In 1948, the first car with a fully automatic transmission was released.  Since that time, automatics have taken hold of consumer demand over their trickier and more attention needing counterpart, manual transmissions.  Most consumers don’t even bother learning the techniques of the stick shift in their entire life because they don’t need to.  I was lucky because my parents got me a nice, cheap manual the winter I got my license.  Well, they got it because I scorned stick and swore I’d never drive it and my father knew I’d have to learn if I didn’t want to ride my bike through two feet of snow everyday (my Dad in a nutshell).  Still, I learned how to maneuver a manual at a young age and even regret not learning it sooner.  That is not the way of the world, though, and automatics dominate the market to the point where stick is only used for racing or out of some undying habitual loyalty to the old age of automobiles.  That doesn’t mean one is better than the other, does it?  Well, I’m glad you asked (or rather I asked for you), because I’ve crunched the numbers and read the research.  I can tell you which switch to itch or what gear to grind, but what I want to do is explain the key differences between manual transmission and automatic and let you decide for yourself.  After all, it’s all what you are comfortable with.

The debate has raged on for decades and those more gear-head inclined seem to be savoring the flavor of the stick shift more than the average everyday commuter.  For those not seasoned in the art of clutch shifting, all it really is is an extra pedal and a knobby thingy set in beside the driver’s and passenger’s seat that clicks the engine into different gears for different inputs of gas into the engine.  Your vehicle needs to start at one gear (1st) and work it’s way to another or rather, can’t work at one gear (2nd) when it reaches a certain speed.  It’s all about managing your torque, which is the thing that accelerates your vehicle.  Each gear is designed for different set of RPMs (Rotations Per Minute) and that is what the torque is used to do.  The more torque, the more rotations, the more horsepower used, the faster your car goes.   When in a lower gear, your going to use less torque, but in 5th or 6th gear, you’ll be at your fastest so you’ll need a significant increase in torque for you’re car to run properly.  Failure to shift will kill your transmission because you’re not applying the right amount of torque to the speed and output of your engine, so it won’t be able to sustain.

I hope that last paragraph explained standard transmission at least enough for you all to follow along.  What you need to know about automatics is that the transmission is entirely different because you don’t have to shift and lock your tranny into a specific set of RPMs.    It works by adjusting several gears within to deliver the best torque as you accelerate.  The primary difference between the two types that an average consumer will notice is that manuals tend to expend less gas.  They require less gear shifting because they lock in where as automatics constantly change.   In a gas crisis this little fact could be enough to push those comfortable with stick shift in that direction.

Automatics are significantly easier to drive and provide drivers with the luxury of paying more attention to the road.  Granted, by the time you master the art of manual driving, it will come almost second nature to you, but automatics are crucial in traffic because you don’t have to hold down the clutch every time you move an inch.  Plus, manuals roll back when you let off the gas and that can be a pain when you’re stopped on a hill.  Conversely, automatics do not give you the same control over your engine.  Stopping is easier in a manual because you downshift back to previous gears which will slow you down gradually.  They are good for bending turns and handling and whether it’s off the line or in transit, they offer quicker shifting for higher acceleration and overall faster speed.  That is why all of NASCAR has a form of manual shifting and why all Paul Walker’s cars are too fast and too furious.

Automatics also cost more because manufacterers and dealerships know consumers don’t want to bother with shifting.  Buying sports or performance vehicles, however, is a bit of a waste if they are automatic.  Not enough grit or quickness to them.  Paddle shifting is something that has become rather popular for those who don’t want to deal with a clutch but want to shift that fancy sports car.  It basically does all the same things as a standard, just with a quick tap of a paddle built into the steering wheel.  These are semi-automatic because you won’t need to clutch down and shift, you just shift, but you still need to shift.  They are a more advanced form of manual in my book.  One last thing that needs to be noted is that when your car battery dies in an automatic, you need to jump start it.  For a manual, you throw it in neutral, push it, pop the clutch (throw it into gear) and fire the engine up.  It’s a lot more hassle free.

It’s hard to say what is right for you if you only know one way.  When I drove manual in my first two cars, I couldn’t wait to get an automatic and not have to deal with shifting.  After years with an automatic, I miss the control a standard gives and the competitive feel from hitting those gears just right and receiving that little extra push.  Manuals are downright fun to drive when you don’t have to deal with hills or traffic or traffic on hills.  Automatics are carefree and simple.  What it comes down to is what you prefer.  I suggest you learn both and decide for yourself.

