You act as if most people use their left foot for the brake and right foot for the gas..
Do you?
Well if you have a light clutch like those found in imports, I don't think it's really necessary to complain much. Also keep in mind, moving your leg between gas and brake isn't really all that less tiring. The only reason why it's tiring for you is because you haven't done it often and long enough. You don't hear any complaints from truck drivers, do you?
Autos get better mileage than manuals in many cases these days. Such as the CVT in my Outback.
But historically manual beat auto for:Pretty hilarious using an efficiency argument in the US for automatics over manuals.
Not saying anything against you specifically, I have no idea about your own personal requirements, but for most Americans, manual vs auto mpg differences are going to be minimal compared to doing something like making a reasonable car choice (i.e. not a huge vehicle which is hopelessly inefficient compared to what they could actually manage with).
That said, increased efficiency where something less efficient is required isn't a bad thing.
And even then, a guy I knew who was one of the first to own the new M5 said he was massively disappointed by it.
Tbh, cars in general are dying. Look at the awesome cars 40 years ago, and compare them with the eco boxes that people get now. Or the massive trucks driven by small dickheads, or the boxy SUVs driven by oblivious women, or the volvos driven by leftists and feminists.
No one cares about performance or good looks, they only care about pissing contests and "safety." Safety itself is beginning to look more and more like stuffing 10 airbags into a car and then thinking you can drive 110 mph into a concrete box--too bad the idiots who do this then wonder why their jawbone is located just below their waistline.
My solution to this problem will be building my own car, fuck the others, and it will be a tribute before the government grew into its power assigned to it by Cornpone, or the eco nazis, or the politically correct Orwellian Thought Police, or the hip idiots with eco boxes, or the ricers who don't bother to do any research and just attach a big trumpet to a honda civic.
The car will be built to my spec, to my design, and to my vision, a tribute to the time when men were men and women were women and there was none of this cock and bull delusions our society is suffering from now.
I'm curious what it costs to replace a DSG gearbox because once these cars are out of warranty that expense is going to fall on the owner and from what I've heard it isn't cheap. Nor are these things ubber reliable either.
Call me old fashioned but I'll take a traditional manual transmission any day. I could beat your DSG equipped ubber cage on my bicycle when you're broken down on the side of the road.
I'm sorry, but that's bullshit. Modern cars are faster, require less maintenance, and are safer ...
Ask somebody (or be somebody) who drove cars back in the 60's and 70's and I think you'll find that reliability wise cars now are magnitudes better. Although I am only just through puberty so can't speak from experience (I was late bloomer) I believe that the idea people have now of buying a new car and expecting nothing beyond routine maintenance and maybe one or two pretty mild glitches in the first few years is realistic but back then it was fantasy land. I bet that in a given year my 132k 2000-year car is more reliable than any brand new vehicle made a few decades ago.I agree with everything in your post. I certainly enjoy classic cars...I'm more jealous of Jay Leno than anyone in this world...but to say current cars are crap...that's just stupid.
Well if you have a light clutch like those found in imports, I don't think it's really necessary to complain much. Also keep in mind, moving your leg between gas and brake isn't really all that less tiring. The only reason why it's tiring for you is because you haven't done it often and long enough. You don't hear any complaints from truck drivers, do you?
(This is not a dig at classic cars, they have their place and I very much appreciate them for what they are, but to sit there with your fingers in your ears screaming "la la la classics are better la la la" is fucking stupid)
true manual is the only option.
i can see the appeal of DSG from a performance standpoint, but i'd rather have a standard manual on the street and frankly i think i'd prefer it on the track, too. i don't understand how you are supposed to hit buttons on the back of the wheel while you're going balls out- seems like it would be hard to shift unless you're going straight. maybe that's the point, i guess.
Have you never heard of Formula 1? I'm pretty sure they use little triggers of some type on the back of their wheel to do their gear changes. They do use something that does the gear changes for them. I'm not too aware of the specifics though. If it was too hard then they probably wouldn't use it...
I'm sorry, but that's bullshit. Modern cars are faster, require less maintenance, and are safer in every way. In the 60's there was just as high a ratio of piece of shit cars to nice ones as there is today, everyone didn't drive around in a Camaro SS or Chevelle SS and race a Charger at every stop light. Back then there were performance shops like Yenko and Shelby, today Shelby is still around as well as Lingenfelter, SMS, Roush, Callaway, etc.
For example, 1965 Shelby GT350-R
Original cost: $6150
Adjust for inflation: $42,000
1/4 mile: 13.6 @ 104mph
0-60: 5.5 seconds
Skidpad: .86g
Braking 60-0 144ft (!)
2010 Camaro SS
Cost $35,380
1/4 mile: 13.0 @ 111
0-60: 4.7 seconds
Skidpad: .90g
60-0: 105ft
$7k cheaper, better performance in every category, better gas mileage, etc.
