767Lover
Topic Author
Posts: 3254
Joined: Fri Sep 26, 2003 6:32 am

Require Manual Shift Cars = Fewer Accidents?

Tue Oct 09, 2007 9:50 pm

After the unexpected death of my 14-year old Honda, we recently purchased a used Mazda. It's real economical, which is what we wanted, it's real cute and it's the first time I've driven a stick-shift in 14 years.

It takes a bit of getting used to....namely, getting used to NOT doing other stuff while driving (eating, drinking, using the phone, scanning Siruis, etc.) I am certainly much more focused on driving now, not only because both hands are tied up, but also because I have to pay closer attention to the cars in front of me so I can downshift if needed.

So I was wondering: Wouldn't phasing out automatic transmissions help reduce accidents? What do you think?
 
DfwRevolution
Posts: 8538
Joined: Sat Jan 09, 2010 7:31 pm

RE: Require Manual Shift Cars = Fewer Accidents?

Tue Oct 09, 2007 9:52 pm

I think it's zero sum.

Once you know what you're doing, I think you just lull your way back into some old bad habits. When I first got my manual Accord, I wouldn't touch my cell phone or radio. Now I just drive with my knees because I'm so comfortable with the shifting. Also, when you're very new, trying to coordinate one more activity takes your attention off the road.
 
LAXspotter
Posts: 3227
Joined: Sat Jan 27, 2007 4:16 pm

RE: Require Manual Shift Cars = Fewer Accidents?

Tue Oct 09, 2007 11:34 pm

Quoting DfwRevolution (Reply 1):
Once you know what you're doing, I think you just lull your way back into some old bad habits. When I first got my manual Accord, I wouldn't touch my cell phone or radio. Now I just drive with my knees because I'm so comfortable with the shifting. Also, when you're very new, trying to coordinate one more activity takes your attention off the road.

yeah that is what i see as well. My friend drives an M3, and he can chew tobacco, drink coffee, talk on the cell phone and everything in between even when driving stick.
"Patriotism is the last refuge of the scoundrel" Samuel Johnson
 
KFLLCFII
Posts: 3173
Joined: Sat Sep 11, 2004 7:08 am

RE: Require Manual Shift Cars = Fewer Accidents?

Wed Oct 10, 2007 12:03 am

Quoting 767Lover (Thread starter):
It takes a bit of getting used to....namely, getting used to NOT doing other stuff while driving (eating, drinking, using the phone, scanning Siruis, etc.)

Hell, it never stopped me in my old truck.

-Burger (supported by wrapper) in the right hand...If I had to put it down, the bag was right in front of the center console. -Drink was in the cupholder on the center console itself.
-Would put the burger down in the bag if I had to take a sip of the drink.
-Steer *and* shift with the left hand, unless I was going around a curve...That be the case, I'd wait until around the curve before shifting.
-A ketchup and/or mustard-soiled hand was never allowed to come in contact with the steering wheel or gear shifter...ever.
-The drink was excluded from such requirement.
-Occasionally the left knee would command steering duties if extenuating circumstances existed...such as eating a burger *and* talking on the cellphone.
-I don't recall ever steering with the right knee...Probably because it maintained accelerator pedal duties at all times.
"About the only way to look at it, just a pity you are not POTUS KFLLCFII, seems as if we would all be better off."
 
MCOflyer
Posts: 7068
Joined: Tue Jun 13, 2006 5:51 am

RE: Require Manual Shift Cars = Fewer Accidents?

Wed Oct 10, 2007 12:07 am

I do not own a manual so I can not say how one can be related to accidents. I imagine they would be about the same. This is a good question.

Hunter
Never be afraid to stand up for who you are.
 
sw733
Posts: 5298
Joined: Wed Feb 25, 2004 6:19 am

RE: Require Manual Shift Cars = Fewer Accidents?

Wed Oct 10, 2007 12:09 am

I am from a place where most cars are manual, and I must say there are just as many accidents, or so it seems. I don't think it makes a big enough difference.
 
N1120A
Posts: 26467
Joined: Sun Dec 14, 2003 5:40 pm

RE: Require Manual Shift Cars = Fewer Accidents?

Wed Oct 10, 2007 12:12 am

Quoting MCOflyer (Reply 4):
I do not own a manual so I can not say how one can be related to accidents. I imagine they would be about the same. This is a good question.

