Manual Drivers: Are they better drivers?

[Supersetoy]

I was just reading the flash to pass thread and have been thinking about this for a while:

1) Do you drive a stick?
2) Do you think stick drivers are better drivers?

For me:

1) Yes, for my whole driving career. (7 years)
2) Yes because they pay more attention while driving. For example: I pay more attention to my speed because of the gear I'm in. I rarely eat while driving, and only use the cell phone when I'm stopped at a long light (stopped traffic) or driving in the same gear on the freeway. I have 1 speeding ticket from when I was 16, and no accidents FYI.

I've just always had a bias towards "slush pump" drivers. Anyone else feel the same?

[SmileyEH]

Absolutely.

-SmileyEH

[RacersEdge]

I think it's more people who enjoy the driving experience and appreciate cars tend to be better drivers. And those people tend to like to experience drving with a stick.

[fluxrad]

Yes. I'd say stick drivers put more effort into learning how to drive, and therefore are probably better drivers in general.

I remember learning out on Tower Rd. and the surrounding neighborhoods some 10 years ago. My mom would have me stop facing up on a hill and we'd practice things like slowly driving forward without rolling back first, or holding yourself stationary with nothing but the clutch. These lessons have served me well and I never would have learned this type of stuff if my mom had thrown me in a stick and said "have at it."

[shadow29]

1. Yes.

2. Yes. But I don't really pay attention to what gear I'm in. I just shift when I hit 3k RPMs or so. I'm a better driver but I think driving a stick gives you more of a feel of "race car driver" and thus resulted in 2 tickets in 1 year after getting the car.

[Bradyams]

I've learned how to drive a stick, and have ridden plenty of large motorcycles, and I think it has all made me a better driver.

However I prefer my automatic transmission that is in my pickup. I hate when people think that manuals are the only way to go, and anyone who doesn't drive one is a "sissy". Ok, have fun shifting and clutching all day when you are in bad traffic. I just want to get from point A to point B.

[shadow29]

[ QUOTE ]
I just want to get from point A to point B.

[/ QUOTE ]

It's about point D man. /images/graemlins/grin.gif

Automatic drivers are sissies, though.

I drive in Atlanta traffic quite frequently and it's not a big deal. Especially since outside of traffic I get to own those lovely suburban twisties.

[MikeL05]

[ QUOTE ]
I've learned how to drive a stick, and have ridden plenty of large motorcycles, and I think it has all made me a better driver.

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't know about a stick car, but I think motorcycle riders have the ability and consciousness, in general, to be far better drivers. I say in general to exclude the jackass kids on their sport bikes who are still at the age when they think they are invincible. But, for most of the rest of motorcycle riders, the demands of doing that are so great that you're forced to become aware of far more things than the average car driver because you're so vulnerable.

[Blarg]

I think this question is incredibly deceptive.

According to how many accidents they get into, non-elderly women are by far the best drivers, but how do you define "best"? Do they really turn corners better, etc.? Probably, with all their own flaws, they're just not as much macho jerks as guys are.

Young guys may drive better, but they take more chances, so even if they're better drivers, they could come out as "worse" when you ask yourself -- do I really want to be on the road next to this guy? Do I care if he can do Starsky and Hutch moves and is obviously a "better" driver, or do I just want to get home to my family tonight?

I think guys and better drivers are drawn to sticks, because they make you consciously drive more and pay attention to the road more, which is a good thing. However, that's also the group more likely to let their ego get into their driving, and more natural risk takers.

Soccer Mom doesn't want to test the limits of her Volvo station wagon, and even though she probably handles her car worse than a lot of 22 year old hotshot boys, for the purposes that count, she probably IS a better driver. No mad skillz, but being a good driver is about a lot more than that. Especially the important/boring parts.

[manpower]

IMO, it's pretty clear that there's a positive correlation between good driving and owning a manual transmission. I don't think buying your girlfriend a stick will make her a better driver though.

[OtisTheMarsupial]

1. yes
2. yes

[Ogre]

1. Yes
2. Yes
and manuals are 1000x mroe fun to drive

[NorCalJosh]

[ QUOTE ]
I was just reading the flash to pass thread and have been thinking about this for a while:

1) Do you drive a stick?
2) Do you think stick drivers are better drivers?

For me:

1) Yes, for my whole driving career. (7 years)
2) Yes because they pay more attention while driving. For example: I pay more attention to my speed because of the gear I'm in. I rarely eat while driving, and only use the cell phone when I'm stopped at a long light (stopped traffic) or driving in the same gear on the freeway. I have 1 speeding ticket from when I was 16, and no accidents FYI.

