"Cecil Moore" wrote in message
. net...
funkbastler wrote:
No, but it darned sure wouldn't hurt to make sure they could drive
something with a standard transmission.

Would you have 1000 people learn to drive a standard
transmission even though only one person out of those
1000 people benefits from it? The cost/benefit ratio
is extremely high.
--
73, Cecil http://www.w5dxp.com

Someone skilled in driving a vehicle with a manual transmission and actually
using it can reap a number of performance benefits. These include improved
gas mileage, better passing performance, better performance in hilly
terrain, etc. If people were required to learn how to drive vehicles with
manual transmissions, more of them might actually choose to drive such
vehicles.

Dee, N8UZE

Dee Flint wrote:
Someone skilled in driving a vehicle with a manual transmission and actually
using it can reap a number of performance benefits. These include improved
gas mileage, better passing performance, better performance in hilly
terrain, etc. If people were required to learn how to drive vehicles with
manual transmissions, more of them might actually choose to drive such
vehicles.

Riding a bicycle has even more benefits so force everyone
to pass a bicycle riding exam.
--
73, Cecil http://www.w5dxp.com

On Sun, 10 Sep 2006 14:06:00 GMT, Cecil Moore wrote:

Riding a bicycle has even more benefits so force everyone
to pass a bicycle riding exam.

Only if they want to ride a bicycle.

--
-fb-

funkbastler wrote:
On Sun, 10 Sep 2006 14:06:00 GMT, Cecil Moore wrote:
Riding a bicycle has even more benefits so force everyone
to pass a bicycle riding exam.

Only if they want to ride a bicycle.

Absolutely not. It doesn't matter if they want to ride
a bicycle or not. Simply knowing how to ride a bicycle
would be good for them. And if they discovered they
liked it enough to actually ride a bicycle, it would
not only benefit them but also benefit the environment.
--
73, Cecil http://www.w5dxp.com

On Sun, 10 Sep 2006 18:22:12 GMT, Cecil Moore wrote:

funkbastler wrote:
On Sun, 10 Sep 2006 14:06:00 GMT, Cecil Moore wrote:
Riding a bicycle has even more benefits so force everyone
to pass a bicycle riding exam.

Only if they want to ride a bicycle.

Absolutely not. It doesn't matter if they want to ride
a bicycle or not. Simply knowing how to ride a bicycle
would be good for them. And if they discovered they
liked it enough to actually ride a bicycle, it would
not only benefit them but also benefit the environment.

You are absolutely right! Why didn't I think of that? One caveat,
however - they'll also have to pass a Morse code test with their
bicycle horn. (I forget now - is this so they can drive a car or
use the microwave oven?) This is too silly.

--
-fb-

From: Cecil Moore on Sun, Sep 10 2006 7:06 am

Dee Flint wrote:
Someone skilled in driving a vehicle with a manual transmission and actually
using it can reap a number of performance benefits. These include improved
gas mileage, better passing performance, better performance in hilly
terrain, etc. If people were required to learn how to drive vehicles with
manual transmissions, more of them might actually choose to drive such
vehicles.

Riding a bicycle has even more benefits so force everyone
to pass a bicycle riding exam.

Cecil, bicycles (and most motorcycles) need smooth
roadways; it is hard to operate "CW" while mobile and
off-road on a bike.

Now HORSEBACK mobile is the same on-road or off-road. No
gasoline or oil needed nor "gear shifting." Horses can
make "new models" all by themselves, keep themselves
"powered up" without the aid of stations like Exxon, 76,
Shell, or Sinclair. The US Army even had a 'horse
mobile' radio set (1943) to talk while the troop was on the
move. :-)

Everybody ought to learn to "sit" a horse and guide it. :-)

---

Dee seems to have little experience in long-haul driving,
or even short-haul automotive transport. I learned to
drive in a '39 Ford sedan. The first three autos I owned
were manual trans, a Plymouth two-door (came out west in
it), a '53 Austin-Healey roadster (manual trans went
kaput while downshifting on a freeway off-ramp back in
'60), and a Brit very compact station wagon. A whole
lotta NONSENSE to do the clutch-gearshift thing on all
those manual transmission vehicles even if it was easy
for me. NO "performance increase" whatsoever of manual
versus automatic.

Buying a new 2005 Chevy Malibu MAXX with its better
engine system computer allowed us to get 32.7 MPG
(based on both fuel tank filling receipts AND the
Driver Information Center display of MPG) for a 1,900
mile round trip up to Washington state and back in
July this year. That's without using the Cruise
Control (which my wife likes but I don't, driving
over 90% of the time). About 2 1/2 MPG better than
the Chevy Cavalier wagon for the same distance the
year before. MAXX had done almost as good MPG in
September last year on a much longer distance to
Wisconsin, again doing about 2 1/2 MPG better than
the Cavalier over the same route the year before that.

