Where's the Manual Transmission

[Plum Ranger XLT]

I think it's stupid to quit offering manuals in full size trucks because there maybe people out there that want one. To me, I'm more comfortable driving a manual in the snow than an auto. Since I use two legs to walk, I'm going to use two legs to drive.

 

[adsm08]

I do think, back a few years, the automatics did have a higher problem percentage, but I think that is going away and may even get lower than manual failure rates.

If we go back as far as 1990 then automatic transmissions have a much higher failure rate. If we take all Chrysler products out of the numbers and consider them to be an outlier then the numbers change drastically and there isn't a huge difference.

Just anecdotally, having always driven a manual, I have had 3 failures, my wife always drives an automatic and has had one.
Automatics can be more expensive to repair, almost always .

I have only had a single true transmission failure on one of my vehicles, and it was caused by using the wrong fluid.


Also, I would not count clutch or slave cylinder problems as true transmissions failures of the same nature as a torque converter issue. The converter is a hard part, not subject to wear or periodic replacement. The clutch and slave on the other hand are considered wear items, subject to failure as part of normal operation.

 

[Frank The Tank]

I just hate driving an auto. When I do I constantly regret the shifts. I have tuned my trucks shifts to the gnats balls but its still wrong half the time when I'm towing. Makes me furious. I hate automatica and people that can't drive a manual.

 

[RonD]

If we go back as far as 1990 then automatic transmissions have a much higher failure rate. If we take all Chrysler products out of the numbers and consider them to be an outlier then the numbers change drastically and there isn't a huge difference.



I have only had a single true transmission failure on one of my vehicles, and it was caused by using the wrong fluid.


Also, I would not count clutch or slave cylinder problems as true transmissions failures of the same nature as a torque converter issue. The converter is a hard part, not subject to wear or periodic replacement. The clutch and slave on the other hand are considered wear items, subject to failure as part of normal operation.

Had a old Chevy PU 4-speed manual blow a gear
'92 Ranger shifting forks issue
'94 Ranger new slave went bad after about a year.


I agree about not counting normal replacement of a clutch, same as not counting changing filters and fluid in an automatic, just normal maintenance.

But a failed throw out bearing, pressure plate or bad "internal" slave before normal replacement time needs to be included.
Master or hydraulic line could be excluded, like a trans cooler or linkage issue on an auto.

 

[Mark_88]

It's because it's difficult to drive a manual and text at the same time, gear shiftings come at the most inconvenient times. Just wait till they only offer automatic steering.

That's the thing...I love shifting, texting, smoking a cigarette, and drinking a coffee all at the same time...sometimes I even have a sandwich or two...working on the soup while driving but that seems to result in messy spills...

But if they offered automatic steering I could get the soup down no problem...

 

[wildbill23c]

The way I look at knowing how to drive a vehicle with a manual transmission is...Its better to know how to drive one, than not know how and some day be put in a position that you need to drive one in an emergency. An emergency is not the time to learn how to drive a manual transmission. Quite a few of my friends have kids that are now old enough to drive, and I taught them to drive manual transmission before anything else. If you can drive a manual you can easily figure out the automatic. Most of those kids own trucks or cars with manual transmissions because they're cheap, easy to find, and relatively less expensive.


My 84 Ford Bronco 2 I have no clue how many miles are really on it, but the clutch had been replaced at some point before I got it, tranny whines, but seems to be common.

My 2008 Toyota Tundra 4x4 5.7L has a 6 speed automatic and 67,000 miles of absolutely no issues with it so far. I've towed some pretty good loads with it and actually like this transmission. It will automatically downshift when in tow/haul mode to help maintain a steady speed up or down hill 5th/6th gears are both overdrive. Great truck other than once again no manual transmission available.

My 1988 Ford F-250 4x4 had a 3 speed automatic transmission and its currently pushing about 400,000 miles on the original 460 engine and original transmission/transfer case. No major components have ever been replaced in it, only things done are routine maintenance and transmission fluid changes every 35,000 miles. My aunt and uncle have that truck now, and its still running and driving great.

My 1984 Ford Ranger had about 176,000 miles on the original engine/transmission as well and all it had was standard maintenance as well. It also towed around a 16' travel trailer for 14 years and never had the transmission fail in it, it also wasn't electronically controlled like the newer automatics either, so that may make a huge difference.

My 1996 Jeep Grand Cherokee 4x4 4.0L 4 speed automatic had 227,000 miles on it when I sold it and it still had the original engine/transmission/t-case in it as well, and never had a transmission problem out of it either, and supposedly chrysler products were well known for transmission failures. Most of those failures actually were in V8 powered vehicles from what I can recall.

My 1993 Ford Tempo 3 speed automatic survived at least 130,000 miles when I traded it in on the jeep.