I've just always had a bias towards "slush pump" drivers. Anyone else feel the same?

[/ QUOTE ]


if you pay more attention when you're driving stick, then you arent a good enough stick driver. you should be shifting with your elbow wh ile you eat, steer with your knees, and talk on your cell.

[david050173]

I don't know. In SF there are ton of shitty stick shift drivers. You can tell because you can leave 5 feet between you and them at a stop sign and they still almost back into you. And I bet they all think they are good drivers because they drive a stick...

[Blarg]

Exactly. I don't see people with manual transmissions sliding back into my front bumper, but it's happened plenty of time with all the "experts" driving sticks.

[DasLeben]

[ QUOTE ]
I was just reading the flash to pass thread and have been thinking about this for a while:

1) Do you drive a stick?
2) Do you think stick drivers are better drivers?

[/ QUOTE ]

1. Yes, and I wouldn't own anything else.
2. Not at all. I see countless terrible stick drivers on a daily basis. People slipping the clutch to 2000 RPM coming off of a stop light, people slipping the hell out of upshifts, improper downshifting technique, etc.

The last one is by far the most irritating, since people are taught how to downshift improperly from the very beginning. I know I was. The "standard" way of downshifting involves 3 steps: clutch in, put it into the lower gear, pull the clutch out. Not only does this put unnecessary wear on your clutch, it's not a smooth and graceful way to get the job done.

The best way to downshift involves rev-matching, where the most basic technique involves a few more steps: clutch in, shifter to neutral, rev to the appropriate RPM for the next lower gear, downshift, clutch out. Done properly, this eliminates wear on the clutch. But, you still have wear on the synchros.

My pickup truck is pretty damn old, so the synchros are worn out and prone to being crunchy. For cars such as these, double clutching might be a good idea. The steps: Clutch in, shift into neutral, clutch out, rev to the appropriate RPM for the next lower gear, clutch in, complete the downshift, clutch out. It sounds like a lot of work, but once you've done it a bajillion times, it's all muscle memory. I don't even think about a double clutch anymore.

Now if you'd like to have some fun, you can do all of this while braking (called heel-toeing). This isn't just a racing technique. It's a solid technique that can improve your safety on the road. While braking, you can choose to do a single-clutch revmatch (the first example), or a double-clutch. I prefer the latter, but again, my synchros are garbage. This allows you to pre-select the appropriate gear for exiting a corner smoothly. When you have the gear already selected, you can keep both hands on the wheel at all times during the corner.

Anyways, I don't mean to ramble on. Just a few things I thought I'd share.

[AngryCola]

[ QUOTE ]
Exactly. I don't see people with manual transmissions sliding back into my front bumper, but it's happened plenty of time with all the "experts" driving sticks.

[/ QUOTE ]

You must have meant automatic transmissions.

Oh, and the OP is right. One just gets a better feel for driving with a stick. I'm not saying people who drive automatics are always worse drivers, but those who have driven a stick for a significant period of time are more likely to be better drivers than those who have never driven a manual, IMNSHO.

There are, of course, plenty of bad drivers who can't drive using either type of transmission.

[lucas9000]

yes, i am.

[bronzepiglet]

1. Yes
2. Usually.

But probably about the two all-time worst drivers I can think of drive stick regularly. I'm talking about being actually scared for your life while riding in their car.

[dabluebery]

I read a study (no idea where) testing this theory. The long and short of it said that manual drivers end up being safer because they are less likely to be distracted by things like food, drinks, cell phones, whatever. The study also theorized that anymore, automatic drivers who don't fall prey to these distractions would be safer than manual drivers. They indicated that simple things like operating the clutch, shifting gears, having 1 hand off the wheel would be things that can contribute to accidents, at least more than a safe automatic driver, who doesn't have to worry about any of it.

It made sense to me, I generally agree. I have 2 cars right now, one is a small sedan with an automatic, and the other is a big pickup with a 5-speed. I live on Long Island, and I admit that I avoid taking the pickup when I know there will be traffic because the clutch is a pain in the neck to go in and out constantly.

I am currently saving up for a 2007 Shelby Mustang, but may chicken out. Not sure if the stick is practical anymore, especially since my wife can't drive it.

Rob

[correia]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I was just reading the flash to pass thread and have been thinking about this for a while:

1) Do you drive a stick?
2) Do you think stick drivers are better drivers?