Tyler Baker; OSM Writer

For those keeping score at home, Saab has been in trouble since they closed their manufacturing plant in April of this year.  They were out of money to pay parts providers and wages to their 3,000 plus employees.  They had plans in place to pay off these wages and developed a restructuring process that included finding foreign investors interested in purchasing the company, but missed deadlines, vetoed proposals and general disjointed communications has lead Saab to finally throw in the towel.

As it was reported in the Chicago Tribune this morning, Saab’s CEO Victor Mueller announced that he handed in the submission of bankruptcy himself.  Since Saab’s deal to be bought by Chinese automotive company, Zhejiang Youngman was thwarted several times by General Motors, Saab lost the potential option for a buy-out as Youngman has to pull out of the deal.  The reason GM, who still have priority votes in regards to any business deal Saab would want to make, denied the sale has to do with their concern that the technology they provide Saab with currently would be used against them by their Chinese competitors in the Asian market.  Since GM didn’t see a way that the sale of Saab would benefit them, and rightly so, they couldn’t allow the deal to go through.  It’s not clear if Saab every truly understood this, because they proposed several deals in the past month, but none of them really addressed GM’s concerns.  With the veto in place, the investors had to give up.

Mueller is reportedly placing blame on Saab’s recently resigned reconstruction administrator, Guy Lofalk, for misrepresenting to the Chinese investors how much of the company could be sold to them.  He claims Lofalk implied the Chinese could do a complete buy-out, which was never going to be approved by GM.  It’s hard to say if this is true or not, seeing as Lofalk asked last week to be removed as the administrator on their restructuring because he didn’t see a way out for Saab.  On the outside, at least, it looks as if Lofalk recognized the severe disconnect between what Saab thought they should get and what their realistic value was.  He also petitioned the courts to end the creditor protection for Saab, siding that they had no legit plan to restructure properly.

Though we may never be able to verify the truth, it seems that Mueller and his board may be the real people responsible for Saab’s constant misfortune and eventual destruction.  He was the one who turned down Chinese investors several times because he was afraid of losing Saab’s identity to outside companies.  It was only after they had missed the deadline to present a course of restructuring to courts that Saab caved in and announced they would sell off their shares to the Chinese.  Then, when GM stepped in and stated their position, Saab did nothing until they ran past the deadline to pay owed wages, in which they resubmitted a deal that would only give up 60% of the company to the Chinese.  GM rejected that as well and here we are.

It is sad to think that the 3,000 employees of Saab, who have been on the edge, waiting for some good news, had to wait until the week of Christmas to learn they’re company would probably be chopped up and sold in pieces.  When a company is so mismanaged the way Saab was, it’s hard not to realize where this was heading.  Mueller’s company, Spyker Manufacturing, purchased Saab from GM almost two years ago with the promise to turn the company around in five years.  A year and a half later, they ran out of money.  Even from the start, many analysts saw a flaw in Mueller’s optimistic plan.  The fact that sticks out the most is how Saab sold a company record 133,000 vehicles in 2006.  Three years later in 2009, they reported sold only 27,000 vehicles.  As plain as day, we can see how such a steep and brutal drop in sales would kill any resemblance of a profit margin.

Today, Saab files for bankruptcy, but the story doesn’t end there.  The courts need to figure out how best to sell off their assets in order to pay debts.  If they can find a buyer who will take the entire company as a whole, this may salvage the jobs of many employees.  For now, however, nothing is certain except that Mueller and company will be out and someone else could be in.

Tyler Baker; OSM Writer

( Source : Chicago Tribune )

A New York Times Column last week issued a statement that has since rocked the digital debate of why electronic devices must be shut off during take-off and landing.  According the Times’ writer Nick Belton, there is no true evidence to support a safety hazard to using your ipads, kindles and blackberries during that rise and fall period in the flight.  This, of course, led to nerd outcries across the internet and ultimately an online petition to repel the sky law that prohibits the use of electronics during take-off and landing.  The petition, available to sign at whitehouse.gov, currently has nearly 800 signatures in just two days.  They hope to have 25,000 by the first week of January.

The old ways appear to be facing the digital gallows.  The simple reason behind this is that information is too wide-spread and accessible now.  We’re informed and empowered and our fingers type text messages at tremendously daunting speed.  It could be said that if this FAA rule gets overturned, it could mean an awakening in a new revolution.  A technological revolution engineered by a more adapted and vocal generation.  At the very least, it could kill that fifteen minutes between runway and minimum altitude with a few rounds of Angry Birds.  The world should be afraid.

Tyler Baker; OSM Writer

( Source : Gwaker.com )

Follow us on Twitter @OneStopMotors and read more articles at our OSM Resource Center!