I buy a new car, then trade it in when it has 150,000 - 200,000 miles on it. I’ve never spent a penny on a clutch/transmission.
So you’re just coasting downhill (and if the clutch is out, you’d gain speed through momentum). If the clutch is partially engaged, it sounds like you’re causing unnecessary wear. Either way, the clutch isn’t uniquely imperative to controlling downhill speed, even if you choose to do so.
If you want to control speed on the downhill, that’s what brakes are for, or if you have manual (paddles or stick), you can just as well hold gear and let the engine participate. The added benefit is that you can modulate the brakes and they’re cheaper and easier. I control my speed on hills all the time and have never needed to place my drivetrain in a neutral state to do so.
I drive a manual and prefer manual trans. 2001 Passat GLX with everything.
One other benefit to a manual not yet mentioned: less likely to get stolen. Few car thieves bother with anything other than an automatic.
For me the main benefit is I enjoy driving a manual.
I prefer a manual, but that’s probably more a mental glitch than anything.
For just about all driving situations, an automatic is just fine. But once in a while a manual is handy. E.g., we just had a couple bouts of ice which reminded me of a good situation to have a manual. Streets are mostly okay but once in a while you hit a shady spot where there’s still ice. With a manual, I just depress the clutch and roll thru. You don’t want the force on the drive wheels to change: no slowing or speeding. Just coasting.
So, here and there, once in a while, a manual is great to have.
OTOH, it’s a pain. Getting stuck in stop-and-go traffic for a long time sometimes gave me leg cramps. Certain tight pull outs from a stop can be tricky. Starting from a steep hill. (Took a while to learn the magic of using the parking brake there.) These situations seem far more common than the ones where having a manual is handy.
As to lifetime: it depends on the car and the driver. I was really careful with the clutch. On my 87 Mazda 323, it went with the original clutch all 235K miles. And generally manuals have fewer transmissions problems than autos if you take care of them.
Thinking about this, I only know one person in my age range (mid-forties) who can’t drive a stick. The idea that no one in North America can drive a stick might be exaggerated.
In general, you’re safer using ABS braking than downshifting on slippery roads. The possible exception is for rear-wheel drive, where downshifting gives you the ability to brake with rear wheels without affecting the front. (Rear wheel drives are also tons more fun on a slick-ice empty parking lot!)
… by adding one? The last time I drove a manual, I noticed that it was rather inconvenient when driving in an unknown town, with a map unfolded, while eating a burger. So, I quit doing that. Not that we ever have maps open any more either.
I prefer manuals but haven't owned one in quite a while. I like actually operating the vehicle, and I like being in full control. But I generally drive a minivan (need room for my stuff) and automatics are generally the only choice. My wife drives a stick fine but prefers an automatic, so that's what she gets.
Whether a manual increases or reduces the value for resale really depends on the age and type of vehicle. I can say that you really don't want to be in the position of trying to sell a used manual minivan (been there, done that).
If you keep a car until it gets more expensive to maintain than to replace (or even half as much, which is my limit), IMHO a manual lasts longer. Every car I've bought since 1985 has had over 150K miles on it by the time I was done with it, and it's always been the automatic transmission that causes me to start looking for another car. A manual not only lasts longer, it's cheaper to fix if something goes wrong. Once an automatic has 150K miles on it, there is no point putting any money into it, and replacing an automatic isn't a cheap job.
As mentioned above, if you need to loan your car or let someone else drive it, automatics are better. I do remember a long road-trip in a manual to some Grateful Dead shows, and wishing my passengers could drive. Hmm, that was a while back.
BTW, a manual is no longer a "standard" -- since before 1980. "Standard" means "standard equipment." I don't have a cite but I heard it on Car Talk, and it jives with my experience. :) Then again, maybe I imagined it during one of those Grateful Dead shows.Only minimally, if at all. Again, if I stayed in the same gear, I’d have to keep my foot on the gas, so I’d be accelerating downhill - don’t want that. And if I downshifted, I’d be slowing down more abruptly than I’d want to.
To a part that never needs replacing, IME. Why on earth are people so concerned with wearing out the clutch? Might as well let the possibility of an asteroid dictate the way I drive.
No, but IME it’s the best way under a number of circumstances.
But brakes DO wear out periodically. So you’re saying put less wear on the never-wear-out clutch, and more wear on the brakes, which will need replacing a few times over the life of the car. WTF, dude?!
I do that where appropriate, which is frequently. This isn’t one of those situations. Giving it enough gas to stay in gear and not stall will accelerate the car on a curvy downhill. Bad idea.
Why brake more than I need to? Why brake if I don’t need to at all? And I repeat, they’re not cheaper. Brakes need periodic replacement; clutches don’t need replacing at all IME. And my experience involves one car that I traded with 156K miles, one that died with 254K miles, and the current Accord that is still kicking ass with 214K miles. So I think my experience means something with respect to clutches.
To each his own. I don’t need to either. It’s just the best way on this road I drive every day. I’m routinely experiencing the benefit you claim doesn’t exist.