For me:

1) Yes, for my whole driving career. (7 years)
2) Yes because they pay more attention while driving. For example: I pay more attention to my speed because of the gear I'm in. I rarely eat while driving, and only use the cell phone when I'm stopped at a long light (stopped traffic) or driving in the same gear on the freeway. I have 1 speeding ticket from when I was 16, and no accidents FYI.

I've just always had a bias towards "slush pump" drivers. Anyone else feel the same?

[/ QUOTE ]


if you pay more attention when you're driving stick, then you arent a good enough stick driver. you should be shifting with your elbow wh ile you eat, steer with your knees, and talk on your cell.

[/ QUOTE ]

Ha excellent point. That was me everyday driving back and forth to school. But in response to the orignial question i would say that in general people who drive stick are better drivers.

[Maulik]

DUH.

[eastbay]

[ QUOTE ]
The steps: Clutch in, shift into neutral, clutch out, rev to the appropriate RPM for the next lower gear, clutch in, complete the downshift, clutch out. It sounds like a lot of work, but once you've done it a bajillion times, it's all muscle memory.

[/ QUOTE ]

Or, you could let a machine do machine-like robotic tasks for you. It's what they're for.

I grew up driving stick, but the whole stick snob machismo thing is silly.

eastbay

[DasLeben]

[ QUOTE ]
Or, you could let a machine do machine-like robotic tasks for you. It's what they're for.

[/ QUOTE ]

My truck doesn't have SMG. /images/graemlins/wink.gif

[ QUOTE ]
I grew up driving stick, but the whole stick snob machismo thing is silly.

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't really consider things like revmatching a macho or snobbish thing to do at all. My post is simply giving information as to the best technique, much like you'd give information about playing specific hands in an SNG. And just like in poker, if you're going to play, you might as well be good at what you do right?

[Guy Incognito]

I guess I've never understood downshifting, it seems so much easier just to coast/brake.

[Maulik]

[ QUOTE ]
I guess I've never understood downshifting, it seems so much easier just to coast/brake.

[/ QUOTE ]

downshifting allows you to smoothly decelerate. It's also fun and gives you more control over your car. your brakes will also last longer.

[astroglide]

last time i checked brakes were a lot cheaper than a clutch

[Maulik]

[ QUOTE ]
last time i checked brakes were a lot cheaper than a clutch

[/ QUOTE ]

indeed they are, but you aren't wearing out your clutch by using it; as you abuse it you're wearing it out?

[astroglide]

huh? even things that are meant to get used wear out and need somewhat regular replacement. the less you use it, the less likely it is to happen.

i basically never 'direct downshift' when i drive. i go up the gears. when i need to stop, i pop into neutral without using the clutch and brake into a stop. if i need to slow down, i pop into neutral without using the clutch and slow down, when appropriate i go into a lower gear to accellerate. i don't do stuff like go straight from fourth to third. it's easier driving, i'm not revving the engine which maybe saves a bit on gas, and i've never had to replace a clutch. certainly i could be results-oriented in my thinking here, but i can't imagine why i would ever want to decellerate by scaling down in gears when i can put the onus on my brakes instead of my clutch.

[bronzepiglet]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
last time i checked brakes were a lot cheaper than a clutch

[/ QUOTE ]

indeed they are, but you aren't wearing out your clutch by using it; as you abuse it you're wearing it out?

[/ QUOTE ]

There actually is some truth to this, despite what one would assume. Clutch wear is almost negligible with scrupulous observance of clutch-friendly driving practices. Only when you heat the clutch up way too much from excessively slipping it, does the clutch take a lot of wear... it can do months of damage to it.

Brakes, however, are always wearing down with proper usage.

[dtbog]

[ QUOTE ]

1) Do you drive a stick?
2) Do you think stick drivers are better drivers?


[/ QUOTE ]

1) Yes.
2) Yes, because I think stick drivers are a self-selecting group of people who generally care more about driving, and therefore pay more attention to the road.

-dB

[Guy Incognito]

Eh, I've replaced my brakes once in 100K+ miles driving like this, and it was something like $20 for the pads since I did it myself. I'm sure downshifting gives you more control, it's just never been an issue for me. To each his own, I guess.

[dtbog]

[ QUOTE ]
I guess I've never understood downshifting, it seems so much easier just to coast/brake.

[/ QUOTE ]

Downshift for power?

What about going up a hill or passing someone.. do you not downshift then?

-dB

[dtbog]

[ QUOTE ]
2. Not at all. I see countless terrible stick drivers on a daily basis. People slipping the clutch to 2000 RPM coming off of a stop light, people slipping the hell out of upshifts, improper downshifting technique, etc.

