Re:People in Los Angeles Are Getting Rid Of Their Cars
by waterphone on Saturday September 03, 2016 @04:30PM
(#12421049)
This isn't an argument that everyone will care about, but it is a legitimate one for some: manual transmissions are much easier/cheaper to repair/rebuild.
[ Parent
| on HN ]
Re:People in Los Angeles Are Getting Rid Of Their Cars
by mikestew on Saturday September 03, 2016 @04:59PM
(#12421172)
The question seems to be which you'd care to replace first: clutch or rebuild the tranny? So I've been told, anyway. I've driven manuals all my life and don't recall replacing a clutch in anything I've owned, car or motorcycle. Come to think of it, of the few auto trannies I've had I don't recall having to get those rebuilt, either. And I've owned some hard-ridden vehicles, so maybe I'm just easy on tranny parts.
The tranny has to be removed in either case, so it's a question of what's easier once the tranny's out. For me, I'm happy to put a clutch in. I haven't the first clue how an auto tranny works Well, I have an idea of the principal, but no working knowledge of what those little check balls and the like do.
Re:People in Los Angeles Are Getting Rid Of Their Cars
by Roboprog on Saturday September 03, 2016 @05:50PM
(#12421393)
I wore the clutch out on the first manual I had in just over 6 years (too much slipping out slowly, I'm sure). After that, it went another 15 years or so before other reasons made the clutch/tranny life moot. Replacing a clutch is quite a bit cheaper, though, than rebuilding an entire automatic tranny.