Where have all the manual transmissions gone?

[Highbeam]

That was a Socratic inquiry on my part - I've owned a 1999 Dodge 3500 with a diesel engine since 2007 and my experience is as follows
- I get about 18-19MGP combined mileage and 24+ on the freeway. The same vehicle (1ton 4x4)with a gas powered v8 or v10 will get about half that mileage
- Upfront cost is more, but resale is also more, so that's a wash
- Diesel fuel prices vary in relation to gasoline but for most of the last 8 years it has hovered between regular and premium. With nearly double the mileage diesel would have to be nearly double the price to compete.
- The cost of maintenance is not a cut-and-dried issue. For example, my truck holds 12 quarts of oil, so oil changes are more expensive. But since my truck holds 12 quarts of oil they are also less frequent. Oil filters, fuel filters, air filters are all about the same price vs gasoline. IMO the only advantage for gasoline is the matter of catastrophic failure or repair: replacing a diesel engine coul

I have also been driving my 2000 Ford F350 4x4 with the international 7.3 diesel for about 7 years and 50,000 miles now and I record mpg on every single fillup in a book. I tow heavy, haul heavy, and also commute with it. Automatic trans, yuk, but manuals are rare. This truck weighs 7500# empty.

-My experience with maintenance is the same, no more expensive than gas.
- mpg when running not towing is very good, 15-20+ depending on distance traveled. 8 mile commute = 15 mpg.
- mpg when towing is much lower. You have to feed an engine to make it work. I return 11-12 mpg when towing 8000# of RV. This is reality on all diesels, look at the RV forums, when you work a diesel you need to burn fuel. Like a cat stove, there is no magic, btus must be burnt to do work.
- The gas version of my truck gets half the mpg and is much weaker.
- The only reason gas is better is that if something inside the engine breaks, it can be extremely expensive if you must use a mechanic to repair it. I replaced the water pump on Saturday and it was in stock for 135$ from autozone.
- I would love a manual trans on mine.

As far as I know the only new full size 4x4 pickup available with a manual transmission is the Dodge Ram 2500 with the 5.9L Cummins diesel.

They haven't made the 5.9 in a ram pickup for almost 10 years. They replaced it around 2007 with the 6.7 cummins.

So i think ?? the diesel overall might actually have more advantage at light load.

The biggest advantage is at light load. The advantage is still there at all times but especially when running empty for long cruises. We're talking a huge engine/truck returning the same mpg as a freaking 4 cylinder minitruck.

Another reason for high mpg is the very high compression ratio. High CR means a more efficient cycle. No throttle plate ever means low pumping losses. The diesel has more energy per gallon than gasoline. Low rpm operation means less friction.

 

[Ashful]

I might have said this, but you could have one leg and an arm out of commission and still drive an automatic.

One doesn't "drive" an automatic. That's just "steering."

 

[joecool85]

One doesn't "drive" an automatic. That's just "steering."

It's true!

 

[bpirger]

2002 Honda CRV with 340,000 miles is my daily driver. 5 speed. Replaced original clutch at about 230,000. Also put in a used tranny as the bearing on the input shaft became very noisy. I sometimes think it might be time to look for another vehicle, then this thing keeps running and running. I go about 35K a year (lengthy commute) and will be in high miles very soon. I'm keeping my eye out for another CRV, 2004, last year they had the 5 speed. Nothing like a manual when driving in snow.

 

[Snagdaddy]

The CVT transmissions look good on paper, but they are weak. I feel sorry for the people that have bought vehicles with this transmission.

I'm just another firewood gatherer who is lamenting the demise of manual transmissions. Perhaps they won't ever go away? Maybe the CVT transmission owners will be so pissed off about having to get a new transmission installed every 5 years or less? The CVT is cheaper to make than the conventional transmissions and it's problems are becoming apparent.

My 99 ford ranger has never had a clutch job. It is not the perfect pickup truck by any measure, but It has 169000 potholed firewood gathering miles on it and I have learned to like it. I am staring down a clutch job and whatever else this vehicle might need in lieu of purchasing a new or newer truck with all the spyware, useless bells and whistles (over complicated systems and tech), and remote engine shutdown capability garbage that comes in the new vehicles.

