Automatic vs. Manual: The Ultimate Showdown Thread

[Dave A]

It is reasonable, and I think eating is a bigger distraction than shifting gears. But a distraction is a distraction, and if you're concerned about people doing too much while driving then you should be in favor of automatics.

Not really, because eating is distracting you from driving, whereas changing gears in involving you in driving more. I drive a lot of motorway miles with work and in all honesty I find driving on the motorway so easy it's at times dangerous. The biggest cause of crashese on motorways is people not paying attention to their driving which is far easier to do when you have so little to focus on the drive becomes easy as opposed to being involved. Now I'm not saying auto's are more dangerous, imo I can see appeal for them in start stop traffic as a luxury, but to claim that they are safer because they mean you have to pay less attention to your driving is imo an oxymoron. Less attention is far more dangerous than having to learn how to operate a stick. Having too much or too little to concentrate on is a balancing act, like anytihng in life. Like a TV show or film even, too little going on and it's boring, too much and it's headache inducing. Different people will have different limits of what they can operate while still having a safe level of attention on the road and whats around them. Some people struggle with manual and for thoes people, if they can't get used to using a manual and paying attention to the road and surrounding then an auto may be safer. For someone like me where I have absolutely no problem problem doing both driving an auto would probably be less safe as my concentration would be more likely to drift. Is driving with the radio on good or bad, at the end of the day it's taking some of your attention. By your loginc driving should be you and the car, no radio, no gears, just go, stop and turn. Oh and no passengers, they're a distraction. Earlier you took the idea of operating gears to an extreme, well thats your argument taken to the extreme.

 

[kingcars]

^That whole post is full of epic win. 👍👍 Goes perfectly along with what homeforsummer and I were saying.

You're basically trying to say that driving a manual distracts the driver from driving by making him focus more on driving....

...I'm far from the most experienced manual driver, but the only effects I've had as far as paying attention have been in a positive manner...

Looking forward to Danoff's response to all of this.

 

[Danoff]

Wow, you really ARE slow.

You know... there is an AUP. And this doesn't really help your point.

As he said, when driving a manual, you have more things to consider (for the slow: PAY ATTENTION TO). Therefore, that KEEPS the driver's attention on what's going on around him or her

No. Having to pay attention to what gear your car is in, what revs your engine is at, what gear you're about to shift into, or how much you need to blip the throttle in order to make a smooth shift does not keep your attention focused on what's going on around you. It keeps your attention on the process of operating the transmission in your vehicle. It doesn't help you avoid collisions. You've never even once asserted HOW driving a manual helps you concentrate on anything besides operating the transmission.

You're basically trying to say that driving a manual distracts the driver from driving by making him focus more on driving. Nice logic you have going.

Yes. Operating the transmission distracts you from pointing the car.

If driving a manual truly distracts you in any way, get an automatic. I'm far from the most experienced manual driver, but the only effects I've had as far as paying attention have been in a positive manner.

Well... you're lying to yourself. I can't operate a manual and not concentrate on what gear I'm in, what gear I need to be in, when I'm about to hit the redline, or whether I need to drop the clutch. I even think about it retroactively "did I use too much clutch just then? Did I over-rev? I used too much throttle and overshot the targeted engine speed didn't it?" And this is after ~10 years of experience driving manual transmissions.

Those thoughts and techniques are preventing me just a little from thinking every moment about which cars are where on the road and what they're doing.

Danoff: With every subsequent post you're being more and more of a complete pain in the arse. I've gone from thinking your posts were fair, to thinking you'd made a few dubious comments, to just thinking you're being a stubborn, argumentative git.

Well, I'm certainly glad you didn't resort to name-calling. It's big of you.

"Fewer things to consider" doesn't mean "less distracting".

YES IT DOES!

I can consider something without it being a distraction. I can also be free of distractions whilst I'm considering something. I can even be considering something, but be distracted by something else.

....WHAT?!?

Can you consider two things at once prefectly? How about 5?

So using my post over, and over, and over again to illustrate your own badly worded points doesn't serve any purpose.

