Interesting. I was sure they said they were going to getrag. I think maybe they will have getrag build it.

NV has not listed transmissions on their website. I was curious why this was. Before they sold out even.

 

Do a search for Manual Transmissions of Muncie - then do a products search on their site - they list the transmissions there - not much else though...

 

I'm only going to comment on two issues here- trannies and IFS/solid axle. I doubt GM is going to change over to solid front axles as they've been using IFS since 1988, and haven't had many issues whatsoever. Being a plow and tow guy, I belong to a plowing forum as well, and the GMC/Chevy 2500/3500 trucks hold up just as well if not better than the Fords & Dodge. The front ends hold very large plows and high weight without issues and tend to have less wear over time-ball joints, tie rods, etc. As far as trannies go, Ford hasn't had the best trannies in some time so I don't understand why everyone jumps on the Dodge bashing bandwagon. From what I've been reading on this site, the plow site, and others, is that since the E4OD, 4R100, and the Torqueshift, they've all had plenty of issues-one being the Torque Converter is very small and wears out fast. A new issue I've read about in the super duties is the issue with planetary gears not holding and causing failure. Dodge has had issues with their trannies, but their diesels have seemed to have had the better of tranny choices, and the 48RE has been doing much better in the newer trucks-02+. GM seems to have been the best in tranny reliability from any date, including the allison. Anytime I visit other sites, talk to techs, and talk to owners, they have their own issues with their trucks, but I rarely hear anything about tranny issues.

 

Here is a link to the new Chrysler 6 speed trannies. They are going to be available on models sometime this year.

http://www.dodgeboy.net/news/6speed/index.htm

 

IFS is also better handing and better on tire wear. Ford finally switched to it on 150's for a reason.

 

Nope, Ford switched because the twin I beam strength wasn't needed and MOST importantly the hoodline is dramatically lowered to improve aerodynamics.


The twin I beam is still a staple in stock classes for off road racing: very strong and great travel.

The F-250's still run 'em (2wd). No CAFE rating.

 

All I heard was negative things about the ibeam. Everyone I know that had one cursed themselves and wanted a sfa.

I offroaded one time with an ifs chevy. He was bottoming out on the same stuff I was flying over. His ride was smoother while he was bottoming out though. IFS is superior at speed over rough terrain.... only if you have the clearance to clear the obstacles.

A solid front axle can be murder on rough trails. Beat you up bad. I actually had to speed up so that it wouldnt jounce me so bad. Let some air out of the tires to soften up the impact from the rocks. If I went a practical speed it would shake the teeth out of my head. So I sped the whole time. Ran a 3 and a half hour road in 2 hours flat.

 

Exactly. So many that just have to have a solid front axle never drive off road and just want the most jacked up "macho" rig. I was miserable with an SFA Toyota. There was almost no suspension travel with stock ride height springs. I love the ride with my TTB and for suspension compliance/travel off-road, some form of IFS is necessary.

Jim