[VanMan36]

I'm wondering about the manual option on my transit's shifter. Does it have a specific purpose (like towing) or is it just a toy? I've searched the forums and can't decide its purpose.

Like, is it bad for the van to just drive it around in manual mode for the **** of it?

 

[joefromga]

Manual won't shift on its own so you can't just drive around in that mode.

You have to actively shift but it will shift down as you come to a stop.

It's for towing, racing, Hills, performance, fun, and more control.

I use it all the time to hold 3rd or 4th when driving around town for max power for passing and such.

 

[VanMan36]

Manual won't shift on its own so you can't just drive around in that mode.

You have to actively shift but it will shift down as you come to a stop.

It's for towing, racing, Hills, performance, fun, and more control.

I use it all the time to hold 3rd or 4th when driving around town for max power for passing and such.

Yeah I knew I had to shift, and I noticed it shifted down on its own... So it's just a way to partially control the transmission so as to prevent unnecessary shifting (which happens a lot with Transits, in my experience)?

Thanks for the info. I can drive a manual shift no problem, but I've never seen one of these "auto manual" things before.

 

[joefromga]

It's not to keep unnecessary shifting from happening but there are times when it is not as enjoyable to have it shifting down so easily.

I think the transmission is the same as the non turbo model which needs those revs to get going whereas the torquey ecoboost doesn't need to go from 6th to 3rd to pass a car.

Most new cars have an auto shift mode nowadays. You move the lever over and push forward or back.

 

[asdrew]

It's for towing, racing, Hills, performance, fun, and more control.

I use mine when racing Sprinters

 

[TomB985]

It's there for the times when you want to control your transmission. I use mine when towing the boat as well as to lock in 6th gear when using the cruise. Purely optional, and you won't hurt a thing by driving it in "M".

 

[VanMan36]

Cool. Thanks guys. I like the idea of racing Sprinters, by the way.

 

[Ahoelk]

Racing Sprinters is easy especially with the Eco Boost - but does it HURT the mileage....

 

[LDH®]

Racing Sprinters with an ECOBOOST is like taking a Nuclear Warhead to a Knife Fight. It's not even remotely close to being fair and you don't have to manual shift to do it...

I turned 7000 miles on my 3.5 this morning and I still cannot believe how fast this thing is if you step in it. Additionally I was towing my loaded down 6x12 race trailer on Monday into a 20mph headwind and when I got on it about half throttle and made a move to the left lane to pass a tractor trailer before I got caught in a line of traffic that I wouldn't be able to get out in front of the entire rig accelerated from 63mph to 85 in just a few seconds with a lighting fast downshift. It's almost an obscene amount of torque for a commercial vehicle.

 

[brittles]

I use mine when towing the boat as well as to lock in 6th gear when using the cruise.

I'm not clear what you mean about locking in 6th gear for cruise control. It would be no different in auto mode would it?

 

[TomB985]

I'm not clear what you mean about locking in 6th gear for cruise control. It would be no different in auto mode would it?

I like to prevent it from downshifting on hills when practical. I'd rather lose a few MPH and maintain top gear than downshift to 5th. Lower fuel consumption and less transmission wear.

 

[brittles]

I thought it automatically downshifted whichever mode your in.

 

[TomB985]

Manual mode will not downshift on its own unless the van goes too slow to maintain that gear. That's typically around 1,000 RPMs, or 35 MPH in 6th gear for my van.

In drive it will downshift on the cruise when it gets about 3 MPH below the set speed. I usually don't want that.

 

[alarmist]

Engine speed and efficiency are not linearly related. Ask anyone with a fuel consumption app or gauge. Sometimes you want a downshift.

 

[TomB985]

Engine speed and efficiency are not linearly related. Ask anyone with a fuel consumption app or gauge. Sometimes you want a downshift.

I haven't found that point. I've monitored fuel consumption in just about everything I've owned over the last ten years. Everything I've ever read about engine efficiency suggests that pumping losses moving air through the throttle plate are the biggest hindrance of engine efficiency, followed by frictional losses in the rotating assembly.