It does. You've defeated your own argument. By admitting that autos require less effort to simply operate, you're admitting that one has more concentration available for the road. Whether you choose to use that concentration for good is not my concern.

The living room comment, if you'd read what I typed and not selectively read what you wanted to hear, was supposed to be a minus point.

I know what it was supposed to be. Because I read it in it's entirety. But it simply isn't. Being easier to operate simply is not and cannot be a "minus" for driving safety. Your notion that operating the transmission requires more effort ergo more effort is being concentrated on driving fails to consider that operating the transmission is not helping you drive safer.

How much concentration do you require watching the TV? I'm guessing probably not a lot? But it's comfy right? Well that's the modern car. No concentration on the road required for most people, because they're not having to worry about giving the process of driving any of their attention.

Explain to me how concentration on shifting = concentration on the road.

- I wouldn't be "distracted" by swinging the bat, but it would require concentration to play the game. I'd be making a conscious decision to swing the bat so I hit the ball in the best way, but it's not a distraction.

The analogy is flawed. It would require concentration to play the game, but in this case playing the game = operating the transmission, not driving down the street.

That's the fundamental point I'm trying to get across, and it's sailing straight over your head.

I know what you're trying to say, but you haven't convinced me that it's right. Your thesis is that automatics promote a lack of concentration on the road because you don't have to concentrate on the transmission. But you haven't established any reason why that would be the case. Similarly, you're claiming that manuals promote greater concentration on the road because they require greater concentration on transmission operation. Again, you haven't established any reason that this is the case.

I simply submit that the one that requires the least concentration to operate offers the most capacity leftover for focusing on the road.

Not really, because eating is distracting you from driving, whereas changing gears in involving you in driving more.

But it's not involving you in focus on your surroundings. It's involving you in focus on operating your car.

The biggest cause of crashese on motorways is people not paying attention to their driving which is far easier to do when you have so little to focus on the drive becomes easy as opposed to being involved.

I'm sorry Dave, I'm just not seeing it. I get just as bored leaving my car in gear down the highway as I do leaving an auto in gear down the highway. In my experience, most accidents happen in parking lots or low speed, low visibility situations. In those situations, concentrating on where all the cars are around you is essential. Negotiating the clutch does not help with that.

but to claim that they are safer because they mean you have to pay less attention to your driving is imo an oxymoron.

Not "driving", "shifting". Operating your transmission isn't driving.

Less attention is far more dangerous than having to learn how to operate a stick.

I agree, less attention is dangerous. That's why I think bad drivers should be driving ATs.

Like a TV show or film even, too little going on and it's boring, too much and it's headache inducing.

So what are you saying? That we should let people choose how complex they like their car to be? That's silly.

I don't think driving a manual keeps you awake any more than an auto - especially in the scenario in which you're most likely to get bored - the freeway. Driving an auto and a manual on the freeway is exactly the same.

By your loginc driving should be you and the car, no radio, no gears, just go, stop and turn. Oh and no passengers, they're a distraction. Earlier you took the idea of operating gears to an extreme, well thats your argument taken to the extreme.

I fully agree. We can't regulate distractions out of cars. That's why I jumped earlier when someone claimed that people should not be eating in the car. I think people should be allowed to eat, talk on their phones, etc. while in the car. If they can't concentrate, pull them over, give them a ticket, take away their license, whatever.

 

[Perfect Balance]

Saying that shifting gears is a distraction from driving is like saying the steering wheel is distracting.

I shift subconciously.

Just as one may steer subconsciously.

 

[kingcars]

Saying that shifting gears is a distraction from driving is like saying the steering wheel is distracting.

I shift subconciously.

Just as one may steer subconsciously.

Beat me to it 👍 . Once again, Danoff is proven wrong. But I'm SURE he'll find some obscure way to keep his argument going; at least in his own mind, that is.

No. Having to pay attention to what gear your car is in, what revs your engine is at, what gear you're about to shift into, or how much you need to blip the throttle in order to make a smooth shift does not keep your attention focused on what's going on around you. It keeps your attention on the process of operating the transmission in your vehicle. It doesn't help you avoid collisions. You've never even once asserted HOW driving a manual helps you concentrate on anything besides operating the transmission.

