Anyone has/had a bent soft top mechanism?

[gull]

Oh, I agree that a manual can be more fun in the twisties when you're out in the middle of nowhere. There's nothing like that heel-toe dance as you downshift for a tight corner. I find it an incredibly rewarding skill to hone, and if I'm buying a car that I'm going to only drive for fun, the manual shift car will win every time. But I drive my Cabriolet almost every day, and trust me, half an hour of clutching in and out over and over again in traffic, several times a week...it gets old, and it's not good for the car.

As a side note, I'm finding a good manual column shift is surprisingly fun. Maybe not so much the sloppy cable-shifted ones American cars used to get saddled with, but the one on my old Saab is tight and responsive. 3-4 and 4-3 shifts are quick and easy; I just slap the lever down or up with my open fingers, barely even have to let go of the wheel. I find it really satisfying somehow. Maybe I'm just weird.

[Briano1234]

As one that learned heel-toe and power sliding around corners (you call it drifting) on a 4spd manual transmission in a 58 bug-eyed sprite or a 67 MG midget. I am one of the older manual tranny users in the forum. I have been driving sticks since I was about 12.

The first 3 cars I had were Manuals...Then I bought my 1st Automatic, a 1972 Rover 3500S. The car spooled fast and I could consistently beat out 350 chevelles and vettes.

Then I bought another couple of stick cars.
My company vehicles were all stick. I have probably driven over a million miles with a stick.
Until that fateful day I blew my brains out.

After I recovered from my stroke, I couldn't trust my shifting ability on hills.....One day on a hill a Arse in a SUV pulled right up to my bumper and started to honk the horn. I got out of my car, stood right next to his window and screamed obscenities at him to make him feel so small. I then figured that I could get shot.
But the satisfaction of making that ass back up to give me room was awesome.

So I realized that I would need to sell my beloved Rabbit as none of my Daughters / wife liked to drive it.

I have 2 cabriolets, they are both automatics. I enjoy the crap out of them...
My first Cabby RIP was a stick and I enjoyed that so much that I got my first ticket in 20 years.... 72 in a 55 two blocks from the red light.

My 2 current cab's both auto are fun to drive and I have them adjusted so that I can choose when the thing shifts. It may have 3 speeds but they are nice.
My green one spools quicker as it has the dual down pipe on it. Some day i hope to get my dual down installed on my blue one....then that one will be as fast.

With the quality of driving that I see from people trying to smoke and talk and shift while texting or talking on their cell phones I wish more would be driving automatics.

[gull]

Then I bought my 1st Automatic, a 1972 Rover 3500S. The car spooled fast and I could consistently beat out 350 chevelles and vettes.

That reminds me of one advantage of automatic transmissions, in general -- if all other things are equal, automatics are frequently faster 0-60 than sticks. The reason is the automatic can usually keep delivering torque right through a shift, or very nearly so. If it takes you a half-second to shift (including clutching) and it takes two shifts to reach 60, that's the same as a one second head start for the automatic. High-end sports cars are nearly all using dual-clutch "automated manual" transmissions now, as are race cars in racing series that allow it.

In Cabriolets, of course, all other things aren't equal because the automatic is short two cogs compared to the stick, so the stick ends up being 2 seconds faster (11 vs 13, according to the specs.) That's a design shortcoming in this particular car, though, and not a general failing of automatic transmissions. I'm actually surprised VW felt they could sell a three speed for as long as they did. Almost everyone had moved on to four-speed overdrive transmissions by the mid-1980s.

[No Automatics!!]

Brian, hope you understand my post was meant to be comical and not insulting to those driving automatics, especially when sometimes this isn't due to choice, as apparently is your case. Sorry to hear about the stroke. Based on how active you are with your toys I'd never guess you've had such a trauma in the past.

I'm mostly pissed at lazy auto driving schools that take the easy way out by teaching new drivers to drive autos. Once you teach someone the easy way, it is a lot harder for them to make the switch. I think they should teach new drivers to drive standard first and then let that person make their own decision as to which car to buy. Heck, just look at all the fuel the world would be saving if there were no automatics around. Not to mention how much more affordable new cars would be if they a buyer didn't have to fork out a chunk of money for this 'option'.

I like to think I have done my (small) part. I have taught a few people how to drive standard (not an easy thing to do I will concede) and it's good to see that they now dread the idea to drive automatics.

[gull]

I don't quite agree. A new driver has a lot to deal with at once, and it's kind of overwhelming at first. I think driving a manual shift is an advanced technique that should be taught after someone is already comfortable with maintaining speed and lane position in traffic. I do think it would be nice if more schools offered it as an option, though.

A good analogy is pilot training...a new student pilot has a lot to deal with, so they learn on simple aircraft. They move up to planes with variable-pitch propellers, retractable landing gear, etc. later, after they've had some time to establish basic skills.

[kamzcab86]

I think drivers should be required to learn both and I agree, learn the driving basics in an auto and then introduce shifting a manual (actually, many, many folks need to be taught that you can manually shift an auto for certain circumstances!!). Watch CBS's The Amazing Race as to why... 1 million bucks lost 'cuz the team couldn't drive a "standard" (or put the proper fuel into a diesel vehicle, but that's another story); although, it does make for great TV: two guys this season pushed the car backwards because they had no clue how to shift the manual trans into reverse . Not to mention, at some point in life, you might find yourself wanting/lusting for a specific car but, d'oh, it's manual. Europeans are often shocked at how many Americans cannot (not "do not") drive an M/T.

My driver's ed class eons ago, of course, used automatic Toyotas (they sucked!), but Mom and Dad gave me lessons in the manual VeeDubs.

[No Automatics!!]

