Jalopnik 
Enter your username and password.
Detroit, 4:20 AM
Thu Nov 12
31 posts in the last 24 hours
Tip your editors:
tips@jalopnik.com
Editor-in-Chief:
Ray Wert | Email | AIM
Road Test Editor:
Wes Siler | Email
Weekend Editor:
Murilee Martin | Email
Associate Editor - Houston:
Matt Hardigree
Associate Editor - Detroit:
Ben Wojdyla
Editor-at-Large:
Mike Spinelli
Contributors:
Mark Arnold
John Krewson | Email
Andy Didorosi
Original material is licensed under a Creative Commons License permitting non-commercial sharing with attribution.
09/30/09
09/30/09
09/30/09
Addendum to the manual transmissions. "Some cars should ONLY come with a manual transmission". Corvette for example. How much fun is this car if your cruising the boulevard in "D"??? Seriously, thats just not what the car is about.
09/30/09
09/30/09
What's wrong with it : In fact, for 99% of people in 99% of driving conditions, they will be safer and faster along a given stretch of road with the traction control/stability control switched on. The computers react faster and control more accurately than a person can, simply because the computer does things a driver can't, like brake one wheel.
Why we believe it anway : Because we think hanging out the tail of a car around a corner makes us a better driver. Sure it's more fun, but it's not faster, and it's certainly not safer. Plus, journalists believe they can't sell magazines unless there is a car oversteering out of a corner, so they cry when the car won't do it.
Sure, the Stig on a dry circuit at full noise can eke a few 10ths out of a Ferrari with the stability control switched out, but for the rest of us, the sad fact is we'd be faster with it switched on - and more likely to make it back to the pits.
09/30/09
Personally I like leaving stability control on on my GenCoupe and then snaking through curves like a go-kart at high speeds while never even straying from my lane... I'd love to try drifting it, but there's nowhere that's really practical for it.
09/30/09
09/30/09
What makes you think a proper crumple zone is impossible with a transverse i4? Do you imagine mounting it longitudinally will somehow offer more crumple zone?
Do you think a V8 inherently offers more crumple zone than a transverse i4? The v8 is heavier, which can help it absorb some energy, though it won't crumple. Then again, battering rams are heavy, too.
09/29/09
Old cars had the same shape radio (well, most of them, during a certain range of decades), so you could buy any aftermarket in-dash radio/tape deck and it would fit without having to buy a large package of plastic grommets and adapters of which you'd only use one.
Old cars had thick steel bodies. You could stand on them to see over a fence. You could sit on them while hanging around downtown. Neither action ruined the hood, trunk, fenders, or roof.
Old cars had chrome. It looks better than painted plastic. Polishing chrome makes a car owner proud.
Sure, there've been many improvements, but the above 4 items should still be around today.
09/30/09
09/30/09
Didn't you see the 2009 Impala vs 1959 Impala crash video posted here last week? You would rather have the 59 still around?
09/30/09
09/30/09
09/30/09
I'd imagine, also, that too sturdy sheet metal, once it does deform, tends to snap or deform in one small area. Might even be more brittle. While that will still offer some crumple zone benefits, I doubt that a foot long stretch of that stuff will offer as much benefit as a foot long stretch of some stuff that deforms more progressively.
09/30/09
09/30/09
09/30/09
The sheet metal has nothing to do with crumple zones. The crumple zones are in the frame, along with where all the strength and stiffness is. The sheet metal just covers it all up to make it look nice, and be more aerodynamic.
I remember hearing from a corvette engineer once, that they had to thicken the carbon fiber panels because they would buckle when waxing the car. The panels were insanely thin, and near weightless. The engineers loved it, but the owners thought it was cheap because of how easy the panels deformed.
You're argument is the same naive one that people use to make fun of Saturn "I won't be safe in plastic!" The skin of a car does nothing to make it stronger.
10/01/09
Imagine constructing a very strong, very stiff roll cage around a crumple zone, for instance. The crumple zone crumples no more.
You're right, though, that I made (or accepted) an assumption I have no business making (accepting): that today's flimsy sheet metal is down to crumple zones, implying that the old was stiff enough to negate the benefits of crumple zones. I actually have no idea if that's true or not.