Yes. Operating the transmission distracts you from pointing the car.

Well... you're lying to yourself. I can't operate a manual and not concentrate on what gear I'm in, what gear I need to be in, when I'm about to hit the redline, or whether I need to drop the clutch. I even think about it retroactively "did I use too much clutch just then? Did I over-rev? I used too much throttle and overshot the targeted engine speed didn't it?" And this is after ~10 years of experience driving manual transmissions.

Those thoughts and techniques are preventing me just a little from thinking every moment about which cars are where on the road and what they're doing.

If this is true, do us all a favor and don't drive. I have those same thoughts, but I can think of them without taking my focus off of what's ahead of/around me. Do you have trouble listening to the radio also? How about talking with passengers?

I know what you're trying to say, but you haven't convinced me that it's right. Your thesis is that automatics promote a lack of concentration on the road because you don't have to concentrate on the transmission. But you haven't established any reason why that would be the case. Similarly, you're claiming that manuals promote greater concentration on the road because they require greater concentration on transmission operation. Again, you haven't established any reason that this is the case.

You've never even once asserted HOW driving a manual helps you concentrate on anything besides operating the transmission.

Did you REALLY forget this post in such a short amount of time?

I think kingcars has a point there. When I drive a manual, I'll naturally be looking ahead to what's happening there to see whether I can prepare to accelerate and shift up a gear, let the car just coast along or probably even go down a gear to decelerate.

When I drive an autobox, I obviously will still look ahead to what traffic does, but there's no point in thinking what's happening next since I won't need to work out how to operate my gearbox. That means that despite I actually have to do more work in the car with the manual, I also pay more attention to what happens around me, because I need to know to be able to operate the gearbox appropriately.

Seriously, stop. You've lost. Several times now.

 

[kingcars]

dp (DANGit)

 

[Wolfe]

@Joey and others: Perfect Balance's earlier explanation of "control" was perfect. You literally have more control over the vehicle because you manually control gear changes and clutch engagement. To answer your question, Joey, "lack of control" would include both spirited driving (where precise gear choice and throttle manipulation are valued) and practical situations such as climbing hills (autos may hunt for gears) or winter driving (manuals can start in second and/or slip the clutch). As was already said, it's not that automatic-equipped cars are out of control, it's that they don't offer as much control as other transmissions. The reason we're getting into this so deeply with you (no aggression or offense intended) is because you're practically denying the dictionary definition of the word "control."


@Danoff: I enjoy playful debate as much as the next amateur philosopher, but on the topic of distractions concerning driving and shifting, rationalizing will only take you in circles; real world experience and examples are the only answer. I personally believe the modern synchromesh manual transmission with a hydraulically assisted clutch is the best compromise. It offers "complete" control over the car while avoiding the extra requirements of a non-synchromesh transmission, and as Perfect Balance, others, and myself have all indicated, it often becomes a completely transparent process to the experienced driver. Even for those who consider it a challenge, unless they're fumbling with the shifter/clutch or trying to peer at the numbers on the tachometer, they'll be concentrating on the road because the drive itself is the fruit of their efforts. Anyone can learn to drive stick, provided that they're physically able, so if they're having trouble, they just haven't had enough practice yet.

That said, of course everyone will have their own idea of what transmission is the best compromise.

 

[homeforsummer]

Well, I'm certainly glad you didn't resort to name-calling. It's big of you.

It isn't name calling, it's a description of your behaviour. I didn't say you are a pain in the arse, just that you're being one...

Can you consider two things at once prefectly?

I can consider how much I need to steer, what gear I need to be in, whether I need to brake or accelerate (or neither) and more all at the same time. It's called multitasking and when you're driving you do it all the time.

It does. You've defeated your own argument. By admitting that autos require less effort to simply operate, you're admitting that one has more concentration available for the road.

The act of changing gear is part of the driving, not a distraction from it. If you couldn't change gear then you wouldn't get anywhere. Even if I couldn't tune the radio then I could still drive - therefore tuning the radio could be considered a distraction.