[/ QUOTE ]

This doesn't make the person a bad driver, though.

I appreciate your comments on stick drivers, but all of those things about downshifting and imperfect clutch use don't make that person get into more accidents or endanger other drivers.

With respect to the original post, you've basically added a third category of drivers:

automatic < bad at driving manual < good at driving manual

... right?

-dB

[shadow29]

re: double clutching

I was under the impression (I honestly don't know that much about cars, except how to drive them) that the newer cars with manual transmissions (actualy manuals, not the clutchless kind) made it so you didn't have to rev match.

I know how to do it, and do it for fun when going up a hill and through twisties, but I didn't think it was necessary with (I think this is the term) synchro-mersh or something like that.

Maybe I'm wrong.

[astroglide]

i believe he meant downshifting when slowing down, coming to a stop, that sort of thing. that's what i was talking about too.

[wacki]

[ QUOTE ]
last time i checked brakes were a lot cheaper than a clutch

[/ QUOTE ]

$8 each at Autozone. Just 2 bolts is all it takes to change em. It's not only cheaper doing it yourself, but the amount of time you save more than makes up for waiting in line at the local repairshop. Well, for me it does. I am a speed demon and our repair shops are horribly slow. I also like to inspect the bolts on the rotors and replace them if they look corroded. It prevents problems later on when dealing with locked bolts.

This car jack rules btw:
http://images.canadiantire.ca/media/images/Automotive/AutoRepair/CreepersJacksStands/0091054_450_CC_176ba.jpg

The picture doesn't do it justice. The thing is huge. I love sams club.

[DasLeben]

[ QUOTE ]
downshifting allows you to smoothly decelerate. It's also fun and gives you more control over your car. your brakes will also last longer.

[/ QUOTE ]

Even with "fancy" heel-toe techniques, you're still using the brakes to slow the car down. Downshifting in this manner, as I said, simply allows you to be in the correct gear for corner exit.

[ QUOTE ]
i basically never 'direct downshift' when i drive. i go up the gears. when i need to stop, i pop into neutral without using the clutch and brake into a stop. if i need to slow down, i pop into neutral without using the clutch and slow down, when appropriate i go into a lower gear to accellerate.

[/ QUOTE ]

So, what if you need to suddenly get on throttle to avoid an accident? You're out of gear and have no way to quickly accelerate. With a properly executed heel-toe, you'll not only be in a gear, you'll be in the correct gear to accelerate away.

[astroglide]

[ QUOTE ]
So, what if you need to suddenly get on throttle to avoid an accident?

[/ QUOTE ]

what are the conditions for such an event?

[DasLeben]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
So, what if you need to suddenly get on throttle to avoid an accident?

[/ QUOTE ]

what are the conditions for such an event?

[/ QUOTE ]

You're slowing down for a stop light, and someone coming up behind you isn't paying attention and is about to rear-end you. I'm already in gear, so I jam on the throttle and avoid this accident. You have to pop it into gear, reef the clutch out (which slows you down more), and then accelerate.

Someone from a side street suddenly jumps out right as you're passing. You have no time to brake, but you can avoid the side collision if you get on throttle.

[astroglide]

[ QUOTE ]

You're slowing down for a stop light, and someone coming up behind you isn't paying attention and is about to rear-end you. I'm already in gear, so I jam on the throttle and avoid this accident. You have to pop it into gear, reef the clutch out (which slows you down more), and then accelerate.

[/ QUOTE ]

jam on the throttle and...run into another car that's slowing down for the light? run off the road? run the light and head into oncoming traffic? i'm still at cruising speed and i can still maneuver the car even if i never go into gear.

[ QUOTE ]
Someone from a side street suddenly jumps out right as you're passing. You have no time to brake, but you can avoid the side collision if you get on throttle.

[/ QUOTE ]

i assume you don't mean "passing" as in "passing another vehicle", because in that case i would be in some sort of gear. if something like this occurs so quickly i'm challenged to think it likely to be able to assess the situation, determine that an accident is unavoidable, and accellerate in the hopes of having a 'better' accident. am i supposed to be in 3rd gear or lower here? flooring it in 4th or higher with a second or less isn't going to do a whole lot in terms of motion and i think it's just going to increase the collision speed, racking up the odds for neck/back-bouncing injuries or losing control of the vehicle if it's a "rear side" impact.

i can honestly say in many years of driving i have never seen a situation where i feel like it would be more useful to jam, but if i were i still even think that i'd rather be in neutral because i could gear up to 3rd and actually move. i can't think of a practical need to be in gear at all times.

