Why do European car buyers, even of luxury marques such as Mercedes still like manual transmissions (about 87% overall in Europe)? Why get a 6-speed when you can get a 7 speed auto?

 

Some like the driving experience of the manual. The TipTronic will never replace a true manual.

 

Did you hear that fuel is $5-$6 per gallon in Europe?

 

There's just a certain something entertaining about a clutch.

 

In Europe, the S-class is the "luxury" model and isn't available with manual transmission.

The E-class is the taxicab.

 

because a 6-speed is more fun . The 7-speed auto is great for people who don't like to shift.

 

once u drive a stick car then u will know y ppl drive stick, it is just that you have more control of the car and therefore it is a lot more fun to drive

 

Driven plenty of stick cars.

No fun in city traffic.

Wouldn't have one.

 

Many people consider manuals more fun and/or rewarding to drive. That partially explains it, but that can't be the sole reason.

At the same time, remember that often the choice is not between a 6M vs. 7A but between a 5-6M and 4A.

All else being equal, manual transmission is cheaper to buy, cheaper to run and cheaper to service/maintain/repair/replace.

(A) Fuel efficiency and (B) design efficiency (i.e. overall size of the vehicle) are relatively more important in Europe than they are in the US. Imagine why Hummer can (or could) sell in the US but not in Europe.

The link from A to manual transmissions is easy. For B, imagine you are in the market for a small-to-midsize car. These cars sell much more proportionately in Europe, primarily for reasons A and B (and the fact that there is a much greater variety on offer in Europe). In such a segment, many of your choices will perhaps have 100 to 170 HP. Driving around in a 120HP car with a 4A transmission is not all that fun. In fact, it will drive you crazy once in a while. Whether it's a Ford Fiesta, Opel Corsa, Toyota Corolla, VW Golf, Peugeot 206 or Renault Megane, you're better off getting the 5M for performance as well as value.

For the luxury marquees, it's about performance, giving your customers the choice and marketing. As long as you have a critical mass of potential buyers, you're better off marketing a performance vehicle with a stick. If nothing else, the ads look better. And regardless of what you eventually get, you don't want journalists or your snide friends to say, "Yeah, but it only comes with a slushbox" (ala gen 1 US-spec SLK). Too bad MBUSA is too conservative to see (or at least find out) that there is a critical mass of potential drivers here who want manual transmission versions of its performance products.

Yes, manuals aren't usually fun in city traffic, and they don't make sense for development in a S600 perhaps. But for luxury and performance marquees, they question should not be, "Why do manual versions sell in Europe?" The more relevant question should be, "Why aren't they offered in the US?" Does MBUSA really want to introduce a new E55 and read in the May 2003 edition of Car & Driver, "And of course the Bimmer was the only supersedan equipped with a manual transmission. Automatics are swell in urban traffic, and some offer a pretty good approximation of manual control—the E55’s five-speed is a good example. But there is still nothing to rival the sense of involvement that goes with shifting for yourself, and the M5’s six-speed does an excellent job of keeping the 4.9-liter V-8 in the sweet part of its power band." Mind you, this was the aging and soon-to-be-replaced "old" M5.

 

I always tell people I have never owned an automatic transmission car, and probably could not learn how to drive one. Steptronic, tiptronic, manumatic, etc. etc. are still automatics.....i.e. no clutch pedal.

I drive a manual for many of the economic reasons stated above. But in truth, I would still prefer a manual even without the cost advantage. The MB 6 speed manual in my car is a fun transmission. I prefer to be involved in the driving experience. Unlike many Americans, I do not eat lunch, talk on the phone, and use the vanity mirror (all at the same time) while I am driving.

I notice most Mercedes for sale with manual transmissions are advertised as "rare" in the USA. In Europe, most C and E class cars I have observed are still manuals (often Diesels, too). Tastes are definitely different.

 

A salesman at one of the dealers told me that "there ARE manual MBs available, but they are hard as heck to find".

I think this is unfortunate. It looks like there would be a significant number of SL fans who would buy one with a manual transmission.

I'd also like to see a 5 or 6-speed manual available on some of the sportier sedans, like the AMGs for example.

