BB standard

On Fri, 28 Jun 2019 12:39:29 +0000 (UTC), Ralph Barone
wrote:

John B. wrote:
On Thu, 27 Jun 2019 21:32:19 -0500, AMuzi wrote:

On 6/27/2019 9:15 PM, John B. wrote:
On Thu, 27 Jun 2019 11:12:39 -0700, sms
wrote:

On 6/27/2019 9:59 AM, wrote:

snip

But they are all available with an AT but people,
- feel manly to stick shift,
- find AT too expensive,
- don't know what they are missing and think AT are still slow and sluggish.

If I simulate my manual shift from my driveway to the main road about
400 m away it would be:
r-1-2-3-2-Corner-3-4-2-speedbump-2-3-4-2-speedbump-3-4-2-corner to
main road 15 manual shift in only 400 meter. Crazy. Automatic
transmission: choose sport setting or leaving the default comfort setting R-D done!

Not disagreeing that an AT is a better choice. And for vehicles with a
good AT it'll end up costing less because it'll last longer than a
clutch replacement on an MT. But some vehicles have had problematic ATs
i.e. Hondas from 1998 to 2004.

---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus

I keep reading this about clutch replacement but I don't remember my
folks ever having to change a clutch on any of their cars and my first
car was a 1937 Chevrolet that I inherited when my folks bought a new
car and it lasted me for two years before it died and I'm pretty sure
that it still had the original clutch in it. Or, at least I know that
my folks never changed the clutch and I certainly didn't. And my
Grandfather had a Model A pickup that he drove for something like 20
years without a clutch change.

Given that a good friends family had about a 1939 Chevrolet and they
seemed to go through about one clutch a year I believe that clutch
wear is largely a matter of the driver's technique and not a matter of
some sort inherent weakness.
--
cheers,

John B.


"largely a matter of the driver's technique"
+1

The only time that I ever noticed having to slip the clutch very much
was starting out on a hill where you needed to keep the car from
rolling backward before you could get going. Brake, Clutch and
throttle were hard to manage with only two feet.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KJleJbn9G6Y :-)
--
cheers,

John B.

In smaller vehicles, with hand operated parking brakes, it’s not a big
deal.

It was, back in the day, as it was almost a universal fact that the
hand brake didn't work worth a damn :-)
--
cheers,

John B.

On Fri, 28 Jun 2019 07:03:03 -0700 (PDT), jbeattie
wrote:

On Friday, June 28, 2019 at 5:29:13 AM UTC-7, AMuzi wrote:
On 6/27/2019 9:31 PM, John B. wrote:
On Thu, 27 Jun 2019 16:01:34 -0700, sms
wrote:

On 6/27/2019 3:00 PM, jbeattie wrote:
On Thursday, June 27, 2019 at 1:47:46 PM UTC-7, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 6/26/2019 5:26 PM, wrote:
I see no reason today for manual shifting except for sentimental reasons and that it is cheaper (2000 -3000 euro's). Modern automatic transmission outperform manual shifting in every way, at least the one I'm driving now.

Here's my situation: We drive a Mazda 3. We have a tiny pop-up camping
trailer. It weighs only 750 pounds empty.

The Mazda's stated towing capacity is zero, although I've been told that
if I had bought the exact same vehicle in Europe, it's towing capacity
would be listed as 500 kg, which is plenty.

I put a trailer hitch on this car as soon as I got it, and we've towed
the trailer as far as Nova Scotia. I knew I was violating the warranty,
but I judged it worth the risk. If the car had an automatic
transmission, I don't know if I'd make that same judgement.

Why? Towing trailers in hilly terrain is a clutch killer, and typically cars with ATs have higher towing capacity than the same model with a MT because of the AT torque converter. I don't see why having a MT would make you feel more positive about towing -- particularly on a car that probably has a pretty low-torque first gear since it is just a family sedan and not a truck.

True. And one of the reasons there are no manual transmission trucks
sold in the U.S. anymore. The only reason for a manual is off-road
driving in low gear. You can still buy a Jeep Wrangler with a manual, in
fact not sure if they even offer an automatic.

"no manual transmission trucks sold in the U.S. anymore"
See:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uZKajOTa4Gg
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B6GpCqj1REo
--
cheers,

John B.


First link, second comment:
"I wish the engine brake actually did something when I’m
loaded. It does absolutely nothing. I really dislike this
transmission"

I think the guy is complaining about the compression braking,
which is tied to the transmission. See
https://www.truckingtruth.com/trucke...-peterbilt-579
These folks seem to conflate engine braking with compression braking.