[astroglide]

i'd also like to note that i have actually seen an accident occur as a result of somebody pre-gearing to first at a stopsign. they were coming in to stop, clearly had geared the car into first and were riding the clutch/brake before stopping. their foot must have come off of the clutch for some reason, because they instantly shook/killed the car and the person behind them ran into them. i see stick drivers pre-gear all the time and i think it's a dangerous habit with no worthwhile upside.

[CORed]

Actually, if you revmatch correctly, you are putting very little wear on the clutch. That said, my usual technique when going through a curve or corner that requires a downshift is to brake with the clutch disengaged while downshifting the transmission while decelerating, and re-engage the clutch in the lower gear when I'm ready to accelerate out of the curve. I've tried the heel-and toe technique, but i really don't find it to be worth the trouble in normal driving.

I used to drive a Scout that had no synchro for first gear. I got pretty good at double clutching.

[CORed]

Double clutching is not necessary for a synchromesh transmission. Doing so (correctly) does reduce the wear on the synchronizing clutches. OTOH, I don't double clutch, I have run several vehicles until they were junk, and the transmission was still working fine on all of them. Generally speaking, a manual transmission will outlast most other components of a car. The same is not always true of automatics. You may go through two or three clutches in the life of a car, though.

Revmatching before engaging the clutch (without a double clutch) on both upshifts and downshifts (eapecially downshfts) reduces wear on the clutch. Ideally, the only time you should have any slippage of the clutch is on a standing (or nearly standing) start, in first gear. In practice, you usually don't match perfectly, so there is a little slippage on shifts.

[johnc]

[ QUOTE ]
I think guys and better drivers are drawn to sticks, because they make you consciously drive more and pay attention to the road more, which is a good thing. However, that's also the group more likely to let their ego get into their driving, and more natural risk takers.

[/ QUOTE ]

I agree somewhat. Younger drivers definately have more potential to be better drivers(in general) ie quicker reaction, better motor skills, better vision, hearing, ect. but the real problem is the vast majority lack the judgemnt skills necessary to be a safe driver, IMO.

[ QUOTE ]
Soccer Mom doesn't want to test the limits of her Volvo station wagon, and even though she probably handles her car worse than a lot of 22 year old hotshot boys, for the purposes that count, she probably IS a better driver. No mad skillz, but being a good driver is about a lot more than that. Especially the important/boring parts.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah, but she's usually the one whose got a cell phone in her ear, turned around yelling at her kids, and sipping on a latte from Starbucks (ok, I embelished that last point). Safe?

[DasLeben]

[ QUOTE ]
i can honestly say in many years of driving i have never seen a situation where i feel like it would be more useful to jam, but if i were i still even think that i'd rather be in neutral because i could gear up to 3rd and actually move.

[/ QUOTE ]

You're definitely missing what I'm trying to convey. You say that you'd rather be in neutral so that you can put it into 3rd and accelerate if you have to. My point is that I'm already in third, and constantly downshifting as I slow down so that I'm always in the correct gear for my speed. If I'm heel-toeing quickly, I'm able to downshift in one second or less. This is opposed to being out of gear and unready to take action immediately if need be.

Also, as I've already said, heel-toeing allows you to preselect the appropriate gear to exit a corner with. I can complete a downshift smoothly and efficiently while approaching the corner, and then be able to keep both hands on the wheel for safety.

Also, heel-toeing correctly eliminates wear on the clutch. Putting the shifter into the next lower gear and then simply pulling the clutch out makes for a decent amount of clutch slip. Your clutch and mounts are going to suffer as you pull the clutch out swiftly without revmatching.

I'd also like to point out that no, double-clutching is not necessary on modern gearboxes with synchros. I'm being nice to the old synchros on my truck, so double-clutching is a good way to save wear and quicken my downshifts (no pause at the synchro). Newer cars generally have no problem with this, and you won't notice much of a difference between a single-clutch and a double-clutch revmatch. That said, I still do double-clutch in newer cars, but only because I'm used to doing it. I don't have to do it, I prefer to do it.

[astroglide]

i understand what you are trying to convey. i don't see realistic situations where i would suddenly be forced to floor it in order to avoid danger. if you are always in the correct gear for your speed, you're not going to get a phenomenal amount of push if you floor it anyway. that is, unless you like to hang out at 4000 rpms.

i cannot see a situation where i would need to be in the appropriate gear for my vehicle (say 4th gear around 30mph) and be forced to floor it to avoid danger, where my accelleration in half a second would spell the difference between a problem and no problem.