I've had a 2006 Chevy Cobalt 5 speed which had to be rebuilt at 15,000 miles but apparently these transmissions were notorious for having issues.

1999 Dodge Ram 1500 4x4 HD4500 tranny had a throw-out bearing failure which the bearing actually shattered and caused major damage to the clutch so it was replaced at 119,000 miles, other than that the transmission itself was great. Just the 3.55 gears sucked for towing.

1989 Nissan D21 4x4 5 speed had 319,000 miles on it on the original tranny/engine, I think the clutch had been replaced once, but other than that never had an issue with it.

1989 Mazda B2600i 4x4 5 speed 390,000 miles on it, and I was told it had the original clutch still in it, don't know if I'd believe that but I never had an issue with it, just a slave cylinder failure.

I've had several autos and several manuals, and I can say that I have never had a transmission problem other than the Chevy Cobalt POS which was a pile of garbage from day 1, not only transmission issues but electrical problems which would randomly leave you driving around at night and all of a sudden have no headlights, or all the gauges would drop to 0 while driving. That car was a nightmare.

 

[ridgerunner]

I tried to teach my 16 yr old nefew how to drive stick with my old 90 F150 this summer. $500 later, new trans rebuild....ugh!

 

[wildbill23c]

Transmission rebuild trying to teach someone to drive a manual...I don't buy that one. Maybe a clutch problem but a tranny rebuild I find hard to believe.

 

[85_Ranger4x4]

Transmission rebuild trying to teach someone to drive a manual...I don't buy that one. Maybe a clutch problem but a tranny rebuild I find hard to believe.

The '80 F-350 at the shop has broken in somewhere between 6 and 10 manual drivers, third is kinda funky but it still works ok once you learn how to hook it into gear. Only has 300k miles on it.

Even on vehicles where you can still get a manual are getting weird because they still have the annoying skipshift that blocks out certain gears for emissions.

That said for the most part I do not have a problem with automatics at all, both my trucks are automatics and I don't really have any complaints aside from one being a 3spd (which would have the same top gear as a 4spd manual) I do hope to switch it to a 5spd mainly because the Ford OD non-computer controlled automatic choices suck. I fried the first A4LD in my ranger the first year I had it, the second lasted until the V8 swap. I did have to drop the C5 out but that was because the guy that built it didn't tighten the bellhousing/pump bolts to spec and they backed out causing a massive leak. One bolt didn't match and was just long enough to start into the case... hard to blame the trans for that.

Why did the manual trans option go away in trucks? Not enough people wanted them.

 

[wildbill23c]

Some days I don't feel like shifting gears, but at the cost of fuel any little bit of money I can save in gas by driving my bronco 2 rather than my full size pickup I'll continue to shift gears unless I need to tow or haul something I will drive my bronco 2 LOL.

 

[ab_slack]

Do automatics trans these days really get the same fuel economy as manual?

From the way I seen some drive a manual it wouldn't surprise me.

As I see it, the shift points on an automatic are always wrong as they are reactive. The automatic transmission can't anticipate one's intent to accelerate, nor anticipate a hill. To me the frustration with the automatic always was the reactive nature. The need to press hard on the gas harder than I would have to do in order for the transmission to shift to a lower gear for hill or start a passing maneuver.

With a standard trans I will downshift on the approach to a hill or before I start a passing maneuver.

When I was last in Italy, about 10 years ago, I rented a car. It was manual trans. It was what you got unless requested otherwise. It was a little tiny 1.3L and it got close to 50mpg and would do over 160kph (100mph). Not bad for a tiny thing. I don't know of many cars in the US, then or now, that would yield the same yet that was very typical of the cars there.

I get the argument that automatic being cheaper to make and the market accepting it.

What I find unfortunate is that it like many other things, it dis-engages the driver from the process of driving leading to greater carelessness.

I find a manual so natural I don't actually think much about shifts. I tend to think more about shifts when driving an auto cause they never occur at the right times.

 

[Ranger-rick]

It is also more expensive for manufactures to build two different vehicles essentially. Manual trans trucks have different computer, pedal set up, and everything else that goes along with the manual trans, clutch, slave cylinder, pedal assembly (already said that), fly wheel, etc...etc...etc. Plus the extra cost associated with engineering a manual trans into a new model. They were probably only breaking even, at best. With the extra cost associated with engineering a manual trans and then building trucks with them. Then to only make up maybe 1% of the sales of new trucks......Just isn't worth it for them to do it.

