My point is things can always change. 15 years ago people would have said the exact same thing you are saying now about Ferrari, Lamborghini and Porsche. They will always offer manuals because the market for high end sports cars and hypercars wants them. In 15 years, this has changed, with Lambo and Ferrari both dropping manuals in the last 3 years (Lambo in 2011 and Ferrari in 2013). Porsche likely won't be offering manuals in five years even on the Cayman and Boxster.

http://gmauthority.com/blog/2014/05/take-rate-for-manual-transmission-in-2014-corvette-stingray-remains-high/
40% manual take rate for the C7, and that's despite GM still using dated traditional automatics instead of a DCT or automated manual. It's hard to find numbers for the C6, but it seems like the manual take rate was over 50-60% in the first years and around 45% by the last year. 40% is still really good, but it's a falling number. It's within the realm of possibility the Z07 in 2017 or 2018 won't have a manual transmission.

Right now manual is standard and automatic is optional on the vast majority of cars still offering manual. When this changes, expect the numbers of manuals sold to plummet again, and the option to slowly disappear off many cars. I expect all sports cars by 2025 to no longer be offered in manual. Perhaps some smaller, hot-hatch type cars will still have manual options, but for $60,000+ cars, manuals are going to disappear. People who are buying these cars new are people more likely to be convinced by performance advantages offered by automated manuals .

You don't need to explain in detain why you are scared to drive a manual, we understand.

You don't need to go through all of this to explain why you can't understand that some people will always prefer a manual.

During the C7 Z06 unveil video the lead GM design engineer said that the corvette will have a traditional manual transmission option for the foreseeable future. The performance corvettes were only available in manual during the C5 and C6 generation.


I don't see why you think these OPTIONS can't coexist. It is an option. No one is forcing you to buy the manual because it is available. Manuals are cheaper to produce. It isn't going to cost them any extra money so why alienate an entire group of people. The group that is most visible at that. You don't see geezers in their automatic corvettes getting any media exposure.

I do understand that some people will always prefer a manual, I contend it will eventually become an extremely small minority of the population and render manuals as options on some very specific mass produced cars. The Corvette argument really doesn't mean much because so many other manufactures have said the same things about their cars (Porsche GT3, Lambo's, Ferrari's, etc.) and it ended up going anyway. Performance Corvettes for the C7 will have automatic options, don't you think that's a huge change? Declining take rates on manuals is also a concern, though it'll have to drop below 10% for them to really drop it (and it dropping that low would require GM to actually create a DCT or automated manual that isn't complete garbage, something's that's clearly a long way off.

Options can coexist, they just need to be financially viable for the manufacturer. It's no longer financially viable for many to give manual options on many different models. Manual transmissions are cheaper to produce, but if only a small minority of your customers are opting for one, it actually costs more because your production line is making cars with two different drivetrains when only a minority are buying one of the variants. When manual numbers drop below a certain number, it becomes more costly to produce both a manual and non-manual.

You may not see auto Corvette's getting media exposure, but for the companies that have already switched get it. Top Gear, who are sort of "automobile purists" and get depressed when they see cars like a Lotus get an automatic transmission when they've never had one before, talk about the valid reasons why companies like Porsche are moving away from manuals. As the take rate on the manual Corvette gets lower and lower, we'll start to see discussion bout it.

Gonna stop you right there.. The 6l80 is a very robust and well built transmission. It 100% serves its purpose and doesn't cost $30K to replace if you did manage to destroy one. The 8L90 improves on that design further. Just because it doesn't advertise 1/1000 of a millisecond shift time or quadruple clutch disc or something it sucks all the sudden?



Not everyone wants a transmission that has more computing power then a alienware desktop.... nor does everyone want to worry about $20-50K in repairs when their transmission goes out.

Sometimes KISS is best.

This post was edited by Killerme99 on Nov 11 2014 11:16am

In comparison to a BMW or VAG DCT/automated manual it's garbage. While manuals will likely still exist as an option on at least some cars in the future, regular automatics have no place in the future of automotive drivetrains. I was also referring to GM's own automated manuals/DCTs, which only exist in concept cars and will not be put into production because GM can't make them cheap/good enough.

Also, you're completely off about the costs involved. Like ridiculously, completely off. I know of a particular incident where a brand new Beatle undercarriage was almost completely destroyed by a bouncing trailer hitch on the highway. Transmission was destroyed, among many other things. Cost less than $15,000 (15,000 was the cutoff line for writing the car off) to fix everything, which included completely replacing the DSG.

Worried about shift time on an automatic?

Let me introduce you to this thing:


Props to the people who know what that is by sight and not google. (Granted the bellhousing makes it look a little different but anybody thats been around one knows what it is)

Um.. YOU are completely off. That $10K pos transmission in the Beatle wouldn't last 1 day mounted to a 500+hp engine in a sports car. You are comparing apples to zucchini and trying to make a huge generalization out of your findings.

If you get bored you should research how happy Nissan customers are with the great DCT transmission they put in their GTR's... The horror stories about the GR6 transmission are still a very prominent thing these days and it has been out for years.

I know I would shit bricks if I paid $100K for a sports car and had to pay $20K out of pocket for a new transmission in the first couple thousand miles.


This post was edited by Killerme99 on Nov 11 2014 12:40pm

You claimed DCTs were extremely expensive. You were wrong. Every transmission costs a lot in an expensive car, I'm not sure what your argument is. And talking about costs of parts unlikely to ever need replacing in the life of the car unless you abuse it is ridiculous. Would you not buy a car because it's engine costs $10,000 more than another? No because engines likely will never need replacing, unless you drives half a million kilometers. Brakes maybe, tranny's absolute not.

You can stop making generalizations already. A lot of them have been wrong. I really don't feel like going through it all. You are clearly disconnected from the rest of us and you are incapable of seeing this from another perspective.

Part of the reason a C6 Z06 can outperform the cars it does at the low comparative cost is the T56 and later TR6060. GM is the master of parts interchangeability. The same transmissions are used in all similar models. Those are great transmissions used by multiple manufacturers and they are very inexpensive. A $6000 (when the price comes down)DCT option would benefit some people. Here we are again though... not everyone would want it. I'd go so far as to say most people wouldn't.

You won't see DCTs replace torque converter autos in pickups anytime soon. The current gen of autos are serviceless. They are sealed for life. Show me a DCT that lasts 200k. Torque converters are great for some things.