Do you really believe that the Big 3 will no longer offer a manual transmission in only 4 years?

 

Just to keep beating this dead horse... don't belive for any amount of time that a manual trany in Seattle, San Francisco, Denver, most of West by God Virginia and any other very hilly city condition will yield 100,000 + clutch lives.... I know better cus I fixed then all the time in Seattle and Oakland and Weirton WVA. I can say very easily, and with a straight face, that many of our customers considered them selves expert truck drivers. And most of them were... but slipping a clutch is still wear that must be re-furbished eventually and that always means lobor and parts.

I have two manuals in my drive right now and both have over 250,000 miles on original clutches. A 77 Diesel Rabbit and a 86 Nissan v6 5sp truck...you could say I am easy on clutches unless you saw me replace three in a weekend at the drag strip! Peace brothers!

Humm maybe I should consider a ZF and gear vendors into 4.88:1 for the T-Bucket V10 project...interesting thought, since I decided to low tech the motor back to Blown Carburated I could eliminate all the computer crap for the trans also... thanks sinnister73 you sold me brother!

 

TxCaddy man

Not sure they ram it through that quick but I see bad things for owner controll just around the corner due to fuel costs and demands to get average CAFE standards up. The big three will be forced to better emmissions control and truth is that is the primary direction the computer controlled tranies have been going. 2010 will be real interesting

 

oh now Fred, Weirton might as well be the buckeye state (flat and on the river) manuals here ,as I hate to tell ya last up to 200,000 mi .
I have realized you like to argue and hate standard transmissons LOL
so I'll argue with ya

 

Ok Fred it's like this - you buy what you like and I'll buy what I like - simple as all that.

You say you werent looking to pick a bone - you are. I could care less if you SAY you werent bashing ZF owners - you did.

Your right, I did forget that you are a small fleet owner - there are so many credible people in this forum, it's tough telling who's who when your a newbie to this place like I am.

The problem I'm having here Fred, is not that you disagree with me for whatever reasons you have, but that you are trying to dismiss points I've made as not being relevant- and they are. Take this statement;

But do not delude your self into thinking that ideas like sinester wants to believe are true.

Not meaning to blackball you Fred, I left this out the first time, but come on - what have I ever done to you? Your insinuating that I'm deluded for "wanting" to believe that the ZF has the advantages I mentioned over the auto.

Here's another;
-------------
am NOT bashing Manual trany lovers. Contrary..if you know how to use one they are fun and a way of life. All that needs to be said is you love a manual trany and you are good at using one. Period. That is cool and respectable.

Just don't be spouting off justifications that are not factually correct.
-------------

I suppose to you this sounds like a reasonable statement? - let's twist it around a bit;

I am not bashing automatic transmissions - it can be fun to do nothing more than simply put it in gear, mash the pedal and go. All that needs to be said is you don't like shifting, you like to be able to just set it and forget it. Period. That's cool and respectable.

Just don't be spouting off justifications which are not factually correct.

Still sound reasonable?

Well whether it does or not - one thing is for sure - people can't deny "setting it and forgetting it", is THE REASON for the popularity of auto transmissions - it's not any advantage (real or percieved) over manuals for towing or for heavy work.

Also Fred (my name is Frank BTW so you aren't at the disadvantage of debating a username here), I think you misinterpreted my remark regarding gear selectability - either that or it means something different to you. For me selecting a gear means putting it there. It stays in the ratio I've selected until I personally decide it's time to be in a different one. I never said anything in any of my posts about the advantages of having more gear ratios. I simply meant that a gear can be manually selected and trusted not to deviate or change ratio's on you.

Since we're on the subject of ratios though, having more gears to choose from is certainly an advantage with a manual - I'm not so sure with an auto. I've never owned a Torqueshift. I've owned a few different autos and they were all the same...not my cup of tea to put it nicely.

It seems automatics hav'ent changed all that much based on remarks posted from many objective owners. I say "objective", because there are many who would still own an auto simply for the convenience of it all, even if the only auto offered were a beefed up C4 three speed. I see complaint's about transmissions only doing a so/so job of electronically selecting the proper gear to be in for a given circumstance (see post number 40 above). So no - this is'int just something to be put off on me because I cite the ability of putting a manual transmission in gear and knowing that it will stay right where it is, as being an advantage.