 

No offense to anyone who has a 6 speed C class or manual mercedes I know they are great gear boxes but I would never get a manual mercedes. If you want a stick go buy a BMW the resale value will be better since more younger kids are into BMW vs mercedes who usually has middle age/older people who want a car with an automatic transmission. I heard a figure that on the C230 in the USA its a 1:30 manual to auto.

 

I don't think there are many SL owners that would prefer their car with a manual.
It's an old persons car.

 

Resale values for the C-class sedans are not so good even for the ones with automatic trans. If resale value is a concern, don't buy a C-class.

 

To me, manual is just a lot of fun to drive, even in Miami traffic... Driving a manual makes you feel sort of "attached" to the car, because you're more in control. I love shifting, and I really wish that MB made more manual cars. I don't even think about the economic differences between the mt and at. If manual was more expensive, I would still get, just because its so much fun to drive.

 

You might be right, and Daimler is NOT a stupid company. Therefore, IF there was a significant demand for a manual transmission in any of their vehicles in the USA, I think they WOULD make it available.

I see the SL series as a younger person's car, but I guess I have to remember that most younger people don't have the $$ for an SL500 or SL600!

Older people do, so I think THAT'S why we see them driving those.

 

The answer for that is the same as; Why do Americans perfer soft suspension over hard European suspension?

It's because Europeans are more focused on driving enjoyment and speed than Americans.

It's also because Manuals are faster and more efficient than Autos assuming you know how to drive properly.

That said Automatics are the way of the future, even if they are less fun, simply cause theres a limit to how quickly a human can engage a clutch and gear and theres no limit on how quickly a machine can do it.

Also Manuals used to have more ratios, anther reason to choose them, but this is obviously changing now.

Older S class were avaliable with Manuals. In Europe the I6 W126 had a Manual as standard!

 

I don't think it's a question of stupid vs. clever. It's more a question of how conservative a company is with regard to its Research & Development and marketing budgets (e.g., how much as a % of its total budget does it allocate to R&D, marketing, etc.)?

Also, given a finite allocation, how much of the R&D+marketing budget does the company invest towards developing and marketing manual transmission cars? If it believes there is a 70% chance that its investment in manuals will pay off, does it take that chance or not?

Remember, most car manufacturers are public companies that have to report earnings per share every quarter just like other publicly traded companies. If shareholders are not happy with the financial numbers, how long will management remain in place? Generally speaking, a CEO of a public company cares more about delivering EPS growth (therefore maintaining his own job security) than satisfying the enthusiasts who make up, say, 3% of his customers.

 

Well thought out and said AGAIN 1985MB380SE

Not many people stop to think about the economics of an issue. In any for-profit organization, there has to be a cost/benefit analysis done before an investment is made.

You clearly made the point that: Daimler probably feels that manual transmissions for the american market are NOT worth the investment from an R&D and marketing standpoint.

Now you have me wondering how accurate your 3% guess is. To me that sounds reasonable, but I'm also wondering what that percentage would NEED to be before we see manual trannys in the E and S classes?

Regards,
M

 

Thanks. My 3% was just a wild guess. But that's a great question. I don't know, but given MB's strategy in the US over the last 20+ years, I would think that we would need to see big big numbers of potential buyers before MBUSA changed their mostly "auto-only" strategy.

Another hint on their strategy (this is from the kill stories forum):

Not really answering your question directly, but my guess is that MB and MBUSA have a sales target for the E-class and as long as they hit that target they won't even think about importing manual E's to the US. The chances of seeing a manual S-class in the US are zero to none, IMHO.

 

If they actually manufacturer a manual version of the car you want, but its not sold in the US, I'm sure you could get a dealer to order one in for you.

 

According to an article from Edmunds.com, MB is making some manual transmission cars because they want to compete with BMW. I must admit, if there wasn't a MB C320 with a stick shift, I would be driving a BMW 330i right now. I don't like the Bangle styling but I dislike driving an automatic car even more.

 

It's not that easy...

 

Funny how sometimes competition can jolt a company out of complacency...

 

I doubt I would have bought a Mercedes if it were not available with a manual transmission. BMW, Audi, and VW still offer manuals.

Automatics have really taken over in the US. For the most part, the only people that now buy manuals are the hard-core types that won't drive anything else. My wife and I are among the manual-only people.