[DasLeben]

Hi everyone, I am DasLeben's friend, and the one who taught him how to heel and toe etc. He hit the point fairly well, but there are some things I would like to touch on.
First off, coasting in neutral is not a smart thing to do. His examples were a little extreme when talking about being in the correct gear, but it has a lot of truth to it. I almost got hit on the right rear of my car (just behind the passanger door) by someone who was running a red light. Since I was in the correct gear, I was able to accelerate away from the situation, and the idiot in his SUV missed my car. Had I hit the brakes, he would have hit me. Just one example.
Certain cars like FWD's for example get stabalized by power applications. Drive a FWD car is icy or slippery conditions, and the ability to stabalize the car with a power application comes in handy. If you are out of gear or in a gear that is too high, you wont maximize the torque to the wheels, and you might not be able to stabalize the car enough.
As for the comment regarding new transmissions not needing rev matching, I recomend studying up a little bit on the principals of operation of a manual tranny. You dont need to rev match for the trannys sake, rather you do it due to the disparity of rotational speeds between the road speed of the car (how fast the tires are spinning) and the correct engine rpm in the gear you have selected. If you dont blip the rpms up, the clutch and the momentum of the car forces the engine rpms up to where they should be.
Why is it important not to force the rpms up with the clutch, and why is rev matching important? When you drag the clutch out slowly, you not only wear the clutch, but you destabalize the car. If you donwshift without a blip, you can lock a tire up when the clutch comes out if you pull the clutch out too quickly. Try doing it in rain or in snow, and if you have a RWD car it is an easy way to spin. As a matter of fact, letting the clutch out without blipping does such a good job at getting the back end of a rwd car out that I use that technique when I want to drift. I dont know about you guys, but when I drive on the streets with my family in the car I want to drive in a manner that reduces any chance of an accident, so keeping the car stable and in the best position to aviod an accident is paramount.
I still dont understand what was meant by direct downshifting. Can that be cleared up?
Somewhere in the thread it was implied that heel and toeing is slowing the car down with compression braking. Just for clarification, you are slowing down using the brakes alone, but you are keeping the car in the correct gear.
For the record, even modern trannys that are synchromesh can benefit from being double clutched. Ever gone 25mph and tried to select 1st? Most of the time, if it goes into gear, it takes some time. Double clutch, and it slots right in. When skipping gears (say you need to pass a bus load of nuns on a two lane road) a double clutch downshift will get you into the lower gear faster, as there is no work for the synchros to do, hence the shifter wont pause going into gear like it usually does. If you merely put the clutch in, select the lower gear, pull the clutch out and then get going on the throttle you have not only slowed the car down, but you have made more work for the tranny and engine mounts, the clutch, and the synchros. If you can negate almost all of that extra work with a simple blip of the throttle, why wouldnt you?
Finally, are stick drivers better than auto drivers? Noone can say with any degree of accuracy. I know everyone has their opinions on the matter, with associated statements that can be asinine at best. How well one drives is a function of that persons driving ability, their desire for safe driving practices, their personal motivation to learn how to drive in the best manner possible, and mostly their situational awareness. Driving stick is not the cure all for that. It only means the driver knows how to operate another system of the car, which although can be integral to safe operation of the car, is usually operated in an unsafe manner. Most stick drivers I have driven with has basic fundamental problems with driving stick. Things like up or downshifting during corners, not being in the correct gear, destabalizing the car when shifting, etc. Now, if you understand physics of driving well, those things arent issues. However, the general population of drivers doesnt have a clue on how to drive a car in any situation other than point A to point B, what to do in an emergency, or cause and effect results from their action behind the wheel. Whether and auto or stick, most drivers in the US dont know what the hell they are doing.
The only point about stick drivers that I do agree with is more enthusiasts are drawn towards sticks. Difference there is that for every person who knows what they are doing with a stick, there are plenty of others who think that they know what they are doing, but who really dont.
Ok, I think I flogged this one to death. If you disagree with anything I have said, I am open to discussion on this. Feel free to post back, as I'll check in on this. Just remember, I am not DasLeben, so he assumes no responsibility for any emotions that might come out as a result of this post.
BTW, if anyone wants to learn how to heel and toe or rev match, I wrote up an explaination at a board I frequent. Here is the link. (http://www.m5board.com/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=52518)
Whether you drive stick or an auto, have fun and be safe out there guys!

