Which is the better tranny?

[RamFan]

Now that I have your attention.

It seems to me that a pivotal point may have been reached with transmissions. It seems like automatic transmissions have not only caught up with manual transmissions but in some cases have surpassed them in regards to shift times, acceleration, and also possibly reliability. From a performance aspect alone, most of the top performance cars out there are use paddle shifters, not a true manual, instead of a traditional stick. What are your opinions? Are automatic transmissions of today on par with, or "better" than their manual counterparts?

 

[Astro14]

Better. Just drove an E350 with the 7 speed auto in the San Jacinto mountains near Palm Springs. Instant shift, smooth, intelligently held gears in corners, perfect ratios matched to engine power band...it did what I would have done with manual control, only faster and it had 7 ratios. Really great transmission.

Now, I miss double-clutching the Packard's 4 speed manual and doing all that work myself.

Verdict: not as much fun...but better...

 

[JHZR2]

The biggest problem with autos is that they turn people into ever greater brain-dead masses with no understanding or respect for physics. N

All the top performance cars use paddles, but they use automated manuals with two clutches, not standard torque converter autos. Regardless, dsg or TC auto shifting adds double the complexity, additional weight, and higher life cycle cost, let alone less fun. No thanks. Save me the $1000 upfront and the thousands in 100k when a rebuild is necessary...

 

[sciphi]

From a bombproof standpoint, it's hard to argue with a manual.

From a daily driver standpoint, the auto wins for convenience. It's just easy to put it into D and away you go.

The next car for me will be a manual since it still can get better real-world MPG with a semi-aware driver, at least on the cars I'm likely to get.

 

[hounddog]

Since the invent of manuals and automatic transmission cars automatics are the lest troublesome of the two. Yes there are/were bad design automatics but traditionally less repairs on them then manual transmissions.

 

[mechtech2]

Some auto transmissions are superb - the best in the world.
[IMO, unfortunately, for only a short time.]

Like mentioned, you really PAY for those complex autos - before and after.

Paddle shifters? I lump them in with push button starters that vibrate .

 

[01rangerxl]

Personally, for everyday use I prefer an automatic.

My 2001 Ranger had a 5-speed manual. It was fun to drive, but it could be a nuisance in heavy traffic, which we have a lot of here. It did help get the most out of the little 2.5 I4 engine though.

The 5-speed auto in my 2002 Ranger 3.0 V6 has been equally reliable, is better when I'm stuck in traffic, and seems to be well matched to the engine and application. I've put quite a few more miles on this Ranger in much less time, and I am glad I got the auto this time around. The auto in this truck has some features that provide some of the benefits of having a manual too...it can be "manually" shifted into 1st and 2nd gear with the column shifter, and overdrive can be turned off with a button which allows engine braking.

 

[MrCritical]

Originally Posted By: JHZR2
The biggest problem with autos is that they turn people into ever greater brain-dead masses with no understanding or respect for physics. N

All the top performance cars use paddles, but they use automated manuals with two clutches, not standard torque converter autos. Regardless, dsg or TC auto shifting adds double the complexity, additional weight, and higher life cycle cost, let alone less fun. No thanks. Save me the $1000 upfront and the thousands in 100k when a rebuild is necessary...



Agreed. Some brain figured out that quite a few people could afford a Lambo, Ferrari, or Porsche that were never going to take the time or have the coordination to drive a manual transmission. So big bucks were invested in DSG's.

 

[hounddog]

My Corvette has got paddle shift. Think you will be seeing more and more 'paddle shifts' in the next year or so.

 

[FZ1]

Simpler is usually better. I think the manuals are less likely to fail,and cost less to fix,than an auto, for high mileage vehicles.

 

[hounddog]

Lots of manual transmission even high line have bearing and shift fork issues. The easier to fix is very debatable. Most of the techs I've known over the years that were at that skill level rather repair automatics then manuals.

 

[calvin1]

Does anyone actually repair autos? I figured it was more like they tossed the old and dropped in the new and bolted it back up.

I know when I had my Taurus in the shop the guys were pretty dumbfounded when I brought it back. I even took the smart one out on a drive to show him exactly how it wasn't working right and he couldn't seem to wrap his head around actually fixing the thing rather than just replacing the parts that came in the box.

"No, no, it has to work. I put all the new stuff in just like they showed me."

 

[hounddog]

Hand him something with gears that have to pressed off,replaced in sets etc.

 

[01rangerxl]

Originally Posted By: calvin1
Does anyone actually repair autos? I figured it was more like they tossed the old and dropped in the new and bolted it back up.

I know when I had my Taurus in the shop the guys were pretty dumbfounded when I brought it back. I even took the smart one out on a drive to show him exactly how it wasn't working right and he couldn't seem to wrap his head around actually fixing the thing rather than just replacing the parts that came in the box.

"No, no, it has to work. I put all the new stuff in just like they showed me."

It depends. Some shops only know how to replace them and any auto trans problem means, "the transmission is bad, you need a new one." This probably works well enough since the typical car owner is going to be completely clueless about the internal workings of the transmission, and they are likely to consider it a single part, not a component made up of many parts.