The perfect firewood gathering pickup truck would have a manual transmission, the clutch being directly actuated by a rod or cable or some combination of the two. It would have a diesel engine and manual rack and pinion steering. No air conditioning would be available. Payload options would start at 2000 pounds. Computer actuated engine management systems would be easily replaced similar to changing an Atari video game cartridge. Wiring in the vehicle would be straightforward and the heater core could be popped out and replaced in ten minutes by my wife.

 

[dougand3]

One doesn't "drive" an automatic. That's just "steering."

In Germany (at least in the 1980s)...big, luxury Mercedes Benz had 5 sp manuals. Lots of American over there with the military and would ship over mostly automatics. The Germans had a saying..."Americans operate their motor cars, Germans DRIVE THEM."

 

[Stelcom66]

2002 Honda CRV with 340,000 miles is my daily driver. 5 speed. Replaced original clutch at about 230,000.

Wow - that's great! I always liked CRVs, if I had to retire the Forester a manual CRV would definitely be a choice. That's amazing you got that much out of the original clutch.
Mine went at about 105,000 miles, but I bought it at 98k, so who knows how it was driven before. Nice thing about Hondas - you typically don't need to worry about headgaskets, unlike Subarus.

I saw someone's post about I believe a Ford 1 ton 4x4 - averaging mpgs in the mid to upper teens, 24 on the highway. That's very impressive considering what I get with my
Chevy 1/2 ton. That diesel Ford could also potentially reach 300+k miles, making the initial up front extra cost for the diesel well worth it. I drove a Ford F250 diesel around the
block that my son was borrowing - I loved the pull and sound of that 7.3L diesel.

 

[clemsonfor]

The CVT transmissions look good on paper, but they are weak. I feel sorry for the people that have bought vehicles with this transmission.

I'm just another firewood gatherer who is lamenting the demise of manual transmissions. Perhaps they won't ever go away? Maybe the CVT transmission owners will be so pissed off about having to get a new transmission installed every 5 years or less? The CVT is cheaper to make than the conventional transmissions and it's problems are becoming apparent.

My 99 ford ranger has never had a clutch job. It is not the perfect pickup truck by any measure, but It has 169000 potholed firewood gathering miles on it and I have learned to like it. I am staring down a clutch job and whatever else this vehicle might need in lieu of purchasing a new or newer truck with all the spyware, useless bells and whistles (over complicated systems and tech), and remote engine shutdown capability garbage that comes in the new vehicles.

The perfect firewood gathering pickup truck would have a manual transmission, the clutch being directly actuated by a rod or cable or some combination of the two. It would have a diesel engine and manual rack and pinion steering. No air conditioning would be available. Payload options would start at 2000 pounds. Computer actuated engine management systems would be easily replaced similar to changing an Atari video game cartridge. Wiring in the vehicle would be straightforward and the heater core could be popped out and replaced in ten minutes by my wife.

I believe the transmission is my 1997 saturn is a cvt. I am about 90% sure. But anyways. It has 255,000 trouble free miles on it. If it died tomorrow I would be happy. I get 32mpg as a commuter car now. I too have a manual 5sp ranger with the 2.3L it is the original trans and had the clutch replaces one that I know of. It has 305,000 miles on it. I load that baby down but once you hook a small loaded trailer to it mileage puts you into full size territory and not enough lower to keep up on smaller hills. It will get 25mpg id I baby it empty and fully loaded pulling a 4x8 trailer full of wood and a loaded bed (almost 3/4 cord) I think I might get 17mpg?

Now I like your thinking but I do like my AC I live in SC and you can sweat through a shirt just driving in the summer here. Up till about 23 years old I never had it and did not miss it. Now a days I dont use it all the time but I sure want shure want whatever I buy to have it!


I also have to say I like my power steering. Never had much trouble out of them in life.

 

[Stelcom66]

The CVT transmissions look good on paper, but they are weak. I feel sorry for the people that have bought vehicles with this transmission

I recently had trouble with my lawn tractor. I ended up fixing it. I saw many new riding mowers are automatic, I assume CVTs. I do wonder how they would hold out.

The perfect firewood gathering pickup truck would have a manual transmission, the clutch being directly actuated by a rod or cable or some combination of the two. It would have a diesel engine and manual rack and pinion steering. No air conditioning would be available.

