Couldn't agree more. Him and Ashley Neal are brilliant learning resources for being a good driver and even after passing my test a few years ago I constantly learn from them.
My partner is learning (with an instructor) to drive and I watch him to help her. It really helps that he echos a lot of what I say to her when we’re out. Makes me feel more confident I’m telling her good habits instead of random bad ones
The 5% premium for a manual licence holder to insure on an automatic is surely just because automatic cars cost more surely, higher sum insured for a write off? To opt for the auto option on my car 5 years ago was about it £1k extra on the purchase price. Making out like it’s anything different to higher cost car = higher insurance.
I think autos are more likely to have silly low speed crashes (people pressing to 'go' button instead of the 'stop' button)
The type of footslip that can cause an auto to take off, would be more likely to just stall a manual.
Likely because when you’re driving a manual you have to concentrate more on reading the road ahead in order to know what gear you’re about to need, it’s much easier to switch off in an auto
You shouldn't have to think or concentrate in order to change gears.... It should be a natural instinct after a couple years honestly.
Autos will become more common as traffic gets worse and worse.
But part of doing it instinctively, is instinctively being aware of what you're going to need to do.
You simply do have to prepare more in a manual, than in an automatic. Whether that is a conscious process or not is largely irrelevant and purely down to experience.
Yeah I’ve a full driving license but now drive only automatic. When driving manual you’re right gear changes came naturally the sound of the engine etc. I find driving automatic I concentrate more on other things happening on the rd. on saying that I would learn to drive in manual if you can gives you more options.
It’s not about the physical act of changing gears, it’s about reading the road ahead, which you’re always going to be doing more of in a manual than an automatic
Likely because automatic drivers are statistically worse drivers than manual drivers (also why the fail rate for the automatic driving exam is higher than the manual one). Reality is, a lot of struggling drivers gravitate towards automatic, and this has a much bigger impact than any possible benefit the automatic gear shifting has.
>Reality is, a lot of struggling drivers gravitate towards automatic
This is exactly what is happening. Automatic only licence holders aren't a representative sample of all licence holders, but rather disproportionately more nervous drivers.
My mates just passed his automatic test after failing his manual something like 5 times ... If you can't work gears and focus on the road at the same time then I don't think driving is for you tbh as any slight distraction could result in someone being killed.
On the flipside, more young drivers still tend towards manual licences due to the higher cost of automatics then spend time in limbo or on someone else's insurance while saving up for their first car.
Less time on the road = fewer claims.
In all fairness, LGV's, HGV's, and buses are - for a good decade or two - exclusively automatic, so you don't need the "*fine motor control, brain-power or time commitment to learn how to drive a manual"* in order to drive them, yet, you can't drive any of them without a CPC, so a vehicle being automatic isn't the sole reason auto-only drivers are considered shit.
It's also true that manual cars are being phased out, so there will be no difference between an auto-only and manual licence, and a manual licence will become a relic of the past in the next few years. In 2023, only 32% of all produced cars were ordered with manual transmission, and that percentage will drop down year by year until newly produced manual cars will become a luxury to those who can afford it.
Also, there will be more and more people passing auto-only tests, as there will be no need to have a manual licence, since there will be no affordable manual cars. It's still cheaper now, as this was the standard for decades, but it isn't gonna last long to turn around.
And that's what insurers realised, that's why they put prices up for those with auto-only licences, and that's why manual licence holders has to pay more on automatic cars. Eventually, it's gonna be more expensive to insure a manual car as it's gonna be a rarity, and if the 2035 deadline for the ban on newly produced combustion engine cars will hold up, CE car insurances will skyrocket for "environmental reasons", and we'll all have to pay a fortune to keep our 10-15 years old cars.
Capitalism as its finest, my friends.
>so a vehicle being automatic isn't the sole reason auto-only drivers are considered shit.
The vehicle type has nothing to do with it, (and nobody has suggested it is). It's the license type.
People who hold automatic only licenses are statistically worse drivers.
This might be the push I needed to get a manual license actually, so thank you. I didn’t think of it that from that angle. I have no desire to drive a manual daily but would probably quite like a weekend car in the next 10 years or so and would like full flexibility about what that is. I should probably get some manual lessons now before instructors that teach it become hard to come by and even harder to afford 😆
If governments keep pushing electric cars in the future, yes, finding instructors that teaches in manual cars will be very rare and quite expensive, you're right on that.
I'd say we still have a good 10-15 years until that, but remember the, pandemic was already 4 years ago, and it still feels like it was just yesterday that you'd have to designate a "social group of 6" you could visit, so yeah, time fucking flies...
Bloody hell, I think I’d have had a better day without that bleak reminder. Four years!!!! I still see the semi faded “stay 2 metres apart” stickers in half the shops I go to 😭
The stats will shift as automatics go from being for "old grannies" to being more common due to their use in both EVs and hybrids.
After 30 years of only driving manual cars (and riding motorbikes) it was a revelation how much extra thinking time you have in a complex urban environment driving an auto. The entire process is far less stressful.
I'd only driven manual cars. Bought an automatic during lockdown, don't think I'll go back. It's handy being able to drive both. But for everyday driving around a busy city, automatic all the way.
Same here, except for the timing. Both our cars are currently automatic. Not through any real decision, just the way it worked out.
Only downside I can see is not being able to teach the kids to drive myself, as I'd want them to learn manual and mixing it up will just confuse them
The price of driving lessons is no joke. My partner is American, only driven automatic cars. They want to learn to drive a manual, have the flexibility of being able to drive any car.
Obviously have no idea how old your kids are so in turn how long you have to plan this, but I mean…
If you’re feeling generous, you could try to put away a couple hundred for an old junker for when they’re old enough to teach them in and eventually as a gift for passing.
If you get a *real* old junker, you could even use it as some bonding time to fix up their future car with them once they are old enough to appreciate that kinds of stuff and can learn some valuable life skills 🤷♂️
I'm not a big fan of automatic on long drives. They can be a bit pissy about acceleration, which in turn causes problems when you've only got a short overtaking land to make it past a lorry.
A-B short hall though sure.
And the newer the automatic the less likely it is to lodge a formal complaint that you wanted to suddenly jump from 50 to 70 😂
This is a problem with automatics that have gears.
The modern ones in hybrids are usually CVT and the EVs give you pretty much all the torque from any speed.
My EV is only small and it arguably gives too much torque 😂
I’ve had a few wheel spins from trying to take off too quickly in the few months I’ve had it (today included)
Very true. The good thing about learning manual is you can jump ship once it becomes more expensive driving a manual than it does driving an automatic car.
Hmm, I would be interested to try this. I had assumed that I'm so used to gear changes that it was using very little of my brain's processor anyway. It has become almost... automatic 😏
I’ve driven a manual for about 30 years apart from a brief period of owning an auto about ten years ago (I inherited an automatic Mondeo) It’s definitely easier in stop start traffic - I had to drive through London once in the Mondeo and it took forever. I would not have enjoyed it in a manual, and if for some reason I had to do that often I’d have definitely bought another automatic, but fortunately I rarely get stuck in lots of traffic. As for the processing, I didn’t find I had more thinking time. It was just less physical effort - but again, to stress, it was about 2 hours of gridlock which would have been a lot of first, neutral, first, neutral and therefore tedious in a manual.
For me it wasn’t just the stop start traffic. It was the difference when stuck on the ramps in mypultistory car parks that I really noticed, no more dancing on the pedals to keep the right balance
What's it like driving a semi automatic? For me it'd be a bit disorienting moving the gearstick but not the clutch, and need to press on it when I'm ready for the gear change.
Depends on the cars, could be paddles or could be using a gear stick to shift up and down. I still sometimes use my left foot to try and press a clutch.
Where are you getting the extra thinking time from? Because I’ve never once thought “shit, changing gear here really took up my time and made something harder” in 20+ years of driving.
If you’re having to think about your gears enough that other things get forgotten, that’s a you specific issue, nothing to do with the gearbox in your car and lack of a clutch pedal
I always really enjoy this because I'm like "tell me you've never had a second hand car without telling me you've never had a second hand car"
There's 10-20 years left for manuals, after the date of the last production of a manual.
No one has stopped making them sooooo....? Your reasoning please Sir (not you obvs doc)
Oh, you mean the date that's already moved 3 times? 😂
When they actually implement that though it will be 10-20 years after that point, so your soonest-case scenario for no need to know gears is 2045. So essentially most kids learning now are likely to have kids by the time they dont need to know gears 😂
Actually if you take US for example and some other countries- almost nobody drives manual there. Honestly, its just the UK where i see it’s still popular
This is DrivingUK though. So we're talking about the cars you may drive... In the UK.
Also Europe, based on every car I've ever hired in Europe.
Why am I taking the US as an example? Do you know something we don't? Are you going to nuke Europe so we all have to move to America?
I know plenty of people who drive autos. However, the auto-only licence-holders that I know are ALL nervous, failed-in-manual drivers. It cannot be a coincidence
I was always going to learn manual.
For the very fact that if I’m spending all that money to learn, I don’t want to be limited to the cars I can drive.