...fails to consider that operating the transmission is not helping you drive safer.

Nor is it making driving more dangerous. Again, it is part of the process, no less than steering with the wheel is. I don't have a big panic as I approach corners worrying about changing gear no more than I do about wondering how much steering lock to apply.

Explain to me how concentration on shifting = concentration on the road.

It doesn't. You've pulled that out of nowhere. You don't need to concentrate on shifting, you just do it when you need to. It's part of that multitasking process.

The analogy is flawed. It would require concentration to play the game, but in this case playing the game = operating the transmission, not driving down the street.

No, that's what you want it to be. Playing the game is linked to driving down the street, in my analogy. Swinging the bat, running etc are all the functions of the game in the same way that changing gear, steering etc are the functions of driving down the street. Don't tell me what I'm trying to say, I said it exactly as I mean it.

Your thesis is that automatics promote a lack of concentration on the road because you don't have to concentrate on the transmission.But you haven't established any reason why that would be the case.

No, they are a component of the theory that the less you involve a driver in the process of actually driving a car, the less they feel they need to concentrate on the important things, like watching traffic, observing rules of the road, and using appropriate speed. If you feel more involved you're likely to be more alert.

I simply submit that the one that requires the least concentration to operate offers the most capacity leftover for focusing on the road.

That's a nice thought, but down on planet Earth it doesn't work like that, and people are pathalogically lazy. Give them less to do and they'll take it for granted, not make up for it by putting more effort into other things, like concentrating on the road.

 

[Danoff]

Saying that shifting gears is a distraction from driving is like saying the steering wheel is distracting.

It is. It would be less distracting if you could operate the car directly with your mind. Simplifying the car/driver interface reduces distractions.

Beat me to it 👍 . Once again, Danoff is proven wrong. But I'm SURE he'll find some obscure way to keep his argument going; at least in his own mind, that is.

Are you still here? Did you want to say something?

If this is true, do us all a favor and don't drive. I have those same thoughts, but I can think of them without taking my focus off of what's ahead of/around me.

No you can't.

Do you have trouble listening to the radio also? How about talking with passengers?

Everyone is distracted by those things. It's not possible to do otherwise. Don't bother arguing it.

Did you REALLY forget this post in such a short amount of time?

Addressed earlier.

 

[Perfect Balance]

[/color]
It is. It would be less distracting if you could operate the car directly with your mind. Simplifying the car/driver interface reduces distractions.

You steer a car subconsciously. Driving the car with your mind would require conscious thoughts all the time.

I can have my mind completely on something other than driving while driving, but I won't crash because I'm driving subconsciously. I'm sure you're aware that the subconscious mind can handle much more than the conscious mind.

In fact, in Ross Bentley's book, he explains how a lot of people drive worse when they "try" to drive because "trying" is a concious act.

 

[kingcars]

[/COLOR]
Are you still here? Did you want to say something?

Oh, I'm here. And proving you wrong constantly, along with a few others.

Addressed earlier.

Your argument against that post has been counter-addressed, which you have ignored. (Danoff ignoring arguments? NEVER!!!). Lets take a look at your original response:

That's a reasonable argument, but there's nothing stopping you from looking ahead while operating an auto is there?

Nope, but there is less reason to look ahead. homeforsummer addresses this concept in his latest post; hopefully you won't ignore him too.

You're assuming that people are going to operate their gearbox "appropriately". That assumption only pertains to people who drive well. By assuming that bad drivers would take into consideration the same things you do while driving a manual, you can pretend that bad drivers would be better if they were operating a manual. The flaw is in the assumption that they'll pay attention. I can tell you from experience that this is not the case.

If you don't pay attention while driving a manual, you'll bog the car down, stall it, not be able to accelerate and brake properly, etc. The car will let you know when you're not paying attention. The obvious mistakes will regain the driver's attention. If not, the driver has no hope, and will not be any better off with an automatic.