The way he describes it, it must be a "Jake" brake that doesn't come
on as quickly as he wishes, if it was simply the braking effect of the
engine with the throttle closed I don't think he would have described
it that way.



Manual transmissions give you more control going up and down hill, but the AT on my Subaru, for example, gives you the option of manual shifting which helps mitigate the spastic CVT.

I did a lot of towing with my old 5sp 4Runner, and backing a loaded trailer up hill and making a 90 degree turn into my driveway was a clutch burner. It's easier with the Subaru except that the Subaru is under-powered, and the hatch back is a blind-spot. The 1996 4Runner was like a terrarium by comparison, although later models were less so.

And for John B, yes clutches burn out. On the 4Runner, it has gone through one clutch in 24 years -- which my son burned out in the middle of nowhere Oregon on his way home from Utah. He struggled into Baker City, spent the night in a hotel while some guy at a place called Grumpy's put in a clutch. http://www.grumpysrepair.com/ Not cheap, but at least we added to the Baker City economy. He fries the clutch in SLC with all the hills and stops and clutch-slipping.

Of course manual clutches "burn out" but extremely rarely if used
properly. As I said in another post my old 1937 Chevy coupe finally
died in about 1950, after 13 years and the clutch was still the
original. But of course, if your son misuses the clutch by slipping
it deliberately - which isn't what a clutch is designed to do - than
it will "burn out".
A clutch is not a speed control device as some people seem to
believe.

One might also comment, with the same degree of accuracy, that
running a tire flat will "burn it up" and running an engine without
oil will "burn it up".
--
cheers,

John B.

On Fri, 28 Jun 2019 08:12:57 -0700, sms
wrote:

On 6/27/2019 7:15 PM, John B. wrote:

snip

Given that a good friends family had about a 1939 Chevrolet and they
seemed to go through about one clutch a year I believe that clutch
wear is largely a matter of the driver's technique and not a matter of
some sort inherent weakness.

It's a wear item. Unlike a 1937 or 1939 Chevrolet, clutch replacement is
complex and expensive on newer cars. I knew someone with a Mini Cooper
with a manual transmission. She cringed when her son was learning to
drive a stick because she knew that a replacement clutch would be close
to $2000 (in California). The parts aren't that expensive but it's a lot
of labor cost because of the bumper removal and the sub-frame removal.

I'm sure that everything costs more in California :-) but changing the
clutch in a Mini is little different than changing one in a VW Bug.
Hoist the front, or rear, of the auto, drop the engine-transmission
change the clutch plate and reassemble the engine and transmission
unit and reinstall it in the auto.

It has been a lot of years since I worked on a VW but from memory it
is about a 2 hour job to change the clutch, for an experienced man.
--
cheers,

John B.

On Fri, 28 Jun 2019 11:46:02 -0400, Frank Krygowski
wrote:

On 6/28/2019 4:03 AM, John B. wrote:
On Thu, 27 Jun 2019 21:32:19 -0500, AMuzi wrote:

On 6/27/2019 9:15 PM, John B. wrote:
On Thu, 27 Jun 2019 11:12:39 -0700, sms
wrote:

On 6/27/2019 9:59 AM, wrote:

snip

But they are all available with an AT but people,
- feel manly to stick shift,
- find AT too expensive,
- don't know what they are missing and think AT are still slow and sluggish.

If I simulate my manual shift from my driveway to the main road about 400 m away it would be:
r-1-2-3-2-Corner-3-4-2-speedbump-2-3-4-2-speedbump-3-4-2-corner to main road 15 manual shift in only 400 meter. Crazy. Automatic transmission: choose sport setting or leaving the default comfort setting R-D done!

Not disagreeing that an AT is a better choice. And for vehicles with a
good AT it'll end up costing less because it'll last longer than a
clutch replacement on an MT. But some vehicles have had problematic ATs
i.e. Hondas from 1998 to 2004.

---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus

I keep reading this about clutch replacement but I don't remember my
folks ever having to change a clutch on any of their cars and my first
car was a 1937 Chevrolet that I inherited when my folks bought a new
car and it lasted me for two years before it died and I'm pretty sure
that it still had the original clutch in it. Or, at least I know that
my folks never changed the clutch and I certainly didn't. And my
Grandfather had a Model A pickup that he drove for something like 20
years without a clutch change.

Given that a good friends family had about a 1939 Chevrolet and they
seemed to go through about one clutch a year I believe that clutch
wear is largely a matter of the driver's technique and not a matter of
some sort inherent weakness.
--
cheers,

John B.