[mostsmooth]

[ QUOTE ]
Ok, have fun shifting and clutching all day when you are in bad traffic. I just want to get from point A to point B.

[/ QUOTE ]
have fun paying more for your car, getting worse gas mileage, and repairing your tran$mi$$ion.

[mostsmooth]

[ QUOTE ]
Exactly. I don't see people with manual transmissions sliding back into my front bumper, but it's happened plenty of time with all the "experts" driving sticks.

[/ QUOTE ]
youre not supposed to stop that close to the car in front of you. you are supposed to be a car length back. i doubt the awful stick driver in front of you drifted back a full car length, and if he did, you would have plenty of time to move back or use your horn or something, unless you just sat there and watched it happen?

[dtbog]

[ QUOTE ]
youre not supposed to stop that close to the car in front of you. you are supposed to be a car length back.


[/ QUOTE ]

Imagine city traffic where every car is more than 5 feet apart.

(have you ever seen that?)

[DasLeben]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
youre not supposed to stop that close to the car in front of you. you are supposed to be a car length back.


[/ QUOTE ]

Imagine city traffic where every car is more than 5 feet apart.

(have you ever seen that?)

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't think that a car length is necessarily realistic either, but I do think that people should give other drivers room, especially on hills. I don't know how many times I've had someone with their automatic pull up within inches of my rear bumper on a hill. I'm capable of starting on a hill with a minimum amount of rollback, but it requires a pretty solid amount of clutch slip to get going.

A car length is a little excessive, but seriously, 4-5 feet is not. By the way, if the hill is steep enough, automatics will roll back some.

[mostsmooth]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
youre not supposed to stop that close to the car in front of you. you are supposed to be a car length back.


[/ QUOTE ]

Imagine city traffic where every car is more than 5 feet apart.

(have you ever seen that?)

[/ QUOTE ]
its not practical, but its the way its supposed to be.

[dtbog]

[ QUOTE ]
I do think that people should give other drivers room, especially on hills.

[/ QUOTE ]

When I drove an automatic, I always pulled up pretty close... until my dad gave me my first stick-shift lesson.

I don't give people credit for being able to use the correct turn signal, change lanes, or execute a U-turn... so to be consistent, I leave a LOT of room on hills. (not more than a couple feet downhill or on level ground, though)

[mostsmooth]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
youre not supposed to stop that close to the car in front of you. you are supposed to be a car length back.


[/ QUOTE ]

Imagine city traffic where every car is more than 5 feet apart.

(have you ever seen that?)

[/ QUOTE ]
its not practical, but its the way its supposed to be.

[/ QUOTE ]another reason that a gap is required: if you get rear ended, you wont get pushed into the car in front of you which you would be liable for.

[Weatherhead03]

1)Yes my whole life as well
2)They are better drivers obviously...if not for the single reason that most people who dont drive stick also do not know how to.

[astroglide]

if somebody rear ends you and pushes you into another car, the person that rear ended you has to deal with it. i know because it happened to me. i was at a complete stop and somebody hit me going 40mph. it's an ok story if i wanted to tell the whole thing, their car actually went up in flames and i had passed them at a light because i saw they were distracted/slow. my mistake apparently. i can't sleep on my left side or i'll get brutal migraines now, my gf has to wake me if i roll over and that sort of thing. didn't get a dime either.

[mostsmooth]

[ QUOTE ]
if somebody rear ends you and pushes you into another car, the person that rear ended you has to deal with it.

[/ QUOTE ]
i was taught long ago you are responsible for your car. if youre sitting at a light too close to the car in front of you and get rear ended into the car, you are liable, and the guy who hit you is liable for both youre car and the one in front of you. (different percentages i suppose). perhaps i was taught wrong or something was odd with your case?

[astroglide]

i had always heard it too. maybe it's a wife's tale, maybe it's a state law thing.

[spamuell]

I'm capable of starting on a hill with a minimum amount of rollback, but it requires a pretty solid amount of clutch slip to get going.

What are you talking about? It's incredibly easy to start on a hill with no rollback at all.

[CORed]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
youre not supposed to stop that close to the car in front of you. you are supposed to be a car length back.


[/ QUOTE ]

Imagine city traffic where every car is more than 5 feet apart.

(have you ever seen that?)

[/ QUOTE ]

Although I realize the probability of actually educating drivers to do this is about the same as hitting ten royal flushes in a row, city traffic would actually move much better if people would leave some distance between their car and the car ahead when stopped at traffic lights. Doing this allows you to start moving as soon as the car ahead does, instead of having to wait for them to move ahead.

