I still like stick shift so my car at least feels fast.
Low cost will keep it around for a long time until at some point a cheaper alternative is available.
there is already some standard autos that are getting comparable or slightly better mpg, in 20 years the only people driving stick will be purists
Maybe not. Manual trans car is more expensive to build. Only reason they are cheaper is that the marketing folks found (fifty years ago) that an automatic was a luxury that people would pay extra for. Today it is pretty much accepted as standard. Case in point being most ads for cars list the price for an auto. In many cases the OEM would rather not offer the manual.
^Base models on many cars come as manual trans though, and its definitely not more expensive to build.
Explain how it is less.
Ahhh, a simple flywheel, clutch, trans assembly, as apposed to an auto with a torque converter, valve bodies, trans computer, Ext. and all the programing necessary to make it work it properly ? are you kidding ? and auto is consumer preferred, not manufacturer.
Main thing is volume. Auto outsells manual in the NA market five to one. Everything is cheaper in volume.
Inside the trans itself, it is cheaper to make two or three planetary sets than a typical layshaft manual. First, pinions are redundant, you have at least three per unit. Volume reduces cost. A typical 2 shaft 5 speed MTX has 12 unique gears, not counting the final drive set and diff common to the ATX. Thus for an auto you may have 3 suns, 3 annuli, and 3 pinions to make (9 gears) as opposed to 12 for the manual.
Auto trans parts are cheaper. Clutch plates are stamped. Clutch baskets can be drawn. On the manual side, synchros, blocker rings, and clutch hubs are complicated parts. The parts require multiple machining steps to make. Look at blocker rings or synchro hubs and you’ll see some faincy pointing going on. Or if made as a netform part (forging or PM) it requires complicated and pricing tooling to make these parts. Proper synchro performance and shift feel depends greatly on the tolerance held on these parts.
Valve bodies aren’t that costly in volume. They are typically cast. The machining on them is pretty straightforward face milling and hole boring. Simpler and faster machining ops than clipping the teeth on a clutch hub.
On to the vehicle itself. The clutch pedal is a no brainer. You either need a clutch linkage or a clutch master cylinder. Those cost money. In a fwd car the two cables to shift the trans are more expensive than the small cable to work the park pawl (and some extra wiring) you’ll have with an auto.
Autos are manufacturer preferred. First, there is the cost issue explained above. Also:
The driveline can be made with a lower torque capacity with an auto. Autos usually have a higher low gear ratio than the manual in the same vehicle. Thus [low gear AT]*1.7 (TC factor)is usually significantly less than (low gear MT)*2.0 (clutch drop spike factor).
You can [via ECM] control driveline torque in an AT through the trans and the engine whereas in the MT you can only torque manage with the engine.
Stability control, traction control, and ABS systems are more effectively integrated with an auto trans. In an ‘event’ the ECM can control gear selection and torque converter lockup whereas with an MT you cannot control the clutch or the gear you are in via ECM.
That explanation isn’t all-inclusive as there are other issues and unique situations. However, that is a basic generalization on the topic from a transaxle & transfercase engineer.
seems like you can more cars in stick now then you could 5-10 years ago.
especially with the growing “hot hatch” market