Flash_Gordon

I always enjoyed driving a manual. If my vette was a weekend toy, it would definitely be a manual. However, since I use it as a DD in stop n go Houston traffic, going with the A6 was a no-brainer for me. I drive 60 miles round trip daily, and at an average trip speed of 29mph. That gets old fast with a manual.

SBC_and_a_stick

Porsche builds DCTs in the same housing as the manual and the trans itself shares many more parts. That said if the C8 goes ME you have to engineer space for linkages, pedals, and so forth.

I could see the manual costing more going forward. But at 20% take up rate I do think GM should build it. Many of these 20% guys are not going to ever want an auto and therefore it's lost business.

Tadge's response brings a noteworthy detail to the front. The move to auto is not only driven by buyers, but also by suppliers. GM's hydramatic created a market, without it, there would be more manuals.

I couldn't be happier with his response. We knew that manuals are a dying breed but we didn't know Tadge was a manual enthusiast! Way to go Tadge!

1500cc

I think motorcycles will be overwhelmingly manual for the foreseeable future.

Flash_Gordon

Anyone who has actually rode one of Honda's Automatic DCT bikes, like the NM4 or the VFR1200X, would see where the future of motorcycles is eventually heading. Granted, I see it being a more gradual and reluctant shift than it has been with cars... but it's still a likely eventuality.

Just depends on what your definition of foreseeable future is. I think in the next 2 or 3 decades, we may still see the manual as the majority, but I don't think it will be "overwhelming." Probably closer to a 60/40 split.

rangda

I am a sample size of one but I won't consider an auto that isn't dual clutch. If the Corvette was A8/A10 only I'd look elsewhere for a car.

SBC_and_a_stick

If the C8 is auto or DCT I think a lot of folks would switch to a GT3. Porsche has said they are making the next one with a manual option and also 4.0L. Think GT3RS with 911R manual for $130K.

I love the 'vette but I don't like any car enough to drive auto/dct.

yozi

well, I've had two auto sports cars, a lambo giardo paddle and a hopped up SC gen 5 Camaro, both lasted about 2 weeks in my stable...I have a M7 Z06 coup and convertible now and enjoy them every time I drive them.

Hot Rod Roy

A stick shift is a good theft deterrent, too! There's a good chance kids out for a joy ride in that neat 'vette won't know how to drive it!

JerryU

Very interesting response. Similar to Tadge, I have only had a standard trans in my DD in ~55 years of driving!

Starting with my first car, a '41 Opera Coupe that became a 2 speed when I "stuffed" in the Olds engine in the late '50's! No problem, with the 4.44:1 rear that came with the OEM low power engine and with those skinny tires! "Burned rubber" in 2nd until I lifted my right foot!

My first 7 speed was a '84 Dodge Colt Turbo with a two stick overdrive. The second was in my first Vette an '88. It had an OEM Doug Nash supplied 4 speed with an electrically activated overdrive, usable in 2nd, 3rd, and 4th. Could split shift with a button on the top of the shifter and make 7 well spaced gears! Fun! Of interest, when that trans was used it was the same price as an automatic!

At '74 don't know how many more Vettes are in my future. Didn't even want to wait too long as never know when that GM built 10 speed will be the only option! Could see that happening when the mid engine is introduced since an all new transaxle will be needed and the volumes may too low for Tremic or ZF to justify design or the extra production cost for GM.

In fact, decided to sell my September 2013 built Z51 C7 earlier than usual and get an M7 in my recently ordered GS while they were still sufficient demand!

JerryU

It's not Porsche that makes their trans it's ZF, like Tremic is making the M7. At some volume it becomes uneconomical for them to design a new model. That could well happen with a mid engine Vette as it will require a new design transaxle!

As you also note it's more costly for GM to integrate in production and deal with spare parts, etc. The higher profit from selling their in house built 10 speed auto is also a consideration!