And a greater number of fixed ratios can be an advantage with a manual where each one is manually selected and stays put. Gear selectability is'int the same thing as variability. Perhaps this greater variability you refer to is what causes so much dissatisfaction for some auto owners since it seems to them the transmission is'int doing it's job properly for a given task. If this is indeed the case here, why would anyone want to add more variation with more gear sets?

Now for this statement;
--------------
The ZF is not a more tow/haul capable trans (a torque converter generate more power to the real axle then the lowest gear a ZF has due to torque multiplication..just a fact folks)

--------------
I've already shown where this is false, but until now did'int feel the need to point it out. Regardless of the "power flow" or greater efficiency of planetary gears. The torque convertor only multiplies torque when it slips. Heat is the result of this slipping process - that means energy loss. You don't get the full 1.89 multiplication to the gear. Add to this, it lasts only until foward motion is achieved.

The gear design of a manual transmission may not be as efficient as an auto's, but due to the heat losses of the slipping torque converter it starts out with much more gear to begin with - and more importantly it keeps that gearing long after the auto has locked up.

LOL, you took a look into my bio huh? That's cool. I've owned many different trucks Fred. I still own a couple HD Dodge's, though I saw no point in listing them in my bio since this is a Ford site afterall. I mean, I'm not going to go into a whole tirade of what I've owned and what we've done with them, yada yada, do we really need to do this? I've owned a few HD Ford's too, (thought I'd mention this since looking at my own bio it does seem very easy to ridicule me as someone who has no hands on experience),do I really seem to come off as someone who would speak without ANY experience at all?

In truth both transmissions do have REAL advantages - I can't think of a single time I did'int wish for an auto when pulling up a boat ramp and losing traction on slime due to too much torque input at the rear wheel with my older Ford trucks. In truth manuals are fun to drive for me - certainly not for some others. And for me the advantages of a manual outweigh the disadvantages considering that I like driving them to begin with - for some one advantage or another advantage would have to be related to a specific use they have in mind since they also have disadvantages, and these people are not partial to them to begin with. I am. I'd pay 1700.00 extra for the manual .

If I could buy a TS equipped truck for 3 k less than a manual - I'd consider it. I don't think it's an inherently bad transmission at all - it's just subject to the same characteristics all other autos have had - even if it is stronger. For me, I'd have to see a good discount to be willing to give up what I feel are advantages with a manual - along with the fun factor. Also there is no doubt that even for me it would sometimes be nice to just put it in gear and go.

My next truck is going to be a 2007 SD. Definately a 6 speed. More than likely a Powerstroke, but the V10 is CERTAINLY a possibility - hence the reason I'm even here.
(I've never driven a 3 valve V10 BTW - I hear they're a hoot)

No hard feelings Fred.

Thanks for thw warm words Wrench.

 

fred, i am not a die hard anti-automatic man, (i drive a powerstroke automatic everyday for my florida county job), but i can give you my 2 reasons why manual trannys will be rare by 2010. #1 is corporate profits, every automaker has been pushing automatics for years and they generally make between 600-1000 extra dollars for every one sold. and now, 90% of the population just buys what is on the dealers lot because buyers have gotten fed up with all the sellers schemes and they just want to get in and out of the car dealer with the least amount of hassle as possible. not like years ago when people actually sat down and ordered their options. which leads to # 2, the pussification of america. we americans, me included, get lazier every year. look at any other country and check the percentage of manual tranny's sold versus automatics. i am a die hard ford man, but i believe ford would still be a viable contender in the mid to full size car market today if they offered a manual tranny like mazda, honda, toyota, and nissan. see what i mean about american automakers? i feel there are still a sizeable amount of people in this country that still like to row their own, me included. but that is completely off the subject of the super duty forum, sorry. i think the 6 speed tranny will stay around in trucks as long as people still order them in signifigant #'s. does anyone wonder why super duty and dodge sales have taken off in the last couple of years? has anyone seen a chevy or gmc heavy duty with a manual tranny lately? to my knowledge, they arent offered anymore. correct me if i am wrong. in conclusion, i am not biased either way. i just love to shift my vehicles. i think before anyone gets their license, they ought to learn to shift a triplex or quadraplex mack like i did. great experience. all your points are excellent and well taken. i just have 1 question for you though. if the torque multiplication is better, and the ft. lbs coming out the tailshaft of an automatic tranny is greater than the manual, then why is a manual tranny truck rated better MPG?

