Why Manual Transmissions are superior

It's just like acting and being an actor or actress. There are those
of you who would know what can happen if a person tries to *act a
certain character* rather than *be a certain character*. There is a
significant difference. The person just acting is not very credible
and he/she looks out of sync and overall out of place.

On the other hand actors/actresses who do know how to act (and act
well), they actually *become* the character rather than *act* the
character.

Vivian Leah was so good at being her character in front of the camera
to the point where her career gave her major manic depression that
could not be controlled by medication. She ended up recieved EST
(electric shock therapy). That just goes to show how commited she was
and that she was an amazing actress.


Now keeping all the above in line imagine all the cars in hill country.
Everyone driving their cars with manual transmissions are not riding
their brakes the way those driving their automatic transmission cars
are doing. This is because the drivers with manual transmissions are
synchronized with not only the gradients of the road but with their
vehicles RPM's and MPH as well.

The drivers with their manual transmissions are "being the car", rather
than the drivers with their slush boxes that are merely "acting/driving
the car".

Ever heard of the expression, "Don't drive the car, be the car"? Well
this is where it comes from.

Drivers in their slush box cars should be banned from the road. Anyone
so lazy that they can't shift gears and be in sync with the automobile
and the road shouldn't be driving. And for the DMV road test, all
drivers need to required to take the test driving a manual transmission
car, otherwise they won't be able to test on an automatic.

It's the principle of it. Drivers in their slush box cars are a
nuisance on the road, more particularly in hill country.

For those of you who don't know what "Bipolar/Manic Depressant" means.

It's basically a mental disorder where a person experiences some very
very high high's and some very very low low's to the extreme.

In order for one be an actress (especially a female actress), she would
be required to cry or be happy and cheerfull on demand in front of the
camera. Aparently Vivian got really good at doing this to the point
where her emotions were no longer stable causing her to develop the
"Bipolar" disorder. I also don't know if "Lithium Carbonate" (a common
modern treatment), has been discovered and used at that time.

Not only Vivian but a wealth of other actors and actresses (that were
world renouned by their skills) developed "Bipolarism".

wrote:
> It's just like acting and being an actor or actress. There are those
> of you who would know what can happen if a person tries to *act a
> certain character* rather than *be a certain character*. There is a
> significant difference. The person just acting is not very credible
> and he/she looks out of sync and overall out of place.
>
> On the other hand actors/actresses who do know how to act (and act
> well), they actually *become* the character rather than *act* the
> character.
>
> Vivian Leah was so good at being her character in front of the camera
> to the point where her career gave her major manic depression that
> could not be controlled by medication. She ended up recieved EST
> (electric shock therapy). That just goes to show how commited she
was
> and that she was an amazing actress.
>
>
> Now keeping all the above in line imagine all the cars in hill
country.
> Everyone driving their cars with manual transmissions are not riding
> their brakes the way those driving their automatic transmission cars
> are doing. This is because the drivers with manual transmissions are
> synchronized with not only the gradients of the road but with their
> vehicles RPM's and MPH as well.
>
> The drivers with their manual transmissions are "being the car",
rather
> than the drivers with their slush boxes that are merely
"acting/driving
> the car".
>
> Ever heard of the expression, "Don't drive the car, be the car"?
Well
> this is where it comes from.
>
> Drivers in their slush box cars should be banned from the road.
Anyone
> so lazy that they can't shift gears and be in sync with the
automobile
> and the road shouldn't be driving. And for the DMV road test, all
> drivers need to required to take the test driving a manual
transmission
> car, otherwise they won't be able to test on an automatic.
>
> It's the principle of it. Drivers in their slush box cars are a
> nuisance on the road, more particularly in hill country.

While I am a fan of manual myself, your theory lacks credibility.
There is absolutely no difference on the highway between the two as far
as 'being the car' or 'driving the car' goes. Once your speed is up to
the flow, nothing shifts in either tranny for hundreds of miles. It is
only in slow, congested traffic that there is a difference. There I
give the bennies to the slushbox, especially in hilly territory.
Considering 85-90% of drivers on the road who can only 'go with the
car' and barely do that, do you -really- want them screwing with a
manual also??

