The best type of transmission/gearbox

[Olas]

I've often told people on here that complain of issues with their automatics to convert to or buy a manual.

That might be changing, I always regarded a pneumatic shifted sequential as the best option but a new technology of torque converted direct drive is changing my opinion.

Details in this video
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=glf_k4qGBAA

 

[HerrStig]

I'm a manual fan but IMHO the best, hardest to kill automatic ever made was the GM THM 400. They sold a lot of them to high end foreign users such as RR.

 

[demarpaint]

Originally Posted By: HerrStig
I'm a manual fan but IMHO the best, hardest to kill automatic ever made was the GM THM 400. They sold a lot of them to high end foreign users such as RR.

The Turbo 400, C6, and TorqueFlite 727 were all monster units.

 

[440Magnum]

I love my Tremec manual in the Challenger, but (apart from troublesome front-drive automatics) I think automatics passed manuals in terms of longevity for the most part back in the 60s. Yes, every time they add a gear or two to automatics, there have been teething pains. But right from the get-go some automatic transmissions like the Chrysler A727 and GM Turbo 400 would out-last manuals, at least the clutch for sure if not the synchronizers also. The fact that there is only ONE full-size truck manufacturer that even offers a manual transmission is telling. Its not because truck owners don't like manuals, its because automatics hold up better and are better at launching heavy loads from a stop without burning up or breaking. For all the way people think of automatics as being "black magic," they're actually very simple and extremely strong mechanically. And that includes the modern truck 6-speeds. Even automatics in FWDs have gotten a lot better in the last 8-10 years.

 

[supton]

Let's not forget, a poorly done manual can be awful. I drove some of the current econoboxes, and some older Toyota manuals, and I think I'd rather have my old-school 4 speed auto instead of their 5 or 6 speed manuals. A lackluster manual isn't much fun, as its only gain is a bit of mpg (dubious in some platforms) and better programming, and perhaps better performance in snow.

 

[chrisri]

Recently I drove three cars; a SAAB 9-3 Estate, a Opel Vectra Estate and an Alfa GT. All three cars had the same engine, the FIATs Multijet 150 hp.

The 9-3 and the Vectra are same GM Epsilon chassis (albeit Vectra is the LWB and tad heavier), Alfa is bespoke and the lightest.

SAAB is,automatic (Aisin IIRC), others manual. Opel has longer gearing than the sporty Alfa, but on pair with 9-3.
Point is: 9-3 accelerates just as fast as Alfa, Vectra is slower (heavy bus)
9-3 doesn't consume more than Vectra manual (there is a weight difference).

Vectra has a GM f40 gearbox that isn't the nicest out there, I'd prefer automatic in car like this.

 

[Kestas]

As an engineer, listening to people choose a "best" design for anything is a pet peeve of mine. Sometimes the cheapest design is best, if the person doesn't have a lot of money to go from point A to point B.

You can have it cheap, you can have it efficient, or you can have it reliable. Pick two. But you can't have all three.

 

[Johnny2Bad]

Originally Posted By: HerrStig
I'm a manual fan but IMHO the best, hardest to kill automatic ever made was the GM THM 400. They sold a lot of them to high end foreign users such as RR.


Almost as tough as the aluminum case version of the Powerglide, but very close. The Powerglide is still used in Drag Racing and can be built to handle in excess of 1,000 HP for a very reasonable cost ... less than the cost of any automatic from any current automaker.

The TH400 was OEM on Rolls Royce, Bentley, Daimler, Range Rover, Checker cab, Ferrari, Jaguar, Nissan, AM General (Hummer), American Motors and AMC Jeep ...

Originally Posted By: Kestas
As an engineer, listening to people choose a "best" design for anything is a pet peeve of mine. Sometimes the cheapest design is best, if the person doesn't have a lot of money to go from point A to point B.

You can have it cheap, you can have it efficient, or you can have it reliable. Pick two. But you can't have all three.


You can buy a heavy duty (tow, race, economy, you choose) fully remanufactured Turbo 400 for about $1100.00. You can't rebuild most transmissions for less than twice that, and in most cases even more.

 

[Nick1994]

I have never wrapped my head around why you bash automatic transmissions so much. Your manual transmission has already been pulled at least once, only 78,000 miles. My automatic has 222,000 miles, it's doing great.

 

[BrocLuno]

I dunno ... I had a 4-speed truck box last in a 1962 F-100 trough three engines (close to 500,000 miles) and it's still running fine w/o any issues in the restored truck it's in now (across town). I don't know of to many autos that will go 1/2 a million miles... Maybe a Allison in bus or something ...

I do know of a number of RTO125-13 truck trannies that went at least 1.5 million miles before having bearing replacements.

But, I guess you'all are talking cars and light trucks

In that case I'd vote for a the mid-1960's Ford C5AZ all synchro iron case three speed. It was std issue in pickups and cars with anything from 250 sixes to 390 V8's and was pretty much indestructible.