 

GM does offer a manual transmission in their HD trucks, it isnt available in the higher trim package however, due to the configuration of the interior. Even in the lower end interior packages, the GM with a manual is about as rare as an ivory billed woodpecker.

 

Hey Frank

Just so we are clear, your were the 4th post on this topic and two of the first three were by the original poster. No one had made any claims at all about the auto trany when you posted this:

Don't let anyone kid you, any other engine I've ever driven feels like an entirely different animal with a manual transmission compared to an auto. The V10 will be the same way. I'd say a manual is good for at least 30CI in terms of feel and performance.

Kid who about what???... seems to me you are implying the auto trany isn't worth considering

Think about this - how many guys stood by the "tried and true" 4R100 back when it was in use, and claimed it to be as good as the ZF for all around use? Now these guys will be the same ones to tell you the Torqueshift is now equal in performance, but that the ZF is superior to the 4R100 in an older truck - if you can even find one.

Not sure what your point is, but sounds like you are challenging the fact that the TorqShift is equal to the ZF

In 5 years it will be the torqueshift being replaced - not the ZF. No auto can equal a HD manual for towing or hauling performance, ease of maintenance, sheer reliability, resistance to heat damage, or gear selectability. Todays autos are better than they used to be - there's been some change that way, but autos still cant compare to manuals for brute toughness - that still has'int changed.

Bold, italics and underline are by me and they represent a few factualy incorrect statments.

In fact the only truth in this rant, is the RESISTANCE TO HEAT DAMAGE. And you know for a fact that it can easily and cheaply be controlled. So in the grand scheme it is not a serious problem either. Except for dumb, ignorant folks who try to back up a steep slope to place a big *** trailer in a camping pad or parking spot.(high torque, no air flow, very hot fluids, puking seals)

Sounds to my like you came down here with an anti auto tranny chip on YOUR shoulder.

By your own admission you don't know anything about hte 5R110 and in your rant you make some very subjective opinions that can not be proven as fact.

I offered an alternate point of view using your assertions as points. I never took your post personal. But because I used your words to make points you seem to feel the need to be defensive. Fine... but it is kind of hard for me to see where you feel slighted when it was your post that seems to bash some of the best equipment the Ford engineers created.

I am not now, never was, and never will be against manual transmissions. I love them!... and BTW my BW super T10 handles 650 HP 6500rpm launches with a 3200LB drag car just fine. I have greanaded several Hays and Shaefer multi disk clutches and snapped 4 pinion shafts and not broke a thing in the trany for many years since the upgrade to the larger diameter main shaft and double row nose bearing modification. And I do have a truck or two in the yard with the ZF, a fine box that holds up well to my employees abuse... the few that I can find to hire with clutch and shift skills.. but that is another rant for another day.

 

10strokin

Not sure what you mean by manual "rated better MPG"

Part of your observation is too true to not comment on. Certainly Ford makes a fine bunch of bucks with the auto trany option but I suspect market forces (your thought on the feminization of America) have more to do with it then corporate greed. They just benefit from weird American buying habits.

Now the PSD vs Gas engine thing is purely profit oriented. A few well done ads of the 3V V10 SuperDuty smoking a Hemi or a 8.1L Silverado and gas sales would zoom to the top. But that $3700 to $5000 PSD option (add in auto trans for $1700 more) premium sales objective and profits force Ford to push the PSD like is was Gods gift to truckdom. Thats cool, I want the company to beat Chevy and stay on top. But we sure pay a premium for having the top rated truck.

