BB standard

Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 6/28/2019 7:28 PM, John B. wrote:
On Fri, 28 Jun 2019 08:12:57 -0700, sms
wrote:

On 6/27/2019 7:15 PM, John B. wrote:

snip

Given that a good friends family had about a 1939 Chevrolet and they
seemed to go through about one clutch a year I believe that clutch
wear is largely a matter of the driver's technique and not a matter of
some sort inherent weakness.

It's a wear item. Unlike a 1937 or 1939 Chevrolet, clutch replacement is
complex and expensive on newer cars. I knew someone with a Mini Cooper
with a manual transmission. She cringed when her son was learning to
drive a stick because she knew that a replacement clutch would be close
to $2000 (in California). The parts aren't that expensive but it's a lot
of labor cost because of the bumper removal and the sub-frame removal.

I'm sure that everything costs more in California :-) but changing the
clutch in a Mini is little different than changing one in a VW Bug.
Hoist the front, or rear, of the auto, drop the engine-transmission
change the clutch plate and reassemble the engine and transmission
unit and reinstall it in the auto.

It has been a lot of years since I worked on a VW but from memory it
is about a 2 hour job to change the clutch, for an experienced man.

It does vary with the model car, and some front wheel drive cars are
difficult.

As I stated, our previous car was a Pontiac Vibe (= Toyota Matrix). At
11 years of age, the clutch was just starting to slip a tiny bit on
occasion. Checking Vibe fan-boy sites online, I found out this was a
common problem.

I tend to keep cars a long while; and back in the day I'd have
considered doing the job myself, but my finances are now healthier than
my back, and I have better ways to spend my time. So I checked with a
good mechanic I've occasionally used.

He phoned back and said he'd researched that clutch job and was
astonished at how difficult it would be. I think the price was going to
be around $1500 to replace the clutch.

We went car shopping instead.



Front wheel drive has certainly made clutch replacement more difficult.
Back in my old RWD Corolla days, you put the car on ramps, disconnected the
driveshaft, took the knob off the shift lever, unbolted the tranny and
dropped it out, then pulled the clutch off the front of the tranny. I went
to replace my wife’s clutch at 300,000 km since I was putting new bearings
in the transmission, and to my surprise, the new clutch wasn’t appreciably
thicker than the one I took out, so I just jammed the old one back in.

On Tuesday, June 25, 2019 at 6:03:42 PM UTC-7, John B. wrote:
On Tue, 25 Jun 2019 16:56:38 -0700 (PDT), pH wrote:

On Sunday, June 23, 2019 at 4:19:42 PM UTC-7, AMuzi wrote:
On 6/23/2019 6:00 PM, John B. wrote:
On Sun, 23 Jun 2019 14:51:23 -0700 (PDT), Tom Kunich
mail.com wrote:

On Sunday, June 23, 2019 at 1:34:14 PM UTC-7, Chalo wrote:
It baffles me a bit that bike manufacturers keep moving incrementally towards the American pattern BB, which has always worked but which they somehow pretend doesn't exist. Why ignore a time-proven design that is free and open, to make a half-assed approximation of it that has problems?

You are expecting engineers to all have the same educations and the same historic knowledge. In fact most engineers believe themselves smarter than those who came before. We are seeing the same thing with the Millennial Generation wo think that older people are stupid and they are God's gift to the universe.

Certainly true and apparently has been true since man started walking
erect and very likely due to two things. One that the world is
changing and unless you keep up with it you are "stupid" in the sense
that you know less than someone with a more modern education. On the
other hand "modern chaps" will often not know stuff that an older
person will think "everybody knows that".

An engineer that worked for me used to tell a story about how he had
been tasked with designing a wooden bridge and couldn't find a thing
concerning wooden bridge building in any of his engineering books. He
finally located an old retired engineer who had worked 30 or 40 years
for the railroad and had designed and built wooden bridges who told
him "all the secrets".
--
cheers,

John B.


Daughter asked today if grandson could drive my 1966 Malibu
to rack up more 'driving practice' for his temp license.
It's a column shift 3 speed and even though I offered
instruction time, they passed on it.

--
Andrew Muzi
www.yellowjersey.org/
Open every day since 1 April, 1971

Both of my driving kids like manual trannies. Older daughter had a 6-speed Veloraster (as I call it) and now same in a Mustang.
Son loves his 5sp Integra but it needs one more gear.

They both want to drive the family Morris Minor, which is where they got all there manual transmission exposure.

I think I'll let them,now, but they are in for a big surprise, the Morris being so much more massively powerful than what they're used to.

pH

"massively powerful"? With a 918cc side valve engine? Or do you have
the Mark II with the 803 cc 30 HP Engine? Or maybe a late model Mark
V with a thundering great 1,098 cc 48 bhp power plant?
--
cheers,

John B.

948cc of unbridled power.
37 bhp, I'll have you know, with a full 50 foot-pounds of torque. Women faint and strong men turn pale at the sight...and fully worth the $45 I paid for it in 1973. The Acme of British technological might (well, that and Brooks saddles and Sturmey-Archer products, of course.)

