(4)
In defence of manual shifting
Don't forget hands-free transmissions
Your View, Nov. 7
Claudio Antelmi's suggestion that the manual transmission (a.k.a. the "standard") be banned flies in the face of the strong case for its expanded use.
First, the standard costs less to purchase and maintain, and is more fuel-efficient than its automatic counterpart. Whether you're on a budget or are environmentally conscious, it's the mode of choice.
Second, the standard compels the driver to focus on driving. The engine pitch quickly becomes the cue to shift gears, rendering frequent RPM checks unnecessary. Gear selections can be precisely matched to driving conditions and speed.
If anything, it makes driving safer, as it renders text-messaging and cellphone use virtually impossible without a hand to spare. Antelmi's example of cars weaving in and out of traffic – speculatively due to their manual transmissions – is baseless.
Third, it's just more fun. The few times I have rented a vehicle with an automatic transmission, the result has been a bland and – pun intended – disengaging experience. This is why hot rods and exotic vehicles invariably sport standard transmissions.
For all of these reasons, I have owned a standard vehicle all of my adult life. If Antelmi is unable to drive a standard, he should do as we all have done in the beginning: spend many a Sunday afternoon at the far end of a mall parking lot with our father beside us, grimacing as we grind the gears and lurch about the place. It's worth it.
Michael Platonov, Mississauga
Having driven manuals for nearly 30 years, I can attest – through my driving history of having caused no accidents – that manual drivers use all of their senses while driving and are therefore safer.
We don't look at a tachometer to know when to shift gears, we listen to the engine.
We don't look at the transmission to shift, we know where it is without looking.
We take only one hand off the steering wheel to shift gears, the same as others do to roll down a window or change the wiper speed.
And we know we are far safer in driving in winter weather because we can slow the car without relying on the brakes.
As for trusting a robotic-arm to deliver a hot cup of coffee safely to my mouth? I prefer to put my faith in using my head to determine when it is safe to do so, then using my old "manual" hand and arm.
Betty Warren, Brighton
I would argue that new drivers should be banned from receiving their licence until they can prove to the examiner they are proficient in using a stick.
They may never use a stick again. But at least they'll experience a stronger connection with the car – a connection I argue will make them a better driver.
They may even like manuals so much, they'll insist all cars they own in the future come with a stick.
Bill Marshall, Mississauga
It is the worst drivers who cannot grasp the overall concept of driving who will undoubtedly find manual transmissions too complicated and impossible to operate.
They don't care about driving and they couldn't be bothered about learning, or they are just simply too inept. These are the people who are the real danger on our roads, and you do not need to guess what their transmission of choice is.
Derek Chen, Scarborough
I would like to add to the (presumably) sarcastic letter by Claudio Antelmi suggesting that manual transmissions are too complicated to operate in traffic and should be banned.
This is certainly not true elsewhere. In Argentina, my tour group was driven around in two highway coaches with manual transmissions. Later in Chile, I noted that the Valparaiso city buses were all manual, and aggressively driven, too!
In Europe, the great majority of vehicles are not automatics. Last spring, I was on two French highway coaches and one city bus, all manually shifted. Later that summer, I was a passenger in a Lithuanian highway coach, and two Polish buses, all manual.
It seems that only North Americans are incapable of shifting for themselves. As for myself, I passionately dislike automatics and will not consider buying a car so equipped.
Peter Bursztyn, Barrie
If we are to ban any type of vehicle, let's ban the automatic transmission one. By only having manual transmission vehicles, we would have better drivers, since manual transmissions require more training and skills to operate.
Paul Beliavsky, Toronto
There are very few manual transmission cars in North America because we are too consumed with eating, drinking, smoking, emailing/texting and talking on the phone while in our cars. These are the real distractions while driving, not the stickshift.
In my opinion, to make the roads safer, ban telephone conversations altogether as hands-free units don't eliminate the fact that your mind is thinking about something else, and don't do anything else behind the wheel besides driving the car.
As for the robotic coffee arm, I'll see you at the next speed bump or pothole.
Kevin Kwan, Toronto
The only problem with manual transmissions is you can't use a cell1phone, text, drink that Timmies and day dream.
Once you learn (if you can) to use this type of transmission, what you will notice is that you have to constantly pay close attention to your driving habits and you will be less likely to speed and make unsafe turns, etc., unlike an automatic transmission where all you need is to be able to see ahead.
Robert Poulin, Scarborough
I hope Claudio Antelmi's letter was a tongue-in-cheek response to the new hands-free law now in effect in Ontario. If not, perhaps he should not be operating motor vehicles.
Robert Baker, Toronto
The reasons I drive a car with a standard transmission are multifold. It's more fun. You feel you are actually driving with some control. Gearing down is an option to save your brakes, gives you traction in the snow or other driving conditions. The initial price of the car is cheaper as well. Another reason is I don't worry about my car being stolen. Not too many people know how to drive it! It's more difficult!
I feel his comments regarding conventional car radios and other distractions such as drinking coffee and scratching your nose are nonsensical. Actually the whole premise of his argument is absurd.
Nancy Fine, Thornhill
Ed. Note: Claudio Antelmi's letter was satirical, intended to point out the absurdity in logic of banning hand-held cellphones in cars while allowing contact with other objects in the car. The contradiction, he wanted readers to recognize, is the contact that is allowed – sipping coffee, wiping your nose – while other contact is forbidden in order to keep a driver's hands on the wheel.
The clue to its nature was in the final paragraphs, in which he suggested a robotic, hands-free arm could deliver coffee direct to drivers' mouths and even scratch their noses, so that they need never remove their hands from the wheel.
Granted, it was subtle in its absurd message – we received many letters similar to those published here.
As Wheels Editor, I contacted Antelmi to confirm that I had read it as he intended – as satire. He replied: "For the record, I consider myself to have owned more manual transmission vehicles, driven more miles in more varied conditions, and repaired more manual mechanical systems than most drivers.
"I generally drive only manual transmission cars and find that while driving automatic, I get lulled into a stoic state worse than lying on a cushy couch watching Aquarium TV.
"I love driving manual and believe that others who enjoy the experience are keener to the driving environment and have an elevated state of awareness."
His letter clearly pressed a few buttons for readers. This is a very good thing – it's heartening to know that so many people are prepared to defend our right to drive with intelligence. Now, about that ludicrous "street racing" law ...
– Mark Richardson)
Write to wheels@thestar.ca or mail
to Your View, Wheels, Toronto Star,
One Yonge St., Toronto, Ont. M5E 1E6.
Please include your full name, address and telephone number.
Woman's win over Honda opens door to mileage claim free-for-all
Video: Chevrolet Sonic a small car with a big car price