I still say that learning the harder one first is the way to go, since most people are too lazy or complacent to do it afterwards. Then again I point the finger at our fast food society, where everything has to be done fast, and obtaining a drivers license is no different. People have this sense of entitlement in North America where you're expected to obtain your license as soon as possible. Emphasis is place on getting the card as a document/ID and not on safe driving. So I disagree with the notion of driving autos in order to not distract drivers too much. If a new driver is having this much trouble with the gears then clearly this person isn't ready to be out on their own - unfortunately the same problem happens with new drivers on autos who clearly are not ready to hit the road.

Yes, driving standard takes a huge deal of time and patience. Yet it can be done (it is done elsewhere in the world isn't it?) and I still believe that it makes better drivers out of those starting out. Oh and for the record, I learned to drive a 4 speed standard when I was 11 years old. So if a kid can do it, what's the excuse for adults?

[No Automatics!!]

I still say that learning the harder one first is the way to go, since most people are too lazy or complacent to do it afterwards. Then again I point the finger at our fast food society, where everything has to be done fast, and obtaining a drivers license is no different. People have this sense of entitlement in North America where you're expected to obtain your license as soon as possible. Emphasis is place on getting the card as a document/ID and not on safe driving. So I disagree with the notion of driving autos in order to not distract drivers too much. If a new driver is having this much trouble with the gears then clearly this person isn't ready to be out on their own - unfortunately the same problem happens with new drivers on autos who clearly are not ready to hit the road.

Yes, driving standard takes a huge deal of time and patience. Yet it can be done (it is done elsewhere in the world isn't it?) and I still believe that it makes better drivers out of those starting out. Oh and for the record, I learned to drive a 4 speed standard when I was 11 years old. So if a kid can do it, what's the excuse for adults?

[gull]

Watch CBS's The Amazing Race as to why... 1 million bucks lost 'cuz the team couldn't drive a "standard" (or put the proper fuel into a diesel vehicle, but that's another story); although, it does make for great TV: two guys this season pushed the car backwards because they had no clue how to shift the manual trans into reverse .

Yeah, that cracked me up, too. Although I have to admit, I've occasionally been stumped. I'm an accomplished manual transmission driver, but the first time I got into a Volvo, I had to ask someone how to defeat the reverse lockout. (Answer: Pull up on the little ring around the shift lever.) I also once spent about ten minutes trying to figure out how to get the rear hatch open on a rental PT Cruiser. Turned out all the doors had to be unlocked first. I had to find this out via trial and error because the rental company had cleverly removed the owner's manual from the car for safekeeping.

I still say that learning the harder one first is the way to go, since most people are too lazy or complacent to do it afterwards. Then again I point the finger at our fast food society, where everything has to be done fast, and obtaining a drivers license is no different.

I suppose the difference between us is you seem to see this as some kind of moral failing, whereas I see it as more of a personal preference thing. I like the idea of being able to drive just about anything I sit down in, but to most people driving is a way to get from point A to point B. They don't care about the details of the car itself, and I don't really have a problem with that. Manual transmissions are fast becoming an obsolete technology, anyway; in another couple decades they'll be as unusual as manual chokes are now.

I do think it's too easy to get a driver's license in this country, but for reasons that have nothing to do with manual vs. automatic.

[eric4321]

I must respectfuly disagre that the mt is becoming obsolete. I have a different perspective on this because I drive 18 wheel big trucks. Automatics are making their way into big rigs some love them some hate them. The facts prove, though, that a good driver with a manual can get better fuel mileage than an automatic. Also on the subject of learning to drive on an a/t or a m/t.a large truck company had students learn to drive on a/t trucks because they thought it would lower their accident rate. Their was no diference in the accident rate. If you like your a/t that's great I prefer m/t but my 81 Rabbit is an a/t and will stay that way. I believe in keeping cars the way they rolled of the line but that is just me.

[No Automatics!!]

Manuals may become obsolute, sure - in North America. But no where else in the world, that's for sure. Anyone who's been to other countries/continents would know this. In most Asian countries (save perhaps Japan to a small extent) there are virtually no one driving autos. Central and South America is the same. Given the amount of hills in those places, autos wouldn't cut it. Even in Europe autos haven't caught on. So no, I do not agree that we'll see the disappearance of the clutch anytime soon.

Not to be confused with the semi autos out there. Sure, the paddle thing is neat novelty. But one that has little purpose other than making you think you're a Formula One driver. Not that the Smart car I drove would ever compare to a F1. But the supped up GTI I drove recently kinda did in many respects. Even then it was nothing but a novelty. In practical terms autos cannot equal the control that a clutch and a skilled driver gets you. With our nasty winters, autos are a hazard in my opinion.

i find it amusing to compare all the pros vs all the cons of both systems (as in, not a single con regarding manuals and not a single pro with autos) and then realize that you'd have to forkout a good chunk of money for an auto when purchasing a new car. Gets even better when you add the cost of auto transmission problems that are virtually inevitable, when they happen some time later. Sure, I wouldn't want to replace a clutch on an Audi - but then again I wouldn't want to replace the auto tranny on that car either.

Bottom line: you drive what you enjoy. As for me and the missys, I think it's safe to say we'll never go to the dark side. If only there was a way to figure how much we'd be saving in gasoline (and diesel) alone through the course of our lifetime.

[gull]

The facts prove, though, that a good driver with a manual can get better fuel mileage than an automatic.

Maybe still true in big rigs, but no longer true in many modern passenger cars. Cars with CVTs and dual-clutch autos often get better EPA fuel economy ratings than the manual transmission version of the same vehicle. Even conventional planetary autos have narrowed the gap to almost nothing, thanks to more gears (current luxury cars often have 7-speed automatics) and lockup torque converters.