Snarl.
Maybe only a Fiat 500, Subaru 360 or Simca 1100 could compare. (Honda 600s are too advanced.)

pH

On 6/28/2019 9:20 PM, pH wrote:
On Tuesday, June 25, 2019 at 6:03:42 PM UTC-7, John B. wrote:
On Tue, 25 Jun 2019 16:56:38 -0700 (PDT), pH wrote:

On Sunday, June 23, 2019 at 4:19:42 PM UTC-7, AMuzi wrote:
On 6/23/2019 6:00 PM, John B. wrote:
On Sun, 23 Jun 2019 14:51:23 -0700 (PDT), Tom Kunich
mail.com wrote:

On Sunday, June 23, 2019 at 1:34:14 PM UTC-7, Chalo wrote:
It baffles me a bit that bike manufacturers keep moving incrementally towards the American pattern BB, which has always worked but which they somehow pretend doesn't exist. Why ignore a time-proven design that is free and open, to make a half-assed approximation of it that has problems?

You are expecting engineers to all have the same educations and the same historic knowledge. In fact most engineers believe themselves smarter than those who came before. We are seeing the same thing with the Millennial Generation wo think that older people are stupid and they are God's gift to the universe.

Certainly true and apparently has been true since man started walking
erect and very likely due to two things. One that the world is
changing and unless you keep up with it you are "stupid" in the sense
that you know less than someone with a more modern education. On the
other hand "modern chaps" will often not know stuff that an older
person will think "everybody knows that".

An engineer that worked for me used to tell a story about how he had
been tasked with designing a wooden bridge and couldn't find a thing
concerning wooden bridge building in any of his engineering books. He
finally located an old retired engineer who had worked 30 or 40 years
for the railroad and had designed and built wooden bridges who told
him "all the secrets".
--
cheers,

John B.


Daughter asked today if grandson could drive my 1966 Malibu
to rack up more 'driving practice' for his temp license.
It's a column shift 3 speed and even though I offered
instruction time, they passed on it.

--
Andrew Muzi
www.yellowjersey.org/
Open every day since 1 April, 1971

Both of my driving kids like manual trannies. Older daughter had a 6-speed Veloraster (as I call it) and now same in a Mustang.
Son loves his 5sp Integra but it needs one more gear.

They both want to drive the family Morris Minor, which is where they got all there manual transmission exposure.

I think I'll let them,now, but they are in for a big surprise, the Morris being so much more massively powerful than what they're used to.

pH

"massively powerful"? With a 918cc side valve engine? Or do you have
the Mark II with the 803 cc 30 HP Engine? Or maybe a late model Mark
V with a thundering great 1,098 cc 48 bhp power plant?
--
cheers,

John B.

948cc of unbridled power.
37 bhp, I'll have you know, with a full 50 foot-pounds of torque. Women faint and strong men turn pale at the sight...and fully worth the $45 I paid for it in 1973. The Acme of British technological might (well, that and Brooks saddles and Sturmey-Archer products, of course.)

Snarl.
Maybe only a Fiat 500, Subaru 360 or Simca 1100 could compare. (Honda 600s are too advanced.)

pH


ugh.
Even mention of SIMCA (wrenched a friend's piece of crap
repeatedly 49 years ago) makes anyone familiar with the
things shudder.

--
Andrew Muzi
www.yellowjersey.org/
Open every day since 1 April, 1971

On Fri, 28 Jun 2019 17:53:55 -0700 (PDT), jbeattie
wrote:

On Friday, June 28, 2019 at 4:20:38 PM UTC-7, John B. wrote:
On Fri, 28 Jun 2019 07:03:03 -0700 (PDT), jbeattie
wrote:

On Friday, June 28, 2019 at 5:29:13 AM UTC-7, AMuzi wrote:
On 6/27/2019 9:31 PM, John B. wrote:
On Thu, 27 Jun 2019 16:01:34 -0700, sms
wrote:

On 6/27/2019 3:00 PM, jbeattie wrote:
On Thursday, June 27, 2019 at 1:47:46 PM UTC-7, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 6/26/2019 5:26 PM, wrote:
I see no reason today for manual shifting except for sentimental reasons and that it is cheaper (2000 -3000 euro's). Modern automatic transmission outperform manual shifting in every way, at least the one I'm driving now.

Here's my situation: We drive a Mazda 3. We have a tiny pop-up camping
trailer. It weighs only 750 pounds empty.

The Mazda's stated towing capacity is zero, although I've been told that
if I had bought the exact same vehicle in Europe, it's towing capacity
would be listed as 500 kg, which is plenty.

I put a trailer hitch on this car as soon as I got it, and we've towed
the trailer as far as Nova Scotia. I knew I was violating the warranty,
but I judged it worth the risk. If the car had an automatic
transmission, I don't know if I'd make that same judgement.

Why? Towing trailers in hilly terrain is a clutch killer, and typically cars with ATs have higher towing capacity than the same model with a MT because of the AT torque converter. I don't see why having a MT would make you feel more positive about towing -- particularly on a car that probably has a pretty low-torque first gear since it is just a family sedan and not a truck.

True. And one of the reasons there are no manual transmission trucks
sold in the U.S. anymore. The only reason for a manual is off-road
driving in low gear. You can still buy a Jeep Wrangler with a manual, in
fact not sure if they even offer an automatic.

"no manual transmission trucks sold in the U.S. anymore"
See:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uZKajOTa4Gg
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B6GpCqj1REo
--
cheers,

John B.


First link, second comment:
"I wish the engine brake actually did something when I’m
loaded. It does absolutely nothing. I really dislike this
transmission"

I think the guy is complaining about the compression braking,
which is tied to the transmission. See
https://www.truckingtruth.com/trucke...-peterbilt-579
These folks seem to conflate engine braking with compression braking.