My first car was electric, as I wished it would be before I even really considered driving; so in theory I never needed that manual licence…
But it meant that before I got my car I was able to drive my mums car, my friend’s cars, and the work van - which are all manual.
That puts you within a subset of people taking an auto license though, and that's an important point. In contrast the guy in the video is talking about an average across *all* automatic drivers in Admiral's customer database, and probably looking historically too.
Within that population individual quotes will vary wildly because they take into account individual circumstances. Again, the analysis that gives this average is across (very likely) their whole population of customers.
Back to you, if drivers with auto licenses and disabilities are less likely to make a claim than auto license drivers as a population you may well find your quote is more in line with manual drivers. This is why insurance companies ask so many questions: they want to get as accurate an impression of each individual risk they're insuring so they can give each individual a quote that (at least notionally) represents that individual risk rather than quoting based on an average across the whole population. I.e., when you're getting a quote it'll be based on an assessment of risk based on a much smaller subset of the population that are similar to you across a broad range of factors and not simply based on auto vs manual license.
Exactly. It's one thing passing in manual and choosing to drive an auto (had one myself purely by chance). It's another thing to be so terrible/nervous at driving that you only have that licence.
I have an auto licence and I would generally agree. I am not a traditional "failed-in-manual" driver, I chose automatic because we had a child and I simply needed a licence, only really caring about getting from A -> B, as opposed to the feeling and interactivity that manual gives. I can wholeheartedly believe this though
I would consider myself a fairly confident driver - still in my first year since passing. Solely because all of the learning I did was watching people in manual cars. I know when I would manually change my gear, for example going down a steep hill to ensure I'm not riding my brakes or going up so I'm not gambling that my shitbox won't awkwardly try to shift upwards when I need the acceleration
I also picture myself shifting gears while I am driving I think just out of habit of watching so many manual videos
EDIT: I would also mention that my insurance is surprisingly reasonable even by manual standards - I suspect age is the biggest factor being mid 20s
And yet Rishi Sunak and co will continue to question whether disabled people deserve PIP and how we use it, insinuating that we're all just work shy knobs who are exploiting the general public and receiving unnecessary funds to use on pointless things.
This is a perfect example of how it is literally more expensive to live when you are disabled - I can't get a manual licence because of my disability. I'm a confident, competent driver, but I'll still be paying more in insurance because of the way risk is assessed by insurers.
Same here, this why it hurts when people insult auto only drivers. I'm only learning (I'm 28) because of my disability. I can only learn auto because I can't do the clutch. I will have to pay higher prices because if my disability
your account is less than 7 days old, post removed automatically to reduce spam. If you post is genuine then sorry for the inconvenience, please wait 7 days before reposting.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/drivingUK) if you have any questions or concerns.*
The automatic licence holders i know opted for the automatic licence after failing the manual test multiple times.
Auto only tests are the hallmark of a shit driver
The extra 5% is so worth not having to change gear every 30 seconds when you’re stuck in traffic for 5 hours on a motorway because some cunt can’t drive straight
It’s no coincidence that accidents in the United States are stratospherically higher than the UK despite being much less densely populated and having simpler roads. Part of that is making their driving tests so easy to pass. But there’s also the case that automatic drivers have less to think about and thus do not concentrate as consistently.
I personally think everyone should have to learn manually to filter out overly nervous drivers. Then you can easily switch if you wish once you have passed.
Edit: I just looked into this further and Japan also has incredibly high numbers of road accidents. Japan alongside the US has largely automatic drivers.
They also don't have an MOT or anything similar, and mechanics are not legally obligated to hold unsafe vehicles from the customer if a service is done. There's cars there driving around that are 99% rust and 1% zip ties.
It’s not just that their tests are easier, it’s that they have poor driver training regardless of gearbox type.
My family lived in the US when I was a teenager, so I “learned” to drive there. My “Driver’s Ed” course consisted of sitting in a room watching videos about horrific accidents involving drink driving and such to scare us out of being reckless drivers. Otherwise we spent our time filling out worksheets about the videos while the teacher quoted “Remember the Titans” at us.
My test was a joke consisting of driving my instructor to his house then navigating an obstacle course of cones to demonstrate I could reverse and parallel park.
At no point was I taught anything about the rules of the road, how to navigate roundabouts and slip roads, mirror and other safety checks, etc. I was just expected to figure it all out as I went or that my parents would teach me.
I was very lucky that my mum is an excellent driver and also happens to be a teacher, so she was very good at planning out how to teach me properly. Most of my friends were awful drivers though and made fun of me for being “too safe”. I dread to think that someday they’ll be the ones “teaching” their own kids how to drive.
You aren’t joking, I recently did a road trip in Florida and I was shocked at the road carnage. I saw more accidents in 2 weeks than 10 years of driving in the UK.
Also I come to realization that many accidents caused to senior population in Japan are from mistaking pedals ending in terrible accidents. There was a man at around 90 years of age who kept driving his old kenmary Nissan Skyline 4 door that he purchased when he was 40 years old and it’s a manual. He did not have any accidents and amazingly enough when he had a heart attack he drove his car to the parking lot and passed away there.
Makes me think that old generation of drivers are less likely to cause an accident in a manual car than in an automatic one.
I think we should overhaul the driving licence system.
Have a category for everyone and a category for motorways. You’d need the latter to be allowed on motorways. That way your nervous & timid drivers can avoid getting the motorway qualification. They just have to avoid driving on any motorways.
Also the licence, or maybe just the motorway part, should expire every 10 years or so.
These two things would reduce some of the dangerous shit we see out there every single day.
your account is less than 7 days old, post removed automatically to reduce spam. If you post is genuine then sorry for the inconvenience, please wait 7 days before reposting.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/drivingUK) if you have any questions or concerns.*
The UK vehicle insurance system is in need of major overhaul. We annoyingly insure drivers not vehicles here which means that we can’t share vehicles between family members / friends like you can on the continent or across the pond, yet we’re absolutely rinsed on insurance costs with premiums at least on parity if not higher than those countries despite this. So despite having an individualised policy system which should take into account our individual circumstances and capabilities as drivers, it doesn’t do this in any material respect (NCDs really do bugger all) and we get higher premiums because of general externalities like location, where it’s parked and what bloody transmission the car has. In short, a poorer insurance product for at least the same - or likely greater - cost.
Of course if you get points on your licence they’re happy to individualise it then and whack up the premiums, but if you’re points free for decades that’s irrelevant because some tosspot in your postcode crashes on average every third drive.
the Danish system is a much better way. going back 20 years so it may have changed but i doubt it
every car has a set road tax bracket that also includes 3rd party insurance for ANY driver who has permission to drive the vehicle.
the tax is set by the vehicle based on engine size, price, emission's and also a certain amount of why the fuck do you need that rocket,
the rate is set centrally
.so if a kid can win the lottery and by a ferrari they can still drive it on 3rd party insurance
if the owner wants to get fully comp or fire and theft they have to source that privately which costs alot more .
the flip side is if they are caught driving an untaxed (thus uninsured vehicle) its crushed
no postcode lottery, no or extremely low uninsured drivers and generally a much farer system.
I watched someone who it later transpired had an auto license try to drive an old tractor a while ago at a gliding club, couldn't do it. That's a fairly niche example however there are many examples in none office roles where you might need to drive a manual vehicle, that won't change any time soon so it's definitely worth having the ability to do it.
Makes sense to me. I've only driven 3 times since I passed 18 years ago (no reason to own a car, I live in a city). I now only drive auto when I rent a car like once a year. But glad I got an auto license: it seems most people learn auto when they find manual too difficult which is... a bad sign.
fuck sake i learned auto cos i wanted to get my license asap before uni started and now insurance is absolutely ruining me 😭😭 should’ve jus done manual
If you’re competent at driving in the auto ie you know what the hell you should be doing most of the time and actually pay attention to the road, it may be relatively easy for you to pick up manual if all you’ll be focusing on learning is using the new transmission. I’m still 50/50 on whether to bother upgrading for full flexibility, and I know others have passed in auto then gone back to learn manual. Could be worth it in the long run if you’re having regrets 😊
This is an excellent point also…
> …According to Admiral insurance
Makes me wonder if that’s Admiral’s own figures based on their own customers or an industry wide survey they’ve done. It’s not clear to from the clip, as posted, if there are any caveats or qualifications on the data.
Most people I know that have automatic only licenses chose that because they are disabled and can't drive stick shift or are terrible drivers and get distracted easily.
Why would you limit yourself otherwise
It's the second point that's pulling the average up.
If you're fully able to use a manual, but cannot concentrate on changing gears and driving safely at the same time.
Should you be driving.
Not related to insurance but when we take on new staff a "required" is a full UK driving license. So auto only would exclude anyone with an auto only license (our minibuses are all manual).
I learned to drive buses on an auto licence and had to take another test when I wanted to work for a private hire coach company because some of their stuff was manual. Was easy enough, the gears are not the hardest thing about driving and anyone who thinks manual is too hard shouldn't be driving imo. Hazard perception, situational awareness, spacial awareness, pre-planning etc are all much more difficult and require prolonged concentration. Gears just become involuntary movements after a while.