Market forces (wussification) AND the new EPA/CAFE standards will force the big three to only offer a manual option for off road or farm use. Just a gut feeling based on last ten years of truck sales and Government mucking around.

 

Schmedly

I know what you mean but I suspect you will have a hard time finding the hand shaker to try out. You really don't have much to worry about though. Order the truck of your dreams, bypass the auto trany option and enjoy. There is no bad choice. The ZF is a great box for a veteran manual shifter.

If you decide to opt for the 5R110 you will be amazed. This box is built for towing and it does it very well. Mated to a 3v V10 or the PSD you will be happy with what the computer chooses because folks here will skool you on how to teach the beast to behave like you want it to. (little quirk called adaptive learning Ford snuck into the brain of the trans) The tow haul mode transforms the 5R110 into a second trany with entirely different set of behaviors. I liked the 4R100 OK but wished for a manual several times in off road areas. Not so with the TorqShift, not one day in the last 13 months have I wished for the hand shaker.

 

Well Fred, we can't always be all things to all people. If speaking my mind rubbed you the wrong way, what can I say? I'm not about to change my points of view to settle in a bit better with someone else's notion of what makes a responsible poster. We all get a bit riled at times. We can all become a bit overzealous about our own views from time to time as well. This is what I did. Perhaps I was a bit unfair in my statements regarding autos. Perhaps I've mistreated you in some way as well.

The original poster asked nothing about auto transmissions or the torqueshift in particular. Not a single solitary question or remark was raised. He plainly stated his intention to find a V10 with 6 speed transmission. He plainly stated his only must was to be able to drive this particular combination before buying one.

It's not like this guy came on asking for advice or opinions regarding the torqueshift and then I happened to jump in ranting and raving over the 6 speed. The post before mine mentioned dissatisfaction with the automatic -I got started and I chimed in as well - albeit overzealously. No law against this - happens all the time. V10 guys rant their advantages over the oil burners. In the diesel forums, it's the opposite. You decide to make a huge issue over my small indescretion (remember, the man was dedicated to a 6 speed from the beginning). Do you ever think that maybe your a tad overzealous yourself sometimes?

So far as the profitablity concerns go - I see it the opposite way. The way I see it, it makes sense that a company can make more money selling an in-house produced product than they can by simply peddling an outsourced one. Keeping it in-house means being able to more closely control production costs. The torqueshift is an in-house design. I'd say it costs Ford less money per unit to manufacture this transmission on a high volume production line than it costs them to purchase 6speed manual gear boxes from ZF. Now tack in the 1700.00 charge for the convenience of having one, and it's easy to see why Ford loves selling auto transmissions.

Same thing applies to the PSD and V10. You know it costs them much less to produce a V10 in-house than it does to purchase diesels from International. Now add all of the expensive warranty work Ford must eat when problems arise with these engines. In this case though, diesels have become so popular, they really don't have a choice but to keep buying them and peddling them out. The added cost, less profitability, and greater cost of performing warranty work are all reasons why Ford charges so much more for this popular option.

Make sense?

 

All of these posts from Fred and Sinister have given me a lot of food for thought and I want to thank them both for giving me such a good read.
I think you have both come up with valid points to support your ideas and IMO this one is a tie. Well done and no need for sudden death O.T. LOL.

 

Hope I edit this in as I posted this while Frant posted his... Frank... trust me brother I am not picking on you personally just using your thoughts and isead to counter argur. Nothing I write is intended to call you stupid, silly , or ignorant. I simply am stating a case and arguing my points so any body readiung can see what your position is and what I think.

There was now way to take your original post and make the pionts with out steppin gon your toes,, and I am sorry but you took off your own boots and stuck them out there to be trampled on a little.

Here is a little more Frank bashing and by now I hope he is numb enough and has enough sense of humor to not takle it personal.

I said in a previous post that The ZF is not a more tow/haul capable trans (a torque converter generate more power to the real axle then the lowest gear a ZF has due to torque multiplication..just a fact folks)

Frank aka sinnister73 says
I've already shown where this is false, but until now did'int feel the need to point it out. Regardless of the "power flow" or greater efficiency of planetary gears. The torque converter only multiplies torque when it slips. Heat is the result of this slipping process - that means energy loss. You don't get the full 1.89 multiplication to the gear. Add to this, it lasts only until forward motion is achieved.