The way he describes it, it must be a "Jake" brake that doesn't come
on as quickly as he wishes, if it was simply the braking effect of the
engine with the throttle closed I don't think he would have described
it that way.



Manual transmissions give you more control going up and down hill, but the AT on my Subaru, for example, gives you the option of manual shifting which helps mitigate the spastic CVT.

I did a lot of towing with my old 5sp 4Runner, and backing a loaded trailer up hill and making a 90 degree turn into my driveway was a clutch burner. It's easier with the Subaru except that the Subaru is under-powered, and the hatch back is a blind-spot. The 1996 4Runner was like a terrarium by comparison, although later models were less so.

And for John B, yes clutches burn out. On the 4Runner, it has gone through one clutch in 24 years -- which my son burned out in the middle of nowhere Oregon on his way home from Utah. He struggled into Baker City, spent the night in a hotel while some guy at a place called Grumpy's put in a clutch. http://www.grumpysrepair.com/ Not cheap, but at least we added to the Baker City economy. He fries the clutch in SLC with all the hills and stops and clutch-slipping.

Of course manual clutches "burn out" but extremely rarely if used
properly. As I said in another post my old 1937 Chevy coupe finally
died in about 1950, after 13 years and the clutch was still the
original. But of course, if your son misuses the clutch by slipping
it deliberately - which isn't what a clutch is designed to do - than
it will "burn out".
A clutch is not a speed control device as some people seem to
believe.

One might also comment, with the same degree of accuracy, that
running a tire flat will "burn it up" and running an engine without
oil will "burn it up".

Even a reasonably skilled driver can beat-up a clutch driving in hills. My son lived on a street with successive stops and an elevation gain of 500 fee in about ten blocks. He was pretty good with the clutch, but nervous about traffic behind him and tended to slip the clutch -- and take offs were not perfect, but pretty good. Anyway, he wasn't running a tire flat or running an engine with no oil. He was a B+ driver who burned out a clutch in terrain where it is simply not much fun driving a manual.

-- Jay Beattie.

I can only comment that I grew up in up-state New Hampshire where
hills are the name of the game and as I have said I can't remember my
folks ever replacing a clutch in any of their cars. Nor did I ever
have clutch problems when I lived there.

In fact when I was in high school I worked part-time in a service
station where we serviced, in addition to the autos, a fleet of
logging trucks, and I don't remember anyone complaining about a clutch
and if a loaded lumber truck, and they normally hauled as heavy load
as they could get away with, still didn't have clutch problems
than...

Now, having said that a good friend's parents had a lot of clutch
problems and as I was a sort of mechanic they asked me about it so I
had a look. The house was built on a side hill and the garage was a
separate building down hill from the house which fronted on the road.
The mother instead of putting the car in low gear and just using
enough throttle to climb the hill she put the car in second (don't ask
me why) and tramped on the throttle and slipped the clutch to control
the speed to get up the hill. And. yes, they did have a lot of clutch
problems.

By the way, my Grandfather bought a second hand Model A Ford pickup in
about 1930 and drove it until some time in the early 1950's and never
changed the clutch. He used to brag that he bought it for $100 and
when he sold it he got $250. It seems that by the 1950's it had become
somewhat of a collector's item :-)
--
cheers,

John B.

On Fri, 28 Jun 2019 19:20:41 -0700 (PDT), pH wrote:

On Tuesday, June 25, 2019 at 6:03:42 PM UTC-7, John B. wrote:
On Tue, 25 Jun 2019 16:56:38 -0700 (PDT), pH wrote:

On Sunday, June 23, 2019 at 4:19:42 PM UTC-7, AMuzi wrote:
On 6/23/2019 6:00 PM, John B. wrote:
On Sun, 23 Jun 2019 14:51:23 -0700 (PDT), Tom Kunich
mail.com wrote:

On Sunday, June 23, 2019 at 1:34:14 PM UTC-7, Chalo wrote:
It baffles me a bit that bike manufacturers keep moving incrementally towards the American pattern BB, which has always worked but which they somehow pretend doesn't exist. Why ignore a time-proven design that is free and open, to make a half-assed approximation of it that has problems?

You are expecting engineers to all have the same educations and the same historic knowledge. In fact most engineers believe themselves smarter than those who came before. We are seeing the same thing with the Millennial Generation wo think that older people are stupid and they are God's gift to the universe.

Certainly true and apparently has been true since man started walking
erect and very likely due to two things. One that the world is
changing and unless you keep up with it you are "stupid" in the sense
that you know less than someone with a more modern education. On the
other hand "modern chaps" will often not know stuff that an older
person will think "everybody knows that".

An engineer that worked for me used to tell a story about how he had
been tasked with designing a wooden bridge and couldn't find a thing
concerning wooden bridge building in any of his engineering books. He
finally located an old retired engineer who had worked 30 or 40 years
for the railroad and had designed and built wooden bridges who told
him "all the secrets".
--
cheers,

John B.


Daughter asked today if grandson could drive my 1966 Malibu
to rack up more 'driving practice' for his temp license.
It's a column shift 3 speed and even though I offered
instruction time, they passed on it.

--
Andrew Muzi
www.yellowjersey.org/
Open every day since 1 April, 1971

Both of my driving kids like manual trannies. Older daughter had a 6-speed Veloraster (as I call it) and now same in a Mustang.
Son loves his 5sp Integra but it needs one more gear.