If you are a truck driver, then you should have lots of manual experience.
Mangeons les French fries, mais surtout pratiquons avec fierte le French kiss
 
GuitrThree
Posts: 1940
Joined: Fri Oct 29, 2004 12:54 pm

RE: Require Manual Shift Cars = Fewer Accidents?

Wed Oct 10, 2007 12:19 am

Quoting 767Lover (Thread starter):
So I was wondering: Wouldn't phasing out automatic transmissions help reduce accidents? What do you think?

Hummm.. a 16 year old teeny-bopper with a cell phone, car stereo/ipod, and multi-colored shoe-polish covered windows with hearts and the phrases of "I love you (fill in the name)" and "Seniors 2010!!!" is more than enough distraction. And you want to now add an extra "shift-thingy?"

Ummm, no. I seriously don't think phasing out automatics would help anything.
As Seen On FlightRadar24! Radar ==> F-KBNA5
 
lobster
Posts: 653
Joined: Thu Oct 02, 2008 7:03 pm

RE: Require Manual Shift Cars = Fewer Accidents?

Wed Oct 10, 2007 12:25 am

I still did all the things I shouldn't do while driving when I had a 5spd. You just learn to adjust how you do things.
 
vikkyvik
Posts: 11753
Joined: Thu Jul 31, 2003 1:58 pm

RE: Require Manual Shift Cars = Fewer Accidents?

Wed Oct 10, 2007 12:26 am

Quoting 767Lover (Thread starter):
So I was wondering: Wouldn't phasing out automatic transmissions help reduce accidents? What do you think?



Quoting DfwRevolution (Reply 1):
Once you know what you're doing, I think you just lull your way back into some old bad habits. When I first got my manual Accord, I wouldn't touch my cell phone or radio. Now I just drive with my knees because I'm so comfortable with the shifting. Also, when you're very new, trying to coordinate one more activity takes your attention off the road.

 checkmark 

I've driven a manual for a few years now, and I'm so used to it, that whenever I drive an automatic, I try and stomp on the clutch, only to find that nothing's there.

Being used to it means that I've developed the ability to talk on the phone, eat, drink, etc, etc, etc, while driving my stick-shift in city traffic. Most of the time, I'm not even really paying attention to shifting.
I'm watching Jeopardy. The category is worst Madonna songs. "This one from 1987 is terrible".
 
MCOflyer
Posts: 7068
Joined: Tue Jun 13, 2006 5:51 am

RE: Require Manual Shift Cars = Fewer Accidents?

Wed Oct 10, 2007 12:29 am

Quoting N1120A (Reply 6):

If you are a truck driver, then you should have lots of manual experience.

I deliver pizzas.

Hunter
Never be afraid to stand up for who you are.
 
futurecaptain
Posts: 1918
Joined: Sat Sep 09, 2006 1:54 am

RE: Require Manual Shift Cars = Fewer Accidents?

Wed Oct 10, 2007 2:33 am

It probably wouldn't cut down on accidents. But.....

How much gas do you think America would save by phasing out automatic transmissions? Stick shift generally gets better mileage than automatic cars. Say an average of 5 mpg extra, times the million cars in the country, times all the miles we drive annually. Could add up to significant fuel savings very quickly.
AirSO. ASpaceO. ASOnline. ASO.com ASO. ASO. ASO. ASO. ASO.
 
LAXspotter
Posts: 3227
Joined: Sat Jan 27, 2007 4:16 pm

RE: Require Manual Shift Cars = Fewer Accidents?

Wed Oct 10, 2007 2:38 am

Quoting Futurecaptain (Reply 11):
How much gas do you think America would save by phasing out automatic transmissions? Stick shift generally gets better mileage than automatic cars. Say an average of 5 mpg extra, times the million cars in the country, times all the miles we drive annually. Could add up to significant fuel savings very quickly

good point.
"Patriotism is the last refuge of the scoundrel" Samuel Johnson
 
TLG
Posts: 364
Joined: Sun Jul 17, 2005 3:41 pm

RE: Require Manual Shift Cars = Fewer Accidents?

Wed Oct 10, 2007 2:44 am

Quoting Futurecaptain (Reply 11):
How much gas do you think America would save by phasing out automatic transmissions? Stick shift generally gets better mileage than automatic cars. Say an average of 5 mpg extra, times the million cars in the country, times all the miles we drive annually. Could add up to significant fuel savings very quickly.

