If you have never bought a car with a manual transmission new

>>17152892
Guess I get to complain

>>17152892
I instinctively wanted to argue your point, but I can't. It's true.

How am I supposed to justify spending 25k *minimum* to get a 200HP sports car or hot hatch, when I could get something like a C5 Z06 for the same amount?

>>17153084
stop being poor and you will not have to justify

>>17153092
Why buy a gay little car like a Fist or Fors when there are actually good, better in all categories card available on the used market at the same price?

I'm sure all those "I'm happy to be paying out the ass for a malfunctioning overstressed I4 family car" guys don't have a single bit of buyers remorse for their god awful decisions.

>>17152892
And like buying one will make a difference?

Corporations no longer listen to their customers, the make their customers think they need what ever they're shilling.

We're no longer in a customer driven economy haven't been since the 90's.

>>17153212
>We're no longer in a customer driven economy haven't been since the 90's.
Are we talking about USA here, because one third of the economy is driven by consumer spending. Companies don't spend money to put out a product for no damn reason.

>>17153211
this is why you are single anon.

you will get more pussy in a new mazda3 then a shitbox corvette from the 1990s

>>17152892
>manual car thread
>post a shitty brand that cant even make a good gearbox

l m a o

>>17152892

Who gives a shit? If the technology progresses, what is the point of having manual transmissions? I get the feeling that the reason for them is nostalgia and a sense of superiority over "dipshit American teenagers".

File: 1491453252728.jpg (20KB, 306x306px) Image search: [Google]

20KB, 306x306px

>>17153873
automatics will always be shit

Manual cars are disappearing for a few reasons.

One is the compounded lack of know-how:
- family buy new, automatic car
- 10 years later, kid gets automatic car secondhand from parents
- kid had no reason to learn manual, so doesn't know how
- kid grows up, goto 1

So the issue compounds over time, driving down demand.

Another problem is fuel economy standards.
The government says cars have to meet 54 MPG soon. Automatic (and now CVTs) are more efficient, which allows the manufacturers to squeeze out every bit of efficiency they can.

>>17153908

Of course high end sports cars and your ricemobile should be manual, but there's no reason why an F250 or a Jag or minivan should be.

>>17152892
hmm ... does buying a pickup with a manual transmission new off the lot count?

if so then I get to complain

>>17153084
>need to justify 16 year old rattle trap mulletvette chevy to anyone but the denziens of the local dive bar.

>>17153920
I find manual transmissions better for trucks when you're hauling a load. You can use the engine braking more effectively, and you can downshift before you start driving up a hill. Not saying auto trucks are bad, I just like the control of a manual for hauling. Diesel is nice too.

File: asian-girls-in-minidresses-and-high-heels-wallpaper.jpg (284KB, 1920x1200px) Image search: [Google]

284KB, 1920x1200px

>>17153826
You should know car companies mostly rely on gearbox manufacturers for these types of things

>>17152892
I'm not going to pay a sucker tax for buying new, but every car I've bought has been manual.
I'm not going to complain, though. It's just symptomatic of the general attitude of laziness common these days.
No one remembers birthdays, they have FB remind them.
No one learns directions, they have GPS talk them through it.
If products won't do things for you, most people have little interest in them.

File: 71PuX51lxKL._SL1500_.jpg (120KB, 1500x788px) Image search: [Google]

120KB, 1500x788px

>>17153873
I feel that you are only half right here.
Right now technology to make a more responsive auto is in the mass market. However, they are attached to the Porsche 911 S. Until everybody is driving a 911 S, there will still be manuals.

>>17153211
I bought a FiST and I have 0% buyers remorse it's an amazing little econobox.

i only buy used cars that i personally think will last and going up in value for the next 50 years


you have to realistically think what will cars be like in 50 years, will this car be around? will this car be desirable? is this car special? will people pay more than i paid for this car in 50 years time?

File: Tank_Automatic.jpg (68KB, 640x360px) Image search: [Google]

68KB, 640x360px

>>17152892
>If you have never bought a car with a manual transmission new off the dealership lot, you have no right to complain about the disappearance of manuals.

In the Impossible Engineering television series of documentary videos about engineering topics, the superiority of automatic transmissions was shown. See Season 3, episode 4 at the 34 minute mark. A WW2 Jeep with manual transmission was pitted against a WW2 M-18 Hellcat tank with an automatic transmission. Now, that was an old technology automatic as compared to the refined ones available nowadays. The manual transmission jeep lost to the automatic transmission tank in a timed test from a standing start to 300 feet.

Hellcat. Yeah!

And no, it was not a chrysler hellcat. General Motors invented the automatic transmission for that M-18 Hellcat. However, the wags here would say the Jeep lost because it didn't have EcoBoost.

>>17155578
Jesus Christ I hope that comparison is sarcasm

Couldn't get more apples to blocks of cheese if you tried

>>17155592
While some people argue for manual transmissions, even in the 1940's, the automatic transmission was capable of being used in stressful high-horsepower situations such as a tank.

I myself have tried manual transmission and found it annoying in freeway stop and go traffic.

The other thing about manual is that sometimes, a person will still use such a car simply because they need to use the car. So they will grind the gears and heat up the clutch as they misuse and abuse the manual transmission gears. Too bad. It will be done because the car will be used. If the owner didn't want gears to be ground up by other users, then he should have bought an automatic.

>>17155641
The point isn't how much stress the transmission can stand, but the level of responsiveness, predictability, driver engagement, and control offered. Automatics, even the best DCTs, reduce all four. Driver engagement is the biggest problem to me. I suspect that if manuals were mandated, we'd see less crashes due to people staring at their phones.
>I myself have blah blah grinding gears blah blah
Manuals aren't inferior simply because you aren't able to use them, stupid redditor.

>>17152892
i bought a fist new so i can bitch all I want

>>17154528
>implying we'll still have a functioning economy in 50 years
>implying ICE cars won't be banned
>implying non-autonomous vehicles won't be banned
>implying you understand inflation
>not factoring the cost of storing a car for 50 years

Sounds like a good retirement plan desu

>>17155685
It's going to be a hard sell to convince anyone that you have some sort of magical insight into the future of our economy.
And there's these things usually attached to houses and apartments called 'garages' where people store their cars, whether it's for 5 years or 50.
The rest of your post is just an idealistic wet dream where you ban shit you don't like.

>>17153803
you could buy 3 corvettes from the 1990's for the price of a new mazda 3. OP is talking about C6s and you know it.