starter kill effectiveness in manual tran

I have a manual transmission Corolla. It did not come with an alarm, so I want to put in a kill switch, and maybe an alarm. (In my neighborhood, nobody pays attention to alarms so I a mulling this decision.) The consensus on this site seems to be that starter kill switches are the best and don't suffer from potential problems of distributor kill switches. However, in my car, one can start the car by rolling it or pushing it, especially when in 3rd or 4th gear, without the use of the starter. So a starter kill switch is not fully protective. Of course, if someone really wanted to steal my car, they could tow it.

Can any one discuss the issues with alternatives to starter kill switches, such as distributor kill switches, or other types?

In my manual transmission car, one cannot start unless the clutch is engaged: can I use this as the starting point for a kill switch? That is, cut off the signal from the clutch to the engine computer so that it appears to the engine computer that the clutch is not engaged?

Also, the diagrams under the passive kill switch with momentary push-button engagement: how does with is work with those of us who have foot clutches?

If it is a manual transmission, it will be easy to push start.  An Ignition kill is the only way you can insure that it will not be able to be started.  As you already know, it is much less safe than a starter kill.  If a starter kill system has a problem, the car will not start.  With an ignition kill failure it could happen at a very unsafe time. 

Agreed with what IAAI said. For manuals, the only true way is the ignition kill so it cant be push started, but the last thing you would want is the ignition to go while your on the highway.

you can put a kill switch for the fuel pump. just a simple toggle switch will do (thats hidden of course)

-------------
Ted
2nd Year Tier 1 Medical School
Still installing as a hobby...pays for groceries
Compustar Expert

I'm not that sure that ignition kills would be unreliable - they are certainly more reliable than fuel pump circuits! (depending on passive or active etc)

Points & ignitors can be shorted to ground to prevent ignition (though if the shorting path is long or too high resistance, it may not kill a revving engine).

Whilst normal a relay could be used to connect the ignition's +12V, it is an active system that may fail.
Two common enhancements are dual relays where failure of either relay is alarmed, or where changeover relay(s) are used with normal ignition through the de-energised relay (NO contacts 30 & 87a) and inhibited with the relay energised (being energised with IGN on and a hidden switch etc that must break power).

Much depends on the vehicle vintage.
Older cars were simply hotwired in a manner that bypassed the ignition key switch and any "power" deactivation of the ignition (as described with the above relay system). [If only the dorks that wrecked my mate's 1960's Holden ute ignition switch knew that - they would have stolen the car easily with a single jumper wire instead of pulling out IgKey wires!]
Shorting the dizzy or ignitor signal in older cars is more reliable (the thief needing to know how to break the short).
Newer cars may not be so easily hotwired - they may need the bus etc comms.

If your Corolla clutch switch goes to the ECU (so the ECU inhibits the starter), you may be able to disable it - but that assumes you cannot roll-start your car (ie, no "starter" means no ECU later to run the engine).
Otherwise it's the same as if the clutch inhibits the starter circuit - you can easily jumper the IGN power, and jumper the starter else roll-start.