While that was true in the past, I don't think that's the case anymore. Automatic transmissions have come a long way in the last 40? years, and with torque converter locks and overdrives the economy is very similar to a vehicle with a manual.

-TLG
 
futurecaptain
Posts: 1918
Joined: Sat Sep 09, 2006 1:54 am

RE: Require Manual Shift Cars = Fewer Accidents?

Wed Oct 10, 2007 3:09 am

To add to my above post.

The DOT says there are around 250 million registered passenger vehicles in the US and the average mpg for the country is 17.1. We supposidly drove about 3,000,000,000,000 miles over the course of a year. That's right, 3 trillion miles are driven by Americans every year.

If that milage was driven at an average of 17.1 mpg, the national average, we used approx ~175,000,000,000 gallons of fuel.

Say every vehicle tomorrow turns into a stick shift. Using my above guess of a manual getting an extra 5 mpg, this would bring the national average up to 22.1 mpg.

3 trillion / 22.1 = ~136,000,000,000 gallons of fuel.

So, 39 billion gallons saved every year nationwide. Times ~$3.00 / gal is ~$117 billion dollars saved, or $680 per vehicle per year.

May not seem like alot of $$$ to some, but I sure as hell would take an extra $680 bucks a year.


Say you start with nothing and put that $680 in an account earning 6% interest compounding once a month.
After 10 years you have $9300
After 20 years you have $26000
30 years = $57000
40 years = $113,000
AirSO. ASpaceO. ASOnline. ASO.com ASO. ASO. ASO. ASO. ASO.
 
asuflyer05
Posts: 2053
Joined: Wed Feb 25, 2004 8:53 am

RE: Require Manual Shift Cars = Fewer Accidents?

Wed Oct 10, 2007 4:39 am

Quoting GuitrThree (Reply 7):
Hummm.. a 16 year old teeny-bopper with a cell phone, car stereo/ipod, and multi-colored shoe-polish covered windows with hearts and the phrases of "I love you (fill in the name)" and "Seniors 2010!!!" is more than enough distraction. And you want to now add an extra "shift-thingy?"

Exactly.

Quoting Futurecaptain (Reply 11):
How much gas do you think America would save by phasing out automatic transmissions? Stick shift generally gets better mileage than automatic cars. Say an average of 5 mpg extra, times the million cars in the country, times all the miles we drive annually. Could add up to significant fuel savings very quickly.

Not sure about other cars, but for the Honda Accord and Civic both get better gas mileage with the automatic. Honestly, it's not that big of a difference either way. It all comes down to the driver. If you drive a stick and need 6000rpm to roll away from a stop sign becase you're afraid of stalling, you should own an automatic.
 
futurecaptain
Posts: 1918
Joined: Sat Sep 09, 2006 1:54 am

RE: Require Manual Shift Cars = Fewer Accidents?

Wed Oct 10, 2007 4:45 am

Quoting Asuflyer05 (Reply 15):
If you drive a stick and need 6000rpm to roll away from a stop sign becase you're afraid of stalling, you should own an automatic.

That's true.

I guess what would really help is better driver education and stricter requirements before licensing drivers in America. But, I'm not convinced this is a cure-all answer either.
AirSO. ASpaceO. ASOnline. ASO.com ASO. ASO. ASO. ASO. ASO.
 
SA7700
Posts: 2940
Joined: Thu Dec 18, 2003 9:38 pm

RE: Require Manual Shift Cars = Fewer Accidents?

Wed Oct 10, 2007 5:25 am

Quoting 767Lover (Thread starter):
Wouldn't phasing out automatic transmissions help reduce accidents? What do you think?

In South Africa we have predominantly manual cars. Road fatalities for the year 2006: 15393 lifes. That is for a country almost twice the size of Texas. IMO driver education and attitude has got a lot to do with it.
When you are doing stuff that nobody has done before, there is no manual – Kevin McCloud (Grand Designs)
 
User avatar
ManuCH
Crew
Posts: 2677
Joined: Mon Jun 20, 2005 12:33 am

RE: Require Manual Shift Cars = Fewer Accidents?

Wed Oct 10, 2007 5:36 am

Quoting Futurecaptain (Reply 11):
How much gas do you think America would save by phasing out automatic transmissions? Stick shift generally gets better mileage than automatic cars.

