Comparison article on Chevy, Dodge and FORD Diesels :-)
http://www.pickuptruck.com/html/2003/ford/superduty/first_drive/page1.html
Wait until PUTC unveils the manual transmission article. That will be the TRUE comparison. Some people were complaining that the test was unfair since the HO was unavailable in CA, and no automatic transmission was available with the HO.
Dodge blew it big time!
>Wait until PUTC unveils the manual transmission article.
>That will be the TRUE comparison. Some people were
>complaining that the test was unfair since the HO was
>unavailable in CA, and no automatic transmission was
>available with the HO.
>
>Dodge blew it big time!
Would that matter? When two of the engines have purpose built 5-spd automatics, why would you want the 5-6 spd manuals that are old, less efficient designs? To me a true test would be one that uses each manufacturer's best method for extraction of the power. For Ford and GM, that is an automatic. If Dodge wants to use a manual for their HO unit, let them. When people can get comparable or better performance with something they don't have to row themselves, it is just that much easier for them to not buy a manual transmission. Convenience sells... Efficiency sells...
Honestly, if you got better power management, better towing, better fuel efficiency, lighter weight (means a higher payload), and it was easier to drive with an automatic, are you saying that you would still buy a manual transmission? Why?
>>Wait until PUTC unveils the manual transmission article.
>>That will be the TRUE comparison. Some people were
>>complaining that the test was unfair since the HO was
>>unavailable in CA, and no automatic transmission was
>>available with the HO.
>>
>>Dodge blew it big time!
>
>Would that matter? When two of the engines have purpose
>built 5-spd automatics, why would you want the 5-6 spd
>manuals that are old, less efficient designs? To me a true
>test would be one that uses each manufacturer's best method
>for extraction of the power. For Ford and GM, that is an
>automatic. If Dodge wants to use a manual for their HO
>unit, let them. When people can get comparable or better
>performance with something they don't have to row
>themselves, it is just that much easier for them to not buy
>a manual transmission. Convenience sells... Efficiency
>sells...
>
>Honestly, if you got better power management, better towing,
>better fuel efficiency, lighter weight (means a higher
>payload), and it was easier to drive with an automatic, are
>you saying that you would still buy a manual transmission?
>Why?
Why is the manual a less efficient design?
> Why is the manual a less efficient design?
I must have been drinking some spiked kool-aid that day. I know that manuals are more efficient as a rule. I guess I was playing "devil's advocate" for the new automatics. I wonder what the lost efficiency is? Since these are supposed to be that much better than previous auto's?
Trending Topics
>and have fewer problems. I hear all over various boards on
>the net about auto transmission problems. The only manual
>problem is the Ford dual-mass flywheel.
I have also had the clutch master cylinder go on my 2001 F-350 SD 4x4 twice! Not good but the truck is worth all of its trouble!
Ford Trucks for Ford Truck Enthusiasts




