User Error or User Interface Error?

[vakkotaur]

Most of the vehicles I've driven, especially those I've driven for any length of time, have had manual transmissions. Occasionally I'd drive something with an automatic transmission and those vehicles had the standard straight-line PRNDL or straight-line PRNDL21 controls, whether on the floor or on the steering column. I had, until very recently, never driven an automatic that had the new style zig-zag control that looks like it's pretending to be a manual shifter, almost. I ran into the equivalent of changing from a 4-speed manual to a 5-speed manual, where one can mistakenly think that fourth gear is the last gear.

The RX-350 has an automatic transmission with a zig-zag control. I drove it back from Detroit to Fairmont. I drove it from Fairmont to Minneapolis. And I wondered why I wasn't getting as good mileage as jmaynard did despite that I do quick accelerations less and have a driving style that tends toward efficiency optimization.

Last night I found out what was going on. It was a rather long day for both myself and jmaynard but his day started a couple hours earlier than mine, so when we stopped for gas in St. Peter, MN we traded places so he could rest some and I'd drive home. This was the first time I'd driven the RX-350 without driving solo. Jay pointed out that I'd shifted the transmission not into [D]rive, but into [4]. The transmission is a 5-speed.

I'd been doing that automatically as it felt like an interlock feature to me. Having two settings in the same vertical position is something I'd never experienced before. Interlocks I had experienced before, and acted accordingly or so I thought.

The layout is something like this:

  P
  R
  N
4-D
3
2-L

As every other automatic transmission control I'd ever used had only one setting for each of the vertical positions here, I (mis)interpreted 4-D and 2-L as each being one setting rather than two.

That the panel indicator said [4] and not [D] didn't trigger anything, other than me wondering a bit on the way back from Detroit as I recalled it was 5-speed. But I didn't wonder enough. In hindsight, it seems pretty obvious. But it's one of those things that's only obvious after it's been explained and experienced.

On the drive from Detroit and the drive to Minneapolis I got mileage in the (very) low 20s. On the drive home from St. Peter, things went better, since I finally allowed the 5th gear to be used. This trip did have the advantage of being on fairly low-traffic highways at night so I didn't have to brake or accelerate very quickly to deal with other folks on the road. I also had the good luck to not need to stop for any of the traffic lights on the way home. The result was that the statistics indicators said I'd gotten about 28 mpg on the trip. And that on Minnesota's 10% ethanol gasoline. I suspect I might have broken 30 mpg with real gasoline.

Comments

[altivo.livejournal.com]

It's a bad design but no surprise. The assumption is probably correct. Most drivers no longer know anything about manual transmissions. They've never driven one at all. So this setup makes sense to them. The "interlock" is intended to KEEP you from using anything but the 5-speed overdrive setting.

[jcw-da-dmg.livejournal.com]

I can drive manuals, but I dislike doing so.

Ethanol is such a rip-off; an excuse for big agri-business companies to keep screwing up the land with their huge monoculture cornfields while pretending to keep family farmers in business.

[yakko.livejournal.com]

The one complaint I had with the 2006 Accord I rented last year was that it had two D positions: the one with a border around it (which was the one I wanted), and one without a border, below it. The control stopped at the one with no border (which turns overdrive off) when I shifted from reverse or park without pressing the button. Honda should've put in a "O/D OFF" switch instead of the extra D on the control. My car has a control that stops at THE D position when I change from R without pushing the button in. All the positions below that which make it less than 4-speed-with-overdrive require extra effort on my part.

My next car is probably going to be a 5-speed manual.

[vakkotaur.livejournal.com]

The layout, once I realize that it's not an interlock (or at least not an interlock that works the way I thought) the control does roughly what it should, as altivo mentioned. It works in a roughly straight line of PRND and it requires moving the control over to get [4]. Then 4-3-2 are in a straight line and it requires moving the control back over to get [L]. I'd figured, perhaps unconsciously, that it was 4-D as one position and that it was a sort of false-neutral and I had to move the control over to indicate that, yes, I really did want to go forward. Which is odd, I realize, considering there is nothing similar for [R]everse where interlocks are generally found. Well, now I know.

I ran into another thing at the airport, which also makes sense but is, again, something I generally don't have to deal with. I got to where I wanted to be, or as close as I could safely get at MSP, and stopped. Then I tried to remove the key. That wasn't happening. I hadn't put it in [P]ark so the key was locked in. Normal operation for an automatic, but I'm used to a manual where removing the key only requires the engine be off, not that the transmission also needs to be in a specific position. Of course, when stopped the transmission is in first or reverse.

I still prefer a manual transmission, where I'm really in control.

[thecanuckguy.livejournal.com]

Something tells me that you won't need more than one "D" if you stick to Minnesota. (I recently, when I was driving* noticed the "2" and "L" after the "D" in our automatic car, I figured that because we live on the Prairies is that I've never seen those numbers used. (However, our trip out west past the Rockies this summer will probably get them some use).

*Yes I'm still not legally allowed to drive, but wife was at least in car with me this time when I was.)