This is not true anymore for new automatic transmissions, at least not all of them. Furthermore, it's much easier to get *worse* mileage out of a stick shift if you don't know how to drive it correctly (ie. when to shift).

My car, in any case, has a better mileage with an automatic than with a shift.
Never trust a statistic you didn't fake yourself
 
ltbewr
Posts: 12359
Joined: Thu Jan 29, 2004 1:24 pm

RE: Require Manual Shift Cars = Fewer Accidents?

Wed Oct 10, 2007 5:37 am

Too many people in the USA are only bearly compentent drivers to begin with and would be totally incompetent with stick cars. To me, urban/suburban driving conditions and traffic discourage, relatively cheaper fuel costs and larger engines mean sticks are seen as impractical so auto transmission cars are overwhelming preferred here.
 
ME AVN FAN
Posts: 12970
Joined: Fri May 31, 2002 12:05 am

RE: Require Manual Shift Cars = Fewer Accidents?

Wed Oct 10, 2007 1:16 pm

Quoting 767Lover (Thread starter):
getting used to NOT doing other stuff while driving (eating, drinking, using the phone, scanning Siruis, etc.) I am certainly much more focused on driving now, not only because both hands are tied up, but also because I have to pay closer attention to the cars in front of me so I can downshift if needed.

So I was wondering: Wouldn't phasing out automatic transmissions help reduce accidents? What do you think?

Absolutely NOT. If you are used to drive per manual shifting of gears, you can do all those things mentioned like eating, drinking, phoning, etc without any problems. Quite to the contrary, whenever having had the opportunity to drive an automatic, I felt I had far more time to concentrate on the traffic in front of me, beside me, and behind me. AND, in countries where the automatics are dominant, the driving is much much calmer than in the manual-driving dominated countries, which reduces accidents quite considerably.
-
That your country is very low with accidents per kilometers driven to a very good part is the success of the automatics.
 
Sabena332
Posts: 14938
Joined: Wed May 09, 2001 3:57 am

RE: Require Manual Shift Cars = Fewer Accidents?

Wed Oct 10, 2007 1:42 pm

Quoting ManuCH (Reply 18):
Quoting Futurecaptain (Reply 11):
How much gas do you think America would save by phasing out automatic transmissions? Stick shift generally gets better mileage than automatic cars.

This is not true anymore for new automatic transmissions

 checkmark 

VW's DSG and Audi's Tiptronic and Multitronic transmissions shift more econimical than a human could ever do with a manual transmission.

Patrick
NZ1's mother is a disgusting crack-whore and his father is a worthless alcoholic!
 
baroque
Posts: 12302
Joined: Thu Apr 27, 2006 2:15 pm

RE: Require Manual Shift Cars = Fewer Accidents?

Wed Oct 10, 2007 2:11 pm

Quoting 767Lover (Thread starter):
So I was wondering: Wouldn't phasing out automatic transmissions help reduce accidents? What do you think?

Gotta ask, what did you do to your Honda to cause death at 14. My Honda was going fine at 28 when four weeks ago, and with misgivings, I parted company for an (sob) automatic. For an auto that is supposed to remember your driving habits, it gets some pretty odd interpretations of what I really want it to do.

I think autos make for all sorts of new ways to have accidents, having to go through R to get to Drive, creep, no clutch as a back up to whether you actually want to go or not. Countless interesting ways of making a foul up that just don't exist with a manual - or even a Manuel perhaps!

And those additional methods of getting into trouble are nothing to do with taking or making phone calls or pouring coffee in your lap. My left foot is likely to fall off due to lack of use, and changing gear with one hand and steering with t'other never did tax me unduly!  angel 
 
canuckpaxguy
Posts: 1482
Joined: Sat Sep 06, 2003 2:31 pm

RE: Require Manual Shift Cars = Fewer Accidents?

Wed Oct 10, 2007 7:17 pm

All I've ever driven is a manual transmission. I've always assumed that people who drive cars with manual transmissions, do so deliberately, and enjoy driving. If you enjoy something, you're probably pretty good at it. Right? I think I'm a better driver than most, but doesn't everyone?

Seriously though, I think DFWRevolution is right --- it's a zero sum. The type of transmission in a car and the propensity for accidents are mutually exclusive.

Now, Corolla drivers are just plain bad drivers, regardless of the transmissions!  Wink

G
 
rfields5421
Posts: 5543
Joined: Thu Jul 19, 2007 12:45 am

RE: Require Manual Shift Cars = Fewer Accidents?

