Perhaps the biggest cheer of encouragement heard at the global launch of the new Nissan Z was that the vehicle would be available with a proper six-speed manual complete with a clutch pedal.
Given the steady demise of this most traditional of driveline layouts, the news has clearly struck a chord with those who like their retro cars to not just look retro, but to operate that way as well.
Actually finding a new car with a manual gearbox these days is a pretty good trick, and while makes and models such as the Toyota 86 (sold almost exclusively with a six-speed manual) Subaru WRX STi (manual-only) and Ford Fiesta ST (ditto) continue the tradition of an analogue gear-shifting experience, they’re very much fringe dwellers in 2021.
Meantime, the new Z’s closest rival, the Toyota Supra (a BMW Z4 twin) is available only with an eight-speed automatic, with not a clutch pedal to be seen.
But where did the manual transmission go wrong?
It’s not so much the fault of technology, rather than vastly improved alternatives combined with a generational shift within the human condition.
Torque-converter (conventional) automatics are very good these days; the dual-clutch robotised manual has proven itself as the logical choice for performance cars of any sort, and even the previously lowly CVT transmission has its followers thanks to reduced power losses and stepped shift strategies that make it feel more 'normal'.
Throw in paddle-shifters and you even get an improved ergonomic environment.
That covers the tech alternative, but what about the human nature side of things?
That’s down to a situation whereby some countries (China, for one) are experiencing their first generation of citizen drivers.
Just as baby boomers in the western world never hankered for a crank-handle to start their post-war cars, neither do consumers in emerging motoring nations feel a need to engage with a technology that was fundamentally obsolete before they hit the road.
And as congestion increases and urban vehicle usage becomes the norm, a self-shifting transmission simply makes life easier.
And car makers, faithfully doing what car makers have always done, are simply following the money.
Don’t be fooled, ditching the manual option certainly does make a difference to the bottom line for manufacturers.
Reducing the engineering, development and testing to just one version of a car rather than two (manual and automatic) is a huge consideration, and so is the simplification at the assembly-line stage.
Even at dealership level, there’s less training, parts proliferation and stock-holding involved when you dump something like the manual gearbox from the line-up.
The other big reason for dumping human-operated gearboxes is all in the name of efficiency and reduced emissions.
While a computer can shift cleanly and surgically every time, even a slightly muffed manual gearshift can send tailpipe emissions spiking for a split-second; enough to condemn the concept over the life of the car.
Yet, Nissan has decided that a manual-transmission version of the Zed is a good idea.
And for enthusiast drivers of a certain age, the agreement is loud and immediate. But why?
There remains a generation of licensed drivers out there who still crave the analogue driving experience.
For those drivers, a car is much, much more than just transport, and they will grudgingly put up with electric power steering, throttle-by-wire and even traction control. But they stoically draw the line at a gearbox that shifts itself.
It’s the concept of the driver telling the car what to do, not the other way around, even if that means the manual version of the same car is actually slower around a racetrack.
It could be argued that this approach is a backward-facing view given there are technically superior solutions; that such buyers are accepting less car for their money.
But isn’t that exactly the same as paying a lot more for a luxury two-door when a larger, four-door is cheaper?
And strangely, although we think of the North American car market as the one that took to automatics so enthusiastically (and the US did lead the world in automatic take-up), it’s that same cohort that has been the most vocal on retaining a manual option.
Earlier this century, Ferrari announced that its future models would be dual-clutch only.
But the howls of protest from the US market were enough to convince Ferrari to engineer three-pedal versions of its new cars.
Even so, that couldn’t last forever, and the Ferrari 599 GTB was to be the last Ferrari with three pedals. Only 30 were made; 20 for the US market and 10 for the whole of Europe.
Of course, there’s a more cynical theory around why Nissan has bothered with a manual version of the new Z. It’s a hard one to argue against, too.
When you compare the new car’s vital statistics against the outgoing 370Z, it soon becomes obvious that there’s a lot in common, including the exact wheelbase dimensions.
Which suggests that there’s an awful lot of 370Z floorpan and structure in the new Z, meaning that a lot of the engineering work for a manual option had already been done.
Throw in the fact that the new car uses an engine descended from the earlier Zed’s VQ series of V6s, and you can see how it might all have been a bit easier (and cheaper) for Nissan than a clean-sheet design would have been.
Meantime, the raging classic-car market around the world is also having an effect on how drivers see drivers’ cars.
It’s a fact that the manual version of a classic Australian car such as a Falcon GT or Holden Monaro will – weight-for-age – be worth more than the automatic version where it was offered in the day.
Even a more contemporary Aussie collectible such as the V2 Holden Monaro will command a premium for a version with the six-speed manual gearbox, even though the automatic is arguably the nicer car to drive. And investors – who like car makers follow the money trail – know it well.
So, what’s the longer-term future of the manual transmission?
It’s actually pretty bleak, to be honest. Not for any of the above reasons but purely because electric cars – which surely represent the future of personal mobility – don’t really require a multi-ratio transmission of any sort.
Even high-performance electric cars like high-end Teslas use a simple, single-speed transmission because the electric motor that powers them has the happy knack of making its maximum torque at zero rpm.
In the short-to-medium term, however, there’s probably a place for the conventional manual gearbox.
The first will be those specialist 'drivers' cars' and the second will be right down at the hyper-budget end of the car market.
The cost benefits of the manual gearbox are too good to ignore, and when it comes to ruggedness and dependability at a sharp price, the conventional manual really takes some beating.
So, that looks like the high-end collectible/enthusiasts’ cars and the spit-simple econo-cars taken care of by the manual transmission.
Leaving everything else in the middle to the two-pedal brigade.