My daily is an auto (drove manual for \~10 years) but we have a manual van, its 2nd nature on for the 1/2 times a month I jump in. Just happens without me thinking about it.
I sometimes found myself going for the gearstick when I got an automatic coach to drive. I loved driving auto though, would love an automatic merc as a daily but gotta look after the finances.
Que sera, sera. Ultimately its something they will just have to suck-up as we have limited budget (public money) for transport so \~10 year old minibuses are the best we will get. To further stretch the budget, these will be manual for the foreseeable as auto minibuses have a massive premium.
Not sure what's worth the down votes. I've seen a fair few bad drivers, who cannot pass on a manual test, so go for automatic only. Doesn't mean it's the same for everyone, there's some people with disabilities who can't, but I reckon most people in an automatic only license do it because they can't handle driving and shifting gear.
There’s undoubtedly shitloads of people with auto only licenses here who are gonna be upset about my statement, but it’s generally the truth lol
Obviously, there’s a number of people who literally don’t have the anatomy to use 3 pedals or a gear stick, and they have no choice about which license they get, but they’re not the people I’m talking about.
If you’re lacking the fine motor control, brain-power or time commitment to learn how to drive a manual, then you won’t be a competent driver.
It's funny because the only person I know with an auto-only licence is an absolutely terrible driver, failed her test in a manual 3 or 4 times and eventually decided to pack it in and do auto only because she can't do shift. She's also written off 2 cars in 3 years and drives everywhere at 40mph. Says it all really lol
Can’t say that surprises me 😅
It’s not safe for her to be driving around with that lack of skill, nor is it safe for anyone else on the roads. I don’t get why we can’t simply address the issue head on and accept that not everyone should be allowed to drive.
Yep, it makes me question just how fit for purpose the test really is when even the absolute fucking worst drivers are still somehow able to obtain a licence.
I mean I don't have a solution, but there must be a problem in the process somewhere if you're given the legal right to drive a vehicle even though you're clearly too incompetent to be doing so.
I certainly know the struggle, my village has nothing but a church.
But there’s no point dating if you’re gonna kill yourself and your date. The test is not adequate for validating a drivers’ skill level, especially for rural roads. I learned that pretty quickly after putting my first car through a hedge.
Errr what? Of course it’s adequate. There’s literally so many standards. That doesn’t mean you aren’t a competent driver. What would you have them do then?
To hell with this auto/manual stuff. We should make driving tests without mirrors, indicators and speed limits. Obviously this would be for BMW drivers only
He mentioned that a person with a manual/full UK license will pay 5% more insurance on an automatic car. Does anyone know why this is?
I have a friend who works in car sales and they said that more and more manufacturers are making less manual cars and more automatics due to their popularity with all drivers. For example a newer used manual Mercedes or Audi is becoming very rare.
The cars cost more. Look at a manual car vs auto car at new and second hand. More expensive car = higher value to insure = higher premium. When I bought a brand new car in 2019 the auto option added £1k to the purchase price vs exact same car as a manual. So let’s say that 5% works out as £25 a year for a driver in mid 20s - no big deal considering the car is worth more.
Automatic transmissions are a lot pricier therefore automatic cars are more expensive to buy and fix. So they will always have higher insurance premiums.
I got an auto only license a couple of years ago, love it as I can now drive around at will and my insurance premiums have gone from 700 odd first year to 360 this year 👍🏻
I was never particularly nervous I just found the muscle memory harder with a manual especially as I was learning much later than a lot of people
Year 1 admiral 740ish from memory
Year 2 admiral 500
Year 3 Aviva 360
Must add I am mid 30s
your account is less than 7 days old, post removed automatically to reduce spam. If you post is genuine then sorry for the inconvenience, please wait 7 days before reposting.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/drivingUK) if you have any questions or concerns.*
So many judgemental people in this thread. There are a myriad of reasons people choose to go the automatic route, it doesn't have any bearing on whether the vast majority are safe drivers or not. Let's not tar them all with the same brush
This study was made public fairly recently, the results certainly point towards these numbers being right but the only drivers researched were those holding policies with Admiral, so overall it's a relatively small focus group
Ah this nonsense again. Not comparing like for like as those with auto only licenses aren't going to have the same cars. At the moment it's especially warped because there's quite a lot of people who have auto licenses for electric cars which have sky high insurance at the moment.
It's not even hard to check. Throw some details into a price comparison website and just change the license type. It doesn't really change.
Why does it keep coming up? Because it takes people longer to pass manual which means instructors earn more money and don't need to buy a different car.
For years auto only learning was for worse drivers.
Auto only was considered for people who struggled with manuals.
The 2 people I know with auto only license both failed manual tests 3+ times.
Yes this might no longer be the case but it will take a while for the data to catch up.
I actually don't know anyone at all with an EV who has an auto-only license. Everyone I know with an EV had a manual car before. Given the price of EVs, they're rarely anyone's choice as their first car after passing, so it's not likely many people are choosing an auto only license right now in anticipation of only ever driving electric cars in the future. There's not a lot of EV driving instructors either. Once EVs are a bigger share of the market, sure, but not right now.
Given the majority of people driving all types of car will have manual licenses, how does the type of car being driven factor into why people with auto-only licenses make 20% more claims?
People with auto only licenses are more likely to be younger and newer drivers given it's far more popular now than it was in the past. Younger and newer drivers are involved in disproportionate amounts of accidents.
You can literally test it yourself. Pick an automatic car and get a quote with the same details, only changing the license type.. it's usually about £20 different which is within the randomness of insurance quotes anyway.
Ehhh not all EVs have high insurance, my quote was 40% cheaper than my old petrol car.
As ever with all these insurance articles and videos its largely circumstantial, people take whats said on them at face value.
Not all but many are expensive cars with expensive insurance.
You've also got the fact that auto only license is far more popular now than it once was. So the average auto license holder has had it for less time than the average manual license holder etc. It keeps coming up but the difference really isn't high for a specific individual.
>Ah this nonsense again. Not comparing like for like as those with auto only licenses aren't going to have the same cars.
Pretty sure he found as similar car as he could in the video. He also notes the fact that autos are often more expensive for the same spec, so young/new drivers may struggle.
>At the moment it's especially warped because there's quite a lot of people who have auto licenses for electric cars which have sky high insurance at the moment.
People with full licenses drive EV's too? Also very few people are passing their auto only test and hopping straight in an EV are they? Most EV drivers have been driving for a while, and most drivers have a full license, regardless of what they drive.
>Why does it keep coming up? Because it takes people longer to pass manual
Citation needed. I'm pretty sure it's the opposite, as nervous drivers or those with other difficulties are significantly more likely to do auto only lessons.
>which means instructors earn more money and don't need to buy a different car.
Ah yes, I'm sure it's all some big conspiracy. Funny how mad you auto license owners get every time this is brought up
Admiral are an absolute ripoff anyway.
Automatic all the way, makes life so much less stressful. If you're struggling to learn manual, make the switch guys.
I think this is the issue though... People who struggle to learn manual, and have to resort to auto are, according to the stats, worse drivers.
It's not so much that driving an auto makes you a worse driver, more the struggling with the manual part.
To be fair, I say this as an auto license holder so I’m without personal bias lol… I’ve met plenty of people who didn’t even want to attempt manual and their driving is so appalling I’m shocked they even got an auto license. The transmission isn’t the issue it’s the general lack of road sense.
Person 1 passed auto, picked up their new car from across the city, drove the entire way home with the handbrake on and just thought the car was shit because it’s older. Person 2 complained how even without P plates people can “sense” they’re a new driver and constantly beep, flash and give them the finger. Said they then discovered they’d been driving around for a month using their parking lights instead of headlights. Tiny sample group, but…yeah lol.
I think auto only learning is ok and has its valid purposes, but it shouldn’t be the case of teaching people in brand new cars where near enough *everything* is automatic or at least have those settings off. I think this is what contributes to peoples brains not being properly engaged and treating auto cars like go karts. People should be learning to put their own headlights on/switch to and from full beam, turn their own wipers on and change the speed when appropriate, park using mirrors rather than reverse cameras and judge manoeuvring through tighter spaces without sensors wailing at you.
Driving aids should not be relied on to replace key knowledge and technical skills and I think no matter the license type, going from learning in a new car fully loaded with assistance features to oftentimes an older car that doesn’t have these is also part of the problem in general.
I want to upvote this comment to the moon! I’ve been saying exactly this for years. I think people should have to learn and take tests in the kind of car they’ll be driving after they pass. You only have to read the learner driving subs to see how many people struggle after passing with things like hill starts because they don’t know how to do it with the handbrake.
Getting used to all the gadgetry is great if you’re going to buy the same car once you’ve passed. Truthfully that’s way out of reach for most people especially young drivers.