Wed Oct 10, 2007 8:19 pm

Quoting GuitrThree (Reply 7):
Hummm.. a 16 year old teeny-bopper with a cell phone, car stereo/ipod, and multi-colored shoe-polish covered windows with hearts and the phrases of "I love you (fill in the name)" and "Seniors 2010!!!" is more than enough distraction. And you want to now add an extra "shift-thingy?"

Okay, it was a 65 Chevy 1/2 ton pickup and I didn't have a cell phone, or a radion - but the manual transmission never slowed me down.

The hardest part was teaching my girl friend to move the column mounted shift lever in sync with my left foot hitting the clutch.

My right hand was occupied with other tasks for our mutual satisfaction.
 
ME AVN FAN
Posts: 12970
Joined: Fri May 31, 2002 12:05 am

RE: Require Manual Shift Cars = Fewer Accidents?

Thu Oct 11, 2007 8:30 am

Quoting Sabena332 (Reply 21):
transmissions shift more econimical than a human could ever do with a manual transmission.

And the calmer way of driving, resulting from the automatics, in reality leads to a lower fuel consumption anyway, as few average people can handle the manual-gears-cars optimally from a petrol-use point-of-view.
 
Brick
Posts: 1486
Joined: Wed Aug 04, 1999 11:08 am

RE: Require Manual Shift Cars = Fewer Accidents?

Thu Oct 11, 2007 10:01 pm

I had a 1982 Mazda 626 in high school that was a stick shift. I was very skilled at driving to school while eating a bowl of cereal. A stick shift won't prevent distractions once you become used to it.

I drive an automatic now and sometimes miss driving a stick shift. I live in the largest city in Colorado and my work commute is 100% dense city driving. An manual transmission would kill me in that kind of traffic!
A noble spirit embiggens the smallest man...
 
Sabena332
Posts: 14938
Joined: Wed May 09, 2001 3:57 am

RE: Require Manual Shift Cars = Fewer Accidents?

Thu Oct 11, 2007 10:11 pm

Quoting Brick (Reply 26):
A stick shift won't prevent distractions once you become used to it.

I agree, eating, drinking, talking on the phone, etc. is actually no problem while driving when you are used to shift manually.

Quoting Brick (Reply 26):
An manual transmission would kill me in that kind of traffic!

Same here, the traffic in the Ruhr-Area is the horror in the mornings and afternoons, thus I am always glad when I get a car with automatic (my parents and me share three cars, two with automatic, one with manual).

I learned on a manual and drove cars with manual transmission for more than 10 years, but now I am sick and tired of it, I clearly prefer automatic transmissions!

Patrick
NZ1's mother is a disgusting crack-whore and his father is a worthless alcoholic!
 
Banco
Posts: 14343
Joined: Mon Oct 29, 2001 11:56 pm

RE: Require Manual Shift Cars = Fewer Accidents?

Thu Oct 11, 2007 10:17 pm

Quoting ME AVN FAN (Reply 25):
And the calmer way of driving, resulting from the automatics, in reality leads to a lower fuel consumption anyway, as few average people can handle the manual-gears-cars optimally from a petrol-use point-of-view.

Eh? What a bizarre statement! That's no more true than just saying that people who drive automatics simply dump the foot on the floor to get kickdown all the time. Manuals are more economical that automatics in real world terms, not just some obscure test version. Now the various semi-automatics recently arrived may well be different, I don't know, I'll take Patrick's word for it, but the idea that people who drive manuals are somehow incapable of extracting better economy than people who drive automatics is simply weird.
She's as nervous as a very small nun at a penguin shoot.
 
redngold
Posts: 6673
Joined: Wed Mar 22, 2000 12:26 pm

RE: Require Manual Shift Cars = Fewer Accidents?

Thu Oct 11, 2007 10:43 pm

I don't think this would help we left-handers - except perhaps in left-side traffic areas.
Up, up and away!
 
cornish
Posts: 7651
Joined: Fri Feb 18, 2005 8:05 pm

RE: Require Manual Shift Cars = Fewer Accidents?

Thu Oct 11, 2007 10:45 pm

Quoting Redngold (Reply 29):
I don't think this would help we left-handers - except perhaps in left-side traffic areas.

or those of us on this side of the pond  Smile
Just when I thought I could see light at the end of the tunnel, it was some B*****d with a torch bringing me more work
 
redngold
Posts: 6673
Joined: Wed Mar 22, 2000 12:26 pm

RE: Require Manual Shift Cars = Fewer Accidents?

