Man I hate automatics

Status
Not open for further replies.
No thanks, no need for a Jeep here.
wink.gif
I either commute to work or want something to move bulky things on the weekends. edit: A Jeep doesn't really serve my needs in either capacity real well. A commuter with a 4spd auto might. Maybe. Although I think a 5spd manual would do better.
 
Last edited:
After driving trucks for over 40 years I developed what I call 'clutch knee'. I told the orthopedic surgeon that's what was wrong with my left knee and he chuckled and agreed. I sold my Nissan truck with a 5 speed manual and bought a Chevy truck with an automatic for that reason. I retired in 2011 and still drive one to days a week. The company has ordered 36 new Volvo trucks with the Allison automatics and I can't wait to try one out. I've changed enough gears and held a clutch pedal in at countless stop lights over the last 40 years to amount to several life times. I'm lovin the automatics at this point in my life.
 
I don't hate driving automatics, but I hate how unreliable some of them are. Sure it may shift like butter and have 10 gears to help fuel economy, but with the cost to rebuild a transmission they shouldn't go out at 100k miles. The "lifetime fluid" automatics are a joke. Not sure who the shining star was that came up with that idea.

I like the AW4 in my Jeep. It may have quirky shift points at times, but it is tough and built to last. I've seen people who ran them low on fluid, had water in them, etc, and they still went to 300k miles. My next vehicle will probably be a 5 speed though. None of this sealed, "lifetime fluid" [censored] for me.
 
You can change "lifetime" fluids. It's a bit more work, but not that hard.
 
Yes; do not confused "lifetime fluids" with "sealed transmissions". Our 1997 and 2001 Cadillacs (4T80-E) had "lifetime fluids", but you could very easily change them. Drop the pan, clean the screen, and fill back up through the dipstick tube. "Lifetime fluid" simply means that the manufacturer doesn't recommend a fluid change, usually based upon driving conditions.

Many people generalize "lifetime fluids" to mean that you never have to change the fluid, or that the manufacturer recommends that the fluid never be changed, period. In many instances, the "normal" maintenance schedule might recommend only fluid inspection, but the "severe" maintenance schedule (which is the one many people should be following) might recommend fluid changes every 50,000 miles or something of that nature. I think the concept of "lifetime fluids" is sometimes generalized to mean more than what it really does.

Our '97 Seville left our family with about 170,000 miles on the original Dexron III. In some transmissions, it seems to work.
 
This thread is funny. I have owned both autos and manuals and never had one bit of trouble with either. I have only owned one new car, so all the other vehicles I have purchased second or third hand. I have hundreds of thousands of miles logged, all trouble free. My formula for success is very simple, yet very precise. Without adhering to these you could have a bad experience with any cars transmission.

1) The first step is do your homework and pick cars that are known to have dead reliable automatic or manual transmissions. You can't possibly expect that you will have success with a transmission that has known issues. Some car companies are better at one or the other, very few are good at both.

2) Second step is to check the history/maintenance of the car you are buying. You can't possibly expect good operational life from anything that has been abused.

3) Autos, manuals each have their place and application. You can't expect an auto to be a performance feature in a 3 cyl firefly, likewise you can't expect a manual to be all kinds of fun in grid lock.

4) Do the maintenance. Yearly drains/refill are golden and cheap to do. Always having fresh fluid trumps extended drain boutique oils every time.

Overall the automatic is taking over. There will be a few holdouts as long as they can, but overall it is the way the world is moving. Years ago Top Gear lamented the flappy paddle gearbox. Now they nary test a car without one.

As far as costs go to repair, if you aren't doing it yourself it is going to cost. Autos over a few drivers tend to have less wear and tear compared to different driving styles (like riding the clutch) would. I can't comment much more, like I said I have never had an issue.
 
When you drive in Austin traffic, you don't want a stick.

It will get old quick.

Just keep the fluid clean in your automatic, and most of them are trouble free.
 
Sorry I should have clarified: I know you can service lifetime fluid transmissions, but the idea of the fluid being lifetime is what creates the problem. The general public is already pretty much clueless about automatic transmissions needing fluid changes for longer life. Tell them the fluid is "lifetime" and the idea of fluid changes goes completely out of their mind.

A transmission that is harder to service, or that deters you from servicing it is one I won't be interested in buying.
 
Stop saying that manual transmission means never a problem within the transmission.

There have been many cars with trouble prone manual transmissions, the Mitsubishi Eclipse and SAAB 900 are the first 2 I can think of.
 
Originally Posted By: Kiwi_ME
Ditto on the Saab 900, I owned two. The fault was actually in the clutch slave cylinder to be fair.


Yeah....a "clutch job" should include replacement of both master and slave cylinders...
 