Although I do prefer a manual over an auto, and when I was in the market for my ranger a few months ago I was not going to buy anything that had an auto it it. I still do recgonize the advantage of an auto too. The new diesels and especially the powerstroke get out of boost when you shift with a standard trans. I dont know if you have ever driven a powerstroke with a manual and with an auto but the auto definitely seems to have more grunt. Once in boost, you never lose it and it continues to pull even through shifts. I still prefer the manual but the new autos are DAMN good at judging shifts and are more efficient than the manual trans. Really the only reason to get a manual trans these days is that you prefer shifting over not shifting. Because its not like you'll get better mileage and with a diesel its all personal preference because it doesn't make much of a difference there either. Maybe 15 years ago it made a big difference to have a manual in a diesel but not today with these 6 speed fully computerized autos that will shift faster than you can and the computers will take into consideration you're load size, amount of throttle applied and everything and make a smoother faster shift than you can, while never losing boost.


That said. I prefer manuals because I prefer to shift. And the autos in old rangers are junk so its obvious why the advantage in a ranger is a manual lol.

 

[wildbill23c]

I'd rather make my own decision to shift not rely on a computer, this is where most auto trannies will fail because most people put them in drive and let it shift on its own which is perfectly fine in a car but in a fully loaded truck while towing you let the transmission decided and it will quickly overheat. I've also noticed with autos and towing the transmission will be late shifting down or will linger in a gear way too long costing lots of fuel economy, its like the transmission sometimes gets stuck in a gear having nothing to do with a hill, cruising speed, accelerator position etc. just kind of gets stuck. Or you go to downshift and hit the accelerator and the computer and transmission have to think about it for a few seconds then all of a sudden it drops 2-3 gears. Nope, I'll take a manual transmission any day over electronics that never work correctly.

As for the manual behind a diesel. Reason being is automatics aren't handling the high torque output of the diesels very well, the "big 3" have had many auto failures behind diesels linked to poor automatic tranny designs not capable of handling the power output of a diesel engine. My only complaint is the new 6 speed manuals in the Dodge Ram Diesels, who the hell put in such a high gear for reverse? There's hardly any control when trying to back up a trailer, its almost forcing you to shift into 4WD low range just to get a slow enough speed to control trailer backing maneuvers.

I haven't had any auto tranny failures but I have done a lot of towing with them and every one of them is the same as I mentioned above the tranny/computer don't know what gear to be in most of the time, and these new electronic trannies you can't manually control them really, you can say to downshift to x gear but if you are going fast it won't downshift, if your RPMs are slightly high it won't downshift. My 1984 Ford Ranger auto tranny if you shifted into 2nd gear manually it downshifted instantly, now the computer says nope not yet, nope not yet, oh ok now. Electronics took over what little manual control a person had with the older auto trannies.

I also noticed the new Dodge Ram 1500's don't have a gear shift they have a rotary knob for the transmission, giving the driver P/R/N/D. No way to even manually shift up or down.

Auto's in the old rangers were sure better than the garbage they came up with in the late 80's and present all electronically controlled. The 3 speed auto tranny in my 84 Ranger did great, never slipped, never failed and it had 12 hard years of towing a 16' travel trailer all over the US. The 93 Ranger my uncle had and later my grandfather acquired the tranny in it wouldn't even hold up to keeping the truck moving without failing and it was the A4LD. Definitely wouldn't trust the electronics.

Anyhow, I'll drive either, but if I had a choice when buying a vehicle I'd take a manual transmission just because I could work on it myself and not have to worry about figuring out the electronic mysteries in the auto trannies.

 

[85_Ranger4x4]

What I find unfortunate is that it like many other things, it dis-engages the driver from the process of driving leading to greater carelessness.

It also reduces driver fatigue. A manual trans is also another distraction to the driver.

My last dd was a manual, I plain and simple got sick of it when I lived in Omaha.

I pushed the buttons and pulled the levers in the right order over and over and nobody ever gave me any cheese!

I haven't heard of massive problems with automatics behind newer diesels, they put autos behind much bigger diesels doing much bigger things than you can do with a wussy little one ton truck.

I have towed quite a bit with my F-150, it starts out a little goofy but as you go for awhile it learns to deal with the extra load. Big deal, I can live with it.

 

[ridgerunner]

Transmission rebuild trying to teach someone to drive a manual...I don't buy that one. Maybe a clutch problem but a tranny rebuild I find hard to believe.

Sorry, yes new clutch. Since the F150 has no lic., insurance, etc. ie dedicated farm truck, I had to take him into the woods in Low 4X4 (high would not do). The I6 300 has lots of torque and made short work of the clutch with him in low 4X4 up hills, in mud, rocks etc. Only took about 10 minutes of abuse and was nearly shot. I was just able to drive it to my neighbors shop 2 miles away to get repairs done. But it still cost me around $500 for the work. Hard to take when the truck isn't worth that to sell it for scrap but I need it to haul wood and dead dear sooo....