manual or automatic?

there are a few reason why I'd like to own a manual.. firstly, I've heard it's almost matianance-free, there are no fragile parts like an auto tranny has.... people told me you don't have to worry about the tranny in the car life time.

2ndly, it 's gass economic. auto tranny eats up gas too quick..

3rdly, I always liked machanics and me likes to play around with all kinds of things...(my camry has been treated almost like a manual.), and I liked sports, gears, and circuits, also I used to be an amateur athlete so my legs are at least strong enough to tolerent the stop&go traffic with clutch.

the last reason is that it's a bit fun to drive, even though I don't like race or whatsorta of *fun*.

Oh. I didn't know that. Good reason not to buy one of those brands then, huh?

Tom

Speaking of all this clutch wear, my 16 year old daughter is about to learn to drive. I have a 2000 Subaru Legacy L wagon, and my wife's car is a 1998 Honda Civic hatchback. Both have manual transmissions. Which clutch is my daughter more likely to trash? And which repair is likely to be costlier?

The Honda is rated at 106 hp. It's a light car. The clutch feels light, but given the engine's low power and the car's low weight, the clutch may be durable.

Thanks.

Tom

I think it's worth taking a shot at buying a manual car without experience. You'll lurch and stall for the first two or three days, but then you'll get the hang of it.

I had little experience with a stickshift when I bought my first car.

The fact that manuals are so rare in this country makes us believe that it's hard to drive them. I don't think that's true.

Tom

Every car has its Achilles' heal.

Tom

I'd say you answered your own question.

I can't really say that I know which repair would cost more, but I'm going to take a stab at it and guess the Subaru because I'm assuming there would be more labor involved because of the AWD. Since YMMV and all that, I think you'd be best off just hitting a local shop and getting quotes for both cars.

Eugene Moon

Rent a manual trans for the first day of those lessons. After that, go with the Honda. :-)

-John O

Not true. A manual transmission (like most other things on cars) requires maintenance. For example, the clutch in my Subaru is currently in need of replacement of its hydraulic fluid.

Also, manual transmissions can also have fragile parts, depending on how they're built and designed. Two common failures I know of with manual transmissions involve gear synchros and the gears themselves (typically

2nd gear - though I don't know why that is).

As for not having to worry about the transmission for the car's lifetime, I'd say it's more common that transmissions that are treated nicely last for good long times while those that are "abused" fail more quickly. Whether the transmission is automatic or manual has nothing to do with this.

While this was true back in the day, today's electronically-controlled transmissions do a much better job of minimizing this. So, keeping in mind that there are still cars sold without electronically-controlled transmissions, I'd say there is no longer a real reason to choose a manual transmission over an automatic solely based on fuel economy.

Agreed.

Eugene Moon

Goodness, what country are you in? I'm in Noo Joizy (in the USA), and I've never seen a rental car with a manual transmission. U-Haul used to rent big trucks with a manual, but most of those are automatic now, too, and I am NOT renting one of those for my daughter.

Tom

Hi,

I know this is only one person's experience with a bit of anecdotal "evidence" tossed in, but I've found the mileage estimates on the window stickers to be very close between manual and automatic versions of the same car, while real life driving always seems to favor the manual, often by a LOT. Especially around town.

As for the electronically-controlled part, I've yet to see where that's all so great. Most of 'em I've driven, including the Camry I own, seem to be programmed by Microsoft dropouts. The only way to be able to predict what my Toyota's gonna do is to lock out the the electronics by hitting the "power" button. At least it acts like a "proper" auto then! OTOH, since it's a base model, it may not be all that electronic, but the auto in the g/f's Civic is perfectly predictable and doesn't leave the driver wondering "what's it gonna do next?"

As I said, just one person's experience and opinion.

Rick

I'm in Michigan. OK, I haven't see a manual rental in a long time, and you're probably right...they don't exist. Anyway, the gist of that is "learn on someone else's clutch." ;-)

-John O

All the other answers about how long clutches have lasted in other maeks and models are quite irrelevant to your question. Firstly the WRX has a powerband somewhere between 3500 and

6000 rpm, below about 3000 a GEO Metro would seem faster. A manual tranny is the only way to go to get the best out of it. If you prefer an automatic, you would probably be happier in another type of car. I needed a clutch replacement on my WRX at

In article , paul wrote: (snip)

(snip)

Mmmm, yes. This reminds me: is it possible to find torque-speed curves or fuel efficiency maps (by rpm and torque) and suchlike for the WRX engines? I'd be interested to learn more about it, but I've not seen any of those plots.

When you don't need the power - say, you're just cruising on an empty highway, what rpm do you aim for?

-- Mark

I'm not sure how this wrecks the clutch, but I suppose re-engaging the clutch afterwards while travelling at that speed probably isn't too good for it. Something I always try to avoid is using the clutch as a brake: there's downshifting, and then there's downshifting without double-clutching or rev-matching. I wince sometimes when I'm in a manual and someone doesn't rev-match when they downshift.. that loud whining noise makes my back teeth twinge.

These scenarios seem to make much more sense. The instruction manual for my STi is quite clear: the clutch should only slip when pulling away from a stop (either in 1st, for normal driving, or 2nd if the road is particularly hazardous and slippery.)