Explain me this, Forums Dot Final Gear Dot Com.

Try 19 and only driven one once... on a test drive. Hell, I've only been in one two or three times besides that

One time and it was my uncles car, the only manual I have ever been in within my memory is also my uncles car.
I bet I could walk up and down my street and look in the window of every parked car and none would be a manual, despite the fact the house across the street has 5 cars and the house next to it is a mechanic.
People who DO have manual cars like their cars (hence why they bought a manual) and are not too keen on letting people learn on it.
 
Took me a while to find it, but yeah, looks like Subaru fitted the 06 2.5i with a turbo-type gear ratio set.

In order, from 1st to 5th:

1st: 3.45
2nd: 2.06
3rd: 1.45
4th: 1.09
5th: 0.78

It's pretty clear that Subaru basically wanted drivers to hold first to spool the turbo then start shifting up.
 
"Don't get a WRX" they said...

:lol:

Looks like turbos are in the cars for the future?
 
If "buying a car with more torque" was an option, my life would be great in more ways then one. :lol: Still, cheers for the advice.

Sorry, that did come across as dickish, and it wasn't meant to. I meant it more as something to think about next time you get a car. And where are you seeing hills in Orlando? I've been in that area a few times and have never seen one. :)
 
"Don't get a WRX" they said...

:lol:

Looks like turbos are in the cars for the future?

Who knows - maybe that was the only gearbox they had. That's kind of dumb for them to do that.

Anyway, that's why you have such a big jump between first and second - it's because Subaru screwed up on the gear ratio and put them too far apart, probably in the name of maximum first gear acceleration. Probably wouldn't be an issue with a larger engine, but in the case of your 2.5, well...
 
Last edited:
Who knows - maybe that was the only gearbox they had. That's kind of dumb for them to do that.

Anyway, that's why you have such a big jump between first and second - it's because Subaru screwed up on the gear ratio and put them too far apart, probably in the name of maximum first gear acceleration.

Toyota did that when they redid the Celica. They made 2nd in the GTS long so they wouldn't have to go to 3rd to get to 60 mph.. one less shift to do to look better in 0-60 tests. Nevermind that when you went to 3rd it dropped you out of the higher VVTi cam rev range, thus killing acceleration after that point.
 
Sorry, that did come across as dickish, and it wasn't meant to. I meant it more as something to think about next time you get a car. And where are you seeing hills in Orlando? I've been in that area a few times and have never seen one. :)

Nah, I knew exactly what you mean. I just got a laugh out of it.

Actually, every damn strip mall and shopping centre has a hill leading to its parking lot. I don't know how they managed to do it, but every thing is built like 5-6 feet below road level.
 
Toyota did that when they redid the Celica. They made 2nd in the GTS long so they wouldn't have to go to 3rd to get to 60 mph.. one less shift to do to look better in 0-60 tests. Nevermind that when you went to 3rd it dropped you out of the higher VVTi cam rev range, thus killing acceleration after that point.

Yeah... that didn't work out so well, as Celica sales showed. :p

Also, Subaru fitted the 2.5i with the 3.9:1 differentials out of the WRX, so that exacerbates the problem.

GM had similar ratios in the four-banger 3rd gen F-bodies, but mated them with a 3.73 rear diff so first wasn't nearly as useless.
 
Re: Auto drivers sticking to your ass. When I drive my automatic, I do everything I can to "educate" the drivers around me. I'll hold on a hill with just the accelerator (or just idle) producing no brake lights - and I WILL let the car backroll on a steep enough hill.

This habit stems from having FAR too many Porsche drivers (and it's ALWAYS Porsche drivers - never any of the japanese generic car drivers) park right up my ass every time I get in an MTX. Seriously. My very first hill start, I had a fucking Boxster within 2 inches.
 
I once had a very awkward experience with a demo WRX, attempting a hill start in wintertime on a very steep hill. Admittedly my manual skills sucked a lot at that time, but having it stall on me a dozen times wasn't very encouraging. Anyway, I got it out at some point, but haven't really trusted the low down torque of Subarus after that. :mrgreen:
 
1st gear should only be used to get going, so that's what I use it for. I don't rev any higher than 2000 rpm in 1st. And from there on:

2nd -> 3rd @ 30 km/h (20 mph)
3rd -> 4th @ 50 km/h (30 mph)
4th -> 5th @ 70 km/h (45 mph)
(5th -> 6th @ 100 km/h) (60 mph)
 
How in the name of all that is decent is one supposed to operate a manual car at speeds under 25 mph? 1st gear isn't enough, 2nd gear is too much. If I leave it in first all the old people in the parking lot going for Sunday strolls look at me like I'm evil, if I switch to 2nd the car shutters due to lack of power and its hard to maintain the speedlimit.

My solution has been to rev the car to get some momentum in 1st, then just press the clutch and coast for a while until it needs another boost in speed.

I never had this problem in my Honda, but driving in very slow traffic was a pain because 1st gear is very touchy and a bit of gas tends to make the whole car to the jump-shudder of poor clutch control.

In your case I would run in low RPM in 2nd unless it's lugging the motor, then I would do the pulse-and-glide thing.

Secondly, why do people in automatics have to get 3 inches behind your car on a hill? Is murder legal in these situations?

Because they don't know how to drive, and yes, I think that would count as justifiable homicide.

Thirdly, how resistant are engines to high revs? While I understand running around town in 2nd gear and 8000rpm will do major damage, would running it at 4000 or 5000 for 25-30 seconds do any real damage?

Maybe, it depends on the engine, how well you care for it and how frequently you do it. I would usually run lower RPMs on my car because it seemed to prefer that to high revs.

Fourthly, I try to downshift as much as possible especially to assist in slowing down. However, sometimes I'll just pop it in neutral and just use the breaks. Explain to me why this is wrong, and how awful of a driver I am for doing this.

Thank you for your loving support,
Whappeh

Don't do that. Unless you are rev-matching perfectly (which I doubt) you are just adding wear to your clutch. Your brakes are designed to stop your car, they are cheap and easy to replace. Your clutch is designed to allow shifting, it's expensive and harder to replace if it wears out.

What would you rather work on, a clutch or brakes?
 
25mph? I'm in 3rd by that point if I'm driving in town. I regularly let it cruise in 4th at 30mph and it sits just under 2,000 RPM.

Most cars are actually designed to run pretty slowly in 2nd; it's still a pretty short gear. It's not swift, but I can easily set off in second from a stand-still.
 
Last edited:
Hmmm, after reading this thread, maybe I should stop engine braking......
 
Engine braking does no harm, I use it for going down hills off road all the time. Revs the nuts off the engine but does no damage.
 
Last edited:
Using the engine to manage speed is fine, it's downshifting every time you come to a light or a stop to "save" your brakes that will result in early clutch failure.
 
Using the engine to manage speed is fine, it's downshifting every time you come to a light or a stop to "save" your brakes that will result in early clutch failure.

Unless you match revs properly and the clutch doesn't have to make up the engine speed difference.
 
Top