Joined
·
21 Posts
Would you choose a stick shift for your Transit, if it were available?
Jason
Jason
Would you choose a stick shift?
1 - 17 of 17 Posts
If it came with an old style 4 speed transmission and I was younger I would consider it. But it comes with Ford's 6 speed transmission which is basically a manual transmission that has been automated. You can put it in manual mode and use the shift levers to shift, best of both worlds. It operates so efficiently in automatic mode the only reason to use manual mode is for fun.
While I always purchase vehicles with manual transmissions if they are available, I would have to drive a van with both the manual and automatic to determine which I would buy. Probably the manual.
The manual operation of the Transit gearbox is not as well done as my 08 Sprinter. With Sprinter, just push the lever to the right to upshift and pull it to the left to downshift. That is more convenient than the Ford little pushbuttons on the lever. I will have to be retrained. At the Ford tour I did run the autocross course with the lever in manual and used the pushbuttons to shift. Works but not as well as the Sprinter. I am expecting the Ford automatic to be a better gearbox than the 5 speed Sprinter POS. Ford will not require constant manual shifting that is required in the Sprinter.
Some enterprising person may be able to put the Mustang manual 6 speed in a Transit. V6 engine is used in the Mustang with a manual 6 speed. The European Transit is available with a manual 6 speed so most likely the clutch pedal parts could be used from Europe. Probably hydraulic operation both in USA and Europe. Maybe our sheetmetal and clutch mounting locations are the same? The problem would probably be the electronics.
The manual operation of the Transit gearbox is not as well done as my 08 Sprinter. With Sprinter, just push the lever to the right to upshift and pull it to the left to downshift. That is more convenient than the Ford little pushbuttons on the lever. I will have to be retrained. At the Ford tour I did run the autocross course with the lever in manual and used the pushbuttons to shift. Works but not as well as the Sprinter. I am expecting the Ford automatic to be a better gearbox than the 5 speed Sprinter POS. Ford will not require constant manual shifting that is required in the Sprinter.
Some enterprising person may be able to put the Mustang manual 6 speed in a Transit. V6 engine is used in the Mustang with a manual 6 speed. The European Transit is available with a manual 6 speed so most likely the clutch pedal parts could be used from Europe. Probably hydraulic operation both in USA and Europe. Maybe our sheetmetal and clutch mounting locations are the same? The problem would probably be the electronics.
Automatic. As mentioned above, manuals are good for 'drivers cars', and decent elsewhere. But automatics in general have become far better than what they were for many years.
I've driven manual in 3 of my 4 cars, and I quite enjoy it. Have driven autos occasionally, and didn't like 'em. Recently spent some time in my dad's 2006 Audi, and was quite pleased with it.
For how I would be using a Transit, an auto would do just fine. Highway miles on cruise control? Sure... Stop and go around town? Yes, please...
The one situation I could see preferring to have a manual would be if I was consistently at max GVW, and/or towing weight as well. And for that, I'd prefer to have a diesel, with an exhaust brake. Worked my uncle's cattle ranch for a few years, drove a Dodge truck w/ Cummins that would regularly tow 15k pounds on the gooseneck. Put it in lower gear, flip on the jake brake, and downhills were no problem. slow, but no problem. And the with the low first gear and the Cummins' torque, never had a problem getting it moving either.
Ok, the other situation would be if I had a weekend 'play' car. Ya know, something like a Caterham 7, Mini Cooper S, or even a basic first gen Miata.
I've driven manual in 3 of my 4 cars, and I quite enjoy it. Have driven autos occasionally, and didn't like 'em. Recently spent some time in my dad's 2006 Audi, and was quite pleased with it.
For how I would be using a Transit, an auto would do just fine. Highway miles on cruise control? Sure... Stop and go around town? Yes, please...