They both want to drive the family Morris Minor, which is where they got all there manual transmission exposure.

I think I'll let them,now, but they are in for a big surprise, the Morris being so much more massively powerful than what they're used to.

pH

"massively powerful"? With a 918cc side valve engine? Or do you have
the Mark II with the 803 cc 30 HP Engine? Or maybe a late model Mark
V with a thundering great 1,098 cc 48 bhp power plant?
--
cheers,

John B.

948cc of unbridled power.
37 bhp, I'll have you know, with a full 50 foot-pounds of torque. Women faint and strong men turn pale at the sight...and fully worth the $45 I paid for it in 1973. The Acme of British technological might (well, that and Brooks saddles and Sturmey-Archer products, of course.)

Well, at least Brooks and Sturmy-Archer are still in business :-)
Snarl.
Maybe only a Fiat 500, Subaru 360 or Simca 1100 could compare. (Honda 600s are too advanced.)

pH



--
cheers,

John B.

On 6/28/2019 10:17 PM, John B. wrote:
On Fri, 28 Jun 2019 17:53:55 -0700 (PDT), jbeattie
wrote:

On Friday, June 28, 2019 at 4:20:38 PM UTC-7, John B. wrote:
On Fri, 28 Jun 2019 07:03:03 -0700 (PDT), jbeattie
wrote:

On Friday, June 28, 2019 at 5:29:13 AM UTC-7, AMuzi wrote:
On 6/27/2019 9:31 PM, John B. wrote:
On Thu, 27 Jun 2019 16:01:34 -0700, sms
wrote:

On 6/27/2019 3:00 PM, jbeattie wrote:
On Thursday, June 27, 2019 at 1:47:46 PM UTC-7, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 6/26/2019 5:26 PM, wrote:
I see no reason today for manual shifting except for sentimental reasons and that it is cheaper (2000 -3000 euro's). Modern automatic transmission outperform manual shifting in every way, at least the one I'm driving now.

Here's my situation: We drive a Mazda 3. We have a tiny pop-up camping
trailer. It weighs only 750 pounds empty.

The Mazda's stated towing capacity is zero, although I've been told that
if I had bought the exact same vehicle in Europe, it's towing capacity
would be listed as 500 kg, which is plenty.

I put a trailer hitch on this car as soon as I got it, and we've towed
the trailer as far as Nova Scotia. I knew I was violating the warranty,
but I judged it worth the risk. If the car had an automatic
transmission, I don't know if I'd make that same judgement.

Why? Towing trailers in hilly terrain is a clutch killer, and typically cars with ATs have higher towing capacity than the same model with a MT because of the AT torque converter. I don't see why having a MT would make you feel more positive about towing -- particularly on a car that probably has a pretty low-torque first gear since it is just a family sedan and not a truck.

True. And one of the reasons there are no manual transmission trucks
sold in the U.S. anymore. The only reason for a manual is off-road
driving in low gear. You can still buy a Jeep Wrangler with a manual, in
fact not sure if they even offer an automatic.

"no manual transmission trucks sold in the U.S. anymore"
See:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uZKajOTa4Gg
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B6GpCqj1REo
--
cheers,

John B.


First link, second comment:
"I wish the engine brake actually did something when I’m
loaded. It does absolutely nothing. I really dislike this
transmission"

I think the guy is complaining about the compression braking,
which is tied to the transmission. See
https://www.truckingtruth.com/trucke...-peterbilt-579
These folks seem to conflate engine braking with compression braking.

The way he describes it, it must be a "Jake" brake that doesn't come
on as quickly as he wishes, if it was simply the braking effect of the
engine with the throttle closed I don't think he would have described
it that way.



Manual transmissions give you more control going up and down hill, but the AT on my Subaru, for example, gives you the option of manual shifting which helps mitigate the spastic CVT.

I did a lot of towing with my old 5sp 4Runner, and backing a loaded trailer up hill and making a 90 degree turn into my driveway was a clutch burner. It's easier with the Subaru except that the Subaru is under-powered, and the hatch back is a blind-spot. The 1996 4Runner was like a terrarium by comparison, although later models were less so.

And for John B, yes clutches burn out. On the 4Runner, it has gone through one clutch in 24 years -- which my son burned out in the middle of nowhere Oregon on his way home from Utah. He struggled into Baker City, spent the night in a hotel while some guy at a place called Grumpy's put in a clutch. http://www.grumpysrepair.com/ Not cheap, but at least we added to the Baker City economy. He fries the clutch in SLC with all the hills and stops and clutch-slipping.

Of course manual clutches "burn out" but extremely rarely if used
properly. As I said in another post my old 1937 Chevy coupe finally
died in about 1950, after 13 years and the clutch was still the
original. But of course, if your son misuses the clutch by slipping
it deliberately - which isn't what a clutch is designed to do - than
it will "burn out".
A clutch is not a speed control device as some people seem to
believe.

One might also comment, with the same degree of accuracy, that
running a tire flat will "burn it up" and running an engine without
oil will "burn it up".

Even a reasonably skilled driver can beat-up a clutch driving in hills. My son lived on a street with successive stops and an elevation gain of 500 fee in about ten blocks. He was pretty good with the clutch, but nervous about traffic behind him and tended to slip the clutch -- and take offs were not perfect, but pretty good. Anyway, he wasn't running a tire flat or running an engine with no oil. He was a B+ driver who burned out a clutch in terrain where it is simply not much fun driving a manual.