"largely a matter of the driver's technique"
+1

The only time that I ever noticed having to slip the clutch very much
was starting out on a hill where you needed to keep the car from
rolling backward before you could get going. Brake, Clutch and
throttle were hard to manage with only two feet.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KJleJbn9G6Y :-)

This Mazda has a system that maintains the brake when stopped on a hill
until the moment the car is moving. Kind of handy!

Strange, there weren't none of them there infalutin things on a 1937
Chevy :-)
--
cheers,

John B.

On 6/28/2019 7:01 PM, John B. wrote:
On Fri, 28 Jun 2019 11:07:32 -0400, Frank Krygowski
wrote:

On 6/28/2019 8:34 AM, AMuzi wrote:
On 6/28/2019 3:18 AM, John B. wrote:
On Thu, 27 Jun 2019 22:22:43 -0700 (PDT), Sir Ridesalot
wrote:

On Friday, June 28, 2019 at 1:00:32 AM UTC-4, John B. wrote:
On Thu, 27 Jun 2019 20:34:22 -0400, Frank Krygowski
wrote:

On 6/27/2019 6:00 PM, jbeattie wrote:
On Thursday, June 27, 2019 at 1:47:46 PM UTC-7, Frank Krygowski
wrote:
On 6/26/2019 5:26 PM, wrote:
Â*Â* I see no reason today for manual shifting except for
sentimental reasons and that it is cheaper (2000 -3000 euro's).
Modern automatic transmission outperform manual shifting in
every way, at least the one I'm driving now.

Here's my situation: We drive a Mazda 3. We have a tiny pop-up
camping
trailer. It weighs only 750 pounds empty.

The Mazda's stated towing capacity is zero, although I've been
told that
if I had bought the exact same vehicle in Europe, it's towing
capacity
would be listed as 500 kg, which is plenty.

I put a trailer hitch on this car as soon as I got it, and we've
towed
the trailer as far as Nova Scotia. I knew I was violating the
warranty,
but I judged it worth the risk. If the car had an automatic
transmission, I don't know if I'd make that same judgement.

Why?Â*Â* Towing trailers in hilly terrain is a clutch killer, and
typically cars with ATs have higher towing capacity than the same
model with a MT because of the AT torque converter.Â* I don't see
why having a MT would make you feel more positive about towing --
particularly on a car that probably has a pretty low-torque first
gear since it is just a family sedan and not a truck.

I admit, I haven't looked into this deeply. But I know that
transmission
coolers are sold as accessories for automatic transmissions used in
towing:
https://www.aamcocolorado.com/what-y...ssion-coolers/

Â* That gives me pause, especially with the warranty issue.

Perhaps those coolers aren't quite as important in these days of
locking
torque converters, but my understanding is that they lock up only at
cruising speed; so if I were towing slowly up a mountain, I'd think
there would be a potential for transmission overheating. And we have
towed this trailer over the Appalachians and Rockies many times.

The Mazda is the fourth little car with which we've towed this same
trailer, all with manual transmissions. (I've never owned an
automatic.)
None had any transmission problem, and only the last one, the Pontiac
Vibe, ever had a clutch problem, a very slight occasional slip once it
was 10+ years old. But since slipping clutches were a known issue with
old Vibes, it probably had little or nothing to do with the towing.

Regarding torque: There's always been enough to climb mountains, etc.
even when the car towing this trailer was a 1985 Honda Civic. We just
went up fairly slowly in a low gear. I the manual transmission didn't
seem to care. I suspect an automatic trans might.

All auto transmissions used to have a cooler as initially installed
but I just went out and had a look at my wife's new Honda and while
the engine compartment is pretty crowded I certainly can't see a
transmission cooler so I assume that they are no longer necessary.
Looking at the parts list there appears to be a "transmission warmer"
though.
--
cheers,

John B.

Browning had a so called automatic transmission for bicycles. I
wonder how long it will be now that electronics are so small before a
genuine automatic transmission will be available for bicycles? After
all, we do have electronic shifting for bicycles that seems to have
all the bugs worked out of it.

Cheers

Apparently someone has built one. See:
http://evworld.com/urban.cfm?newsid=52
http://www.cyclelicio.us/2010/nuvinc...cvt-test-ride/
--
cheers,

John B.


Nuvinci are CVT=infinite step not an actual auto.
http://www.yellowjersey.org/NUVINCI.JPG

IIRC, the NuVinci is pretty inefficient. Lots more energy lost inside
the box than with typical gears.