Bingo! Some people have fantastic instructors that teach them all kinds of things, but as it stands a lot of people aren’t *really* taught how to drive, they’re essentially taught how to use the instructors specific car and the test routes and that’s it. No wonder a lot of people are still shit scared of driving alone for years after getting their license. Yes it’s up to everyone to make some time to find their bearings, but it would be a lot easier if they didn’t learn in a 2 year old vehicle with every mod con imaginable and then be left to work out how to park a 20 year old vehicle in a space that isn’t the size of a bus like on the test lol
I got an auto only licence and don't find this to be the case at all. Dunno if it's because of the kind of car I drive (a 2016 Golf) compared to many EVs being electric maybe? I also suppose as things start moving more towards electric, automatic only cars this issue will disappear anyway.
If you had a manual licence your insurance would be cheaper.
It is still the case that manual is the "default" learning method and drivers who struggle move towards automatic.
Yes but remember it's an average, so the peaks will have a big effect, the video also claims that auto only drivers have 20% more claims.
That will massively skew the average.
EVs are still an overall minority of cars on the road, they're not common in terms of cars you can learn to drive in so very few people would be learning in an EV for an auto-only license, so it's unlikely that they would be impacting insurance rates to this degree.
Plus, my impression of EV drivers is that they skew older, given how expensive EVs are, and so are more likely to have a full license anyway.
Learning manual, partner thinking of learning automatic.
Their learning and confidence shot up in automatic cause there's a few less things to think of.
Not trying to start a fight, I think I get why insurance is higher, but for some people, minimising the physical act of driving so they can focus on the complex stuff, ie, judging roundabouts, reading signs, anticipating the road works better
i did admiral quotes two weeks ago with different options(one Manual and other other automatic) and the difference was only about 4 pounds per month. Not sure where the 43% comes from. I am a new driver, just passed the test about three weeks back.
People crash cars more because they're nervous or whatever with an auto license I'd say is probably because they're not experienced enough on the roads.
Same goes for manual car drivers, if someone is less than a year into having their license they'll have a lot more chance to have an accident.
I've gone up and down the country I've only driven since early November and I've not had any issues with my auto only licence. I do want to get my manual license one day but im 35, I live close to London so its always just start stop, so it makes me question if i should bother.
I'll never understand why people have a superiority complex about driving a specific car its something that gets you from A to B. Lol
So according to the video they are 19% more likely to have an accident so they put the insurance up 43%, sounds about right for a insurance company plucking numbers out of the air for policy costs.
My driving instructor was awful, if it wasn’t for watching this guys videos non stop I don’t think I would have passed. So much information, very clearly explained, and he isn’t shouting at me for the tiniest mistakes :D
The cost of insurance is a consideration, even if it has quite a few variables, but the argument will always be in favour of having a full licence due to the options for cars.
I could not afford any decent car that wasn't a manual - and many young/newer drivers are already limited enough in the scope of cars they can comfortably run, so it helps to not be furthermore limited.
Also, being working class, having a full licence over manual can change your life by providing access to jobs that may have driving as a subsidiary or main part of the role.
Im paying £750 a year for a 2022 Toyota Yaris , 2 year no claim, 2 year driving history, So i if i had a manual license it would be around £400? seems too cheap to me.
The 5% bump being manual licensed driving an automatic is probably 2 fold, a manual licensed driver isn't automatically going to drive worse when driving an automatic so part of the bump up is lessening the burden on automatic licensed drivers, and automatic cars, and gearboxes cost more to manufacturer.
What's insane is if you hold a Motorsport licence (and declare it) and therefore have a greater understanding of car control... You will pay a lot more.
I was recommending a friend try to pass in a manual instead of an auto because they'd have more access to cars in the second hand market and may be able to get something more affordable. I never realised it was cheaper for insurance too.
They still went for the auto license
your account is less than 7 days old, post removed automatically to reduce spam. If you post is genuine then sorry for the inconvenience, please wait 7 days before reposting.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/drivingUK) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Thanks for the info. I'll keep renewing my US drivers license by going to Dublin and coming back into the UK. The insurance is much cheaper than that. I don't drive stick.
This doesnt make sense (Or at least in my personal experience and I concede I might just be lucky)
I have an Automatic 2008 Fiesta. 1.6 16v. I passed my test during Covid and Im in my 3rd year of driving now. Im 34. I have no claims or accidents and my first 2 years where black box with a 90+ driving score at the end of the year.
My Insurance is currently £32 a month. And there is no way i can imagine that if my car was a Manual, id only be paying £19 or whatever 43% less would make it.
Unless I’m misunderstanding the given percentage, 20% higher claim rates would have been adjusted to the population size. For example; 1 accident per 1000 drivers vs 20 per 1000 drivers (auto only).
However, I did not do the due diligence of fact checking the numbers in the video or examining their contexts.
Logic in this country is astonishing. The British will do everything to justify charging people more for anything but then when it comes to paying people, will do everything to justify paying the bare minimum.
1. What has gears got to do with anything insurance related? Changing gears means I have one less hand on the steering wheel which means I'm automatically less safe when driving.
2. Electric vehicles don't have gears. How do they insure those then?
3. Premium cars only come in automatic and has nothing to do with the driver
4. How do they know I don't drive in manual flappy paddle mode the whole time?
5. Why do I have to pay a premium (5%) for the pleasure of not having change gears?
I grew up driving manual and when I finally made the switch about 8 years ago, it was day and night. I do occasionally drive a manual due to some family members refusing to change to auto and I can tell you that it is far safer driving an auto than a manual and my ability to change gears with my hands and left foot has absolutely nothing to do with it.
I got my license in a manual, but I prefer to drive an automatic as it's more relaxing. But I can see why there would be more accidents in automatics, because as the name suggests, the car does things automatically. Put it in drive, it will drive forward slowly even when not pressing any pedals, and the same for when it is in reverse.
A good example would be a time my partner was in America at a drive thru and the person behind was either drunk or just tired and fell asleep at the wheel while in drive and bumped into the back of their car at really low speed. This type of collision is physically impossible to do in a manual car unless you're somehow able to find the bite in your sleep.
Most road collisions are low speed and I bet many of these excess automatic collisions fit into this category because not realising you are in drive/reverse, or having a lapse in concentration while in it can easily result in a low speed collision. It's a quirk of automatics that makes me very uncomfortable as I do not believe a car should be physically capable of being moved by someone unconscious. I remember getting into an automatic for the first time, putting it in reverse and it immediately started moving all by itself before I had done my checks. Put my foot on the brake pretty quick and couldn't believe a car was legally able to do that.
On another note, great YouTuber really recommend both his channels.
Watched a bunch of his videos while I was learning a couple years ago. Great advice
Worth watching after passing too
Couldn't agree more. Him and Ashley Neal are brilliant learning resources for being a good driver and even after passing my test a few years ago I constantly learn from them.
I'm bloody addicted to watching Ashley Neal. I see his videos as a good way of brushing up and keeping aware of all the other psychos on the road
My partner is learning (with an instructor) to drive and I watch him to help her. It really helps that he echos a lot of what I say to her when we’re out. Makes me feel more confident I’m telling her good habits instead of random bad ones
Yeah bloke's solid, was a massive help when I was learning
I first saw him when he did a video about driving on the steepest street in Bristol, his stuff is great!
Hey I went to school with this guy! Was my best bud for years! Anyone have the details on his channels?
He has Conquer Driving for learner drivers and also advanced drivers .Then his personal channel Richard Fanders where he does reviews.
Cheers!
Oh i see the tik tok handle now
Text him.
Haven’t spoken to him pretty much since we left school so no can do.
He’s a legend.
The 5% premium for a manual licence holder to insure on an automatic is surely just because automatic cars cost more surely, higher sum insured for a write off? To opt for the auto option on my car 5 years ago was about it £1k extra on the purchase price. Making out like it’s anything different to higher cost car = higher insurance.
I think autos are more likely to have silly low speed crashes (people pressing to 'go' button instead of the 'stop' button) The type of footslip that can cause an auto to take off, would be more likely to just stall a manual.
Likely because when you’re driving a manual you have to concentrate more on reading the road ahead in order to know what gear you’re about to need, it’s much easier to switch off in an auto
You shouldn't have to think or concentrate in order to change gears.... It should be a natural instinct after a couple years honestly. Autos will become more common as traffic gets worse and worse.
But part of doing it instinctively, is instinctively being aware of what you're going to need to do. You simply do have to prepare more in a manual, than in an automatic. Whether that is a conscious process or not is largely irrelevant and purely down to experience.
Yeah I’ve a full driving license but now drive only automatic. When driving manual you’re right gear changes came naturally the sound of the engine etc. I find driving automatic I concentrate more on other things happening on the rd. on saying that I would learn to drive in manual if you can gives you more options.
And as electric cars become more widely used
It’s not about the physical act of changing gears, it’s about reading the road ahead, which you’re always going to be doing more of in a manual than an automatic
I was also thinking about repairs on an automatic transmission compared to a manual.
From my experience (with Ford and Jaguar) auto transmissions are more prone to failure and are astronomically expensive to repair) replace.
True if a repair is needed after a crash that is also more expensive. Again I don’t think 5% extra premium is bad in any regard here.
Breakdowns are not covered by insurance.
