Quote:
Originally Posted by NemesisX
The problem with a traditional manual transmission is that it doesn't do anything well anymore (other than give people a greater sense of involvement).
|
What if driver involvement means more than just about every other aspect?
Quote:
Originally Posted by NemesisX
It's slower around the track compared to paddle shifting variants. It gets worse gas mileage (on average) than most automatic transmissions.
It's great for people who willingly want to be slower around a track in exchange for performing unnecessary and extraneous maneuvers. It provides a "video game" feel to driving.
|
I drive a supercharged V6... if I wanted good gas mileage I would have bought a Prius. I've also never been on a track and I don't feel like I'm playing a game... I feel like I'm driving a car that I have full control over.
Quote:
Originally Posted by NemesisX
There seems to be a lot of outcry about the lack of manual transmission on most car forums, but the corresponding sales figures never seem to match. BMW is already scrapping the traditional manual transmission for its next M5. Developing a traditional manual transmission M5 for all of the 7 people who want it just isn't a financially sensible option anymore. It's costing them money.
|
That's similar to saying that most Americans are sick while you're sitting in a doctors office. Enthusiasts on auto forums are largely those purists who enjoy a manual. I just did a little bit of non-scientific research on cars.com for the M5 between 2007-10 (only years they offered both the SMG and 6MT in the M5) and of 212 cars for sale, 66 were manual. That's a 31% take rate. I did the same thing for the M3 for the last 10 years. 1,006 cars for sale and 492 are manual, a 49% take rate. If I shorten it to last 5 years (with the DCT available), the take rate on a true manual goes to 51%.