We had one in a Dirt Track car. Ran 1/4 mile tracks in second, and longer (faster) tracks in 3rd. Saved having to change rear-end gears

And we were feeding it prodigious power and beating on it all the time and it never whimpered or broke

On the street I ran those with a Fenton 500 shifter behind a bunch of big healthy Fords (406 ~ 430 inches) in the play cars (mostly 2-door Ranch Wagons). I'd side step the clutch at 3,500 and leave hard time and time again all night long down on 1st & 3nd Streets in San Jose cruising and street racing. Same on Beach Street in Santa Cruz or out at 4-lanes on the coast highway.

Only Auto that ever came close was the 727 TorqueFlite. You could neutral start that tranny behind a big block and it would leave hard too. Then guys figured out how to build converters and that era was over.

Either tranny would last longer than OEM rear-ends

But, as stated above, now-days it's real hard to beat a TH-400. There are some beefed examples behind 600 inch blown outlaw motors running E-85 making 2,500 HP on the "street" and running in the 8's. They hold up well enough

the next step up from there in a Lenco

 

[HerrStig]

Originally Posted By: chrisri
Recently I drove three cars; a SAAB 9-3 Estate, a Opel Vectra Estate and an Alfa GT. All three cars had the same engine, the FIATs Multijet 150 hp.

The 9-3 and the Vectra are same GM Epsilon chassis (albeit Vectra is the LWB and tad heavier), Alfa is bespoke and the lightest.

SAAB is,automatic (Aisin IIRC), others manual. Opel has longer gearing than the sporty Alfa, but on pair with 9-3.
Point is: 9-3 accelerates just as fast as Alfa, Vectra is slower (heavy bus)
9-3 doesn't consume more than Vectra manual (there is a weight difference).

Vectra has a GM f40 gearbox that isn't the nicest out there, I'd prefer automatic in car like this.
A SAAB with a FIAT engine, I didn't think even GM could sink that low.

 

[clinebarger]

Originally Posted By: Johnny2Bad
Originally Posted By: HerrStig
I'm a manual fan but IMHO the best, hardest to kill automatic ever made was the GM THM 400. They sold a lot of them to high end foreign users such as RR.


Almost as tough as the aluminum case version of the Powerglide, but very close. The Powerglide is still used in Drag Racing and can be built to handle in excess of 1,000 HP for a very reasonable cost ... less than the cost of any automatic from any current automaker.

The TH400 was OEM on Rolls Royce, Bentley, Daimler, Range Rover, Checker cab, Ferrari, Jaguar, Nissan, AM General (Hummer), American Motors and AMC Jeep ...

Originally Posted By: Kestas
As an engineer, listening to people choose a "best" design for anything is a pet peeve of mine. Sometimes the cheapest design is best, if the person doesn't have a lot of money to go from point A to point B.

You can have it cheap, you can have it efficient, or you can have it reliable. Pick two. But you can't have all three.


You can buy a heavy duty (tow, race, economy, you choose) fully remanufactured Turbo 400 for about $1100.00. You can't rebuild most transmissions for less than twice that, and in most cases even more.


That is not exactly true, As far as strength is concerned, The TH400 IS stronger than a Power Glide, But when your chasing fractions of a second......The PG eats less HP & is lighter than a TH400 making a PG the best choice for lighter cars (under 3500 pounds)

In the last few years 2-speed TH400's with modified 2nd gear ratios(Starts in 2nd gear) are being used over PG's in 1500hp+ cars, Taking off in 2nd increases the efficiency of the unit......In 1st gear, The Direct Drum spins at 84% of engine RPM in the opposite direction & it weighs 14 pounds coupled with the Direct Frictions Dragging/Overruning at 184% of engine RPM making the TH400 one of the least efficient units in 1st gear. In 2nd gear the Direct Drum is held stationary by the Intermediate Clutch.

I agree with Kestas.....
TH400's were not cheap to manufacture, Though they are cheap to us now, Not efficient, But VERY reliable & strong.

 

[edyvw]

Originally Posted By: HerrStig
Originally Posted By: chrisri
Recently I drove three cars; a SAAB 9-3 Estate, a Opel Vectra Estate and an Alfa GT. All three cars had the same engine, the FIATs Multijet 150 hp.

The 9-3 and the Vectra are same GM Epsilon chassis (albeit Vectra is the LWB and tad heavier), Alfa is bespoke and the lightest.

SAAB is,automatic (Aisin IIRC), others manual. Opel has longer gearing than the sporty Alfa, but on pair with 9-3.
Point is: 9-3 accelerates just as fast as Alfa, Vectra is slower (heavy bus)
9-3 doesn't consume more than Vectra manual (there is a weight difference).

Vectra has a GM f40 gearbox that isn't the nicest out there, I'd prefer automatic in car like this.
A SAAB with a FIAT engine, I didn't think even GM could sink that low.