 

[Joey D]

@Joey and others: Perfect Balance's earlier explanation of "control" was perfect. You literally have more control over the vehicle because you manually control gear changes and clutch engagement. To answer your question, Joey, "lack of control" would include both spirited driving (where precise gear choice and throttle manipulation are valued) and practical situations such as climbing hills (autos may hunt for gears) or winter driving (manuals can start in second and/or slip the clutch). As was already said, it's not that automatic-equipped cars are out of control, it's that they don't offer as much control as other transmissions. The reason we're getting into this so deeply with you (no aggression or offense intended) is because you're practically denying the dictionary definition of the word "control."

I'll use the Blazer as an example then as it's more of a typical automatic then the Cooper. It was a 4-speed and it did end up breaking (which was my fault one time, shotty workmenship the other). I never had an issue climbing hills with it and the only reason I had problems in the winter was because it was rear wheel drive, with a short wheel base, and had poorly selected tires on it (once again my fault entirely). Neither one of those things would have been affected if my transmission were different.

The whole control thing is still subjective in my opinion. I fully agree you have control with a manual, I'm not doubting that. I'm just saying you have just as much control with an auto. With the Blazer if I needed to do a start in second (which I did in the winter) I would move the gear lever to 2 on the dash. The MINI would be a bad example of this because it starts in 2nd no matter what.

The whole problem with the argument is we are trying to argue opinions based on our experiences (as I've said, I'm guilty of it too) with no one providing any evidence outside our own experiences because we can't.

I'm not ignoring the definition of control, I know full well what it is. I don't see how saying you are just as in control with an auto is going against that. Going against it and stating something rather foolish would be out and out saying autos are better then manual, which I haven't done at all.

 

[buickgnx88]

You steer a car subconsciously. Driving the car with your mind would require conscious thoughts all the time.

*driving car with mind* "Ok keep going straight...a little faster...*looks right* oh McDonalds, I'm hungry!" *car careens towards McDonalds*

 

[Perfect Balance]

If you don't pay attention while driving a manual, you'll bog the car down, stall it, not be able to accelerate and brake properly, etc. The car will let you know when you're not paying attention. The obvious mistakes will regain the driver's attention. If not, the driver has no hope, and will not be any better off with an automatic.

I believe you have just proved his point.


Amirite?

 

[kingcars]

I believe you have just proved his point.


Amirite?

No urnotrite, because unlike the manual car, the automatic car will keep going without issue until the driver causes a much bigger issue, like a crash.

 

[Perfect Balance]

The whole control thing is still subjective in my opinion. I fully agree you have control with a manual, I'm not doubting that. I'm just saying you have just as much control with an auto.

1. Throttle
2. Brake
3. Steering

In a manual car:

1. Throttle
2. Brake
3. Steering
4. Gears

Is 4 > 3 difficult to understand? Everyone seems to think I'm basing my arguments on the fact that I prefer a manual transmission. I'm simply comparing the number of things that you can control, in which a manual comes out on top. There are more things in the car you have control over = you have more control.

You don't have as much control. 3 is not as much as 4.

EDIT: Yes kingcars, Iamrite. You proved another big part of his argument right. Although I'll still say I don't need to "pay attention" to drive my manual car. I don't think about putting it in first gear when the light turns green, I'm just used to doing it and always do.

 

[Danoff]

It isn't name calling, it's a description of your behaviour. I didn't say you are a pain in the arse, just that you're being one...

VV

you're being a stubborn, argumentative git.

I can consider how much I need to steer, what gear I need to be in, whether I need to brake or accelerate (or neither) and more all at the same time. It's called multitasking and when you're driving you do it all the time.

Every task you have to perform makes driving one step more difficult.

The act of changing gear is part of the driving, not a distraction from it.

No, it isn't. It would be if ATs didn't exist. But since they exist, it is now simply a more complicated way to operate a vehicle.

Nor is it making driving more dangerous. Again, it is part of the process, no less than steering with the wheel is.

Much less than the steering wheel is. How do I know? Because transmission operation can be AUTOMATED.

It doesn't. You've pulled that out of nowhere. You don't need to concentrate on shifting, you just do it when you need to. It's part of that multitasking process.