The one situation I could see preferring to have a manual would be if I was consistently at max GVW, and/or towing weight as well. And for that, I'd prefer to have a diesel, with an exhaust brake. Worked my uncle's cattle ranch for a few years, drove a Dodge truck w/ Cummins that would regularly tow 15k pounds on the gooseneck. Put it in lower gear, flip on the jake brake, and downhills were no problem. slow, but no problem. And the with the low first gear and the Cummins' torque, never had a problem getting it moving either.
Ok, the other situation would be if I had a weekend 'play' car. Ya know, something like a Caterham 7, Mini Cooper S, or even a basic first gen Miata.
Joined
·
21 Posts
If I were the only driver, yes, I would. However, since my wife would also occasionally drive the van and she would want an automatic, I have to buy auto. She can drive a manual transmission but doesn't enjoy it as much as when we were younger. Her first car was a VW with 4-speed stick and drove it quite well but shifting got old in time. Apparently she's in the majority. Plus autos get better mileage most of the time.
Joined
·
1,208 Posts
Autos get better mileage? First I ever heard that one?
Last van with manual tranny had 3 on the tree (1970). With a 6-speed not sure if manual makes sense even with floor shifter. Also new Transit seat configuration (closer to center line) makes a floor stick problematic, similar to comment (USMCVet?) sbout the Quigley 4WD transfer/shifter being challenging to locate.
Not wild about the "Manual" function of the new transmission (using buttons on shift lever) but better than no control I guess, especially for long downhills towing a heavy trailer. Engine braking is very useful here, and really saves the brakes.
Went by too many runaway truck sand bail-out zones out west . . .
Not wild about the "Manual" function of the new transmission (using buttons on shift lever) but better than no control I guess, especially for long downhills towing a heavy trailer. Engine braking is very useful here, and really saves the brakes.
Went by too many runaway truck sand bail-out zones out west . . .
Yeah, I'm a little surprised too but hard data is hard to ignore. EPA ratings for most cars that are available with both auto and stick (otherwise the same vehicle) gives the advantage to the auto transmissions. Gearing that is usually taller with automatics has a lot to do with it.
And now it seems CVTs on average are taking it a step further for vehicles that offer them. Again, it's partly due to gearing that can be even taller still.
Sometimes I wonder how they determine the fuel mileage ratings of automatics vs. manuals. Same driver? Does driver of manual transmission vehicle shift at the correct time? I am fairly sure I can get better mileage with a manual in hills than an automatic on or off cruise control. I have the advantage of seeing the changing conditions before they occur. I can also let vehicle loose a bit of speed as I approach the top of the hill.
No doubt that a automatic can beat an manual if automatic has additional gear ratios. A manual over 6 speeds starts to get tedious.
Then there is the manufacturers choice of gear ratios. I have a 02 BMW 330Ci 5 speed manual. It has poorly chosen ratios in my opinion. I regularly short shift it bypassing 4th gear. The ratios for 3rd,4th and 5th are so close together that 4th is of little value. A gearbox with evenly spaced ratios would be a big improvement.
Another example of poor transmission design is the Sprinter V6 with the 5 speed NAG 1 semi-automatic. It is one of the major reasons for my selling the Sprinter. It is not an automatic. You have to buy a Scan Gage to watch the LOD reading so you can downshift to prevent engine operating at 100% load. Fuel mileage increases if you manually downshift. The Sprinter manual downshift is a better design than the Transit. Just move the lever side to side to down and up shift. No manual mode selection and no small pushbuttons to actuate. Will miss that design.
No doubt that a automatic can beat an manual if automatic has additional gear ratios. A manual over 6 speeds starts to get tedious.
Then there is the manufacturers choice of gear ratios. I have a 02 BMW 330Ci 5 speed manual. It has poorly chosen ratios in my opinion. I regularly short shift it bypassing 4th gear. The ratios for 3rd,4th and 5th are so close together that 4th is of little value. A gearbox with evenly spaced ratios would be a big improvement.