-- Jay Beattie.

I can only comment that I grew up in up-state New Hampshire where
hills are the name of the game and as I have said I can't remember my
folks ever replacing a clutch in any of their cars. Nor did I ever
have clutch problems when I lived there.

In fact when I was in high school I worked part-time in a service
station where we serviced, in addition to the autos, a fleet of
logging trucks, and I don't remember anyone complaining about a clutch
and if a loaded lumber truck, and they normally hauled as heavy load
as they could get away with, still didn't have clutch problems
than...

Now, having said that a good friend's parents had a lot of clutch
problems and as I was a sort of mechanic they asked me about it so I
had a look. The house was built on a side hill and the garage was a
separate building down hill from the house which fronted on the road.
The mother instead of putting the car in low gear and just using
enough throttle to climb the hill she put the car in second (don't ask
me why) and tramped on the throttle and slipped the clutch to control
the speed to get up the hill. And. yes, they did have a lot of clutch
problems.

By the way, my Grandfather bought a second hand Model A Ford pickup in
about 1930 and drove it until some time in the early 1950's and never
changed the clutch. He used to brag that he bought it for $100 and
when he sold it he got $250. It seems that by the 1950's it had become
somewhat of a collector's item :-)
--
cheers,

John B.


Manual gearbox undocumented featu

https://www.channel3000.com/news/cri...eys/1090326370

For trouble en route on Joerg's bike it's water, bent nail,
tubeless sealer and a hand pump. For my cars, small
toolbox. For some people it's a backup stolen car...

--
Andrew Muzi
www.yellowjersey.org/
Open every day since 1 April, 1971

On Saturday, June 29, 2019 at 6:19:06 AM UTC-7, AMuzi wrote:
On 6/28/2019 10:17 PM, John B. wrote:
On Fri, 28 Jun 2019 17:53:55 -0700 (PDT), jbeattie
wrote:

On Friday, June 28, 2019 at 4:20:38 PM UTC-7, John B. wrote:
On Fri, 28 Jun 2019 07:03:03 -0700 (PDT), jbeattie
wrote:

On Friday, June 28, 2019 at 5:29:13 AM UTC-7, AMuzi wrote:
On 6/27/2019 9:31 PM, John B. wrote:
On Thu, 27 Jun 2019 16:01:34 -0700, sms
wrote:

On 6/27/2019 3:00 PM, jbeattie wrote:
On Thursday, June 27, 2019 at 1:47:46 PM UTC-7, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 6/26/2019 5:26 PM, wrote:
I see no reason today for manual shifting except for sentimental reasons and that it is cheaper (2000 -3000 euro's). Modern automatic transmission outperform manual shifting in every way, at least the one I'm driving now.

Here's my situation: We drive a Mazda 3. We have a tiny pop-up camping
trailer. It weighs only 750 pounds empty.

The Mazda's stated towing capacity is zero, although I've been told that
if I had bought the exact same vehicle in Europe, it's towing capacity
would be listed as 500 kg, which is plenty.

I put a trailer hitch on this car as soon as I got it, and we've towed
the trailer as far as Nova Scotia. I knew I was violating the warranty,
but I judged it worth the risk. If the car had an automatic
transmission, I don't know if I'd make that same judgement.

Why? Towing trailers in hilly terrain is a clutch killer, and typically cars with ATs have higher towing capacity than the same model with a MT because of the AT torque converter. I don't see why having a MT would make you feel more positive about towing -- particularly on a car that probably has a pretty low-torque first gear since it is just a family sedan and not a truck.

True. And one of the reasons there are no manual transmission trucks
sold in the U.S. anymore. The only reason for a manual is off-road
driving in low gear. You can still buy a Jeep Wrangler with a manual, in
fact not sure if they even offer an automatic.

"no manual transmission trucks sold in the U.S. anymore"
See:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uZKajOTa4Gg
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B6GpCqj1REo
--
cheers,

John B.


First link, second comment:
"I wish the engine brake actually did something when I’m
loaded. It does absolutely nothing. I really dislike this
transmission"

I think the guy is complaining about the compression braking,
which is tied to the transmission. See
https://www.truckingtruth.com/trucke...-peterbilt-579
These folks seem to conflate engine braking with compression braking.

The way he describes it, it must be a "Jake" brake that doesn't come
on as quickly as he wishes, if it was simply the braking effect of the
engine with the throttle closed I don't think he would have described
it that way.



Manual transmissions give you more control going up and down hill, but the AT on my Subaru, for example, gives you the option of manual shifting which helps mitigate the spastic CVT.

I did a lot of towing with my old 5sp 4Runner, and backing a loaded trailer up hill and making a 90 degree turn into my driveway was a clutch burner. It's easier with the Subaru except that the Subaru is under-powered, and the hatch back is a blind-spot. The 1996 4Runner was like a terrarium by comparison, although later models were less so.

And for John B, yes clutches burn out. On the 4Runner, it has gone through one clutch in 24 years -- which my son burned out in the middle of nowhere Oregon on his way home from Utah. He struggled into Baker City, spent the night in a hotel while some guy at a place called Grumpy's put in a clutch. http://www.grumpysrepair.com/ Not cheap, but at least we added to the Baker City economy. He fries the clutch in SLC with all the hills and stops and clutch-slipping.

