Manual vs Automatic transmission in TV

krobbe wrote:
Automatics make it easier to drink coffee, eat, text, and talk on the cellphone at the same time.;)

Exactly

Thanks for all the information. I would prefer buying an automatic for resale value and convenience of driving. We did find a very small fifth-wheel, so now, we are looking for a TV. The seller delivered it to the house. We are excited to get back on the road and enjoy camping again!

25 years ago I was slamming the gears in a CJ8. Hopping out, locking the hubs, crawl half way up a hill climb, stall out, and roll back unpowered. Take the key out of the ignition while driving, and taping my foot on the hi/low beam rocker switch. Oh how I miss that relic too.

rbpru wrote:
Which is better depends on the driver and what he or she likes to drive. "Feel" is a large part of some people's driving.

Automatics and Manuals certainly have a different feel to them.

All of this is a moot point of course, because Detroit made the decision for us over a decade ago.

There it is in a nutshell. ((Detroit made the decision for us)).

Which is better depends on the driver and what he or she likes to drive. "Feel" is a large part of some people's driving.

Automatics and Manuals certainly have a different feel to them.

All of this is a moot point of course, because Detroit made the decision for us over a decade ago.

Where I do a lot of my towing I prefer a manual. I spend a lot of time on slow/steep mountain roads. The lower gearing and heat generation of a manual is a big benefit. Even with large coolers it's hard to keep a auto cool with an unlocked torqued converter at 10-25 mph on a 95° day at 20K GCW.

Modern auto's are better at highways speeds, where most people spend their time. So if your talking mountains on a paved surface then I wouldn't be concerned at all about an auto.

If/when I go to replace my current TV with a new one it will be an automatic, the manuals are hindered too much on torque and IMHO it's not worth messing with the new engines (tuning, etc). If Ram still only offers 3.42's with the SRW I will have 4.10's swapped in before it leaves the lot, I spend too much time where 1st and 3.42's is too tall and working too hard.

Rowing through gears is for sports cars...and even that has been changing depending on the car. But no way will I give up rowing the gears in my performance car. Since I don't commercial tow...don't care what they do.

That aside, with today's auto-trans ability to select gears or lock-out a wider range of gears, I would disagree that towing through the mountains is better with a manual trans. Give me a newer auto-trans for towing any day in these here mountains.

Proxim you are correct. The various government regs no doubt encouraged the development of automatic transmissions which are more compatible with the computer interfacing.

As for the manual transmission's suitability for towing with modern vehicle designs, certainly Detroit could have developed it. But only a comparative handful of folks would have purchased them.

It is the same as reducing the towing capacity when you opt for a 4x4. Quite different from the old days.

E&J push'n wind wrote:
DessertSpooners,

I think you pretty much got the answer to your question.

RJCorazza wrote:
My previous truck was severely derated by the manufacturer if equipped with a manual transmission. Auto transmissions have come a long way over the years with computer controlled tow/haul modes, 6+ speeds, ability to manually shift, and lock out higher ranges.
I still like manuals, but I would have to say that they are not going to out perform an auto. IMHO.

That said, I've often wondered why to this answer? Just to use as an example, semi's. The manual tranny still remains to be more efficient and you have a whole lot of forward gears to choose from. As far as light trucks and modern transmissions, there are manual transmissions with as many as 8 forward gears now rivaling the auto tranny's with as many forward gears as well.

So the question is why the "de-rating" of light trucks when equipped with a manual tranny as an option? I know one of the "weak links" is the clutch assembly in a light truck manual transmissions. That could be easily overcome in the mfg process. Personally, I would prefer a manual tranny when it comes to towing. You just don't have it as a viable option in today's light trucks.

100% agree with you. Towing (driving period) is far easier with a manual transmission. I hate my automatic transmission, but with a crew cab and gasser, there was no choice. I still need to use the up/down arrows to keep the truck in 2nd, 3rd, and 4th while towing my trailer because it goes through way too much gas in 5th and 6th and hunts gears. My transmission temperature goes way too high and the truck struggles to pull the load. I have the Sierra 5.3 with the 6 speed auto. When I downshift and keep those revs above 4000, everything runs wonderfully. Transmission temps go down, fuel consumption goes down, speed stays up at 55 for almost all grades.

I can say, these newer automatics certainly tow better then automatics 15 years ago. There seem to be much lower gear ranges in 1st and 2nd now.

Trying to meet ever tightening emission standards is another reason why we're seeing manuals disappear. It's much easier for manufacturers to write algorithms for auto since everything is interconnected electronically. The ECU knows the speed, rpm, load, etc and can easily control the engine/transmission to reduce emissions. It's not so easy with manuals since the operator can select a gear on a whim. The operator can easily lug or over rev a gear which will cause emission spikes.

I still love my manuals, but when it comes to towing I'll stick with the autos. When you think about it, they're the best for longevity. The vehicle spends its whole life trying to protect itself. It's more complicated and little less efficient, but the trade off is that you'll probably get more life out of the tranny and engine.