The engine computers keep getting better and better,
some even compensating for the bad habits of some
drivers using the almost-universal automatic. Why
anyone would prefer using a manual or automatic in
stop-and-go city traffic can be summed up as
RATIONALIZATION or braggadoccio by manual trans
owners. Besides, operating "CW" in stop-and-go city
traffic will seriously cut down one's morsemanship
speed with a manual trans. Unless one has a third
hand... :-)

Cell phone coverage is growing, growing, growing.
My wife used the cell for all kinds of calls while
we were moving in MAXX through several states, even
checking her e-mail on AOL! Without any skill at
morsemanship whatsoever, she "worked" her sister
in WA state from the parking lot of a restaurant in
Amana, IA, using the cell phone. :-)

Hmmmm. One out of three Americans has a cell phone
now. Yet, Blowcode contends "everyone has to learn"
morsemanship to have a backup skill in comms? :-)

Dee Flint wrote:


Someone skilled in driving a vehicle with a manual transmission and actually
using it can reap a number of performance benefits. These include improved
gas mileage, better passing performance, better performance in hilly
terrain, etc. If people were required to learn how to drive vehicles with
manual transmissions, more of them might actually choose to drive such
vehicles.

Dee, N8UZE


Not all of those statements are always true. As fond as I am of manual
transmissions, sometimes automatics have the advantage. A hydraulic
torque converter with a manually controlled "automatic" transmission is
better at drag racing than a manual gearbox under many conditions.

This is less true under road race conditions where the lower torque
needed to be handled by the transmission allows the newer style "manual"
transmissions to change gears in milliseconds. The secret is 2
transmissions, one for the odd gears, one for the even, and 2 clutches,
you are literally in 2 gears at the same time for a short period of
time. Takes a lot of computer control. That's one way to do it, there
are others.

The landscape is very blurred nowadays concerning what is a manual and
what is an automatic transmission, with "manuals" in modern race cars
being more automatic than "automatics" in non-race cars.

And the state of CW vs digital is about the same. Except CW can always
be beat if your PC works. You just need to select the correct mode.

tom
K0TAR

"Tom Ring" wrote in message
.. .
Dee Flint wrote:


Someone skilled in driving a vehicle with a manual transmission and
actually using it can reap a number of performance benefits. These
include improved gas mileage, better passing performance, better
performance in hilly terrain, etc. If people were required to learn how
to drive vehicles with manual transmissions, more of them might actually
choose to drive such vehicles.

Dee, N8UZE

Not all of those statements are always true. As fond as I am of manual
transmissions, sometimes automatics have the advantage. A hydraulic
torque converter with a manually controlled "automatic" transmission is
better at drag racing than a manual gearbox under many conditions.


Never said they were always true. And most of us do not put racing
equipment in our personal, daily use street vehicles.

This is less true under road race conditions where the lower torque needed
to be handled by the transmission allows the newer style "manual"
transmissions to change gears in milliseconds. The secret is 2
transmissions, one for the odd gears, one for the even, and 2 clutches,
you are literally in 2 gears at the same time for a short period of time.
Takes a lot of computer control. That's one way to do it, there are
others.

The landscape is very blurred nowadays concerning what is a manual and
what is an automatic transmission, with "manuals" in modern race cars
being more automatic than "automatics" in non-race cars.


Again this does not affect the ordinary driver.

And the state of CW vs digital is about the same. Except CW can always be
beat if your PC works. You just need to select the correct mode.

tom
K0TAR

That last statement is a fallacy. The digital modes are wiped out by
conditions that will still permit CW to be used. Even SSB can sometimes be
used when conditions wipe out the digital. I have repeatedly said and now I
am emphasizing: EVERY MODE HAS ITS UNIQUE ADVANTAGES AND UNIQUE
DISADVANTAGES. It seems that people wish to deny that whatever mode they
don't want to deal with has any advantages whatsoever. They also wish to
attribute magic properties to whatever is their favorite mode. Both points
of view are foolish.

Dee D. Flint, N8UZE

Dee Flint wrote:


That last statement is a fallacy. The digital modes are wiped out by
conditions that will still permit CW to be used. Even SSB can sometimes be
used when conditions wipe out the digital. I have repeatedly said and now I
snip
Dee D. Flint, N8UZE



Wrong. There are digital modes that handle every distortion type that
exists. You just have to pick the correct one.

tom
K0TAR

"Tom Ring" wrote in message
.. .
Dee Flint wrote:


That last statement is a fallacy. The digital modes are wiped out by
conditions that will still permit CW to be used. Even SSB can sometimes
be used when conditions wipe out the digital. I have repeatedly said and
now I
snip
Dee D. Flint, N8UZE

Wrong. There are digital modes that handle every distortion type that
exists. You just have to pick the correct one.

tom
K0TAR

Name them. I've not found any one mode that can handle all conditions of
distortion. However, I have found from time to time that distortion can be
severe enough at times to wipe out all digital modes even if you try to
switch from mode to mode. Occasionally it can wipe out CW.

I repeat: EVERY MODE HAS ITS ADVANTAGES AND DISADVANTAGES. To deny that is
foolish.

Dee D. Flint, N8UZE