Of course manual clutches "burn out" but extremely rarely if used
properly. As I said in another post my old 1937 Chevy coupe finally
died in about 1950, after 13 years and the clutch was still the
original. But of course, if your son misuses the clutch by slipping
it deliberately - which isn't what a clutch is designed to do - than
it will "burn out".
A clutch is not a speed control device as some people seem to
believe.

One might also comment, with the same degree of accuracy, that
running a tire flat will "burn it up" and running an engine without
oil will "burn it up".

Even a reasonably skilled driver can beat-up a clutch driving in hills.. My son lived on a street with successive stops and an elevation gain of 500 fee in about ten blocks. He was pretty good with the clutch, but nervous about traffic behind him and tended to slip the clutch -- and take offs were not perfect, but pretty good. Anyway, he wasn't running a tire flat or running an engine with no oil. He was a B+ driver who burned out a clutch in terrain where it is simply not much fun driving a manual.

-- Jay Beattie.

I can only comment that I grew up in up-state New Hampshire where
hills are the name of the game and as I have said I can't remember my
folks ever replacing a clutch in any of their cars. Nor did I ever
have clutch problems when I lived there.

In fact when I was in high school I worked part-time in a service
station where we serviced, in addition to the autos, a fleet of
logging trucks, and I don't remember anyone complaining about a clutch
and if a loaded lumber truck, and they normally hauled as heavy load
as they could get away with, still didn't have clutch problems
than...

Now, having said that a good friend's parents had a lot of clutch
problems and as I was a sort of mechanic they asked me about it so I
had a look. The house was built on a side hill and the garage was a
separate building down hill from the house which fronted on the road.
The mother instead of putting the car in low gear and just using
enough throttle to climb the hill she put the car in second (don't ask
me why) and tramped on the throttle and slipped the clutch to control
the speed to get up the hill. And. yes, they did have a lot of clutch
problems.

By the way, my Grandfather bought a second hand Model A Ford pickup in
about 1930 and drove it until some time in the early 1950's and never
changed the clutch. He used to brag that he bought it for $100 and
when he sold it he got $250. It seems that by the 1950's it had become
somewhat of a collector's item :-)
--
cheers,

John B.


Manual gearbox undocumented featu

https://www.channel3000.com/news/cri...eys/1090326370

For trouble en route on Joerg's bike it's water, bent nail,
tubeless sealer and a hand pump. For my cars, small
toolbox. For some people it's a backup stolen car...

Small tool box for a number of reasons and not just the transmission. Welcome to the real world, Neo. https://car-images.bauersecure.com/p...jpg?scale=down

I look under the hood and hunt for the engine. I wouldn't know what to do if I found it, but I do know where to check the oil and add wiper fluid. I can pump my own gas when I got out of state. My wife handles the recalls. The Subaru is going in for the exploding airbag recall next week. We also have a cheap Nissan, and between the two, I think we get a recall notice about every other month. The Subaru is mostly the snow car and trip car and remains parked most of the time.

-- Jay Beattie.

jbeattie wrote:
On Saturday, June 29, 2019 at 6:19:06 AM UTC-7, AMuzi wrote:
On 6/28/2019 10:17 PM, John B. wrote:
On Fri, 28 Jun 2019 17:53:55 -0700 (PDT), jbeattie
wrote:

On Friday, June 28, 2019 at 4:20:38 PM UTC-7, John B. wrote:
On Fri, 28 Jun 2019 07:03:03 -0700 (PDT), jbeattie
wrote:

On Friday, June 28, 2019 at 5:29:13 AM UTC-7, AMuzi wrote:
On 6/27/2019 9:31 PM, John B. wrote:
On Thu, 27 Jun 2019 16:01:34 -0700, sms
wrote:

On 6/27/2019 3:00 PM, jbeattie wrote:
On Thursday, June 27, 2019 at 1:47:46 PM UTC-7, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 6/26/2019 5:26 PM, wrote:
I see no reason today for manual shifting except for
sentimental reasons and that it is cheaper (2000 -3000
euro's). Modern automatic transmission outperform manual
shifting in every way, at least the one I'm driving now.

Here's my situation: We drive a Mazda 3. We have a tiny pop-up camping
trailer. It weighs only 750 pounds empty.

The Mazda's stated towing capacity is zero, although I've been told that
if I had bought the exact same vehicle in Europe, it's towing capacity
would be listed as 500 kg, which is plenty.

I put a trailer hitch on this car as soon as I got it, and we've towed
the trailer as far as Nova Scotia. I knew I was violating the warranty,
but I judged it worth the risk. If the car had an automatic
transmission, I don't know if I'd make that same judgement.

Why? Towing trailers in hilly terrain is a clutch killer, and
typically cars with ATs have higher towing capacity than the
same model with a MT because of the AT torque converter. I
don't see why having a MT would make you feel more positive about towing --
particularly on a car that probably has a pretty low-torque
first gear since it is just a family sedan and not a truck.

True. And one of the reasons there are no manual transmission trucks
sold in the U.S. anymore. The only reason for a manual is off-road
driving in low gear. You can still buy a Jeep Wrangler with a manual, in
fact not sure if they even offer an automatic.

"no manual transmission trucks sold in the U.S. anymore"
See:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uZKajOTa4Gg
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B6GpCqj1REo
--
cheers,

John B.


First link, second comment:
"I wish the engine brake actually did something when I’m
loaded. It does absolutely nothing. I really dislike this
transmission"

I think the guy is complaining about the compression braking,
which is tied to the transmission. See
https://www.truckingtruth.com/trucke...-peterbilt-579
These folks seem to conflate engine braking with compression braking.