VV

driving an auto gives drivers fewer things to consider

You do need to concentrate on (ie: consider) shifting.

No, that's what you want it to be. Playing the game is linked to driving down the street, in my analogy. Swinging the bat, running etc are all the functions of the game in the same way that changing gear, steering etc are the functions of driving down the street. Don't tell me what I'm trying to say, I said it exactly as I mean it.

I was pointing out why your analogy is not applicable, not telling you what you were trying to say. Keep up.

No, they are a component of the theory that the less you involve a driver in the process of actually driving a car, the less they feel they need to concentrate on the important things, like watching traffic, observing rules of the road, and using appropriate speed. If you feel more involved you're likely to be more alert.

A) Not if shifting is subconscious
B) Not in situations where driving is boring
C) Try assuming both drivers are alert and tell me that the AT isn't less distracting.

That's a nice thought, but down on planet Earth it doesn't work like that, and people are pathalogically lazy. Give them less to do and they'll take it for granted, not make up for it by putting more effort into other things, like concentrating on the road.

It's an interesting thought. But situations in which people are prone to be lazy, there is no difference between MT and AT. And in situations where people are not likely to be lazy, MT is a distraction.

And in my own personal experience with bad drivers, they're just as bad in a MT, just as likely to ignore the road, just as likely to do all the same things that they do in an AT.

They try to eat, talk on their phone, use the radio, etc. except that they now have more trouble doing so because they have to operating the shifter. Nothing in my own experience driving ATs and MTs, and seeing others drive transmissions of both types leads me to believe that MT does anything except add an (often quite enjoyable) task to driving.

I believe you have just proved his point.


Amirite?

Yup! 👍

No urnotrite, because unlike the manual car, the automatic car will keep going without issue until the driver causes a much bigger issue, like a crash.

OMG *facepalm*

 

[kingcars]

They try to eat, talk on their phone, use the radio, etc. except that they now have more trouble doing so because they have to operating the shifter.

Wow, you just proved my point, and the concept that homeforsummer was referring to earlier about people "focusing their attention not used on shifting to other, non driving related activities." THANKS!!! Have a nice day.

 

[Danoff]

Wow, you just proved my point, and the concept that homeforsummer was referring to earlier about people "focusing their attention not used on shifting to other, non driving related activities." THANKS!!! Have a nice day.

No.

They have more trouble driving and talking on the phone and operating an a MT than an AT. But they do it just the same. If someone is going to be eating while driving, I'd choose to put them in an AT over MT every time.

 

[buickgnx88]

I do have to agree that doing extra activities in the vehicle while driving is worse with a manual since when you would need to shift, you would have to juggle everything around which could cause an accident.

 

[kingcars]

No.

They have more trouble driving and talking on the phone and operating an a MT than an AT. But they do it just the same. If someone is going to be eating while driving, I'd choose to put them in an AT over MT every time.

Or maybe they simply wouldn't do it because it's a hassle? If I get a phone call while driving my car, I wait till I can find a place to stop before taking the call. When the car was an automatic, I would just talk on the phone while driving. And the argument isnt about eating while shifting. It's about shifting while driving.

You've also ignored (GASP!!) another point that's been made:

Saying that shifting gears is a distraction from driving is like saying the steering wheel is distracting.

I shift subconciously.

Just as one may steer subconsciously.

You steer a car subconsciously. Driving the car with your mind would require conscious thoughts all the time.

I can have my mind completely on something other than driving while driving, but I won't crash because I'm driving subconsciously. I'm sure you're aware that the subconscious mind can handle much more than the conscious mind.

In fact, in Ross Bentley's book, he explains how a lot of people drive worse when they "try" to drive because "trying" is a concious act.

 

[Kylehnat]

I do have to agree that doing extra activities in the vehicle while driving is worse with a manual since when you would need to shift, you would have to juggle everything around which could cause an accident.

Which is why most manual drivers DON'T.