Thu Oct 11, 2007 10:52 pm

Quoting Cornish (Reply 30):
or those of us on this side of the pond

That's what I meant but you're not the only ones.
Up, up and away!
 
vikkyvik
Posts: 11753
Joined: Thu Jul 31, 2003 1:58 pm

RE: Require Manual Shift Cars = Fewer Accidents?

Fri Oct 12, 2007 12:46 am

Quoting Redngold (Reply 29):
I don't think this would help we left-handers - except perhaps in left-side traffic areas.

Just curious as to why that is. Is it because you tend to grip the wheel with your right hand? Or because it's easier to shift with your left?
I'm watching Jeopardy. The category is worst Madonna songs. "This one from 1987 is terrible".
 
sprout5199
Posts: 1681
Joined: Sat Feb 26, 2005 8:26 am

RE: Require Manual Shift Cars = Fewer Accidents?

Fri Oct 12, 2007 2:30 am

Quoting RFields5421 (Reply 24):
column mounted shift lever

Ahhh yes, the three on the tree. Thats the ONLY way to learn how to drive a manual shift. You know its in second when it hits your thigh, and reverse when it hits your knee. Add in manual steering with a suicide knob and you are good to go.

Quoting RFields5421 (Reply 24):
My right hand was occupied with other tasks for our mutual satisfaction.

Hardest part(pun intended) was not hitting her head when turning the steering wheel. Bad painful things happen when that happens.

Dan in Jupiter
 
ME AVN FAN
Posts: 12970
Joined: Fri May 31, 2002 12:05 am

RE: Require Manual Shift Cars = Fewer Accidents?

Fri Oct 12, 2007 9:16 am

Quoting Banco (Reply 28):
the idea that people who drive manuals are somehow incapable of extracting better economy than people who drive automatics is simply weird.

not weird but simply realistic. I may be ready to excempt the British drivers from this harsh "judgment" !  Big grin
but can say that it for sure is realistic with German, Swiss, French, Italian, Spanish and Arab drivers, who by majority after EVERY change of gear treat the accelarator like the drumming instrument of a big-band
 
sv2008
Posts: 591
Joined: Tue Aug 29, 2006 11:05 pm

RE: Require Manual Shift Cars = Fewer Accidents?

Fri Oct 12, 2007 11:02 am

I find RHD cars easier to drive than LHD, but I'm used to driving RHD in England and only drive LHD maybe one week a year on holiday, so it's difficult to say if thats because it's more difficult or I'm just not used to it. Probably the 2nd - if you drive both often enough it probably doesn't make any difference.
 
ME AVN FAN
Posts: 12970
Joined: Fri May 31, 2002 12:05 am

RE: Require Manual Shift Cars = Fewer Accidents?

Fri Oct 12, 2007 12:37 pm

Quoting Banco (Reply 28):
the idea that people who drive manuals are somehow incapable of extracting better economy than people who drive automatics is simply weird.

not weird, but simply realistic.
 
Banco
Posts: 14343
Joined: Mon Oct 29, 2001 11:56 pm

RE: Require Manual Shift Cars = Fewer Accidents?

Fri Oct 12, 2007 1:21 pm

Quoting ME AVN FAN (Reply 34):
not weird, but simply realistic.

It's not realistic at all. It's been demonstrated a million times in real world driving that automatics use more fuel than equivalent manuals. It's a fantasy you're having.
She's as nervous as a very small nun at a penguin shoot.
 
ME AVN FAN
Posts: 12970
Joined: Fri May 31, 2002 12:05 am

RE: Require Manual Shift Cars = Fewer Accidents?

Fri Oct 12, 2007 3:40 pm

Quoting Banco (Reply 35):
automatics use more fuel than equivalent manuals

And even if, driving with automatics is more comfortable, calmer, and so is one of the reasons why the USA have a very low accident-rate
 
Banco
Posts: 14343
Joined: Mon Oct 29, 2001 11:56 pm

RE: Require Manual Shift Cars = Fewer Accidents?