That may well be the case. I guess ABS is standard in new cars now, but it wasn’t widely available if at all when I bought the car I regularly drive, and even when my wife bought her 2009 Accord, it was an extra that cost a couple thousand more. So I’ve yet to experience it. Funny how it could go from being experimental technology to the norm in the life of one car.
Jerry’s been dead for just shy of 20 years, so yeppers. 
I’ll take your word for it. Certainly manuals were referred to as ‘standard’ long, long after they ceased being standard. (Wonder when automatics started outnumbering manuals on American roads? I’m betting sometime in the 1950s.)
I’m in MD as well, so I’m honestly curious as to which location this is that has such unique hills. Please PM if you don’t mind, maybe I know where you’re talking about.
If the incline isn’t steep enough to increase your rolling momentum (if at all), then it sounds like it’s more flat than hilly. If this is the case, I doubt it’s steep enough to dramatically alter your speed if you just let off the throttle and/or modulate, the way people do if they just want to maintain speed. If you can master clutch control enough to not wear yours for the life of the car, you can control the throttle to the same degree.
Otherwise, if you want to actually slow a car going downhill (a real hill), coasting in a neutral state won’t do it. You’re going to have to involve a dedicated system (brakes) or rely on the engine (which requires your car to be in gear). Either way, it sounds like you’re describing a driving preference, not a unique advantage.
I bought my car (Fiat 500, manual 5-speed) from a friend who had special-ordered it from the factory. I thought that was a tad ridiculous; why couldn’t she just go pick one out from the lot?
Then I thought about trading my Fiat in for something else that isn’t a Fiat, but is also a 5-speed. I have “used Beemer” in mind. Anyway, after contacting all the major dealerships in town, I was shocked to discover that, at that moment, there were exactly three used stick-shifts within 100 miles of me: A 1972 Volvo, a slightly newer Corvette, and a Porsche Carerra. I was gobstopped. Really? Really. You have to order a stick shift if you want one (within the narrow, limited range of “vehicles I am willing to drive”). Or stalk someone who drives one and beg to buy their car whenever they get ready to sell it.
I still do searches from time to time and I call the dealer back. “Please call me when you get a stick shift on the lot, okay?” Who has to beg a car dealer to call them? I do.
I think the main Pro is : If you like it, it’s awesome.
The main con is: They’re hard to find unless brand-new or special-ordered and your old one will be difficult to get rid of.
Selling old manual transmission cars isn’t all that difficult in my experience. People are looking for them, and there aren’t many so people hunt around for them. But for used cars, at least certain ones, it looks to me like demand > supply.
I can’t speak authoritatively for each case - these were test drive cars so I wasn’t redlining them.
I do, however know that some will NOT take any action not initiated by the driver. They are “true” manuals. I know exactly what you are talking about in each case.
It may be ‘cheating’ to purists, but many manual transmission cars (mine included) have “hill start assist” these days. When the car detects that it’s on an incline, it will automatically hold the foot brake for about 1.5 seconds while you engage the clutch, so there’s no rolling.
Came as a standard feature in my '13 Camaro, but I believe it was optional until that model year.
There was also a time where manuals didn’t have synchros for gear shifts, while fast forwarding to now, some manual gear boxes rev match for you. You still get manual control, but there has been a gradual evolution where you can now choose between technique or technology. I think it’s all interesting and welcome the variation/changes, while not totally forfeiting control.
Oh wow. I had never even heard of such a thing. That’s pretty cool. It’s not like I have to do the hand-brake hill starts pretty much at all these days (living in the flat Midwest), but I had no idea that anyone even bothered to automate a solution to such a niche problem.
I suspect if you cut off everyone above age 40, the number of people that can drive manuals in the US drops a lot.
In my family, it’s a strict generational divide. Only one person born since 1980 can drive stick and that’s because he rides a motorcycle; the rest pretty much refuse to learn (it’s harder to text while driving, I suspect), and they don’t have to. As a teen I had two jobs that required knowing how to drive stick; probably doesn’t come up much anymore.
Look, I’m typing this from a desk, not from the middle of a test drive with my eye on the speedometer. I was gonna try to kinda watch what I was doing on the way out this morning to make sure I was describing things accurately, but the roads were slippery with last night’s snow, so I was driving a bit more cautiously than usual. But at least in my recollection, it doesn’t feel like I’m picking up speed as I go down the hill. Maybe my recollection is flat.
Manual advantages: more control; ability to push-start in a pinch; better shift (usually; unless you install a shift improver kit of some sort in the automatic); usually better gas mileage
Automatic advantages: come to a complete stop with just the brakes w/o stalling (especially useful in metropolitan stop-and-go traffic jams); generally better wheel-lock via Park than what you get with just parking brake on a manual; easier to learn for newbies
FWIW, I couldn’t even test drive my car because it’d been well over a decade since I’d been taught (once) to drive a stick in an auto, though I grew up driving a tractor with a clutch so I had a little experience.
Born in '81; never had to drive a stick until I decided to buy one…