Another example of poor transmission design is the Sprinter V6 with the 5 speed NAG 1 semi-automatic. It is one of the major reasons for my selling the Sprinter. It is not an automatic. You have to buy a Scan Gage to watch the LOD reading so you can downshift to prevent engine operating at 100% load. Fuel mileage increases if you manually downshift. The Sprinter manual downshift is a better design than the Transit. Just move the lever side to side to down and up shift. No manual mode selection and no small pushbuttons to actuate. Will miss that design.
A little off topic, but for instance: I've owned two Subaru Outbacks with basically identical 4 cyl engines. Previous was a 5 speed manual, newer one has a CVT (which is a really good one by the way, shocking).
The CVT is turning about 1,000 rpm lower on the freeway than the 5 speed.
MPG difference day to day is only about 2MPG, but under ideal conditions (55mph, no wind), it's about 6-7 MPG better than the 5 speed.
The torque converter locks at about 18mph, so there isn't the slippage of the old automatics.
It will be interesting to see if we get heavy duty CVT's for light trucks in the future. I really like it on the freeway as we have a lot of hills here and there is no shifting when on cruise control, just a mild change in rpm. Very smooth and quiet, no surging as you would have with a regular automatic shifting to another gear. I like the way it tows my utility trailer too.
I was really skeptical after driving a Dodge Caliber rental with a CVT which was absolutely horrible and noisy. Subaru nailed it though.
JP4, I was reviewing Honda Fit specs thinking it would make a great toad for RVing, and was truly surprised at how much overall gearing difference there is between the 6-speed manual and CVT. The CVT is rated higher in fuel economy but I'd feel better about flat towing the 6-speed. I'm not even sure the CVT can be flat towed or not.
Anyway, CVT overall gearing is 5.44 X .408 = 2.22
6-speed is 4.62 X .727 = 3.36
To me that seems like a huge difference. The manual in some cases would have to run the engine 50 percent faster -- like 2000 vs 3000 RPM.
I think the reason they don't run taller gearing with manuals transmissions is because drivers wouldn't want to have to shift the moment the road turns uphill even if slightly. A lot of drivers don't even like that with their automatic transmissions. But as you say, with a CVT the driver doesn't see or feel a discrete change so it's not objectable.
Regarding whether we'll see CVTs in vans, I think so given more time. CVTs are torque limited at present but their capacity has been improving steadily. Nissan CVTs handle a lot of power.
Having said that, I think perhaps an electric-based CVT transmission like used on Honda Accord hybrid will provide all the torque we need. It's hard to say though because of mid-range inefficiency when direct drive can't be used for prolong periods.
Anyway, CVT overall gearing is 5.44 X .408 = 2.22
6-speed is 4.62 X .727 = 3.36
To me that seems like a huge difference. The manual in some cases would have to run the engine 50 percent faster -- like 2000 vs 3000 RPM.
I think the reason they don't run taller gearing with manuals transmissions is because drivers wouldn't want to have to shift the moment the road turns uphill even if slightly. A lot of drivers don't even like that with their automatic transmissions. But as you say, with a CVT the driver doesn't see or feel a discrete change so it's not objectable.
Regarding whether we'll see CVTs in vans, I think so given more time. CVTs are torque limited at present but their capacity has been improving steadily. Nissan CVTs handle a lot of power.
Having said that, I think perhaps an electric-based CVT transmission like used on Honda Accord hybrid will provide all the torque we need. It's hard to say though because of mid-range inefficiency when direct drive can't be used for prolong periods.
Joined
·
1,208 Posts
I will have to go with Orton, some people are better off to have an auto, and the people that know how to shift could benefit with a standard. I know a guy with a fleet of class 5 Internationals get better mileage with the standards then the autos.
I have always done better with standards as well.
I have always done better with standards as well.
If I could get a van with a manual transmission, I would have it on order so fast it would make your head spin. I dislike (kind word) automatics, but nothing is worse than a CVT. One of the most recent rental cars I had was a Subaru Forester with a CVT. The rubber band effect drove me absolutely nuts. I'll take the mileage hit and I'll even pay more for it, but a clutch pedal is the option I covet over all others. Sadly, I'm in a clear minority.
1 - 17 of 17 Posts