[jakethebake]

For some reason women can't drive manual. Therefore the answer is yes on average.

[CORed]

Methods for starting up a hill with a stick:

1. Timing: Move your right foot quickly from the brake to the gas while releasing the clutch to the friction point. If you do this well, you will have only a few inches of rollback. This is the one I mostly use.

2. Heel and toe: Operate the throttle with your heel while your toe is on the brake. Release the brake as soon as the clutch starts to engage. No rollback. This is good for really steep hills.

3. Use the parking brake: Set the parking brake. (This requires that your parking brake actually works well enough to hold the car on the hill you are starting on.)
Release the parking brake as you start. This also works for steep hills, but requires one hand off the steering wheel to release the parking brake.

[CORed]

I think manual vs. automatic is really a matter of personal preference. An atutomatic is definitely easier to drive, especially in stop and go traffic. All my cars have had sticks. I like to be in control, not the dumb machine. Modern automatics with electronic controls definitely work better than the older ones that had engine speed and engine vacuum or throttle position as analog inputs. However, you still have to manually downshift the sometimes.

The other advantages of manual transmissions are effieciency and longevity. The torque converter of an automatic transmission is always slipping, therefor automatic transmissions usually are less efficient at transferring power from the engine to the wheels. This means that a car with an automatic will usually get a little lower gas mileage, and be a little slower accelerating than the same car equipped with a manual transmission. The difference isn't huge, but it's real.

Manual transmissions usually outlast the car. Automatics often wear out at about 100,000 miles. OTOH, while a manual transmission typiclly outlasts the rest of the car, clutches are usually only good for 80,000 to 100,000 miles (much less if abused). Clutch replacement, while expensive, is usually cheaper than overhauling or replacing an automatic transmission.

To sum it up, a manual transmission will save you a little money over the life of the car, and give you a little better performance, other things being equal. However, the advantages are not huge, and many (most) people don't feel they outweigh the convenience factor of automatics.

[spamuell]

[ QUOTE ]
3. Use the parking brake: Set the parking brake. (This requires that your parking brake actually works well enough to hold the car on the hill you are starting on.)
Release the parking brake as you start. This also works for steep hills, but requires one hand off the steering wheel to release the parking brake.

[/ QUOTE ]

Why would anyone not do this?

Anyway, it's possible to have no rollback with the first way you mentioned (one foot on brake, one on clutch and releasing the brake when the clutch is at biting point and then give some gas and release clutch more), but I find it's quite difficult to get right all the time.

[DasLeben]

[ QUOTE ]
The torque converter of an automatic transmission is always slipping, therefor automatic transmissions usually are less efficient at transferring power from the engine to the wheels.

[/ QUOTE ]
Pretty good post, but I need to clarify a few things. The torque converter slips at a launch, and then locks up. Modern automatic trannys have lock up torque converters that solved that issue. Older autos never locked up, hence the term slushbox.

Once the torque converter locks up, the power transfer is similar to a manual. A turn of the engine crank gives a turn of the input shaft of the tranny.

The torque converter locks and unlocks for starts, stops and depending on the tranny, gear changes. If the torque converter doesnt unlock during a stop, it can either stall the car, or the force of the car can force it to unlock.
Automatic transmissions usually impact mileage negativly due to more drivetrain loss (more internal friction, more weight), less optimized gearing, and some slip on starts.

Did anyone read the novella my friend wrote last page? I know it was long, but you can stand to learn something.

I would have to say stick to poker guys. Assumptions that fly from the hip without too much thought or reason dont have any merit. As a whole drivers in the US are uneducated, and not safe at all. Speculating on their ability through their transmission choice is about as lame as saying "Ford drivers are better than Chevy drivers because Chevy's are junk..." and then having 10 pages of people explain why. Someone give some real facts, or just admit that there isnt an answer.

[oneeye13]

they seem to spend a lot of time claiming to be

[Sully]

[ QUOTE ]
another reason that a gap is required: if you get rear ended, you wont get pushed into the car in front of you which you would be liable for.

[/ QUOTE ]

Wrong. Just wrong.

[Maulik]

i was reading the post on the m5 forums about doubleclutching & revmatching; these accomplish the same thing just holding the clutch in place while matching or shifting out of gear to neutral then "blip" then downshift to gear?

[mostsmooth]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
another reason that a gap is required: if you get rear ended, you wont get pushed into the car in front of you which you would be liable for.

[/ QUOTE ]

Wrong. Just wrong.

[/ QUOTE ]
i think we need a lawyer to verify