The solution is to use them on a red bicycle which will, of course,
negate any frictional losses that may exist.

Good point. I hadn't thought of that.


--
- Frank Krygowski

On 6/28/2019 7:28 PM, John B. wrote:
On Fri, 28 Jun 2019 08:12:57 -0700, sms
wrote:

On 6/27/2019 7:15 PM, John B. wrote:

snip

Given that a good friends family had about a 1939 Chevrolet and they
seemed to go through about one clutch a year I believe that clutch
wear is largely a matter of the driver's technique and not a matter of
some sort inherent weakness.

It's a wear item. Unlike a 1937 or 1939 Chevrolet, clutch replacement is
complex and expensive on newer cars. I knew someone with a Mini Cooper
with a manual transmission. She cringed when her son was learning to
drive a stick because she knew that a replacement clutch would be close
to $2000 (in California). The parts aren't that expensive but it's a lot
of labor cost because of the bumper removal and the sub-frame removal.

I'm sure that everything costs more in California :-) but changing the
clutch in a Mini is little different than changing one in a VW Bug.
Hoist the front, or rear, of the auto, drop the engine-transmission
change the clutch plate and reassemble the engine and transmission
unit and reinstall it in the auto.

It has been a lot of years since I worked on a VW but from memory it
is about a 2 hour job to change the clutch, for an experienced man.

It does vary with the model car, and some front wheel drive cars are
difficult.

As I stated, our previous car was a Pontiac Vibe (= Toyota Matrix). At
11 years of age, the clutch was just starting to slip a tiny bit on
occasion. Checking Vibe fan-boy sites online, I found out this was a
common problem.

I tend to keep cars a long while; and back in the day I'd have
considered doing the job myself, but my finances are now healthier than
my back, and I have better ways to spend my time. So I checked with a
good mechanic I've occasionally used.

He phoned back and said he'd researched that clutch job and was
astonished at how difficult it would be. I think the price was going to
be around $1500 to replace the clutch.

We went car shopping instead.


--
- Frank Krygowski

On Fri, 28 Jun 2019 19:56:38 -0400, Frank Krygowski
wrote:

On 6/28/2019 7:28 PM, John B. wrote:
On Fri, 28 Jun 2019 08:12:57 -0700, sms
wrote:

On 6/27/2019 7:15 PM, John B. wrote:

snip

Given that a good friends family had about a 1939 Chevrolet and they
seemed to go through about one clutch a year I believe that clutch
wear is largely a matter of the driver's technique and not a matter of
some sort inherent weakness.

It's a wear item. Unlike a 1937 or 1939 Chevrolet, clutch replacement is
complex and expensive on newer cars. I knew someone with a Mini Cooper
with a manual transmission. She cringed when her son was learning to
drive a stick because she knew that a replacement clutch would be close
to $2000 (in California). The parts aren't that expensive but it's a lot
of labor cost because of the bumper removal and the sub-frame removal.

I'm sure that everything costs more in California :-) but changing the
clutch in a Mini is little different than changing one in a VW Bug.
Hoist the front, or rear, of the auto, drop the engine-transmission
change the clutch plate and reassemble the engine and transmission
unit and reinstall it in the auto.

It has been a lot of years since I worked on a VW but from memory it
is about a 2 hour job to change the clutch, for an experienced man.

It does vary with the model car, and some front wheel drive cars are
difficult.

As I stated, our previous car was a Pontiac Vibe (= Toyota Matrix). At
11 years of age, the clutch was just starting to slip a tiny bit on
occasion. Checking Vibe fan-boy sites online, I found out this was a
common problem.

I tend to keep cars a long while; and back in the day I'd have
considered doing the job myself, but my finances are now healthier than
my back, and I have better ways to spend my time. So I checked with a
good mechanic I've occasionally used.

He phoned back and said he'd researched that clutch job and was
astonished at how difficult it would be. I think the price was going to
be around $1500 to replace the clutch.

We went car shopping instead.

Ah will, USians are noted for being rich so perhaps $1500 isn't a lot
of money in "America".

I'm not sure about the friction plate but a pressure plate is about
3,000 baht - about US$ 100 so a friction plate must be in the
neighborhood of maybe 1000-1500 baht, about $50. Labour is cheap, so
call it 1,000 baht for labour so about 5,500 baht, maybe $177 for the
job including he pressure plate change. Say that they stick it to you
and double the price and it is about 10,000 baht, (you are obviously a
foreigner and all foreigners are rich :-) say $325. (and people wonder
why I live in Thailand).
--
cheers,

John B.

