|
Grex > Agora47 > #175: shopping for a car, this time because I have to | |
|
| Author |
Message |
| 25 new of 120 responses total. |
jep
|
|
response 81 of 120:
| 
Nov 28 17:02 UTC 2003 |
I had a Pontiac LeMans several years ago, my first manual transmission
car. I stalled it and couldn't get it restarted at the Arby's near
Hamburg. The battery was dead.
The LeMans was even smaller than my Sunfire. The parking lot there is
on a slight incline. Arby's was dead for business that evening,
fortunately for me. So I pushed the car up the incline, and down
again, jumping in to try to start it. I did this something like 5
times, unsuccessfully, but finally a kindly employee came out and
pushed the car for me. That worked better, I got it started, and I
made it home.
This illustrates more that one should pay attention to one's battery
than that one should buy a manual transmission car, in my opinion.
|
rcurl
|
|
response 82 of 120:
|
Nov 28 17:28 UTC 2003 |
I buy only manual transmission cars for the various reasons others have
given above plus:
It is easier to rock the car to get it out of snow or mud; one gets better
engine breaking going downhill; my cars are less likely to be stolen; our
daughter discovered her "friends" at college don't ask to borrow her manual
("May I borrow your car?" It's a stick shift. "Oh...well, thanks anyway.")
In fact, I can't think of any advantages to an automatic shift. Why are we
having this discussion...? 8^}
|
aruba
|
|
response 83 of 120:
|
Nov 28 17:54 UTC 2003 |
The only time I wish I had an automatic is when I'm in a stop-and-go traffic
jam. If I had that to do every day, I'd buy an automatic for sure.
|
gull
|
|
response 84 of 120:
|
Nov 28 18:47 UTC 2003 |
Re #82: I've rocked an automatic. It's not that hard, though you do
have to lead the direction change a little with the shifter to make up
for the time it takes the transmission to shift. Check the owner's
manual first, though; the internal design of some automatics makes
rocking the car a very bad idea. Some Hondas, for example, have a
rather unique automatic transmission design that doesn't tolerate
rocking well.
Re #83: I agree with you there. Stop and go traffic gets tedious in a
hurry in a manual shift car.
|
tpryan
|
|
response 85 of 120:
|
Nov 28 20:10 UTC 2003 |
Having a hand on the manual transmission can delay you changing
the station on the radio when the commercials come on (and yes, I
do change the station when the commercials come on the NPR stations).
|
rcurl
|
|
response 86 of 120:
|
Nov 28 21:03 UTC 2003 |
I think the dominance of the automatic transmission comes about at the
stage of learning to drive. Shifting is a skill that needs to be learned
and practiced. This is frustrating for both the learner and the
instructor! Of course, the learner can't realize the advantages of a
manual transmission, while the instructor can finish the job more easily
(for the same pay) with an automatic. I learned to drive before there were
good automatic transmissions, and of course our daughter wanted to learn
to drive with what was available, which meant a stick shift.
|
drew
|
|
response 87 of 120:
|
Nov 28 22:00 UTC 2003 |
Re #83-84:
The other two major disadvantages of manual transmissions are:
* Harder to goto full acceleration when needed (ie, when a traffic signal
changes at *exactly* the wrong moment)
* No "park" gear. Parking brake cables invariably go bad or get stuck
eventually; and parking with the gears engaged would disallow things
like remote starting.
|
jep
|
|
response 88 of 120:
|
Nov 28 22:16 UTC 2003 |
I can "rock" an automatic transmission car out of the snow more easily
than a manual. I had practice during my time in Houghton.
On the other hand, I can get quick acceleration from a manual much
more quickly and reliably than from an automatic. (Just downshift.)
The only time I've had a problem with the emergency brake is when it
wasn't used for a long time. With a manual, you're always using the
emergency brake.
|
jep
|
|
response 89 of 120:
|
Nov 28 22:18 UTC 2003 |
The fog light thing still has me bugged. If anyone is a fan of fog
lights, please explain a little more. I honestly don't understand
them. I find it to be an irritant to have them on my car. Maybe I'm
missing something?
|
gelinas
|
|
response 90 of 120:
|
Nov 28 23:18 UTC 2003 |
I'm beginning to suspect that the purpose of fog lights is to make your car
more easily seen in fog, not to make it easier for you to see. But I can't
recall approaching a car using fog lights, so I can't test the hypothesis.
(I put my headlights on earlier, and leave them on later, even though both
cars have daytime running lights, to make it easier for others to see me.)
|
bru
|
|
response 91 of 120:
|
Nov 28 23:52 UTC 2003 |
I always thought amber foglamps helped me see better in fog.
|
gull
|
|
response 92 of 120:
|
Nov 29 01:06 UTC 2003 |
Re #90: The idea of fog lamps is to get them low enough to get the light
under the fog. There's often a clear area just above the ground. A lot
of factory fog lamps aren't very effective, though; they're more for looks.