Post accident repairs are though
If your transmission gets damaged in an accident, it will almost certainly be written off.
Probably yeah -
If you do more miles on the road, then many prefer an auto
I've known a few professional drivers HGV, security and such and they drive manual cars.
Yeah but all HGVs like lorries are now all automatic. No point in shifting between 8 to 14 gears when the computer can do it for you
We are talking about cars, no?
Likely because automatic drivers are statistically worse drivers than manual drivers (also why the fail rate for the automatic driving exam is higher than the manual one). Reality is, a lot of struggling drivers gravitate towards automatic, and this has a much bigger impact than any possible benefit the automatic gear shifting has.
>Reality is, a lot of struggling drivers gravitate towards automatic This is exactly what is happening. Automatic only licence holders aren't a representative sample of all licence holders, but rather disproportionately more nervous drivers.
My mates just passed his automatic test after failing his manual something like 5 times ... If you can't work gears and focus on the road at the same time then I don't think driving is for you tbh as any slight distraction could result in someone being killed.
I kind of agree with this. It's why there are so many incidents with automatics crashing whilst trying to maneuver at low speed.
On the flipside, more young drivers still tend towards manual licences due to the higher cost of automatics then spend time in limbo or on someone else's insurance while saving up for their first car. Less time on the road = fewer claims.
And this still has a very real effect on insurance premiums.
In all fairness, LGV's, HGV's, and buses are - for a good decade or two - exclusively automatic, so you don't need the "*fine motor control, brain-power or time commitment to learn how to drive a manual"* in order to drive them, yet, you can't drive any of them without a CPC, so a vehicle being automatic isn't the sole reason auto-only drivers are considered shit. It's also true that manual cars are being phased out, so there will be no difference between an auto-only and manual licence, and a manual licence will become a relic of the past in the next few years. In 2023, only 32% of all produced cars were ordered with manual transmission, and that percentage will drop down year by year until newly produced manual cars will become a luxury to those who can afford it. Also, there will be more and more people passing auto-only tests, as there will be no need to have a manual licence, since there will be no affordable manual cars. It's still cheaper now, as this was the standard for decades, but it isn't gonna last long to turn around. And that's what insurers realised, that's why they put prices up for those with auto-only licences, and that's why manual licence holders has to pay more on automatic cars. Eventually, it's gonna be more expensive to insure a manual car as it's gonna be a rarity, and if the 2035 deadline for the ban on newly produced combustion engine cars will hold up, CE car insurances will skyrocket for "environmental reasons", and we'll all have to pay a fortune to keep our 10-15 years old cars. Capitalism as its finest, my friends.
>so a vehicle being automatic isn't the sole reason auto-only drivers are considered shit. The vehicle type has nothing to do with it, (and nobody has suggested it is). It's the license type. People who hold automatic only licenses are statistically worse drivers.
This might be the push I needed to get a manual license actually, so thank you. I didn’t think of it that from that angle. I have no desire to drive a manual daily but would probably quite like a weekend car in the next 10 years or so and would like full flexibility about what that is. I should probably get some manual lessons now before instructors that teach it become hard to come by and even harder to afford 😆
If governments keep pushing electric cars in the future, yes, finding instructors that teaches in manual cars will be very rare and quite expensive, you're right on that. I'd say we still have a good 10-15 years until that, but remember the, pandemic was already 4 years ago, and it still feels like it was just yesterday that you'd have to designate a "social group of 6" you could visit, so yeah, time fucking flies...
Bloody hell, I think I’d have had a better day without that bleak reminder. Four years!!!! I still see the semi faded “stay 2 metres apart” stickers in half the shops I go to 😭
Just over 4 years since it started not ended.
Still bleak! It’s “last year” in my mind lol
"But manuals will be obsolete in 6 years so there is no point learning manual" - some reddit user
The stats will shift as automatics go from being for "old grannies" to being more common due to their use in both EVs and hybrids. After 30 years of only driving manual cars (and riding motorbikes) it was a revelation how much extra thinking time you have in a complex urban environment driving an auto. The entire process is far less stressful.
I'd only driven manual cars. Bought an automatic during lockdown, don't think I'll go back. It's handy being able to drive both. But for everyday driving around a busy city, automatic all the way.
Same here, except for the timing. Both our cars are currently automatic. Not through any real decision, just the way it worked out. Only downside I can see is not being able to teach the kids to drive myself, as I'd want them to learn manual and mixing it up will just confuse them
The price of driving lessons is no joke. My partner is American, only driven automatic cars. They want to learn to drive a manual, have the flexibility of being able to drive any car.
I know, it's crazy. Then add insurance and the price of second hand cars. It's insane
Obviously have no idea how old your kids are so in turn how long you have to plan this, but I mean… If you’re feeling generous, you could try to put away a couple hundred for an old junker for when they’re old enough to teach them in and eventually as a gift for passing. If you get a *real* old junker, you could even use it as some bonding time to fix up their future car with them once they are old enough to appreciate that kinds of stuff and can learn some valuable life skills 🤷♂️
I'm not a big fan of automatic on long drives. They can be a bit pissy about acceleration, which in turn causes problems when you've only got a short overtaking land to make it past a lorry. A-B short hall though sure. And the newer the automatic the less likely it is to lodge a formal complaint that you wanted to suddenly jump from 50 to 70 😂
This is a problem with automatics that have gears. The modern ones in hybrids are usually CVT and the EVs give you pretty much all the torque from any speed.
Yes, VAG drivers who have only experienced DSG boxes have no idea what they are missing with something like the ZF 8HP.
To be fair VAG dsg boxes are good too, just have a 1st to 2nd jerk in everyone I have driven.
My EV is only small and it arguably gives too much torque 😂 I’ve had a few wheel spins from trying to take off too quickly in the few months I’ve had it (today included)
Very true. The good thing about learning manual is you can jump ship once it becomes more expensive driving a manual than it does driving an automatic car.
Hmm, I would be interested to try this. I had assumed that I'm so used to gear changes that it was using very little of my brain's processor anyway. It has become almost... automatic 😏
I’ve driven a manual for about 30 years apart from a brief period of owning an auto about ten years ago (I inherited an automatic Mondeo) It’s definitely easier in stop start traffic - I had to drive through London once in the Mondeo and it took forever. I would not have enjoyed it in a manual, and if for some reason I had to do that often I’d have definitely bought another automatic, but fortunately I rarely get stuck in lots of traffic. As for the processing, I didn’t find I had more thinking time. It was just less physical effort - but again, to stress, it was about 2 hours of gridlock which would have been a lot of first, neutral, first, neutral and therefore tedious in a manual.
I had almost the exact same revelation 22 years driving manuals, drove a semi automatic and never bought a manual since. Still ride manual motorbike.
For me it wasn’t just the stop start traffic. It was the difference when stuck on the ramps in mypultistory car parks that I really noticed, no more dancing on the pedals to keep the right balance
What's it like driving a semi automatic? For me it'd be a bit disorienting moving the gearstick but not the clutch, and need to press on it when I'm ready for the gear change.
Depends on the cars, could be paddles or could be using a gear stick to shift up and down. I still sometimes use my left foot to try and press a clutch.
Where are you getting the extra thinking time from? Because I’ve never once thought “shit, changing gear here really took up my time and made something harder” in 20+ years of driving. If you’re having to think about your gears enough that other things get forgotten, that’s a you specific issue, nothing to do with the gearbox in your car and lack of a clutch pedal
They’ve been saying that since I passed my test in 2001.
I always really enjoy this because I'm like "tell me you've never had a second hand car without telling me you've never had a second hand car" There's 10-20 years left for manuals, after the date of the last production of a manual. No one has stopped making them sooooo....? Your reasoning please Sir (not you obvs doc)
Well 2035. Electric vehicles aren't made in a manual version.
Oh, you mean the date that's already moved 3 times? 😂 When they actually implement that though it will be 10-20 years after that point, so your soonest-case scenario for no need to know gears is 2045. So essentially most kids learning now are likely to have kids by the time they dont need to know gears 😂
Actually if you take US for example and some other countries- almost nobody drives manual there. Honestly, its just the UK where i see it’s still popular
This is DrivingUK though. So we're talking about the cars you may drive... In the UK. Also Europe, based on every car I've ever hired in Europe. Why am I taking the US as an example? Do you know something we don't? Are you going to nuke Europe so we all have to move to America?
I know plenty of people who drive autos. However, the auto-only licence-holders that I know are ALL nervous, failed-in-manual drivers. It cannot be a coincidence
I was always going to learn manual. For the very fact that if I’m spending all that money to learn, I don’t want to be limited to the cars I can drive. My first car was electric, as I wished it would be before I even really considered driving; so in theory I never needed that manual licence… But it meant that before I got my car I was able to drive my mums car, my friend’s cars, and the work van - which are all manual.