On 6/28/2019 5:58 PM, John B. wrote:
On Fri, 28 Jun 2019 07:34:59 -0500, AMuzi wrote:

On 6/28/2019 3:18 AM, John B. wrote:
On Thu, 27 Jun 2019 22:22:43 -0700 (PDT), Sir Ridesalot
wrote:

On Friday, June 28, 2019 at 1:00:32 AM UTC-4, John B. wrote:
On Thu, 27 Jun 2019 20:34:22 -0400, Frank Krygowski
wrote:

On 6/27/2019 6:00 PM, jbeattie wrote:
On Thursday, June 27, 2019 at 1:47:46 PM UTC-7, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 6/26/2019 5:26 PM, wrote:
I see no reason today for manual shifting except for sentimental reasons and that it is cheaper (2000 -3000 euro's). Modern automatic transmission outperform manual shifting in every way, at least the one I'm driving now.

Here's my situation: We drive a Mazda 3. We have a tiny pop-up camping
trailer. It weighs only 750 pounds empty.

The Mazda's stated towing capacity is zero, although I've been told that
if I had bought the exact same vehicle in Europe, it's towing capacity
would be listed as 500 kg, which is plenty.

I put a trailer hitch on this car as soon as I got it, and we've towed
the trailer as far as Nova Scotia. I knew I was violating the warranty,
but I judged it worth the risk. If the car had an automatic
transmission, I don't know if I'd make that same judgement.

Why? Towing trailers in hilly terrain is a clutch killer, and typically cars with ATs have higher towing capacity than the same model with a MT because of the AT torque converter. I don't see why having a MT would make you feel more positive about towing -- particularly on a car that probably has a pretty low-torque first gear since it is just a family sedan and not a truck.

I admit, I haven't looked into this deeply. But I know that transmission
coolers are sold as accessories for automatic transmissions used in
towing:
https://www.aamcocolorado.com/what-y...ssion-coolers/
That gives me pause, especially with the warranty issue.

Perhaps those coolers aren't quite as important in these days of locking
torque converters, but my understanding is that they lock up only at
cruising speed; so if I were towing slowly up a mountain, I'd think
there would be a potential for transmission overheating. And we have
towed this trailer over the Appalachians and Rockies many times.

The Mazda is the fourth little car with which we've towed this same
trailer, all with manual transmissions. (I've never owned an automatic.)
None had any transmission problem, and only the last one, the Pontiac
Vibe, ever had a clutch problem, a very slight occasional slip once it
was 10+ years old. But since slipping clutches were a known issue with
old Vibes, it probably had little or nothing to do with the towing.

Regarding torque: There's always been enough to climb mountains, etc.
even when the car towing this trailer was a 1985 Honda Civic. We just
went up fairly slowly in a low gear. I the manual transmission didn't
seem to care. I suspect an automatic trans might.

All auto transmissions used to have a cooler as initially installed
but I just went out and had a look at my wife's new Honda and while
the engine compartment is pretty crowded I certainly can't see a
transmission cooler so I assume that they are no longer necessary.
Looking at the parts list there appears to be a "transmission warmer"
though.
--
cheers,

John B.

Browning had a so called automatic transmission for bicycles. I wonder how long it will be now that electronics are so small before a genuine automatic transmission will be available for bicycles? After all, we do have electronic shifting for bicycles that seems to have all the bugs worked out of it.

Cheers

Apparently someone has built one. See:
http://evworld.com/urban.cfm?newsid=52
http://www.cyclelicio.us/2010/nuvinc...cvt-test-ride/
--
cheers,

John B.


Nuvinci are CVT=infinite step not an actual auto.
http://www.yellowjersey.org/NUVINCI.JPG

True, but as the first site says they combined the CVT with a an
automatic speed sensor and some type of electrical shifter, powered,
apparently by a front hub generator , which turns it into what is
effectively an "automatic transmission".
--
cheers,

John B.

sorry couldn't access 1st link. THX.

--
Andrew Muzi
www.yellowjersey.org/
Open every day since 1 April, 1971

On Friday, June 28, 2019 at 4:20:38 PM UTC-7, John B. wrote:
On Fri, 28 Jun 2019 07:03:03 -0700 (PDT), jbeattie
wrote:

On Friday, June 28, 2019 at 5:29:13 AM UTC-7, AMuzi wrote:
On 6/27/2019 9:31 PM, John B. wrote:
On Thu, 27 Jun 2019 16:01:34 -0700, sms
wrote:

On 6/27/2019 3:00 PM, jbeattie wrote:
On Thursday, June 27, 2019 at 1:47:46 PM UTC-7, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 6/26/2019 5:26 PM, wrote:
I see no reason today for manual shifting except for sentimental reasons and that it is cheaper (2000 -3000 euro's). Modern automatic transmission outperform manual shifting in every way, at least the one I'm driving now.