 

[Perfect Balance]

Or maybe they simply wouldn't do it because it's a hassle? If I get a phone call while driving my car, I wait till I can find a place to stop before taking the call. When the car was an automatic, I would just talk on the phone while driving.

You've also ignored (GASP!!) another point that's been made:

Which is why you proved his point here:

If you don't pay attention while driving a manual, you'll bog the car down, stall it, not be able to accelerate and brake properly, etc. The car will let you know when you're not paying attention. The obvious mistakes will regain the driver's attention. If not, the driver has no hope, and will not be any better off with an automatic.

That is not what I'd call subconscious.

 

[buickgnx88]

Or maybe they simply wouldn't do it because it's a hassle? If I get a phone call while driving my car, I wait till I can find a place to stop before taking the call. When the car was an automatic, I would just talk on the phone while driving.

You've also ignored (GASP!!) another point that's been made:

Depends though. Some people just have to eat that burger or take that call, not everyone can think before doing something. And anyways, shifting may be something you're used to while driving normally, but with the added handicap of something in one hand, you now have to use the other hand to do two things simultaneously (unless you stuff the burger in your mouth or put the phone in the crook of your neck while you shift).

Edit:

Which is why most manual drivers DON'T.

Key word: most.

 

[Danoff]

Which is why most manual drivers DON'T.

Really? Prove it.*

But why do you think they wouldn't? Because they've already got their hands full operating the vehicle?


*Edit: Don't bother proving it. It wouldn't show anything. There's nothing that requires eating, talking on the phone, or doing any other activities in an AT. If it could somehow be proven that people are more likely to do those things in an AT, it would just mean that those people were deciding that the distraction was acceptable. That's not an inherent flaw in driving an AT. If it is a problem, it's a problem in individual decision making.

 

[kingcars]

That is not what I'd call subconscious.

Agreed, it's called being a moron. A moron that would cause a wreck no matter what type of transmission was involved. Doesn't prove Danoff's point in any way. Lets get back to the ORIGINAL point being made:

When someone is a bad driver, having an automatic will have no effect. They will drive badly and ignore the road. With a manual, they will still drive badly, but if they would like their car to drive properly, they would still have to pay more attention to driving and whats around them. It won't happen in all cases, but it's a slim possibility. Automatics are NOT going to help a bad driver concentrate. They will have less reason to pay attention, and therefore, wont.

 

[Joey D]

You don't have as much control. 3 is not as much as 4.

You can still slap stick with probably 98% of autos, thus choosing gears, and most modern autos have some sort of manumatic system. They still can be interpreted as four a piece.

 

[Wolfe]

Actually, I agree with kingcars on that quote about bogging down, etc. If someone is stalling, misshifting, and just plain struggling to make it down the road, one of four things is true:

1. They've never driven a manual and shouldn't be driving it on the street.

2. They haven't practiced enough with a manual to be driving it on the street.

3. They're in no condition to drive, no matter the transmission choice.

4. The car is broken.

I'm not ignoring the definition of control, I know full well what it is. I don't see how saying you are just as in control with an auto is going against that. Going against it and stating something rather foolish would be out and out saying autos are better then manual, which I haven't done at all.

Because we are defining control as the amount of control you have over your vehicle. Correct me if I'm wrong, but it seems you are still defining control as whether or not you are "in control." We could argue the semantics if you'd like, but we won't get anywhere until that's sorted.

 

[Perfect Balance]

Agreed, it's called being a moron. A moron that would cause a wreck no matter what type of transmission was involved. Doesn't prove Danoff's point in any way.

He said driving a manual car distracted you from focusing on the road. I disagree because I drive subconsciously.

Then you said if one doesn't pay attention specifically to driving the manual vehicle, the car will stall, ect ect, proving his point that it requires some concentration to drive the vehicle, which in turn reduces the amount of concentration left to direct the car and know where traffic is and whatnot.

In other words, because it requires some of your concentration to drive your manual vehicle, you are being distracted from the other part of driving.

You proved his point.

 

[Kylehnat]

That's not an inherent flaw in driving an AT. If it is a problem, it's a problem in individual decision making.

You and I are on the same page here.