I’ve been driving an automatic since I passed nearly a decade ago. In that time whenever I tell anyone I drive auto, it’s usually met with some level of derision. I think that attitude is changing, but I’m still kind of confused by it in the first place.

Why?

  • dragontamer@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    10 months ago

    Dropping 250lbs and removing the torque converter (~2% loss alone) will do more for overall fuel efficiency for your car than anything those automatic transmissions can do.

    Yeah, I get that computers + improved automatic modes of transmission control (ex: CVTs or Dual Clutch Transmissions) can improve engagement times. And the removal of the wet-clutch/slushbox of automatic transmissions grossly improves efficiency. But these units are still heavier in practice than a dumb, manual clutch.

    I don’t think any automatic transmission beats a manual in efficient driving yet. Because weight is king. Automatics (at least, DCTs and CVTs) are finally reaching the response times of a manual transmission by having more direct connection of accelerator pedal to the engine… but the weight issue, cost-issue are still there.

    At least modern transmissions basically never brake down anymore. (CVTs, Dual Clutch, and more are all basically going to last the whole lifetime of a typical car).


    That being said, these eCVT designs from Hybrid cars (Prius Prime, Ford Edge) are pretty incredible, and are far superior to anything a manual can do.

    But for pure ICE, I’m not quite sure if even the most advanced automatic today can beat me in manual. Its more about how the electric-motor interacts with the system that we finally have a way for computers to beat me. But without an electric motor, I’m reasonably confident that my manual driving is still overall better than an automatic.

    • TWeaK@feddit.uk
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      10 months ago

      Tbf the whole argument is basically moot with electric vehicles taking over.

      • dragontamer@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        10 months ago

        Agreed. I edited a bit about Hybrids / Electric motors in there while you were typing that response up.

        Hybrid Engines really change the game, as do full electrics. I still am convinced that a gearbox is superior by the way (ie: Toyota Prius or Ford Escape designs, as well as Porsche Tycan for a full EV). But electric engines have many more “tricks” available that remove the need of a manual clutch, wet clutch, or other needs of older ICE designs.

        ICE still is overall cheaper. But if Hybrid becomes the new standard, then manuals are fully dead. These eCVT / planetary gear system magic is really incredible… and no need for a clutch (or wet-clutch) either.


        I personally feel like overpowered EVs will be seen as wasteful, especially because we’ve reached the limitation on how cheap Li-ion can get. Cheaper batteries are possible with future chemistries (Sodium-ion, Silicon+Li-ion , etc. etc.) but not dramatically so. I don’t think it will be possible to scale up mass production of the complex chemical processes needed to convert acid from mountains into Lithium. And recycling of Lithium remains fraught with problems.

        Of course, I could be wrong and maybe these problems will be solved soon. But for the near future, assuming the environmental costs of Li-ion remain roughly the same as now, there’s a bigger need to shrink down battery/motors and therefore use gears to handle a wider range of driving speeds.

        The cheapest material moving forward will remain steel. Therefore any “steel-based” solution (like a gearbox) will remain the king of overall efficiency and effectiveness of car designs. Copper, Lithium, Cobalt, Silicon, Sodium… many other metals can build up more complex behaviors (EVs), but ugggh. They’re just not as cheap or effective as what steel can do.