Seems like most efficiency maps suggest that peak efficiency is found at peak load around the peak in the torque curve. But that's only at peak load, efficiency falls considerably as engine load falls, meaning it's better to have higher engine load at lower RPMs(i.e. higher gear) than lower engine load at higher engine speeds. For practical applications this means being in the highest possible gear unless you're at the lugging limit.

Check out this video at 15:30

https://youtu.be/1Z2CxNNUMQY?t=15m30s

Talks about the benefits of the new 10-speed auto, and this portion talks about an efficiency map. Note the shift points on the following slide and the RPMs they are at.

 

[joefromga]

The turbos will make it different than N/A motors, though.
When not downshifting I have found that the turbos will add boost and add fuel so lugging is way too far to go to overcome the efficiency curve.

Also lugging is hard on your engine internals because of leverage of piston rods when in too high of a gear.

 

[TomB985]

The turbos will make it different than N/A motors, though.
When not downshifting I have found that the turbos will add boost and add fuel so lugging is way too far to go to overcome the efficiency curve.

Yup, very different efficiency curves on the boosted engines. My F150 is quite thirsty when under heavy boost.

Also lugging is hard on your engine internals because of leverage of piston rods when in too high of a gear.

How do you define lugging? My WOT is somewhere around half throttle for your EcoBoost, as under boost your pistons, rods, and bearings see far more load than my N/A engine can. Exact same rods and bearings BTW, so why would they be bad for my engine when your identical parts routinely see far greater forces? And that's not lugging?

I hate the "lugging" term, I think it's commonly misused.

 

[joefromga]

I define lugging as that point where you can hear and feel the engine struggling and you really should shift down to another gear.

With a stickshift we all know that sound. Maybe you coast to a light and get distracted and don't shift but the light changes so you hit the gas and lugg lugg..

I didn't know the rods are the same. But lugging is bad in either case. I would imagine the leverage is still worse and probably much worse on the transmission. Maybe not. I'm no engineer.

 

[VanMan36]

Yup, very different efficiency curves on the boosted engines. My F150 is quite thirsty when under heavy boost.



How do you define lugging? My WOT is somewhere around half throttle for your EcoBoost, as under boost your pistons, rods, and bearings see far more load than my N/A engine can. Exact same rods and bearings BTW, so why would they be bad for my engine when your identical parts routinely see far greater forces? And that's not lugging?

I hate the "lugging" term, I think it's commonly misused.

WOT? N/A? Sorry for the noob questions...trying to catch up on the jargon.

 

[RandomJoe]

WOT = wide open throttle
N/A = normally aspirated, e.g. no turbos (the 3.7L engine in the Transit)

I had found with my S10 that the ScanGauge reported the same instant MPG whether I was in 5th or 4th for any reasonable speeds (obviously I wasn't trying this at 70+). Similarly for lower speeds no apparent difference between 4th and 3rd. I'd often downshift from 5 to 4 before I got to a hill so I didn't lose speed. (It has a N/A 4.3L V6.)

Not at all the case with the Transit / EB! Every time I've switched to manual and toggled between the two adjacent gears at a fixed speed I got markedly lower instant MPG on the SG when in the lower gear. I am presuming that has something to do with the turbos spooling up more at the slightly higher engine RPM.

However I also wonder if the SG's reading is actually correct. I've never bothered to do their "tuning" stuff, just configured for the engine and off I went. That's been fine in all the previous vehicles I've used one in but this is the first turbo engine. I always thought in the past that the instant MPG was a value read from the ECU and now know it isn't, the SG calculates it using mass airflow (or manifold pressure? can't remember right off) and the engine size. Perhaps that's what messes with the numbers more in the EB since those numbers will change more wildly due to the turbos. I've had times in steady-state driving where the SG's instant numbers suggest I'm getting somewhat lower MPG than the cluster display says but that value doesn't slowly drop as if this was really the case. (Of course, the cluster display values have been mildly optimistic on mine - usually around 1 MPG high when I fill up and hand calculate.)