The way he describes it, it must be a "Jake" brake that doesn't come
on as quickly as he wishes, if it was simply the braking effect of the
engine with the throttle closed I don't think he would have described
it that way.



Manual transmissions give you more control going up and down hill,
but the AT on my Subaru, for example, gives you the option of manual
shifting which helps mitigate the spastic CVT.

I did a lot of towing with my old 5sp 4Runner, and backing a loaded
trailer up hill and making a 90 degree turn into my driveway was a
clutch burner. It's easier with the Subaru except that the Subaru is
under-powered, and the hatch back is a blind-spot. The 1996 4Runner
was like a terrarium by comparison, although later models were less so.

And for John B, yes clutches burn out. On the 4Runner, it has gone
through one clutch in 24 years -- which my son burned out in the
middle of nowhere Oregon on his way home from Utah. He struggled
into Baker City, spent the night in a hotel while some guy at a
place called Grumpy's put in a clutch. http://www.grumpysrepair.com/
Not cheap, but at least we added to the Baker City economy. He fries
the clutch in SLC with all the hills and stops and clutch-slipping.

Of course manual clutches "burn out" but extremely rarely if used
properly. As I said in another post my old 1937 Chevy coupe finally
died in about 1950, after 13 years and the clutch was still the
original. But of course, if your son misuses the clutch by slipping
it deliberately - which isn't what a clutch is designed to do - than
it will "burn out".
A clutch is not a speed control device as some people seem to
believe.

One might also comment, with the same degree of accuracy, that
running a tire flat will "burn it up" and running an engine without
oil will "burn it up".

Even a reasonably skilled driver can beat-up a clutch driving in
hills. My son lived on a street with successive stops and an
elevation gain of 500 fee in about ten blocks. He was pretty good with
the clutch, but nervous about traffic behind him and tended to slip
the clutch -- and take offs were not perfect, but pretty good. Anyway,
he wasn't running a tire flat or running an engine with no oil. He was
a B+ driver who burned out a clutch in terrain where it is simply not
much fun driving a manual.

-- Jay Beattie.

I can only comment that I grew up in up-state New Hampshire where
hills are the name of the game and as I have said I can't remember my
folks ever replacing a clutch in any of their cars. Nor did I ever
have clutch problems when I lived there.

In fact when I was in high school I worked part-time in a service
station where we serviced, in addition to the autos, a fleet of
logging trucks, and I don't remember anyone complaining about a clutch
and if a loaded lumber truck, and they normally hauled as heavy load
as they could get away with, still didn't have clutch problems
than...

Now, having said that a good friend's parents had a lot of clutch
problems and as I was a sort of mechanic they asked me about it so I
had a look. The house was built on a side hill and the garage was a
separate building down hill from the house which fronted on the road.
The mother instead of putting the car in low gear and just using
enough throttle to climb the hill she put the car in second (don't ask
me why) and tramped on the throttle and slipped the clutch to control
the speed to get up the hill. And. yes, they did have a lot of clutch
problems.

By the way, my Grandfather bought a second hand Model A Ford pickup in
about 1930 and drove it until some time in the early 1950's and never
changed the clutch. He used to brag that he bought it for $100 and
when he sold it he got $250. It seems that by the 1950's it had become
somewhat of a collector's item :-)
--
cheers,

John B.


Manual gearbox undocumented featu

https://www.channel3000.com/news/cri...eys/1090326370

For trouble en route on Joerg's bike it's water, bent nail,
tubeless sealer and a hand pump. For my cars, small
toolbox. For some people it's a backup stolen car...

Small tool box for a number of reasons and not just the transmission.
Welcome to the real world, Neo.
https://car-images.bauersecure.com/p...jpg?scale=down

I look under the hood and hunt for the engine. I wouldn't know what to
do if I found it, but I do know where to check the oil and add wiper
fluid. I can pump my own gas when I got out of state. My wife handles the
recalls. The Subaru is going in for the exploding airbag recall next
week. We also have a cheap Nissan, and between the two, I think we get a
recall notice about every other month. The Subaru is mostly the snow car
and trip car and remains parked most of the time.

-- Jay Beattie.


The engine compartment in most modern vehicles looks like somebody mixed up
10 gallons of “Two part, expanding, fast curing drivetrain� and just poured
it in the top. I blame 3-D CAD.

On Sat, 29 Jun 2019 08:19:02 -0500, AMuzi wrote:

On 6/28/2019 10:17 PM, John B. wrote:
On Fri, 28 Jun 2019 17:53:55 -0700 (PDT), jbeattie
wrote:

On Friday, June 28, 2019 at 4:20:38 PM UTC-7, John B. wrote:
On Fri, 28 Jun 2019 07:03:03 -0700 (PDT), jbeattie
wrote:

On Friday, June 28, 2019 at 5:29:13 AM UTC-7, AMuzi wrote:
On 6/27/2019 9:31 PM, John B. wrote:
On Thu, 27 Jun 2019 16:01:34 -0700, sms
wrote:

On 6/27/2019 3:00 PM, jbeattie wrote:
On Thursday, June 27, 2019 at 1:47:46 PM UTC-7, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 6/26/2019 5:26 PM, wrote:
I see no reason today for manual shifting except for sentimental reasons and that it is cheaper (2000 -3000 euro's). Modern automatic transmission outperform manual shifting in every way, at least the one I'm driving now.