Somewhat like my 1st pickup truck, a 1979 Dodge Ram, but RWD and a 225 slant 6. Manual windows, no a/c, did have power streering. My 1980 Ford Club Wagon did not have power steering - but did have a very rare (for that model) 4 speed manual on the floor behind the 300cid 6. With the seats removed (they usually were) I used it many times like a pickup truck. With a lot of weight and decent tires, it may have been ok in snow. But damn, parking was a bit of a chore.

I heard rumors Ford may bring back the Ranger, a very good truck (as noted with the year and miles you have) - and it was offered with a manual transmission. I've heard that and the Dodge Dakota (I think even later years could be had with a manual) weren't profitable enough to sustain production - which is surprising based on how many I see out there.

 

[clemsonfor]

Wow - that's great! I always liked CRVs, if I had to retire the Forester a manual CRV would definitely be a choice. That's amazing you got that much out of the original clutch.
Mine went at about 105,000 miles, but I bought it at 98k, so who knows how it was driven before. Nice thing about Hondas - you typically don't need to worry about headgaskets, unlike Subarus.

I saw someone's post about I believe a Ford 1 ton 4x4 - averaging mpgs in the mid to upper teens, 24 on the highway. That's very impressive considering what I get with my
Chevy 1/2 ton. That diesel Ford could also potentially reach 300+k miles, making the initial up front extra cost for the diesel well worth it. I drove a Ford F250 diesel around the
block that my son was borrowing - I loved the pull and sound of that 7.3L diesel.

Any truck now a days should reach 300k miles thats not that many really?? I know many 1/2 ton fords and chevies I run into with other foresters (the profession not the subaru) that have that many. I personally know lots of loggers that have the old 7.3s and have easily 400-700k on them.

Many foresters put 50-80,000 miles on a truck in a year so these mileages are not hard to get very fast. Many of those guys trade trucks every 1-3 years.

 

[clemsonfor]

I recently had trouble with my lawn tractor. I ended up fixing it. I saw many new riding mowers are automatic, I assume CVTs. I do wonder how they would hold out.



Somewhat like my 1st pickup truck, a 1979 Dodge Ram, but RWD and a 225 slant 6. Manual windows, no a/c, did have power streering. My 1980 Ford Club Wagon did not have power steering - but did have a very rare (for that model) 4 speed manual on the floor behind the 300cid 6. With the seats removed (they usually were) I used it many times like a pickup truck. With a lot of weight and decent tires, it may have been ok in snow. But damn, parking was a bit of a chore.

I heard rumors Ford may bring back the Ranger, a very good truck (as noted with the year and miles you have) - and it was offered with a manual transmission. I've heard that and the Dodge Dakota (I think even later years could be had with a manual) weren't profitable enough to sustain production - which is surprising based on how many I see out there.

My last work truck was an 07 dakota automatic with the v8. If I had any urge, (which I dont )to own one, that truck cured me of it. That thing was a piece of junk. Uncomfortable and at best got 17mpg and usually 14-15mpg which were mostly highway miles

 

[joecool85]

I recently had trouble with my lawn tractor. I ended up fixing it. I saw many new riding mowers are automatic, I assume CVTs. I do wonder how they would hold out.



Somewhat like my 1st pickup truck, a 1979 Dodge Ram, but RWD and a 225 slant 6. Manual windows, no a/c, did have power streering. My 1980 Ford Club Wagon did not have power steering - but did have a very rare (for that model) 4 speed manual on the floor behind the 300cid 6. With the seats removed (they usually were) I used it many times like a pickup truck. With a lot of weight and decent tires, it may have been ok in snow. But damn, parking was a bit of a chore.

I heard rumors Ford may bring back the Ranger, a very good truck (as noted with the year and miles you have) - and it was offered with a manual transmission. I've heard that and the Dodge Dakota (I think even later years could be had with a manual) weren't profitable enough to sustain production - which is surprising based on how many I see out there.

Lawn mowers use hydrostatic transmissions, totally different.

 

[jharkin]

The CVT transmissions look good on paper, but they are weak. I feel sorry for the people that have bought vehicles with this transmission.

I'm just another firewood gatherer who is lamenting the demise of manual transmissions. Perhaps they won't ever go away? Maybe the CVT transmission owners will be so pissed off about having to get a new transmission installed every 5 years or less? The CVT is cheaper to make than the conventional transmissions and it's problems are becoming apparent.