Modern auto's are far superior, their is nothing a MT can do that a 2014 auto can't do better.

MT's fail as well, and you have to replace a clutch at some point. Porsche for example will give you a full and long warranty on their excellent PDK, but a stick? Your on your own, let your GF try to drive your $150k GT3 and she toasts the clutch and your out $3k. Porsche provides no warranty on clutch's...

Even with larger trucks the only operators that spec manuals these days are either super cheap or old timers.
 
Last edited:
I used to feel that way about automatics, but not so much anymore. Common automatic failures are generally model-specific, and/or related to neglect and abuse.

I grew up in the days where "the automatic puts the car in the junkyard," but even then it was a model specific thing. It was just that a lot of common autos had design flaws or did not do well with neglect. My parents bought a 1990 Taurus new that went through three automatics in the time we owned it, and at least four before it was junked. I remember my dad checking the dipstick during one failure, and there were chunks of clutch material on it. But that was the only auto we had that failed, or even had any problems of any kind.

I have had three vehicles...two Rangers and an Explorer. The Explorer and my current Ranger have automatics...literally zero problems from either one. The Explorer shifted perfectly at 158K miles when I got rid of it due to rust. My current Ranger is at almost 152K miles and shifts like it did when new. Both were maintained, but neither was babied. Both towed, and the Ranger has seen countless 5000 RPM shifts. It has never missed a beat. I just changed the filter in the Ranger for the first time 4K miles ago, and was amazed at how clean the insides were.

That said, many if not most people think maintenance is just changing the engine oil. The trans goes untouched. For some, that works out just fine, but I strongly believe ATF should be changed at regular intervals. My truck has had complete changes every 25K-30K throughout its life. I have done filter changes on other vehicles where the trans had not been touched for over 100K miles, and the bottom of the pan showed it. IMO, if the magnet is not catching all of the debris due to being loaded up, that debris will cause added wear and keep things from functioning as they did when new.

As others mentioned, manuals can be failure prone and have design flaws too. The manual offered in my vehicle of choice tends to be very reliable, but does have some problem areas (leaking slave cylinder, leaking shift rail plugs), but at the same time the, basic unit is typically good for life. I have sometimes thought about that from a cost of ownership/reliability standpoint, but with over 150K on two Ranger 4R/5R transmissions with literally no problems to speak of...I am not sure if it is really better. When my 5R44E puts me on the side of the road or gives me headaches I might think otherwise, but right now at 12 years and 152K, it's working perfectly. I really couldn't ask for a better transmission in my truck.

What I really miss from my old manual Ranger is the driving experience on open roads. That for me is really the area where there is no contest. Winding my auto truck up to 5K is fun, but it just lacks the visceral feel of rowing the gears in a manual. A couple weeks ago I did some maintenance on a family friend's 1990 3.0 Ranger with a manual. They live in a rural area with winding, hilly roads. After I got done, I took the truck out for a drive, and it was like getting high. I hadn't really driven a manual for any length of time in about 5 years, but it came right back to me "like riding a bike." The truck had no tach, and shifting based on the sound/feel of the engine was awesome. I think I enjoyed it more than I would have with a tach. That kind of connection with the vehicle is just impossible to get with an automatic. Driving my truck was as numb as driving a Camry afterwards. I told them if the old '90 3.0 ever goes up for sale, call me first. It's not for sale.
 
Originally Posted By: 01rangerxl
I used to feel that way about automatics, but not so much anymore. Common automatic failures are generally model-specific, and/or related to neglect and abuse.

I grew up in the days where "the automatic puts the car in the junkyard," but even then it was a model specific thing. It was just that a lot of common autos had design flaws or did not do well with neglect. My parents bought a 1990 Taurus new that went through three automatics in the time we owned it, and at least four before it was junked. I remember my dad checking the dipstick during one failure, and there were chunks of clutch material on it. But that was the only auto we had that failed, or even had any problems of any kind.

I have had three vehicles...two Rangers and an Explorer. The Explorer and my current Ranger have automatics...literally zero problems from either one. The Explorer shifted perfectly at 158K miles when I got rid of it due to rust. My current Ranger is at almost 152K miles and shifts like it did when new. Both were maintained, but neither was babied. Both towed, and the Ranger has seen countless 5000 RPM shifts. It has never missed a beat. I just changed the filter in the Ranger for the first time 4K miles ago, and was amazed at how clean the insides were.

That said, many if not most people think maintenance is just changing the engine oil. The trans goes untouched. For some, that works out just fine, but I strongly believe ATF should be changed at regular intervals. My truck has had complete changes every 25K-30K throughout its life. I have done filter changes on other vehicles where the trans had not been touched for over 100K miles, and the bottom of the pan showed it. IMO, if the magnet is not catching all of the debris due to being loaded up, that debris will cause added wear and keep things from functioning as they did when new.