Fri Oct 12, 2007 3:49 pm

Quoting ME AVN FAN (Reply 36):
And even if, driving with automatics is more comfortable, calmer, and so is one of the reasons why the USA have a very low accident-rate

One, there's no justification whatsoever for saying an automatic is "calmer". I hate the bloody things, the lack of control makes me anything but calm. Secondly, there are any number of reasons why a country has a low accident rate, and the fact that the US is an enormous country with relatively few people in it per mile of road might be said to have a fairly big part to play.

Britain has the lowest accident rate in Europe. We have the lowest number of diesels too. Care to suggest that we have fewer accidents because we drive more petrol powered cars than continental Europe does?
She's as nervous as a very small nun at a penguin shoot.
 
Leezyjet
Posts: 3540
Joined: Sun Oct 14, 2001 7:26 am

RE: Require Manual Shift Cars = Fewer Accidents?

Fri Oct 12, 2007 3:50 pm

From reading this thread, it would seem the best way to have fewer accidents is to stop eating/drinking/yapping on the phone etc. and actually concentrate on the 1,000kgs+ of potential killing machine that you are operating and the environment you are operating it in.

Although I guess for our friends in the US that don't have to worry about going round corners, doing these things whilst driving are ok.  Wink

 Smile
"She Rolls, 45 knots, 90, 135, nose comes up to 20 degrees, she's airborne - She flies, Concorde Flies"
 
ME AVN FAN
Posts: 12970
Joined: Fri May 31, 2002 12:05 am

RE: Require Manual Shift Cars = Fewer Accidents?

Fri Oct 12, 2007 5:00 pm

Quoting Banco (Reply 37):
Britain has the lowest accident rate in Europe

and the best drivers in my personal opinion. Fast but fair and relaxed. I however like the automatics, as I am NOT a control freak. But automatics tend to have high purchasing prices and are too expensive.
 
KFLLCFII
Posts: 3173
Joined: Sat Sep 11, 2004 7:08 am

RE: Require Manual Shift Cars = Fewer Accidents?

Fri Oct 12, 2007 5:06 pm

Quoting Redngold (Reply 29):
I don't think this would help we left-handers - except perhaps in left-side traffic areas.

 confused  Never bothered me one bit...
"About the only way to look at it, just a pity you are not POTUS KFLLCFII, seems as if we would all be better off."
 
Arrow
Posts: 2325
Joined: Wed Jun 19, 2002 7:44 am

RE: Require Manual Shift Cars = Fewer Accidents?

Fri Oct 12, 2007 6:00 pm

Quoting Banco (Reply 35):
It's been demonstrated a million times in real world driving that automatics use more fuel than equivalent manuals.

There are too many variables to make a bold statement like that. It's probably true that a professional driving a stick shift can coax better fuel economy out of the vehicle than someone one driving the same car with an automatic. But very few people (and I've been driving manual transmission equipped vehicles for 25 years now) can get the shifting/acceleration pattern down to anything like the precision needed to maximize fuel economy. A computer-controlled automatic can compensate for a lot of driver-induced inefficiency with a stick.
Never let the facts get in the way of a good story.
 
Banco
Posts: 14343
Joined: Mon Oct 29, 2001 11:56 pm

RE: Require Manual Shift Cars = Fewer Accidents?

Fri Oct 12, 2007 6:09 pm

Quoting Arrow (Reply 41):
It's probably true that a professional driving a stick shift can coax better fuel economy out of the vehicle than someone one driving the same car with an automatic. But very few people (and I've been driving manual transmission equipped vehicles for 25 years now) can get the shifting/acceleration pattern down to anything like the precision needed to maximize fuel economy. A computer-controlled automatic can compensate for a lot of driver-induced inefficiency with a stick

No, it's more than that. The fuel consumption figures (here at least) MUST mimic real world driving, they can't be some artificially created thing. And automatics routinely have higher fuel consumption. As I say, I can't comment on DSGs and the like, I'm talking traditional auto boxes.
She's as nervous as a very small nun at a penguin shoot.
 
redngold
Posts: 6673
Joined: Wed Mar 22, 2000 12:26 pm

RE: Require Manual Shift Cars = Fewer Accidents?

Fri Oct 12, 2007 7:42 pm

Quoting Vikkyvik (Reply 32):
Or because it's easier to shift with your left?

Yes, that's it. Most left handers have more dexterity with their left hand, since it is used more frequently.
Up, up and away!

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: aerlingus747, B777LRF, jetwet1, Majestic-12 [Bot], MaverickM11, Scorpio and 41 guests