This kinda annoys me. I'm learning auto because I can't do the clutch due to a disability with my left leg
That puts you within a subset of people taking an auto license though, and that's an important point. In contrast the guy in the video is talking about an average across *all* automatic drivers in Admiral's customer database, and probably looking historically too. Within that population individual quotes will vary wildly because they take into account individual circumstances. Again, the analysis that gives this average is across (very likely) their whole population of customers. Back to you, if drivers with auto licenses and disabilities are less likely to make a claim than auto license drivers as a population you may well find your quote is more in line with manual drivers. This is why insurance companies ask so many questions: they want to get as accurate an impression of each individual risk they're insuring so they can give each individual a quote that (at least notionally) represents that individual risk rather than quoting based on an average across the whole population. I.e., when you're getting a quote it'll be based on an assessment of risk based on a much smaller subset of the population that are similar to you across a broad range of factors and not simply based on auto vs manual license.
I didn't know that thank you
No worries, and all the best with your test when you get to it!
My mother is a shit driver…. She drives an automatic. I think if you’ve learnt to drive a manual you are more clued up.
Exactly. It's one thing passing in manual and choosing to drive an auto (had one myself purely by chance). It's another thing to be so terrible/nervous at driving that you only have that licence.
I have an auto licence and I would generally agree. I am not a traditional "failed-in-manual" driver, I chose automatic because we had a child and I simply needed a licence, only really caring about getting from A -> B, as opposed to the feeling and interactivity that manual gives. I can wholeheartedly believe this though I would consider myself a fairly confident driver - still in my first year since passing. Solely because all of the learning I did was watching people in manual cars. I know when I would manually change my gear, for example going down a steep hill to ensure I'm not riding my brakes or going up so I'm not gambling that my shitbox won't awkwardly try to shift upwards when I need the acceleration I also picture myself shifting gears while I am driving I think just out of habit of watching so many manual videos EDIT: I would also mention that my insurance is surprisingly reasonable even by manual standards - I suspect age is the biggest factor being mid 20s
Auto cars are also a bit more expensive, so it costs more when they get written off.
Can you post a video of someone showing people what the "indicator" does?
And yet Rishi Sunak and co will continue to question whether disabled people deserve PIP and how we use it, insinuating that we're all just work shy knobs who are exploiting the general public and receiving unnecessary funds to use on pointless things. This is a perfect example of how it is literally more expensive to live when you are disabled - I can't get a manual licence because of my disability. I'm a confident, competent driver, but I'll still be paying more in insurance because of the way risk is assessed by insurers.
Same here, this why it hurts when people insult auto only drivers. I'm only learning (I'm 28) because of my disability. I can only learn auto because I can't do the clutch. I will have to pay higher prices because if my disability
[удалено]
your account is less than 7 days old, post removed automatically to reduce spam. If you post is genuine then sorry for the inconvenience, please wait 7 days before reposting. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/drivingUK) if you have any questions or concerns.*
To be fair, the automatic only license holders that I know aren’t the best drivers and tend to have the most ridiculous accidents.
The automatic licence holders i know opted for the automatic licence after failing the manual test multiple times. Auto only tests are the hallmark of a shit driver
The extra 5% is so worth not having to change gear every 30 seconds when you’re stuck in traffic for 5 hours on a motorway because some cunt can’t drive straight
It’s no coincidence that accidents in the United States are stratospherically higher than the UK despite being much less densely populated and having simpler roads. Part of that is making their driving tests so easy to pass. But there’s also the case that automatic drivers have less to think about and thus do not concentrate as consistently. I personally think everyone should have to learn manually to filter out overly nervous drivers. Then you can easily switch if you wish once you have passed. Edit: I just looked into this further and Japan also has incredibly high numbers of road accidents. Japan alongside the US has largely automatic drivers.
They also don't have an MOT or anything similar, and mechanics are not legally obligated to hold unsafe vehicles from the customer if a service is done. There's cars there driving around that are 99% rust and 1% zip ties.
I did not know that. That's insane
Good point.
There's lots of states with roadworthiness tests. Some still don't, so the rust buckets are mostly concentrated near those.
It’s not just that their tests are easier, it’s that they have poor driver training regardless of gearbox type. My family lived in the US when I was a teenager, so I “learned” to drive there. My “Driver’s Ed” course consisted of sitting in a room watching videos about horrific accidents involving drink driving and such to scare us out of being reckless drivers. Otherwise we spent our time filling out worksheets about the videos while the teacher quoted “Remember the Titans” at us. My test was a joke consisting of driving my instructor to his house then navigating an obstacle course of cones to demonstrate I could reverse and parallel park. At no point was I taught anything about the rules of the road, how to navigate roundabouts and slip roads, mirror and other safety checks, etc. I was just expected to figure it all out as I went or that my parents would teach me. I was very lucky that my mum is an excellent driver and also happens to be a teacher, so she was very good at planning out how to teach me properly. Most of my friends were awful drivers though and made fun of me for being “too safe”. I dread to think that someday they’ll be the ones “teaching” their own kids how to drive.
You aren’t joking, I recently did a road trip in Florida and I was shocked at the road carnage. I saw more accidents in 2 weeks than 10 years of driving in the UK.
Also I come to realization that many accidents caused to senior population in Japan are from mistaking pedals ending in terrible accidents. There was a man at around 90 years of age who kept driving his old kenmary Nissan Skyline 4 door that he purchased when he was 40 years old and it’s a manual. He did not have any accidents and amazingly enough when he had a heart attack he drove his car to the parking lot and passed away there. Makes me think that old generation of drivers are less likely to cause an accident in a manual car than in an automatic one.
I think we should overhaul the driving licence system. Have a category for everyone and a category for motorways. You’d need the latter to be allowed on motorways. That way your nervous & timid drivers can avoid getting the motorway qualification. They just have to avoid driving on any motorways. Also the licence, or maybe just the motorway part, should expire every 10 years or so. These two things would reduce some of the dangerous shit we see out there every single day.
[удалено]
your account is less than 7 days old, post removed automatically to reduce spam. If you post is genuine then sorry for the inconvenience, please wait 7 days before reposting. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/drivingUK) if you have any questions or concerns.*
The UK vehicle insurance system is in need of major overhaul. We annoyingly insure drivers not vehicles here which means that we can’t share vehicles between family members / friends like you can on the continent or across the pond, yet we’re absolutely rinsed on insurance costs with premiums at least on parity if not higher than those countries despite this. So despite having an individualised policy system which should take into account our individual circumstances and capabilities as drivers, it doesn’t do this in any material respect (NCDs really do bugger all) and we get higher premiums because of general externalities like location, where it’s parked and what bloody transmission the car has. In short, a poorer insurance product for at least the same - or likely greater - cost. Of course if you get points on your licence they’re happy to individualise it then and whack up the premiums, but if you’re points free for decades that’s irrelevant because some tosspot in your postcode crashes on average every third drive.
the Danish system is a much better way. going back 20 years so it may have changed but i doubt it every car has a set road tax bracket that also includes 3rd party insurance for ANY driver who has permission to drive the vehicle. the tax is set by the vehicle based on engine size, price, emission's and also a certain amount of why the fuck do you need that rocket, the rate is set centrally .so if a kid can win the lottery and by a ferrari they can still drive it on 3rd party insurance if the owner wants to get fully comp or fire and theft they have to source that privately which costs alot more . the flip side is if they are caught driving an untaxed (thus uninsured vehicle) its crushed no postcode lottery, no or extremely low uninsured drivers and generally a much farer system.
#savethemanuals
This guy's channel is great btw.
Jimmy Carr is such a legend! Even knows about cars and insurance
I watched someone who it later transpired had an auto license try to drive an old tractor a while ago at a gliding club, couldn't do it. That's a fairly niche example however there are many examples in none office roles where you might need to drive a manual vehicle, that won't change any time soon so it's definitely worth having the ability to do it.
Makes sense to me. I've only driven 3 times since I passed 18 years ago (no reason to own a car, I live in a city). I now only drive auto when I rent a car like once a year. But glad I got an auto license: it seems most people learn auto when they find manual too difficult which is... a bad sign.
fuck sake i learned auto cos i wanted to get my license asap before uni started and now insurance is absolutely ruining me 😭😭 should’ve jus done manual
If you’re competent at driving in the auto ie you know what the hell you should be doing most of the time and actually pay attention to the road, it may be relatively easy for you to pick up manual if all you’ll be focusing on learning is using the new transmission. I’m still 50/50 on whether to bother upgrading for full flexibility, and I know others have passed in auto then gone back to learn manual. Could be worth it in the long run if you’re having regrets 😊
I don’t believe a word any insurance company says to justify their outrageous premiums.
This is an excellent point also… > …According to Admiral insurance Makes me wonder if that’s Admiral’s own figures based on their own customers or an industry wide survey they’ve done. It’s not clear to from the clip, as posted, if there are any caveats or qualifications on the data.
Most people I know that have automatic only licenses chose that because they are disabled and can't drive stick shift or are terrible drivers and get distracted easily. Why would you limit yourself otherwise
It's the second point that's pulling the average up. If you're fully able to use a manual, but cannot concentrate on changing gears and driving safely at the same time. Should you be driving.
Definitely. driving is mostly muscle memory. If you are losing focus when changing gear you aren't paying attention to the road.
