The Death of the Manual Transmission

[robwbright]

The author doesn't really want it (read the comments) but says its inevitable.

http://ericpetersautos.com/2014/04/1...-transmission/

[robwbright]

Incidentally, the same author LOVES the twins (and loves their AT):

http://ericpetersautos.com/2012/12/1...obaru-brzfr-s/

Excerpt:

"The BRZ (and FR-S) are sports cars. 190 proof, no-nonsense, no BS, real-deal sports cars. Like Miata – only so much better. Low-mounted flat-four boxer engine and 200 hp. Driving dynamics you have to experience to appreciate – after which you will be sorely tempted to sell your oldest daughter to a Saudi sheik – if that’s what it takes to get the $25k or so it takes to acquire one of these things. The best automatic transmission on the market. Yes, a six-speed manual is standard – as it ought to be – but the automatic in this car – anticipatory (and rev-matched) double downshifts, spot-on upshifts – is just as good. Maybe better.

God, I could go on and on...

WHAT’S GOOD

What’s not?
If handling and fun to drive were translated into IQ, this car would rate genius.
No, super genius.
Superbly good six-speed automatic – if you swing that way.
More interior space than Miata.
34 MPG on the highway – with the optional automatic.
No “chick car” issues.

WHAT’S NOT SO GOOD
No convertible – yet.
30 MPG on the highway with the standard manual.
A bit beefy (2,762 lbs. vs. 2,480 for the convertible Miata).
Probable dealer mark-up.

[robwbright]

In comparing to the Miata he notes an interesting point:

"If the Sciobaru weighed the same as the Miata, it would smoke the Miata. And the fact is, the Sciobaru ought to weigh less than the Miata – because it (the Sciobaru) is a hardtop coupe and hardtops usually weigh less than convertibles – because they don’t need the extra body reinforcement to make up for the loss of roof structure.

Mazda’s ace in the hole, despite the Miata being an older design (and arguably, a less sexy design) is that it’s – somehow, miraculously – not a fatty.

So how come the Sciobaru is (for what it is)? My guess is it was designed to anticipate the next round of government crashworthiness standards – which usually means more mass (and so, more weight).

The current Miata may only be a lightweight for now. It will be interesting to see whether the next Miata porks out, too."

[robwbright]

And comparing to other sports/sporty cars:

"At this price point – or within $15k of it – there’s nothing that can touch it.

Now, some reviewers have bitched about the 7 second-ish 0-60 times. That a new Mustang V-6 is much quicker – which it is. In a straight line. But the BRZ driver will have his say when the road is no longer straight. God help the Mustang jockey trying to keep up. That goes for the V-8 Mustang, too. It’s a big, beefy, brawny car that handles very well… for a big, beefy brawny car. Even though I personally wish the BRZ were 300 pounds lighter, a new Mustang (the V-6 Mustang) is almost 700 pounds heavier. It also almost two feet longer (188.1 inches vs. 166.7) , nearly four inches wider through the hips (73.9 inches vs. 69.9) and five inches taller (55.6 inches vs. 50.6). It – and cars like it (Camaro, Challenger – even the Hyundai Genesis coupe ) are huge cars in comparison. And, they feel it.

It’s not that they’re oafish. Just big. Heavy. A handful.

The BRZ isn’t."

[Mikem53]

Originally Posted by robwbright

In comparing to the Miata he notes an interesting point:

"If the Sciobaru weighed the same as the Miata, it would smoke the Miata. And the fact is, the Sciobaru ought to weigh less than the Miata – because it (the Sciobaru) is a hardtop coupe and hardtops usually weigh less than convertibles – because they don’t need the extra body reinforcement to make up for the loss of roof structure.

Mazda’s ace in the hole, despite the Miata being an older design (and arguably, a less sexy design) is that it’s – somehow, miraculously – not a fatty.

So how come the Sciobaru is (for what it is)? My guess is it was designed to anticipate the next round of government crashworthiness standards – which usually means more mass (and so, more weight).

The current Miata may only be a lightweight for now. It will be interesting to see whether the next Miata porks out, too."

The miata also has less useable space.. Less headroom.. Etc.. So less weight.

[robwbright]

Originally Posted by Mikem53

The miata also has less useable space.. Less headroom.. Etc.. So less weight.

Which the reviewer notes...

[Calum]

He lost me at manual transmissions not being practice. If you've ever driven both in the snow, you know the manual is leaps and bonds easier to control.

I have yet to own an automatic, nor has my wife. The day we are forced to buy one will be a very sad day for us.

We should all be supporting this cause. "Save the Stick"

[Dooley]

'Manual' means the same it has always been. Technology will always eventually catch up especially in the age of computers. A perfect shift everytime has already been achieved. There isn't much more needed in that sense.

