If you're thinking that all electrics will replace gasoline engines, I would think again, hybrids with gasoline maybe (in the short term), but all electrics, never. The reason for this is infrastructure. Only Tesla (and I give them a lot of credit) is making an attempt at setting up both quick charge stations and battery swapping stations. All of the other electric cars, including such cars as the Nissan Leaf are simply designed to enhance average mpg numbers across the rest of the manufacturers' line of cars. Every Leaf as well as every Chevy Volt sold loses money, a lot of money, however, they significantly raise mileage averages. You don't see Nissan or GM scrambling to build nationwide networks of quick charge stations. You can't take a Leaf on a trip from Los Angeles to San Francisco (you can barely get to Malibu and back). Manufacturers are not doing this because this will not be the technology of the future, it's a very short lived technology, and they don't want to put vast resources in now. Tesla is the only one, and they deserve praise because they're going it alone.

Hydrogen fuel cells are coming, and the money will be spent here on the fuel delivery systems, not electrics. And by the way, don't count the internal combustion engine out just yet. There may be a change to more natural gas as a percentage of fuel used, but we're a long, long, way from eliminating it.

In my humble opinion, of course.

 

Who knows, we could be turning to gas-electric turbine-powered hybrids as in the C-X75 prototype (or as it was originally conceived). That would be pretty cool! Or perhaps the ICB engine will only be a generator for the electric motors as in the Chevy Volt.

With all of the concern over the climate and (more importantly) local air quality/pollution, using the ICB engine as the primary source of power doesn't seem like it's going to last much into the future. Then again, we are producing more oil than ever in the US and are set to become energy independent, so that will probably have a big impact on the future of automobiles!

 

As good the 911 is, as big as the following is, they weren't making enough money off of them to keep the brand alive. If it wasn't for the Cayenne, not sure Porsche would have been around. They took the profit from it and dumped into the 911s.

 

True. But equally true, for those of us with manuals, wives are not an option either!

 

EXACTLY, PRECISELY! "This" is my point. For a significant percentage of us, it ain't about squeezing the last drop of speed around the track at the sacrifice of all else. It's about man and machine interacting in joyous harmony. And for anyone who has taken a true manual trans sports car for a run across a winding two lane highway, the numbers pale in comparison to the experience. It's the journey. Not the time slip handed to you at the end of the road. Right?

 

I wouldn't be at all surprised if the manual out lives the ZF single clutch automatic as the dual clutch replaces it, and perhaps sees a resurgence in popularity. Few brands will offer a manual, and on fewer models, but there will be a significant demand so long as there are enthusiasts that can experience the joys of driving one, and the contemporary racing and driving icons sharing their views on why they've preferred it.

Reports of the death of the manual are highly exaggerated, IMO.

 

Certainly the classic American muscle/sports cars like the Mustang, Camaro, Viper and Corvette will be offered with a manual into the foreseeable future!

 

Ironic you should mention the Cayenne, which as it turns out, is also offered with a MANUAL(!) transmission. Very rare, indeed, but it shows you how they have a real focus on the driver experience.

 

Yes there will be some cars with a manual option. But Jag even stopped offering their other cars with a manual box after a while. They just don't sell in enough numbers. An example is the S-Type which had more than one manual variant in its time, all of which were discontinued in short order. Even Clarkson et al haven't persuaded people that a manual is a good idea compared to paddle shift.

 

Jaguar stopped building sports cars in 1971 and naturally hasn't needed a manual since then. That's when the XKE was transformed into a much heavier luxury sporty car rather than sports car, and was only available with automatic soon after at its demise in 1974. Offering a manual in their sporty sedan made even less sense.

I watch a lot of reviews by respected automotive testers and they always love the manuals in sports cars, and are saddened to see some replaced with automatics. They are also impressed with how the best automatics work so well, and how the dual clutch tranny would be quicker on a race track than a manual would be. Many of the fastest cars on race tracks are still manuals, which drives the point home that there's a lot more to building a fast car than choice of tranny.

Edit: Purely by coincidence, I was just watching this interview again, and Randy Pobst comments on the appeal of a manual starting around 9:30 or so...

I agree that Jaguar hasn't needed an automatic in any of their cars in decades, their buyers can also own a sports car with a manual if they like, and I'm sure the comedy team at Top Gear would agree.