I'm not a fan of the driving experience of CVTs, but I have never seen any reference to this rash of CVT reliability problems you are alluding to. Care to provide detail?

 

[jharkin]

Lawn mowers use hydrostatic transmissions, totally different.

They use lots of different transmissions. I think some of the mowers labelled as automatic are actually split pulley belt CVTs. the speed selector just operates the split pulley to vary the reduction.

Mowers with "manual" transmissions may have either a real gearbox with ratios, or again my be a split pulley CVT that just has detents in the selector level to simulate fixed ratios. My cheap Troy Built pushmower has this kind of transmission for the drive wheels.

Hydrostatic transmissions are a different animal altogether - though I could image them being labelled as automatic to consumers. the speed lever is hooked up to the hydraulic valve between the engine driven pump and the drive unit on the axle. When I was a kid we had an old Case 444 "Hydraulic Drive" that used this system. That thing was a beast

 

[CountryBoy19]

Hydrostatic transmissions are a different animal altogether - though I could image them being labelled as automatic to consumers. the speed lever is hooked up to the hydraulic valve between the engine driven pump and the drive unit on the axle. When I was a kid we had an old Case 444 "Hydraulic Drive" that used this system. That thing was a beast

I think most hydrostatic drives have a variable pitch wobble plate on the driven pump instead of a valve as you allude to.

That being said, I've never seen a movable shiv belt-drive CVT on a lawn-tractor, but then again, I don't deal with cheapo lawn-tractors either. I wouldn't put it past some of the cheapo brands to do that.

The use of the system on a lawn-tractor or push-mower is still entirely different from use on an automobile. Lawn-tractors and push-mowers don't see extremely high miles, the owner expects to have to replace drive-belts etc every once in a while, and they don't typically tow heavy loads. Car OTOH, do see high miles and shouldn't require frequent tranny removal to replace worn parts in a CVT.

 

[joecool85]

My brother has an old MTD that has the variable belt pulley with detents system. But most lawn tractor around here use hydrostatic, even cheaply made craftsman models.

 

[Jags]

Case 444 "Hydraulic Drive" that used this system

The Case was a true hydraulic drive. Pump to motor. Hydrostatic is yet another type of system.

Edit: as an example of the difference...with the case at full throttle and full speed ahead, you could pull the lever to neutral and the tractor would free wheel (coast) a few more feet forwards. With the hydrostatic, there is a more positive displacement (because of the design) that would simply lock up the drive and slide the wheels if the same were done. Essentially a hydraulic "lock".

 

[Highbeam]

I saw someone's post about I believe a Ford 1 ton 4x4 - averaging mpgs in the mid to upper teens, 24 on the highway. That's very impressive considering what I get with my
Chevy 1/2 ton. That diesel Ford could also potentially reach 300+k miles, making the initial up front extra cost for the diesel well worth it. I drove a Ford F250 diesel around the
block that my son was borrowing - I loved the pull and sound of that 7.3L diesel.

Perhaps it was my earlier posts in this thread. I record 15-20mpg, a couple of 21s but never 24, that's the cummins guys with their tiny 5.9 liter 6 banger and light weight trucks. Anybody with a 4x4 ford powerstroke that says they get over 21 is either lying, is bad at math, or is doing some sort of estimating. I suppose you could do a hot engine fillup and then drive 300 miles at 60mph and then fillup again to eliminate the less efficient warm up period an perhaps get up into the lower 20s but my 15-20 is whole tank average.

The truck will usually rot out before you get 300k. People that are affluent enough to buy a newish diesel truck are not going to tolerate hanging onto it that long. Instead you will see them resell (recouping the diesel premium) and kids will buy them well used and keep driving them until something breaks that is more expensive to fix than the truck is worth. That's the real danger with diesels like mine, one head gasket job is worth more than the whole truck.

 

[jharkin]

Minor point . . . the Scion FR-S is in fact a Scion . . . a sister division if you would to Toyota. That said, the FR-S and Subaru BR-Zs are also known as "Toybarus" since both the FR-S and BR-Z share parts from Toyota and Subaru. Supposedly the design of this car was by Toyota and a lot of the power train and other components came from Subaru. Both the FR-S and less commonly seen BR-Z can be found with either manual or automatic options.

Yes I new that, just a typo on my part putting it on the wrong line. Corrected.