Good transmission shops and good dealers will be able to diagnose valve body/solenoid problems, electrical problems, torque converter problems, problems with the planetary gears, problems with the clutches, etc. It's worth it to find a shop that knows what they are doing...don't want to spend $2000+ on a transmission when a $50 part could be the problem.

I'd rather have a good shop rebuild a transmission than have a mediocre one thrown in an aftermarket rebuilt one of unknown quality too.

 

[fdcg27]

Originally Posted By: MrCritical
Originally Posted By: JHZR2
The biggest problem with autos is that they turn people into ever greater brain-dead masses with no understanding or respect for physics. N

All the top performance cars use paddles, but they use automated manuals with two clutches, not standard torque converter autos. Regardless, dsg or TC auto shifting adds double the complexity, additional weight, and higher life cycle cost, let alone less fun. No thanks. Save me the $1000 upfront and the thousands in 100k when a rebuild is necessary...



Agreed. Some brain figured out that quite a few people could afford a Lambo, Ferrari, or Porsche that were never going to take the time or have the coordination to drive a manual transmission. So big bucks were invested in DSG's.


You guys have the right idea.
Three out of five of our daily drivers are sticks, since they're cheaper, faster, more economical (in real-world driving, not EPA) and never likely to need anything more than a clutch, maybe not even that.
WRT high-end performance cars, it is probably too much to expect the diamond pinky ring set to learn how to manage three pedals, so DSGs were developed to make these guys think they could actually drive the cars as they were meant to be driven.
It will be hysterical when these same non-drivers have to pay to have these complicated devices repaired or replaced.
Nothing beats a three pedal car for durability and driver involvement.
Too bad so many people not only avoid sticks these days, but can't even drive one.

 

[artificialist]

There is an assumption that manual transmissions are always tough.

Certain versions of the Mitsubishi Eclipse and SAAB 900 prove that to be false.

Anyway, auto transmission life also depends on the company that made it. I see 200,000 mile automatic transmissions on many cars, except for Chryslers.

 

[demarpaint]

Originally Posted By: artificialist
There is an assumption that manual transmissions are always tough.

Certain versions of the Mitsubishi Eclipse and SAAB 900 prove that to be false.

Anyway, auto transmission life also depends on the company that made it. I see 200,000 mile automatic transmissions on many cars, except for Chryslers.


There are some lousy manual transmissions, for sure. Speaking of Chryslers, my BIL has a little over 200,000 miles on a Dodge Caravan AT, NY stop and go driving. He had to replace some electronics related to the transmission, but the unit is all original. He is very hard on cars.

 

[rslifkin]

My Chrysler transmission is still original at 117k, and shifts perfectly too. They just tend to be fussy about maintenance, so they don't last when abused.

 

[meep]

i have owned equal amounts of both.

clutches lasted me ~100,000 miles, I've had two replaced at ~$900 per. Never any other issues with manuals, though sometimes I'd get annoyed with the stick feel not being quite what I wanted.

I've never replaced at AT. HOWEVER, I've sold one honda because I suspected, the AT was dying, had another honda with a nasty 1-2 shift flare, and have certainly put MUCH more maintenance into ATs to hopefully keep them healthy.

I agree with another poster above-- chrysler transmissions... myself and related family-- have NEVER had one fail, but we have also NEVER substituted the wrong fluid!!! 96 LHS 200,000+ miles, 01 LHS 100,000 miles, 01 minivan, sold at 80,000 with flawless auto that saw lots of camper towing, 2 jeeps. I know there are bad ones out there, and they had a horrible rep due to "factory condoned" use of DEX in lieu of ATF+3 (woops!) but if you take those MANY related failures out of the equation, I'd bet they aren't that far off from everyone else.

honda has had their mistakes. 'yota. look at the mid '00 yukons... 150,000 is the implode milestone per their forums for that trans. Not a shabby life by any means but not the "gold standard" either. Ford tauri (?) had their share of problems in the '90s.

a coworker's GTI got lemon-lawed due to repeated problems with DSG. car was in the shop 1/3 of its ownership. more complicated means more points of failure.

But yes, NEWER autos, I think, become a wash, if maintained beyond the dealer schedule, and driven nicely.

I think for aggressive driving, a manual will hold up longer, if for no other reason than AT clutch wear during hard acceleration. I good stick driver knows how to handle the clutch on hot acceleration, an auto driver can't control the clutch modulation--- they slip as they manage all that torque (even with torque management) and have to absorb all of that rotational inertia as the engine rpms get pulled down.

M

 

[SteveSRT8]

Gawd, all the [censored] about Chrysler trans is warranted for older models but completely wrong about newer models. Sheesh. But they earned that rep, now they have to 'un' earn it.

That said, it is only the uninformed who compare DSG's (2 clutches or 1) to manuals and then to slushboxes. They are ridiculously different and simply not comparable. Hello?

Longevity in ANY trans has more to do with the driver and his maintenance practices than any other factors. I broke many a so-called "bulletproof" trans when I was younger, and they were manuals and autos both. Didn't matter if they were behind high powered engines or not, I still broke 'em.