You can't make the modern cars have no soul argument either, it's been bitched about by the older population since the beginning of time. In the 60's some complained about the music being shit, now people complain about the music being shit compared to the 60's. Is everything getting worse with time? I'll give you a hint... It's not. It is getting better consistently. (or in the case of music, at least equal)
Just because you prefer to have an older restored car does not mean anything about the actual viability of modern performance vehicles. and for the money you're going to spend on your supposed project you could do a lot better with a modern car but, thanks to our freedom, you can do whatever the fuck you want, though you have yet to do anything but talk about your project car.
(This is not a dig at classic cars, they have their place and I very much appreciate them for what they are, but to sit there with your fingers in your ears screaming "la la la classics are better la la la" is fucking stupid)
Have you never heard of Formula 1? I'm pretty sure they use little triggers of some type on the back of their wheel to do their gear changes. They do use something that does the gear changes for them. I'm not too aware of the specifics though. If it was too hard then they probably wouldn't use it...
You miss the point. Look at the cars on the road now. Even the "performance" ones from Ford, GM, Honda, etc. (Honda Civic Si, Ford Focus RS, Chevy "whatever") all look pretty terrible. They have the same tub of lard shape, the same generic spoiler in the rear, and look about attractive as a well made sandwich does...after it's been left out in the rain.
The Mustang has become inflated out of the price range of your average 18 year old (and it's becoming a boat), the new camaro IS a boat, the Dodge Challenger is a yacht and the BMWs only come in (if you want to maintain respect) shades of blue, grey, and black.
The Audi R8 is lauded as one of the most beautiful supercars to date, but it only commands respect in black or dark grey.
There's no car with the exception of the lambo that looks good in orange, and cars that have stripes painted on them now frankly look ridiculous (unless its a modern iteration of a muscle car).
The color and cheery nature of cars has gone out. Not to mention the care for weight.
There's no doubt the engineering and technological aspects of cars have improved (as they logically should--it's been 40 years after all), and the '60's in general were the end of the world (at least the civilized world) but at least they all went to hell in gorgeous looking cars.
I'm sorry, but that's bullshit. Modern cars are faster, require less maintenance, and are safer in every way. In the 60's there was just as high a ratio of piece of shit cars to nice ones as there is today, everyone didn't drive around in a Camaro SS or Chevelle SS and race a Charger at every stop light. Back then there were performance shops like Yenko and Shelby, today Shelby is still around as well as Lingenfelter, SMS, Roush, Callaway, etc.
For example, 1965 Shelby GT350-R
Original cost: $6150
Adjust for inflation: $42,000
1/4 mile: 13.6 @ 104mph
0-60: 5.5 seconds
Skidpad: .86g
Braking 60-0 144ft (!)
2010 Camaro SS
Cost $35,380
1/4 mile: 13.0 @ 111
0-60: 4.7 seconds
Skidpad: .90g
60-0: 105ft
$7k cheaper, better performance in every category, better gas mileage, etc.
You can't make the modern cars have no soul argument either, it's been bitched about by the older population since the beginning of time. In the 60's some complained about the music being shit, now people complain about the music being shit compared to the 60's. Is everything getting worse with time? I'll give you a hint... It's not. It is getting better consistently. (or in the case of music, at least equal)
Just because you prefer to have an older restored car does not mean anything about the actual viability of modern performance vehicles. and for the money you're going to spend on your supposed project you could do a lot better with a modern car but, thanks to our freedom, you can do whatever the fuck you want, though you have yet to do anything but talk about your project car.
(This is not a dig at classic cars, they have their place and I very much appreciate them for what they are, but to sit there with your fingers in your ears screaming "la la la classics are better la la la" is fucking stupid)
Look at the older 4th generation camaros vs. the new 5th gen camaros. The older 4th gens were lighter, cheaper and the fastest thing for the money at the time, $17k for a 1993 Z28 that had a 275 hp V8 engine and a 6-speed stick? Fuckin amazing. It would beat any sports car at that price in any preformance and fuel econemy test at the time.
The new 5th gen camaros are fat overweight pigs that are more like a luxury sport coupe then an afordable sports car. The engines are much better these days (300hp out of a v6? damn good) but the bullshit safty, emmissions, blah blah blah...laws governing cars are getting out of control.
Older muscle cars are in a completly different class then modern "muscle" cars. The
Challenger is the worst. Mustang is the best of the recent muscle cars as far as not becomeing fat as hell.
My point is you can't compare older cars to newer ones, the new ones are too bloated to compete. If they were upgraded with modern equipment...it would be a completly different story.
If a company had the balls to release a cheap preformance car in the vien of the older muscle cars, the gas mileage would be even more amazing, acceleration would be phenominal, and they wouldn't handle like pigs. Plus they wouldn't have brakes that sucked balls. If you want your luxury options, buy a frikin M3.