One of the things that annoys me about automatics is under situations
where you're using a lot of throttle at a steady speed (like climbing a
hill) they tend to 'hunt' between gears. On the Ford van I used to own
I'd get into situations where it would lose speed in 3rd, downshift to
2nd, gain speed, upshift to 3rd, lose speed, downshift to 2nd... I
ended up manually locking it in 2nd anyway, so I might as well have had
a manual.
|
jep
|
|
response 93 of 120:
|
Nov 29 02:44 UTC 2003 |
There was a study several years ago that showed people who use their
headlights all the time get in less accidents. I've never been
convinced the headlights made the difference. People who do things
like that are probably more careful drivers, and a car with headlights
on in the daytime was unusual. It seemed to me those things probably
accounted for the safety difference.
Anyway, Canada passed a law saying all cars have to have headlights on
all the time. Maybe it's just for new cars; I'm not sure. I think it
was backed by GM. GM came out with the marketing scheme of daytime
running lights (DRL), and new GM cars have all had them for about 7 or
8 years now. The headlights aren't on; just the parking lights. I
don't know of any follow-up studies on whether DRLs make a
difference. I assume they don't when I'm driving.
I also turn on my headlights earlier than many, and leave them on
later than many. Headlights don't cost very much so I don't care if I
wear them out faster.
Another thing I do, if I don't have my headlights on, but see a few
other cars which do, I turn mine on too. If other people think they
need them, maybe they really do.
|
dcat
|
|
response 94 of 120:
|
Nov 29 17:09 UTC 2003 |
IIRC, daytime running lights is also headlights on low-power as well as
parking lights, but not on fully.
|
rcurl
|
|
response 95 of 120:
|
Nov 29 18:29 UTC 2003 |
The idea of fog lights is to set the light low so there is not direct
return glare, and to use yellow lights as that is supposedly not reflected
as greatly. I have read that these effects are illusionary. However I
have found that trying to use high-beams in a snow storm is much worse
than using low-beams, so there are better and worse ways to use illumination.
(On some occasions I have opened the driver side door slightly so that
I can follow the centerline of the road, which was not visible in the
snow squall ahead.)
|
jep
|
|
response 96 of 120:
|
Nov 30 02:46 UTC 2003 |
re resp:94: I just found that out today. DRLs are low-power
headlights. I had thought they were just the parking lights.
re resp:95: I agree with all you said, and have done the same things
as well.
Have you ever found fog lights, specifically, to be useful to you,
Rane?
|
russ
|
|
response 97 of 120:
|
Nov 30 04:23 UTC 2003 |
Re #96: Depending on the car, the DRLs are just the parking
lights. I believe the Corvette is one of them; anything
which meets the standard for brightness etc. will do.
The first-generation GM DRLs were horribly bright and aimed
way too high. I wanted something which could fry those
things every time they got in my rear-view mirror.
|
rcurl
|
|
response 98 of 120:
|
Nov 30 06:30 UTC 2003 |
I've never driven a car with fog lights, so I cannot compare personally.
I was speaking from things I've read and observed about other cars.
|
bru
|
|
response 99 of 120:
|
Nov 30 14:06 UTC 2003 |
My cars headlights automatically come on when it is dark, or when I put the
car in gear.
|
slynne
|
|
response 100 of 120:
|
Nov 30 20:40 UTC 2003 |
My car's headlights are on all the time but at lower power (DRL). This
is good because I am the type of person who forgets to turn on my
headlights on rainy grey days when lights probably do make a
difference.
|
remmers
|
|
response 101 of 120:
|
Dec 1 00:24 UTC 2003 |
DRL = Daytime Running Lights. I have 'em and I like 'em.
|
gull
|
|
response 102 of 120:
|
Dec 1 15:34 UTC 2003 |
Re resp:93: I think Volvo has had DRLs longer than GM, but I'm not sure.
My '86 Volvo doesn't have them, but I often drive during the day with the
headlights on anyway. This is mainly because the headlights and parking
lights go off when I turn off the key, so I often don't bother to ever turn
them off manually.
|
rcurl
|
|
response 103 of 120:
|
Dec 1 16:09 UTC 2003 |
Subarus do have DRL - and they go off with the key. I have on occasion
failed to turn on my headlights at dusk because they are already on -
but the taillights aren't! The dash lights do come on with the headlights,
but I usually have the dash lights turned very low so may not notice
that until it gets much darker.
|
jep
|
|
response 104 of 120:
|
Dec 1 16:15 UTC 2003 |
Any lights that are left on in my car when it's not running -- dome
light, map light, headlights -- will be shut off automatically after 20
minutes. It's nothing that shows up in advertising anywhere. I had to
read the owner's manual a couple of times to find it. It's just a nice
thing they stuck in the car, probably because there's a computer in the
car anyway and it cost little to add it.
re resp:102: If my car turned off the headlights automatically when I
turn off the key, I'd leave them on all the time, too.
|
jep
|
|
response 105 of 120:
|
Dec 1 16:17 UTC 2003 |
According to my owner's manual, I only need to change the oil every
7500 miles. Mostly I drive on highways or 55 mph county roads.
However, I've heard from some people I should ignore that and change
the oil every 3000 miles. Comments?
|