As others mentioned, manuals can be failure prone and have design flaws too. The manual offered in my vehicle of choice tends to be very reliable, but does have some problem areas (leaking slave cylinder, leaking shift rail plugs), but at the same time the, basic unit is typically good for life. I have sometimes thought about that from a cost of ownership/reliability standpoint, but with over 150K on two Ranger 4R/5R transmissions with literally no problems to speak of...I am not sure if it is really better. When my 5R44E puts me on the side of the road or gives me headaches I might think otherwise, but right now at 12 years and 152K, it's working perfectly. I really couldn't ask for a better transmission in my truck.

What I really miss from my old manual Ranger is the driving experience on open roads. That for me is really the area where there is no contest. Winding my auto truck up to 5K is fun, but it just lacks the visceral feel of rowing the gears in a manual. A couple weeks ago I did some maintenance on a family friend's 1990 3.0 Ranger with a manual. They live in a rural area with winding, hilly roads. After I got done, I took the truck out for a drive, and it was like getting high. I hadn't really driven a manual for any length of time in about 5 years, but it came right back to me "like riding a bike." The truck had no tach, and shifting based on the sound/feel of the engine was awesome. I think I enjoyed it more than I would have with a tach. That kind of connection with the vehicle is just impossible to get with an automatic. Driving my truck was as numb as driving a Camry afterwards. I told them if the old '90 3.0 ever goes up for sale, call me first. It's not for sale.


I bought my current Corolla with 148K miles. Not knowing how well the tranny was cared for by the previous owner, I drained the ATF at the time of purchase, and installed a new filter and a tranny cooler. I changed the ATF at every oil change (which is every 6K miles) the first 3 times, and now I change it every 18K miles (which is every 3rd oil change). My motto has always been keep the fluid in good shape and the tranny will take care of you...
 
Last edited:
Quote:

Please list 10 reason why manual is better than auto in a 4-door family sedan.



I was asked this elsewhere and I'm asked the same question on photography forums when I say that I prefer manual focus lenses and manually adjusting exposure in the cameras, and my answer there is this...

85rlccu43b.jpg



..because I can...and because the process and results are much more satisfying knowing that I shot it with my own hands and eyes without automatic anything...and because, in this shot at least, it is unlikely that an AutoFocus lens would have gotten the shot as it is off center (this is a crop of the original), and the AF box might very well not have locked precisely on the feet (vs the wings or tail) as I had...

As for MT vs AT...I'm still young enough and able, thankfully @ 67, to shift with my left leg and appreciate the good fortune to be able to...

I've never felt inconvenienced when driving an MT in traffic...I do have a light foot and don't have to shift and shift and shift and...I've been in ATs that do just that and it drives me crazy...

I'm not saying that MTs are better, but I have experienced ATs that aren't as good as me in controlling RPMs for specific needs, whether for cruising or changing lanes, or passing...they didn't have paddle shifters, and I'll concede that they would make a difference there...

I don't argue or begrudge anyone driving an AT....and don't seek to convince anyone to drive an MT...it's just how I prefer to drive...

Back to question posed above...I'm not sure how a 4-door family sedan is any different than a 2-door coupe in this regard...the other day though I tried shifting as if it were a AT 4-door family sedan, and the guy behind me honked at me to get moving on....

I've had both coupes and sedans (BMW 2002, Fiat Spider, Mitsu/Plymouth Galant/Sapporo, Audi 5000, Subaru wagon, Nissan Altima) as well as trucks and vans and motorcycles, and would not have had any of them with an AT....

BTW, I DO own and use AF lenses, and DO use cameras in Auto-mode, it's just not my preference.
 
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: JustinH
When you drive in Austin traffic, you don't want a stick.

It will get old quick.

Just keep the fluid clean in your automatic, and most of them are trouble free.


I drive in the Boston area every day. I want a standard shift!
 
Originally Posted By: KrisZ
I don't hate automatics. Some are excellent and some are down right awful, the same applies to manual trannies.


+1. It comes down to the specific trans. Some manuals are not that great and still less efficient despite how good you can shift. I prefer MT's, but there are some good AT's. In a truck, I definitely lean towards AT.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

T
One dentist found a ton wrong that another one didn't?
3 4 5
Replies
85
Views
2K
The motor guy
I
Red Line D6 and ZF 8 Speed
Replies
8
Views
399
RBT
J
Replace metal TPMS with rubber valve stem TPMS
Replies
5
Views
817
joenobodyyet
D
Help with clutch on 1999 Honda Foutrax 300 4WD ATV
Replies
10
Views
231
diesellover
N
88 F-150 Clutch problems
Replies
3
Views
177
D60
Back
Top Bottom