SIDE BAR: I came from an industry that had no spare parts retention requirement except customer satisfaction logic. For the VP who was responsible for introducing, managing, pricing products, keeping customers happy, the tech service folks etc (me) before I retired 17 years ago l would have "discussions" with the manufacturing VP!

We were, like most companies, in a JIT, keep inventory low mode. When we introduced a new MIG wire feeder, our 20 year old industry HD standard feeder that was replaced, used a custom electric motor integrated gear case design. The manufacturing VP's bonus was based on having no more than ~1 months supply of any item. The computer spit out the data instantly! Found out the motor mfg would sell us 50 motors for the same price as the ~10 he was allowing purchasing to buy for spare parts! He cared more about his bonus than the customer and our spare parts profit- my concerns! Got that attitude changed!

SBC_and_a_stick

Yes but the stick shift is the only choice for "joy" rides!

Snowwolfe

I don't really understand the economics. If the automatics rule as far as being made in volume and hence a possible lower price then why does the manual continue to be standard with a price benefit of about $1,800?

JerryU

At ~40,000 units per year ~25% standard shifts is still about 10,000. I'm sure Tremic would happier with more volume but that is still reasonable production economics. It's also much less complex with far fewer parts-gears, clutches, bands, hydraulic circuits etc. Cluster spur gears are much less expensive to produce than multiple sun and planetary gear sets, etc.

As I mentioned in a prior post, the Doug Nash 4+3 in my '88 Vette (used from '84 through '88) cost the same as the GM automatic at the time! It had an electrically operated two speed automatic type construction overdrive behind an old 4 speed!

HOXXOH

Think profit. If 80% of your customers are willing to shell out an extra $1800, why would you make it a no cost option?

CaptainMerricka

Hopefully by the time the manual dies we will be face to face with an electric future.

Snowwolfe

When looking at it from this perspective it makes perfect sense.

Iconic

I'd say it's what the market will bear. Much like my $995 Long Beach Red, which is the exact same paint code called Siren red on all other GM vehicles, for a cost of $395.

I have paid close to $3,000 for optioned paint on my last 3 Vettes, but I saved over $5,000 on transmissions since all 3 were manuals.

JerryU

Sure profit margin is a factor BUT:
There are 10+ times more parts, in an automatic, i.e. internal tooth sun gears, many planetary gears, many more bearings, bands, band actuators, hydraulic controls, etc. etc.

The reason for the extra cost of tint coats and why Bowling Green can only offer a limited number of colors in tintcoat was explained by a forum moderator who visited Bowling Green some years ago. That paint line had one area for applying a clear coat. When a tinted clear was needed the clear painting robots had to be cleaned. That took time and there was a cost for labor and materials. By limiting the number of colors they could schedule production so as not to slow the line speed or cause a stop. Other GM plants may not have that constraint as most are much larger. Perhaps with the new paint line they can increase the number and/or lower the price.

Side Bar: When I bought my '08 C6 I was going to get a color that was tintcoat in '07. They announced that color would still be supplied for the '08 but since they were adding a Blue tintcoat, they did not have the capacity to add another color. They said the color I wanted was aesthetically the "least affected" by a switch back to none tintcoat. Since I ordered early in the production year could not fine one to look at so I picked Yellow instead, which retained the tintcoat!

I mistakenly deduced that their comments meant it was a three coat process. At the time some posters indicated it was. The moderator clarified that it was not - just a tint of the clear coat.

Fastmikefree

Actually I am glad to have chosen the M7 over the auto since the only solution to overheating the car is so far only available for the M7. Got the additional radiator installed by GM yesterday :-)

NathanS

Same here, I went with the M7 to avoid potential overheating issues on track. I prefer the feel of manual as well, and the higher reliability when pushed hard. Maybe a DCT could take the heat better than the planetary A8, but it's not for me either way. I also prefer manual in traffic - I find driving auto gives me less to do, so I get angrier at the slow Austin drivers than I do driving a manual car.

"Appreciate them while they last" is right.