Here's my situation: We drive a Mazda 3. We have a tiny pop-up camping
trailer. It weighs only 750 pounds empty.

The Mazda's stated towing capacity is zero, although I've been told that
if I had bought the exact same vehicle in Europe, it's towing capacity
would be listed as 500 kg, which is plenty.

I put a trailer hitch on this car as soon as I got it, and we've towed
the trailer as far as Nova Scotia. I knew I was violating the warranty,
but I judged it worth the risk. If the car had an automatic
transmission, I don't know if I'd make that same judgement.

Why? Towing trailers in hilly terrain is a clutch killer, and typically cars with ATs have higher towing capacity than the same model with a MT because of the AT torque converter. I don't see why having a MT would make you feel more positive about towing -- particularly on a car that probably has a pretty low-torque first gear since it is just a family sedan and not a truck.

True. And one of the reasons there are no manual transmission trucks
sold in the U.S. anymore. The only reason for a manual is off-road
driving in low gear. You can still buy a Jeep Wrangler with a manual, in
fact not sure if they even offer an automatic.

"no manual transmission trucks sold in the U.S. anymore"
See:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uZKajOTa4Gg
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B6GpCqj1REo
--
cheers,

John B.


First link, second comment:
"I wish the engine brake actually did something when I’m
loaded. It does absolutely nothing. I really dislike this
transmission"

I think the guy is complaining about the compression braking,
which is tied to the transmission. See
https://www.truckingtruth.com/trucke...-peterbilt-579
These folks seem to conflate engine braking with compression braking.

The way he describes it, it must be a "Jake" brake that doesn't come
on as quickly as he wishes, if it was simply the braking effect of the
engine with the throttle closed I don't think he would have described
it that way.



Manual transmissions give you more control going up and down hill, but the AT on my Subaru, for example, gives you the option of manual shifting which helps mitigate the spastic CVT.

I did a lot of towing with my old 5sp 4Runner, and backing a loaded trailer up hill and making a 90 degree turn into my driveway was a clutch burner. It's easier with the Subaru except that the Subaru is under-powered, and the hatch back is a blind-spot. The 1996 4Runner was like a terrarium by comparison, although later models were less so.

And for John B, yes clutches burn out. On the 4Runner, it has gone through one clutch in 24 years -- which my son burned out in the middle of nowhere Oregon on his way home from Utah. He struggled into Baker City, spent the night in a hotel while some guy at a place called Grumpy's put in a clutch. http://www.grumpysrepair.com/ Not cheap, but at least we added to the Baker City economy. He fries the clutch in SLC with all the hills and stops and clutch-slipping.

Of course manual clutches "burn out" but extremely rarely if used
properly. As I said in another post my old 1937 Chevy coupe finally
died in about 1950, after 13 years and the clutch was still the
original. But of course, if your son misuses the clutch by slipping
it deliberately - which isn't what a clutch is designed to do - than
it will "burn out".
A clutch is not a speed control device as some people seem to
believe.

One might also comment, with the same degree of accuracy, that
running a tire flat will "burn it up" and running an engine without
oil will "burn it up".

Even a reasonably skilled driver can beat-up a clutch driving in hills. My son lived on a street with successive stops and an elevation gain of 500 fee in about ten blocks. He was pretty good with the clutch, but nervous about traffic behind him and tended to slip the clutch -- and take offs were not perfect, but pretty good. Anyway, he wasn't running a tire flat or running an engine with no oil. He was a B+ driver who burned out a clutch in terrain where it is simply not much fun driving a manual.

-- Jay Beattie.

On Monday, June 10, 2019 at 9:04:29 AM UTC-4, AMuzi wrote:
Standards are great! We ought to have more of them!

https://www.bikeradar.com/news/2020-...ockett-t47-bb/

Exactly. A quote from the comments: "Yep, 9 hours for the job, and 5 years taken off your life span. This is probably the hardest clutch job I have had the displeasure of doing."

I've rebuilt VW Beetle and bus engines. You can drop one of those out of the back in about an hour, and then you're looking directly at the clutch.

The Vibe is different.

- Frank Krygowski