Anything "Manual" will be upgraded for "Automated". Robots replace workers, pop-machines replaced soda shops, Engines replaced horses. It's a cycle. Those that stick with manuals will have a pretty high demand 30+ years from now when people who know how to work on a clutch become more and more obsolete.

[Sport-Tech]

Some car makers are giving the venerable stick shift a better fighting chance by adding rev-matching to their manuals (370Z, C7, MINI, M3/M4, etc) - something I'd love to see on the '16 twins refresh and the new ND.

[fatoni]

Originally Posted by robwbright

In comparing to the Miata he notes an interesting point:

"If the Sciobaru weighed the same as the Miata, it would smoke the Miata. And the fact is, the Sciobaru ought to weigh less than the Miata – because it (the Sciobaru) is a hardtop coupe and hardtops usually weigh less than convertibles – because they don’t need the extra body reinforcement to make up for the loss of roof structure.

Mazda’s ace in the hole, despite the Miata being an older design (and arguably, a less sexy design) is that it’s – somehow, miraculously – not a fatty.

So how come the Sciobaru is (for what it is)? My guess is it was designed to anticipate the next round of government crashworthiness standards – which usually means more mass (and so, more weight).

The current Miata may only be a lightweight for now. It will be interesting to see whether the next Miata porks out, too."

i dont see how the twins would be able to do this. so often people just kind of assume there is an extra 300lbs or so to be chopped off of cars with no penalty. i dont understand how you would make the frs lighter than the miata and still have it smoke a miata without becoming prohibitively expensive. where are you taking the weight from? and the miata isnt going to gain significant weight. its likely the car to have stuck to its philosophy for the longest in car history. the nc is even lighter than the outgoing mazdaspeed model and judging by the brake size revealed recently and the return to 4x100, its likely to be lighter

[robwbright]

Originally Posted by fatoni

i dont see how the twins would be able to do this. so often people just kind of assume there is an extra 300lbs or so to be chopped off of cars with no penalty. i dont understand how you would make the frs lighter than the miata and still have it smoke a miata without becoming prohibitively expensive. where are you taking the weight from? and the miata isnt going to gain significant weight. its likely the car to have stuck to its philosophy for the longest in car history. the nc is even lighter than the outgoing mazdaspeed model and judging by the brake size revealed recently and the return to 4x100, its likely to be lighter

Try reading this re: the possibility of reducing weight...

http://ericpetersautos.com/2012/01/1...-were-missing/

And re: air bags and lack of choice:

http://ericpetersautos.com/2013/04/14/whos-responsible/

And re: government preventing us in the U.S. from buying really high mpg cars:

http://ericpetersautos.com/2013/06/0...llowed-to-buy/

http://ericpetersautos.com/2011/02/0...st-not-for-us/

http://ericpetersautos.com/2013/06/1...r-we-cant-buy/

[Dadhawk]

Originally Posted by robwbright

The author doesn't really want it (read the comments) but says its inevitable.

For 98.9% of cars, and car owners, it is inevitable. Once the MPG ratio of autos vs. manuals crossed each other, the need for auto manufacturers to build manuals declined and eventually will cease to be a practical choice for them if they are to meet MPG standards.

Some manufacturers may hold on, and I hope they do, because we should always have the choice. But eventually when the public is buying ATs in the super majority of mass market cars, the manual will become an expensive option (lower volume raises prices) causing a downward spiral even more than now.

It may not be in the next few years, but it is inevitable, particularly as more automation slips into the picture.

And of course flying cars will all have to have ATs.

[tahdizzle]

Originally Posted by robwbright

Try reading this re: the possibility of reducing weight...

http://ericpetersautos.com/2012/01/1...-were-missing/

And re: air bags and lack of choice:

http://ericpetersautos.com/2013/04/14/whos-responsible/

And re: government preventing us in the U.S. from buying really high mpg cars:

http://ericpetersautos.com/2013/06/0...llowed-to-buy/

http://ericpetersautos.com/2011/02/0...st-not-for-us/

http://ericpetersautos.com/2013/06/1...r-we-cant-buy/

The real answer is Corn. Ethanol fuels and subsidies recieved by the people who grow corn and produce ethanol.

Same reason everything is sweetend by corn syrup.

And the same reason why the US was the first on the moon To see if we could plant more.. You guessed it... CORN!

[fatoni]

Originally Posted by robwbright

Try reading this re: the possibility of reducing weight...

http://ericpetersautos.com/2012/01/1...-were-missing/

And re: air bags and lack of choice:

http://ericpetersautos.com/2013/04/14/whos-responsible/

And re: government preventing us in the U.S. from buying really high mpg cars:

http://ericpetersautos.com/2013/06/0...llowed-to-buy/

http://ericpetersautos.com/2011/02/0...st-not-for-us/

http://ericpetersautos.com/2013/06/1...r-we-cant-buy/

how would any of this indicate that the frs could be lighter than the miata? im pretty sure the rules apply to both cars