Here's my situation: We drive a Mazda 3. We have a tiny pop-up camping
trailer. It weighs only 750 pounds empty.

The Mazda's stated towing capacity is zero, although I've been told that
if I had bought the exact same vehicle in Europe, it's towing capacity
would be listed as 500 kg, which is plenty.

I put a trailer hitch on this car as soon as I got it, and we've towed
the trailer as far as Nova Scotia. I knew I was violating the warranty,
but I judged it worth the risk. If the car had an automatic
transmission, I don't know if I'd make that same judgement.

Why? Towing trailers in hilly terrain is a clutch killer, and typically cars with ATs have higher towing capacity than the same model with a MT because of the AT torque converter. I don't see why having a MT would make you feel more positive about towing -- particularly on a car that probably has a pretty low-torque first gear since it is just a family sedan and not a truck.

True. And one of the reasons there are no manual transmission trucks
sold in the U.S. anymore. The only reason for a manual is off-road
driving in low gear. You can still buy a Jeep Wrangler with a manual, in
fact not sure if they even offer an automatic.

"no manual transmission trucks sold in the U.S. anymore"
See:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uZKajOTa4Gg
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B6GpCqj1REo
--
cheers,

John B.


First link, second comment:
"I wish the engine brake actually did something when I’m
loaded. It does absolutely nothing. I really dislike this
transmission"

I think the guy is complaining about the compression braking,
which is tied to the transmission. See
https://www.truckingtruth.com/trucke...-peterbilt-579
These folks seem to conflate engine braking with compression braking.

The way he describes it, it must be a "Jake" brake that doesn't come
on as quickly as he wishes, if it was simply the braking effect of the
engine with the throttle closed I don't think he would have described
it that way.



Manual transmissions give you more control going up and down hill, but the AT on my Subaru, for example, gives you the option of manual shifting which helps mitigate the spastic CVT.

I did a lot of towing with my old 5sp 4Runner, and backing a loaded trailer up hill and making a 90 degree turn into my driveway was a clutch burner. It's easier with the Subaru except that the Subaru is under-powered, and the hatch back is a blind-spot. The 1996 4Runner was like a terrarium by comparison, although later models were less so.

And for John B, yes clutches burn out. On the 4Runner, it has gone through one clutch in 24 years -- which my son burned out in the middle of nowhere Oregon on his way home from Utah. He struggled into Baker City, spent the night in a hotel while some guy at a place called Grumpy's put in a clutch. http://www.grumpysrepair.com/ Not cheap, but at least we added to the Baker City economy. He fries the clutch in SLC with all the hills and stops and clutch-slipping.

Of course manual clutches "burn out" but extremely rarely if used
properly. As I said in another post my old 1937 Chevy coupe finally
died in about 1950, after 13 years and the clutch was still the
original. But of course, if your son misuses the clutch by slipping
it deliberately - which isn't what a clutch is designed to do - than
it will "burn out".
A clutch is not a speed control device as some people seem to
believe.

One might also comment, with the same degree of accuracy, that
running a tire flat will "burn it up" and running an engine without
oil will "burn it up".

Even a reasonably skilled driver can beat-up a clutch driving in hills. My son lived on a street with successive stops and an elevation gain of 500 fee in about ten blocks. He was pretty good with the clutch, but nervous about traffic behind him and tended to slip the clutch -- and take offs were not perfect, but pretty good. Anyway, he wasn't running a tire flat or running an engine with no oil. He was a B+ driver who burned out a clutch in terrain where it is simply not much fun driving a manual.

-- Jay Beattie.

I can only comment that I grew up in up-state New Hampshire where
hills are the name of the game and as I have said I can't remember my
folks ever replacing a clutch in any of their cars. Nor did I ever
have clutch problems when I lived there.

In fact when I was in high school I worked part-time in a service
station where we serviced, in addition to the autos, a fleet of
logging trucks, and I don't remember anyone complaining about a clutch
and if a loaded lumber truck, and they normally hauled as heavy load
as they could get away with, still didn't have clutch problems
than...

Now, having said that a good friend's parents had a lot of clutch
problems and as I was a sort of mechanic they asked me about it so I
had a look. The house was built on a side hill and the garage was a
separate building down hill from the house which fronted on the road.
The mother instead of putting the car in low gear and just using
enough throttle to climb the hill she put the car in second (don't ask
me why) and tramped on the throttle and slipped the clutch to control
the speed to get up the hill. And. yes, they did have a lot of clutch
problems.

By the way, my Grandfather bought a second hand Model A Ford pickup in
about 1930 and drove it until some time in the early 1950's and never
changed the clutch. He used to brag that he bought it for $100 and
when he sold it he got $250. It seems that by the 1950's it had become
somewhat of a collector's item :-)
--
cheers,

John B.


Manual gearbox undocumented featu

https://www.channel3000.com/news/cri...eys/1090326370

For trouble en route on Joerg's bike it's water, bent nail,
tubeless sealer and a hand pump. For my cars, small
toolbox. For some people it's a backup stolen car...

Given that fuel usage is, to some extent, dependent on weight one
might expect much cheaper operating costs by not including a tool box
in the car's accessories and stealing only cars with full fuel tanks
:-)
--
cheers,

John B.

Progressively refining an unsustainable and putrid technology (gasoline engines) requires progressively greater measures such as precise heat control, that make seemingly pointless engine covers useful in their context.