 

[Ashful]

Lawnmowers... meh. I wasn't done complaining about the demise of the manual gearbox and clutch, just yet.

 

[JRHAWK9]

I prefer to drive my vehicle and not just be along for the ride........therefore I drive manual gearboxes.

 

[TMonter]

I prefer to drive my vehicle and not just be along for the ride........therefore I drive manual gearboxes.

I would agree but finding a manual these days is tough mainly because the automatic has been more in demand and they have gotten to the point where they are very close to the same efficiency as a manual without the need for a clutch replacement.

The lockup torque converters have all but eliminated the friction losses from an auto compared to a manual these days and you can easily get 250k+ on an automatic with just a few fluid changes over the life of the transmission.

 

[iamlucky13]

I'm not a fan of the driving experience of CVTs, but I have never seen any reference to this rash of CVT reliability problems you are alluding to. Care to provide detail?

I'd be curious about more details, too. I spent a fair amount of time trying to find information about consistent reliability problems before we bought an Outback with a CVT two years ago. There were a few scattered issues, but not notably more than I was finding in similar years from conventional automatics. I've still got some long term apprehension based on the relatively small number of them in the wild and limited number of miles accrued, but I know a substantial number of Subaru CVT's are in the 100,000+ mile range now and apparently holding up.

As for driving experience, I find the Outback comparable to most other automatics. Not as predictable, consistent, or tactile as a manual, but acceptable, and the lack of shifts is a minor advantage.

In contrast, I recently rented a Nissan Versa with a CVT that gave me the worst driving experience I can remember. I think it was just really badly programmed. There were times I'd press down on the gas and sometimes it would lag while at others the car would actually slow down for a second or two as the transmission lowered the ratio faster than the engine revved up, and then would scream the engine up over 5000 RPM for a moderate acceleration. At other times, I'd be driving on consistently flat ground and it would change the ratio for now reason at all.

They use lots of different transmissions. I think some of the mowers labelled as automatic are actually split pulley belt CVTs. the speed selector just operates the split pulley to vary the reduction.

My Craftsman "automatic" transmission mower is definitely a hydrostatic. I've confirmed this from the transmission-supplier. I get the sense that the trend is to label foot pedal controlled hydrostatics as hydrostatics, but label hand-lever controlled hydrostatics as automatics.

I'm not sure what my Husqvarna walk-behind mower has. I'm honestly a bit curious, but haven't been able to find an answer.

The truck will usually rot out before you get 300k.

My in-laws have an early 2000's F-350 that hit 300,000 several years ago, most of those miles pulling a custom stock trailer they run their equine vet practice out of. I don't know the actual trailer weight, but based on how I've seen it compact the ground despite fairly large tires, I'm guessing it's over 10,000 lbs. I do know they've had the transmission (automatic...I have no idea why) rebuilt once at very significant cost, and it's reaching the end of its life now. However, given the relatively heavy use it's seen and the significantly higher cost for a heavier duty truck, I think its performance has been reasonable.

 

[TMonter]

Perhaps it was my earlier posts in this thread. I record 15-20mpg, a couple of 21s but never 24, that's the cummins guys with their tiny 5.9 liter 6 banger and light weight trucks. Anybody with a 4x4 ford powerstroke that says they get over 21 is either lying, is bad at math, or is doing some sort of estimating. I suppose you could do a hot engine fillup and then drive 300 miles at 60mph and then fillup again to eliminate the less efficient warm up period an perhaps get up into the lower 20s but my 15-20 is whole tank average.

The truck will usually rot out before you get 300k. People that are affluent enough to buy a newish diesel truck are not going to tolerate hanging onto it that long. Instead you will see them resell (recouping the diesel premium) and kids will buy them well used and keep driving them until something breaks that is more expensive to fix than the truck is worth. That's the real danger with diesels like mine, one head gasket job is worth more than the whole truck.

The truck rotting depends on location. My 86' F250 is rust free since we don't use salt on the roads here.

 

[clemsonfor]

My 1980 k10 is pretty much rust free. Some rot on rockers and floor pans bit thats from leaky seals and rain. A tiny amount on back of wheels in fenders where mud is sandwiched between the layers of metal. And some on the seams in the bed from where dirt and crud had packed over the years. Everything else is minor surface rust and nothing major. Brakes and hardware come off not break off.