that "fact" was part of the course. Eco-driving is a mandatory part of both the written test and the practical test, so the "correct" answer if you wanted to pass the test was that you should prefer a stick shift over an automatic, because of fuel economy. Also, if you do your practical test with an automatic, you get a mark on your license saying you are not allowed to drive manuals.
These days, it's factually wrong, so driving students get told wrong things, and spend time learning and doing useless bullshit, and get told to buy the wrong type of car. That pissed me off like no other.
> The reason to drive a stick is to drive.
I agree. That's an honest argument for stick shift. The feeling of driving one. Even though a modern automatic will accelerate faster than you can ever do driving a stick shift. Because everything you can do, a machine can do better...
The transmission can't see the road ahead and prepare in advance.
I know you said braking but I've seen it in both my 2002 and 2015 automatics when coasting.
If I'm coasting up to a red light I'm pretty sure I can brake lightly and still be coasting with no fuel consumption, and then it will only turn the fuel back on when it needs to creep.
I'll check it on the live MPG display next time I'm driving.
If they always assumed you wanted to brake, that would really hurt mileage.
And it would have to disengage anyway at some point to avoid stalling.
Engine braking is more RPMs in aggregate, but nothing particularly bad for an engine.
I meant wearing our brakes is cheaper to fix that engine parts.
and quicker « free » cabin heat in cold conditions.
Engine braking won't heat the engine much over just idling, in fact it may even cool it off more because the governor will cut off fuel completely.
I mean, the energy has to go somewhere, and the engine itself makes the most sense.
We’re doing the opposite of acceleration (sometimes faster), so that’s gotta be a lot more energy turned into heat than necessary to keep an engine idle.
If brake pads get to several hundred degrees while braking...
Gas vehicles effectively engine brake without modification, but dunno where all the energy is getting converted.
I do wish alternators would detect engine braking and ramp up electric cabin heat though.
Automatics don't have a clutch though. They have a torque converter, which is not the same thing.
Oh wait, they made that illegal starting MY2015 (in the US, at least).
OK, how about just without a touchscreen, then?
Apparently they're not selling well in US.