When the good old 3v V10 is spinning at 2100rpm it is producing 80% of its rated flywheel torque for argument sake lets say that is 100ftlbs...(it is much more but I like 100Ftlbs)

Some folks seems to want to worry that the input rpm is faster then the out put rpm and that misses the point... the clutch only transfers to the main shaft the amount of ftlbs the motor is producing, a torque converter CONVERTS the torque to a higher amount and the closer to the stall speed the higher this multiplication is... who cares that great gobs of heat are also generated we need the torque to twist the rear axle and get the load moving.... more torque is always a good thing!

The ZF will apply this theoretical 100ftlbs and multiply it up by the low gear ratio and at the tail shaft you will not measure that full multiplication because of parasitic losses (not great but they do exist)

The 5R100 will apply this 100ftlbs to the driven side of the torque converter and the way Frank wants you to see it you have just a bunch of heat being generated and energy loss.

OK that is true enough but he will not acknowledge that the converter created TWO forms of energy the other was to transform the 100ftlbs to something higher. For argument lets say 23% multiplication of torque so now we start at the first gear reduction with 123Ftlbs to now multiply again and at the tail shaft we subtract the parasitic losses... hum gee the planetary design has significantly less loss so we end up with equal or greater torque driving the pinion gear then the lowest gear in the ZF.

BTW if you have the 4.10:1 or 4.30:1 you get to take another increase in torque multiplication over the 3.73:1 most ZFs are driving.

Frank also is not aware that the 5R110 is computer controlled and the torque converter has a well designed lock and un lock logic. When a load is sensed it can unlock, allow torque to multiply and prevent the need for a down shift.

And finally do not forget we are starting this theoretical 35 thousand lb load from a dead stop up hill at 6% grade and how soon will the ZF have to shift to stay in the power band? How large is the ratio change on the 1/2 shift relative to the 5R110s 1/2 shift?.... OK the 5R110 does have a shift in there that is a pretty big split but it does not factor in until your load is up in the 45-50mph range at the 2/3 shift and it has never dropped my 3v V10 out of the power band. If I had the 310HP 2v V10 it would force me back a gear in a hurry but the PSD and the 3V V10 have plenty of power to pull through this shift

Frank the ZF is a great working and super smooth trany. But do not kid your self that it is superior to the 5R110 TorqShift I like to think of the 5R110 as finally an auto trany that is as good as any trany I have ever towed with.

Bet there are few of you that know the 5R110 only has 3 fixed gear sets and an OD set that can be applied to two of the forward gears to creat the 5 different ratios. From the looks of the layout Ford can apply the OD to one more set and call it a 6 speed auto trans... coming soon to a dealer near you (grin)

Any body want to argue about the strongest transfer case ever put in a 4x4 truck?

 

And that would be?

I have experience with the NP 205 in my highboy... that thing had 350K+ miles on it, and while it leaked like a sieve, it kept spinnin' - low in it didn't make even a slight noise.

My '01's transfer case, I used it in low over Labor Day weekend pulling stumps, large chunks of concrete, pieces of old trailer (axle assembly), etc. Never complained.

Now, Fred, I'm sure you'll pick out some transfer case that was put in a Ford F600 6x6, or even bigger

art k.

 

The torqueshift tranny is a solid tranny and if I were in the market for any automatic in a haevy duty, it would likely be it. I would never argue the advantages of the automatic. It has the convenience factor, plenty of torque, they are very reliable now, etc... Transmissions that learn your driving habits and adapt to them have been around for some time now. I have driven some of these vehicles. They still don't know when I intend to pass or how quickly or what other hazzards or considerations are coming up. They don't know that an entrance ramp or exit ramp is coming up. They don't know what is on my mind or what I intend to do. These things are more important to me than, obviously the vast majority of vehicle purchasers. And unless they have done something very recently that I don't know about, a larger percentage of the engine horsepower will actually reach the rear wheels with a manual than an automatic, making it potentially more fuel efficient.