Lol, I do not think you ever had opportunity to drive Multijet engine or JTD engine from FIAT. In the end, FIAT is company which brought common-rail to the passenger vehicles in 1997 and direct injection diesel to passenger vehicles in FIAT Chroma.
FIAT engines are so bad, that while GM managed to bankrupt SAAB, FIAT owns Chrysler.

 

[Olas]

Originally Posted By: Nick1994
I have never wrapped my head around why you bash automatic transmissions so much. Your manual transmission has already been pulled at least once, only 78,000 miles. My automatic has 222,000 miles, it's doing great.


I didn't need to pull the gearbox for maintenance the old cloth was still biting just fine - it came out because I had a lightened flywheel to put in along with a larger diameter pressure plate and spring plate... Doing 'stuff' to my car is as much of a hobby as it is a part of general maintenance.


Edit

The lifespan is just as much about abuse vs care as it is about how the cogs are selected.

 

[Olas]

Originally Posted By: edyvw
Originally Posted By: HerrStig
Originally Posted By: chrisri
Recently I drove three cars; a SAAB 9-3 Estate, a Opel Vectra Estate and an Alfa GT. All three cars had the same engine, the FIATs Multijet 150 hp.

The 9-3 and the Vectra are same GM Epsilon chassis (albeit Vectra is the LWB and tad heavier), Alfa is bespoke and the lightest.

SAAB is,automatic (Aisin IIRC), others manual. Opel has longer gearing than the sporty Alfa, but on pair with 9-3.
Point is: 9-3 accelerates just as fast as Alfa, Vectra is slower (heavy bus)
9-3 doesn't consume more than Vectra manual (there is a weight difference).

Vectra has a GM f40 gearbox that isn't the nicest out there, I'd prefer automatic in car like this.
A SAAB with a FIAT engine, I didn't think even GM could sink that low.

Lol, I do not think you ever had opportunity to drive Multijet engine or JTD engine from FIAT. In the end, FIAT is company which brought common-rail to the passenger vehicles in 1997 and direct injection diesel to passenger vehicles in FIAT Chroma.
FIAT engines are so bad, that while GM managed to bankrupt SAAB, FIAT owns Chrysler.


All dispels have always been direct injection - its not a fiat thing

 

[KrisZ]

There are some horrible manual trannys out there. Sometimes it's not even the tranny, but lousy throttle response, or in case of drive by wire, lousy programming that kills the experience.
There are some horrible automatics out there as well.

One thing is for sure, there is no such thing as "the best".

 

[Jetronic]

Originally Posted By: HerrStig
A SAAB with a FIAT engine, I didn't think even GM could sink that low.


What engine is in the diesel cruze since 2014 you think?

or in Opel vauxhall 1.9/2.0 diesels.

Saab even shared platforms with Fiat

 

[Jetronic]

Originally Posted By: Olas


All dispels have always been direct injection - its not a fiat thing


You show your lack of diesel knowledge.

 

[chrisri]

Originally Posted By: HerrStig
Originally Posted By: chrisri
Recently I drove three cars; a SAAB 9-3 Estate, a Opel Vectra Estate and an Alfa GT. All three cars had the same engine, the FIATs Multijet 150 hp.

The 9-3 and the Vectra are same GM Epsilon chassis (albeit Vectra is the LWB and tad heavier), Alfa is bespoke and the lightest.

SAAB is,automatic (Aisin IIRC), others manual. Opel has longer gearing than the sporty Alfa, but on pair with 9-3.
Point is: 9-3 accelerates just as fast as Alfa, Vectra is slower (heavy bus)
9-3 doesn't consume more than Vectra manual (there is a weight difference).

Vectra has a GM f40 gearbox that isn't the nicest out there, I'd prefer automatic in car like this.
A SAAB with a FIAT engine, I didn't think even GM could sink that low.

Actually, engine is the best part of that car. Chassis is only decent, interior is poorly fitted and rattled a lot.

Croma sibling have a higher quality interior, so does Vectra. Up to 05 GM didn't have decent diesels, those Isuzu sourced were terrible. GM did pay FIAT massive amounts of cash, but they gained license to build first class diesels in return. Opel can thank recent sales to strong diesels that are a must in Europe.

FIAT never had problems with their drivetrain, problems were /are with their final products, Mediterranean mentality, poor fit and finish, and nonexistent quality control outside of drivetrain components.
I'm glad that with new Giulia they are finally able to provide the whole package.

 

[Win]

Originally Posted By: Johnny2Bad
...

The TH400 was OEM on ... Jaguar ...


Only the V12 cars, afaik. The six cylinders used Borg Warners, and then later, ZF's. Even when Ford owned it, and put the junk Ford transmissions in some of the cars, the V12's were still built with 4L80E's, the controller module is back in the boot ....