And yeah, I poorly phrased my earlier comment, talking about the sheet metal offering (or not) the benefits of crumple zones, when I should have spoke of the sheet metal not preventing (or preventing) the crumple zones from working.
My argument, while probably naive, is more of the reverse of the anti-Saturn argument. The plastic panels deform quite a lot (are flexier than the sheet metal) and, by my reasoning, would have less negative impact upon the crumple zones.
09/29/09
(couldn't resist) Anyway,great article,and I would add one more thing:the one about European cars always being better than American cars. I do believe there was a time when that would have been the case,but I think we've made major strides towards equalizing that playing field. We do choose to still believe it,to some extent,and I'm sure a lot of people just like certain European cars because they do.
09/29/09
09/29/09
09/29/09
09/29/09
09/30/09
09/29/09
09/30/09
09/29/09
WHAT'S WRONG WITH IT: Driving a manual is a skill in the same way that brushing your teeth is a skill. Sure, you have to learn it, and you can improve your technique, but it's not fucking rocket science. You push in the clutch, you select gear, you let out clutch. Ta da!
Being able to drive manual doesn't connote that you're a superior driver, it just shows that you had a parent/friend with a manual transmission, you were willing to learn, and they were willing to let you torture their gearbox.
WHY WE BELIEVE IT ANYWAY: It makes us feel accomplished and superior. (I'm not saying it's not fun, I'm just saying it's not the red badge of courage people make it out to be.)
Also, to anyone who says that driving a MT is too much of a hassle in traffic, WTF is wrong with you? What are you doing that makes you so busy you can't be bothered to operate your car while operating your car? So you have to push a pedal in a few hundred times, your calf muscles will stop cramping in a week. If you don't want to drive a manual, don't, but if you blame it on "the hassle of it all," please tie one arm behind your back so you won't be bothered to choose which one to use to reach for your KFC Snacker. (KFC Crispy Snacker for the win.) Seriously, it's not difficult and it's not an accomplishment, it's a fecking gearbox.
09/29/09
09/30/09
I'm actually starting to believe this one. Most people I know don't know how to drive stick, even fewer know how to drive one WELL.
I've moonlighted as a valet and most of the VALETS will let me take the 5 speeds since they aren't too confident in their skills.
I do agree with your last paragraph though, I live in Los Angeles mother of all shitty traffic and don't find my stick shift to be a hassle.
09/30/09
Why do people still use the term "5-speed" to refer to a manual transmission? There are many 5-speed automatics on the market and a number of manuals come with 6 or 7 speeds.
09/30/09
All my cars have been 5 speeds as have the vast majority of cars I've parked, therefore I refer to them as 5 speeds or manual or stick...
09/30/09
09/30/09
Corvair, Volvo, Mercedes, etc.
My truck does have 5. But first is a granny.
09/30/09
And for driving in traffic... where else do people drive other than tracks, where it's bound to pose even more of a challenge? On a highway you could use AT or MT. If you get a manual car, you must like shifting gears, so I don't see why driving in traffic poses a problem. Personally I kind of like it in gridlock because I can feather the clutch and just barely creep forward...
09/29/09
What's Wrong With It: People have a range of incomes and will buy the best car they can afford on their budget, basic math means that half the population will be better-off than average
Why I Believe It Anyway: Fuck those guys
09/29/09
09/29/09
@eviladrian: Hell yes!
09/29/09
1. I like modern cars. Many times more than classic cars
2. Ferraris are nice, but they're not anything special for me. I'm not sure I have a halo marque as much as I simply aspire to build a Miata coupe to my specs.
3. The Indy 500 sucks. The Monaco GP, while boring, at least has glamor.
4. Car dealers can't be trusted. I have someone in the family in the industry, I've heard the stories.
5. The Prius actually is pretty competent. I never got the hate for it.
6. Never saw Le Mans.
7. Manuals rule, automatics drool (wow I agreed with Jalopnik)
8. Bob Lutz is a marketing guy that misses as much if not more than he hits.
09/30/09
I agree with the sentiment, but is that a "Homeward Bound" reference?
09/30/09
EDIT: No, you were right... I checked.
09/29/09
Also, I defy any die hard stick shifter to not crack a smile of joy when thrown behind a dashboard equipped with a push-button automatic.
09/30/09
So, yeah-- I'd be grinning.