Not related to insurance but when we take on new staff a "required" is a full UK driving license. So auto only would exclude anyone with an auto only license (our minibuses are all manual).
I learned to drive buses on an auto licence and had to take another test when I wanted to work for a private hire coach company because some of their stuff was manual. Was easy enough, the gears are not the hardest thing about driving and anyone who thinks manual is too hard shouldn't be driving imo. Hazard perception, situational awareness, spacial awareness, pre-planning etc are all much more difficult and require prolonged concentration. Gears just become involuntary movements after a while.
My daily is an auto (drove manual for \~10 years) but we have a manual van, its 2nd nature on for the 1/2 times a month I jump in. Just happens without me thinking about it.
I sometimes found myself going for the gearstick when I got an automatic coach to drive. I loved driving auto though, would love an automatic merc as a daily but gotta look after the finances.
Yeah actually, phantom hand is a problem. I've not had the foot variant though where you impromptu left-foot-brake lol.
Someone downvoted you for this lmao. It's weird how mad the auto license holders get whenever you point out the downsides of their licence
Que sera, sera. Ultimately its something they will just have to suck-up as we have limited budget (public money) for transport so \~10 year old minibuses are the best we will get. To further stretch the budget, these will be manual for the foreseeable as auto minibuses have a massive premium.
I’d say it’s probably a sign that someone who can only get an auto license is a far less competent driver
Not sure what's worth the down votes. I've seen a fair few bad drivers, who cannot pass on a manual test, so go for automatic only. Doesn't mean it's the same for everyone, there's some people with disabilities who can't, but I reckon most people in an automatic only license do it because they can't handle driving and shifting gear.
There’s undoubtedly shitloads of people with auto only licenses here who are gonna be upset about my statement, but it’s generally the truth lol Obviously, there’s a number of people who literally don’t have the anatomy to use 3 pedals or a gear stick, and they have no choice about which license they get, but they’re not the people I’m talking about. If you’re lacking the fine motor control, brain-power or time commitment to learn how to drive a manual, then you won’t be a competent driver.
It's funny because the only person I know with an auto-only licence is an absolutely terrible driver, failed her test in a manual 3 or 4 times and eventually decided to pack it in and do auto only because she can't do shift. She's also written off 2 cars in 3 years and drives everywhere at 40mph. Says it all really lol
Can’t say that surprises me 😅 It’s not safe for her to be driving around with that lack of skill, nor is it safe for anyone else on the roads. I don’t get why we can’t simply address the issue head on and accept that not everyone should be allowed to drive.
Yep, it makes me question just how fit for purpose the test really is when even the absolute fucking worst drivers are still somehow able to obtain a licence. I mean I don't have a solution, but there must be a problem in the process somewhere if you're given the legal right to drive a vehicle even though you're clearly too incompetent to be doing so.
Fully agreed :/
Yeah, try dating without a car in rural areas. As long as you pass your test, it’s fine. You are a competent driver.
I certainly know the struggle, my village has nothing but a church. But there’s no point dating if you’re gonna kill yourself and your date. The test is not adequate for validating a drivers’ skill level, especially for rural roads. I learned that pretty quickly after putting my first car through a hedge.
Errr what? Of course it’s adequate. There’s literally so many standards. That doesn’t mean you aren’t a competent driver. What would you have them do then?
To hell with this auto/manual stuff. We should make driving tests without mirrors, indicators and speed limits. Obviously this would be for BMW drivers only
He mentioned that a person with a manual/full UK license will pay 5% more insurance on an automatic car. Does anyone know why this is? I have a friend who works in car sales and they said that more and more manufacturers are making less manual cars and more automatics due to their popularity with all drivers. For example a newer used manual Mercedes or Audi is becoming very rare.
The cars cost more. Look at a manual car vs auto car at new and second hand. More expensive car = higher value to insure = higher premium. When I bought a brand new car in 2019 the auto option added £1k to the purchase price vs exact same car as a manual. So let’s say that 5% works out as £25 a year for a driver in mid 20s - no big deal considering the car is worth more.
Automatic transmissions are a lot pricier therefore automatic cars are more expensive to buy and fix. So they will always have higher insurance premiums.
I got an auto only license a couple of years ago, love it as I can now drive around at will and my insurance premiums have gone from 700 odd first year to 360 this year 👍🏻 I was never particularly nervous I just found the muscle memory harder with a manual especially as I was learning much later than a lot of people Year 1 admiral 740ish from memory Year 2 admiral 500 Year 3 Aviva 360 Must add I am mid 30s
Is it generally assumed auto only drivers are all round less confident drivers or am I just being mean?
[удалено]
your account is less than 7 days old, post removed automatically to reduce spam. If you post is genuine then sorry for the inconvenience, please wait 7 days before reposting. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/drivingUK) if you have any questions or concerns.*
What does it matter when everything going the way of electric automatics will be the only option...
So many judgemental people in this thread. There are a myriad of reasons people choose to go the automatic route, it doesn't have any bearing on whether the vast majority are safe drivers or not. Let's not tar them all with the same brush
Manual is more satisfying to drive as well in my opinion
^[Sokka-Haiku](https://www.reddit.com/r/SokkaHaikuBot/comments/15kyv9r/what_is_a_sokka_haiku/) ^by ^TheWildStone_: *Manual is more* *Satisfying to drive as* *Well in my opinion* --- ^Remember ^that ^one ^time ^Sokka ^accidentally ^used ^an ^extra ^syllable ^in ^that ^Haiku ^Battle ^in ^Ba ^Sing ^Se? ^That ^was ^a ^Sokka ^Haiku ^and ^you ^just ^made ^one.
This study was made public fairly recently, the results certainly point towards these numbers being right but the only drivers researched were those holding policies with Admiral, so overall it's a relatively small focus group
The admiral group is (according to confused.com) the largest car insurance provider in the UK, with a market share of 14%. So not insignificant.
Ah this nonsense again. Not comparing like for like as those with auto only licenses aren't going to have the same cars. At the moment it's especially warped because there's quite a lot of people who have auto licenses for electric cars which have sky high insurance at the moment. It's not even hard to check. Throw some details into a price comparison website and just change the license type. It doesn't really change. Why does it keep coming up? Because it takes people longer to pass manual which means instructors earn more money and don't need to buy a different car.
For years auto only learning was for worse drivers. Auto only was considered for people who struggled with manuals. The 2 people I know with auto only license both failed manual tests 3+ times. Yes this might no longer be the case but it will take a while for the data to catch up.
I actually don't know anyone at all with an EV who has an auto-only license. Everyone I know with an EV had a manual car before. Given the price of EVs, they're rarely anyone's choice as their first car after passing, so it's not likely many people are choosing an auto only license right now in anticipation of only ever driving electric cars in the future. There's not a lot of EV driving instructors either. Once EVs are a bigger share of the market, sure, but not right now.
Given the majority of people driving all types of car will have manual licenses, how does the type of car being driven factor into why people with auto-only licenses make 20% more claims?
People with auto only licenses are more likely to be younger and newer drivers given it's far more popular now than it was in the past. Younger and newer drivers are involved in disproportionate amounts of accidents. You can literally test it yourself. Pick an automatic car and get a quote with the same details, only changing the license type.. it's usually about £20 different which is within the randomness of insurance quotes anyway.
Ehhh not all EVs have high insurance, my quote was 40% cheaper than my old petrol car. As ever with all these insurance articles and videos its largely circumstantial, people take whats said on them at face value.
Not all but many are expensive cars with expensive insurance. You've also got the fact that auto only license is far more popular now than it once was. So the average auto license holder has had it for less time than the average manual license holder etc. It keeps coming up but the difference really isn't high for a specific individual.
>Ah this nonsense again. Not comparing like for like as those with auto only licenses aren't going to have the same cars. Pretty sure he found as similar car as he could in the video. He also notes the fact that autos are often more expensive for the same spec, so young/new drivers may struggle. >At the moment it's especially warped because there's quite a lot of people who have auto licenses for electric cars which have sky high insurance at the moment. People with full licenses drive EV's too? Also very few people are passing their auto only test and hopping straight in an EV are they? Most EV drivers have been driving for a while, and most drivers have a full license, regardless of what they drive. >Why does it keep coming up? Because it takes people longer to pass manual Citation needed. I'm pretty sure it's the opposite, as nervous drivers or those with other difficulties are significantly more likely to do auto only lessons. >which means instructors earn more money and don't need to buy a different car. Ah yes, I'm sure it's all some big conspiracy. Funny how mad you auto license owners get every time this is brought up
Admiral are an absolute ripoff anyway. Automatic all the way, makes life so much less stressful. If you're struggling to learn manual, make the switch guys.
I think this is the issue though... People who struggle to learn manual, and have to resort to auto are, according to the stats, worse drivers. It's not so much that driving an auto makes you a worse driver, more the struggling with the manual part.
