Autos vs Manual transmissions

SMH at some of the replies. I'm in a fleet that does not hire new drivers and runs all 48, and more west than east. They started phasing out sticks for similar spec'd autos (Detroit autos) about 3 years ago. Shooting the bull with the top brass a month or so ago, he showed me invariably on the computer, when a driver was moved into an auto, mileage instantly went up 1 MPG, in some cases, even better. And the weight was identical to my prior an similar spec'd stick.

Same goes in my case where I recently moved to my first auto after aggregate 20+ years in various sticks. I moved from a '15 to an '18 (Freightliner). I would still prefer a 13 speed but that's hasn't been an option for me in many years, so, that said, these Detroits paired with the Detroit DD12 auto, and they're better than the doggy 10 speed stick I retired ... it's hard to find anything to complain about with these new DD12 autos with the eCoast and terrain-aware maps. And the engine brake is far superior to my previous truck. I suspect Detroit has now reached a point where Volvo can no longer claim to have the best overall auto.

Autos are going to be the norm for most. May as well accept it.

And the 1 MPG improvement? Do the math for a mid or large fleet where most trucks are running 34k+ miles/qtr. It'll blow your mind.

 

I"m sticking with the argument that it depends on the operation. It's kind of a moot point when pulling flats or hh through the rocky mountains. Although, i guess every little bit helps.

My best mileage came from the 16 FL DD15 @ 515. With 13 speed. 6.3 mpg. Better then the 14 FL's the company had. Their first auto's. My guess with that truck would be the horsepower. It didn't spend as much time climbing hills. Defenitely made the trips faster. That truck also had a longer frame. Was supposed to be a cost savings for oversized permits. But permits still had to be bought. The extra 3 feet was nothing more then a PITA in California. Money pit when it came to trailer tires.

 

I learned on a 6x4 and I prefer a manual transmission and will stay with one. I do see the areas where an auto could be better, such as in town driving etc. The army was one of the first adopters of "automatic" transmissions" with the Allison back in the day. I have driven a Splicer 4x4 air shift buy that's a somewhat like the Super 10, which I am not fond of. I like the old style 6x4,4x4, 5x4.

 

It is the entire operation of the autoshift that gives it the fuel saving.. Anyone who tells you they can operate a stick with the same efficiency as the current generation of autoshift is probably still driving one of those 6mpg dinosaurs because they look cool. No offense, but putting less in the tank makes me feel cool.

 

You mean those 6 mpg dinosaurs from the 90s/early 2000s? The ones that are still out there earning someone a living? Probably on 3 days a week at that. I think a lot of people are still proud of their dinosaurs and happily pay the fuel bill.

 

I like more. Less stopping and logging of fuel on the log book. Or ELD.

 

More is good.

Considering that they want to ban dinosaurs.

 

Plenty of applications were it may not be a factor. But social media is full of donuts who brag about their 100mph large car classic Kenworth's while they complain about freight rates & fuel costs..
Had one who bought a 200k 600hp classic beast & was complaining about it being down because of def system issues. He was pulling light loads to save money on fuel. His desire to look cool & not spec his equipment for the job might cost him his house. 600hp & 2050 Torque for under 20k loads? Yep you will have issues

 

If Freight Tonnage increases income potentially why are we seeing him haul 20K loads? I see no value in 20K loads, *Semi rants in paradox... if you are gonna rock a semi like that putting down 2000 torque etc load it to the nuts I say.. let's haul something.

 

They shift too slow and loose too much momentum between shifts to save any fuel over a manual.