I have one of each.

Harry K

I learned how to work a manual on an '86 Yugo. It was frustrating at
first but once I got the hang of it I was hooked. I've owned several
manual cars ('86 Yugo, '58/65 Beetle, '68 Beetle, '98 Beetle, '79
Transporter -- all four speed) and many automatics.

I've heard all the arguments pro/con either side (gas mileage being a
common factor in favor of manuals). Manuals are irritating in
stop-and-go traffic, which is nearly ubiquitous these days (esp. in
L.A.) It's basically 1st-2nd-1st-2nd-1st-stop-1st-2nd and so on. So I
can see the preference for automatics in that case.

I also like to have automatics in larger vehicles, while small sporty
cars practically beg for manual. I read an article a while back that
the % of manuals being sold in the US keeps dropping and that in the
near future (esp. with tiptronic, CVT, and so on) they may be, sadly,
extinct. It annoys the hell out of me to see a subcompact car with an
automatic tranny, though this seems to be the default option nowadays
in the U.S. Rental car companies, which are a big market for
manufacturers, always carry automatic cars because most of their
customers don't know how to use or can't be bothered with a manual. Of
course those cars end up in the used car market later on.

Even the high-end sport manufacturers, such as Ferrari, are making
inroads with their paddle-shifters and "semi-automatic" trannies that
seem to be smarter than the driver. Eventually this technology will
trickle down to mass market consumer cars. I'm going to miss the ol'
stick on the floor.

Alot of newer cars have grade sensors that will downshift when going up
or down a hill, if it's needed.

My VW Jetta (diesel) auto transmission seems to work fine most of the
time. Only once was it a little annoying. I was going about 45 mph and the
torque converter locked up in 4th gear. I got off the gas because I was
starting to pass into a 35 mph zone . I didn't hit the brake and the TC
apparrently stayed locked all the way down to about 1200 RPM or so. I
started giving it a little bit more gas and it stayed in 4th gear, but
seemed to lug a little. It never downshifted, which personally I think I
"would" have done, had it been a manual. When I touched the brake, the TC
disengaged and it dowshifted instantly.

You have an auto matic trans in your Volkswagen?! What a sacralige.

Anyway as for the so called "grade sensors" in new auto trans cars
these days. The main question is why? Who make auto's so over
engineered and so outrageously complicated to the point where cars
become out of reach to the masses because of price, and where cars are
so complex to the point where NOBODY can fix them once anything goes
wrong. What would seem like a simple repair would cost the price of
the car to fix (if used).

I and many others like me certainly don't care of the
*over-engineering*. That's what manual transmissions are for, for
their durability, low maintainance costs, practicallity and elegant
simplicity.

> wrote
> You have an auto matic trans in your Volkswagen?! What a sacralige.

On this I agree on ;-)

> Anyway as for the so called "grade sensors" in new auto trans cars
> these days. The main question is why? Who make auto's so over
> engineered and so outrageously complicated to the point where cars
> become out of reach to the masses because of price, and where cars are
> so complex to the point where NOBODY can fix them once anything goes
> wrong. What would seem like a simple repair would cost the price of
> the car to fix (if used).
>
> I and many others like me certainly don't care of the
> *over-engineering*. That's what manual transmissions are for, for
> their durability, low maintainance costs, practicallity and elegant
> simplicity.

On this I disagree on. Newer autos are no more complicated than
old ones - in fact they have fewer controls: one. The control is a
single computer that has inputs from the speedometer, throttle,
engine computer, ABS computer, etc. All those old mechano-hydraulic
controls in the transmission, connected to the "kick-down" lever
and vacuum are - thankfully - no more.

Floyd

Floyd, how big is your penis?


Is the Pope Catholic?

plonk
> wrote in message
oups.com...
> Floyd, how big is your penis?
>
>
> Is the Pope Catholic?
>

fbloogyudsr wrote:
> plonk

That's why I killfiled eastwardbound so long ago. The guy (acts like
he) has some degree of mental retardation.