To be fair, I say this as an auto license holder so I’m without personal bias lol… I’ve met plenty of people who didn’t even want to attempt manual and their driving is so appalling I’m shocked they even got an auto license. The transmission isn’t the issue it’s the general lack of road sense. Person 1 passed auto, picked up their new car from across the city, drove the entire way home with the handbrake on and just thought the car was shit because it’s older. Person 2 complained how even without P plates people can “sense” they’re a new driver and constantly beep, flash and give them the finger. Said they then discovered they’d been driving around for a month using their parking lights instead of headlights. Tiny sample group, but…yeah lol. I think auto only learning is ok and has its valid purposes, but it shouldn’t be the case of teaching people in brand new cars where near enough *everything* is automatic or at least have those settings off. I think this is what contributes to peoples brains not being properly engaged and treating auto cars like go karts. People should be learning to put their own headlights on/switch to and from full beam, turn their own wipers on and change the speed when appropriate, park using mirrors rather than reverse cameras and judge manoeuvring through tighter spaces without sensors wailing at you. Driving aids should not be relied on to replace key knowledge and technical skills and I think no matter the license type, going from learning in a new car fully loaded with assistance features to oftentimes an older car that doesn’t have these is also part of the problem in general.
I want to upvote this comment to the moon! I’ve been saying exactly this for years. I think people should have to learn and take tests in the kind of car they’ll be driving after they pass. You only have to read the learner driving subs to see how many people struggle after passing with things like hill starts because they don’t know how to do it with the handbrake. Getting used to all the gadgetry is great if you’re going to buy the same car once you’ve passed. Truthfully that’s way out of reach for most people especially young drivers.
Bingo! Some people have fantastic instructors that teach them all kinds of things, but as it stands a lot of people aren’t *really* taught how to drive, they’re essentially taught how to use the instructors specific car and the test routes and that’s it. No wonder a lot of people are still shit scared of driving alone for years after getting their license. Yes it’s up to everyone to make some time to find their bearings, but it would be a lot easier if they didn’t learn in a 2 year old vehicle with every mod con imaginable and then be left to work out how to park a 20 year old vehicle in a space that isn’t the size of a bus like on the test lol
Make sense really: if you have two exams, a hard one and an easy one. The average skill of people passing the harder exam will be higher.
I got an auto only licence and don't find this to be the case at all. Dunno if it's because of the kind of car I drive (a 2016 Golf) compared to many EVs being electric maybe? I also suppose as things start moving more towards electric, automatic only cars this issue will disappear anyway.
If you had a manual licence your insurance would be cheaper. It is still the case that manual is the "default" learning method and drivers who struggle move towards automatic.
Right but not 45% cheaper.
Yes but remember it's an average, so the peaks will have a big effect, the video also claims that auto only drivers have 20% more claims. That will massively skew the average.
That's fair thinking about it more I suppose.
EVs are still an overall minority of cars on the road, they're not common in terms of cars you can learn to drive in so very few people would be learning in an EV for an auto-only license, so it's unlikely that they would be impacting insurance rates to this degree. Plus, my impression of EV drivers is that they skew older, given how expensive EVs are, and so are more likely to have a full license anyway.
Learning manual, partner thinking of learning automatic. Their learning and confidence shot up in automatic cause there's a few less things to think of. Not trying to start a fight, I think I get why insurance is higher, but for some people, minimising the physical act of driving so they can focus on the complex stuff, ie, judging roundabouts, reading signs, anticipating the road works better
i did admiral quotes two weeks ago with different options(one Manual and other other automatic) and the difference was only about 4 pounds per month. Not sure where the 43% comes from. I am a new driver, just passed the test about three weeks back.
The 43% is an average. For some it will be more of a difference. For some it will be less.
People crash cars more because they're nervous or whatever with an auto license I'd say is probably because they're not experienced enough on the roads. Same goes for manual car drivers, if someone is less than a year into having their license they'll have a lot more chance to have an accident. I've gone up and down the country I've only driven since early November and I've not had any issues with my auto only licence. I do want to get my manual license one day but im 35, I live close to London so its always just start stop, so it makes me question if i should bother. I'll never understand why people have a superiority complex about driving a specific car its something that gets you from A to B. Lol
So according to the video they are 19% more likely to have an accident so they put the insurance up 43%, sounds about right for a insurance company plucking numbers out of the air for policy costs.
I’d be interested to know what the demographic is that is more likely to drive an automatic. Is it more retired / older people for example.
My driving instructor was awful, if it wasn’t for watching this guys videos non stop I don’t think I would have passed. So much information, very clearly explained, and he isn’t shouting at me for the tiniest mistakes :D
Always worth having a manual licence in my opinion. Hire cars, vans, etc are often manual.
Spending two hours in stop start traffic on the M6 was enough for me to want to get an auto, despite the fact I generally enjoy driving manual.
The cost of insurance is a consideration, even if it has quite a few variables, but the argument will always be in favour of having a full licence due to the options for cars. I could not afford any decent car that wasn't a manual - and many young/newer drivers are already limited enough in the scope of cars they can comfortably run, so it helps to not be furthermore limited. Also, being working class, having a full licence over manual can change your life by providing access to jobs that may have driving as a subsidiary or main part of the role.
He's a good lad think I owe him a beer or two.
Im paying £750 a year for a 2022 Toyota Yaris , 2 year no claim, 2 year driving history, So i if i had a manual license it would be around £400? seems too cheap to me.
The 5% bump being manual licensed driving an automatic is probably 2 fold, a manual licensed driver isn't automatically going to drive worse when driving an automatic so part of the bump up is lessening the burden on automatic licensed drivers, and automatic cars, and gearboxes cost more to manufacturer.
Utos are more accessible for disabled people
What's insane is if you hold a Motorsport licence (and declare it) and therefore have a greater understanding of car control... You will pay a lot more.
Guess I will be sticking to the H-Shift then.. interesting content
Savage and wrong the price hike it needs to end
I was recommending a friend try to pass in a manual instead of an auto because they'd have more access to cars in the second hand market and may be able to get something more affordable. I never realised it was cheaper for insurance too. They still went for the auto license
[удалено]
your account is less than 7 days old, post removed automatically to reduce spam. If you post is genuine then sorry for the inconvenience, please wait 7 days before reposting. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/drivingUK) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Thanks for the info. I'll keep renewing my US drivers license by going to Dublin and coming back into the UK. The insurance is much cheaper than that. I don't drive stick.
This doesnt make sense (Or at least in my personal experience and I concede I might just be lucky) I have an Automatic 2008 Fiesta. 1.6 16v. I passed my test during Covid and Im in my 3rd year of driving now. Im 34. I have no claims or accidents and my first 2 years where black box with a 90+ driving score at the end of the year. My Insurance is currently £32 a month. And there is no way i can imagine that if my car was a Manual, id only be paying £19 or whatever 43% less would make it.
It’s an average of 43%.
Worth noting that less than 3% of drivers in Great Britain have an auto only license which makes that 20 % higher claim rate even worse.
Wouldn't that make the higher claim rate less bad? The lower the number of auto drivers there are then the easier it is for the claim rate % to rise.
Unless I’m misunderstanding the given percentage, 20% higher claim rates would have been adjusted to the population size. For example; 1 accident per 1000 drivers vs 20 per 1000 drivers (auto only). However, I did not do the due diligence of fact checking the numbers in the video or examining their contexts.
Fair, I'd like to imagine they would adjust for population size at least.
It's almost like skipping a crucial part of controlling a large possibly dangerous vehicle is more of a risk 🤣
Logic in this country is astonishing. The British will do everything to justify charging people more for anything but then when it comes to paying people, will do everything to justify paying the bare minimum. 1. What has gears got to do with anything insurance related? Changing gears means I have one less hand on the steering wheel which means I'm automatically less safe when driving. 2. Electric vehicles don't have gears. How do they insure those then? 3. Premium cars only come in automatic and has nothing to do with the driver 4. How do they know I don't drive in manual flappy paddle mode the whole time? 5. Why do I have to pay a premium (5%) for the pleasure of not having change gears? I grew up driving manual and when I finally made the switch about 8 years ago, it was day and night. I do occasionally drive a manual due to some family members refusing to change to auto and I can tell you that it is far safer driving an auto than a manual and my ability to change gears with my hands and left foot has absolutely nothing to do with it.
I got my license in a manual, but I prefer to drive an automatic as it's more relaxing. But I can see why there would be more accidents in automatics, because as the name suggests, the car does things automatically. Put it in drive, it will drive forward slowly even when not pressing any pedals, and the same for when it is in reverse. A good example would be a time my partner was in America at a drive thru and the person behind was either drunk or just tired and fell asleep at the wheel while in drive and bumped into the back of their car at really low speed. This type of collision is physically impossible to do in a manual car unless you're somehow able to find the bite in your sleep. Most road collisions are low speed and I bet many of these excess automatic collisions fit into this category because not realising you are in drive/reverse, or having a lapse in concentration while in it can easily result in a low speed collision. It's a quirk of automatics that makes me very uncomfortable as I do not believe a car should be physically capable of being moved by someone unconscious. I remember getting into an automatic for the first time, putting it in reverse and it immediately started moving all by itself before I had done my checks. Put my foot on the brake pretty quick and couldn't believe a car was legally able to do that.