Bad news for manual lovers

Lol I meant 2013.

Sorry the Libyans were chasing me.

 

I was a trainer for one of the megas and I can say first hand that shifting is the most consistent problem students have. I believe you are right and that making it easier for newbies is a huge factor.

 

Too true but one of the reasons they're wanting to convert to autos more is they're finding that young rookie kids can't drive a manual. I guess they think it's easier to drive an auto. I wouldn't even consider driving one, just leave me alone with my 13 speed. I will do fine with that. As for fuel economy, maybe they will save $$ but I'm sure maintenance costs will be higher.
And if you've ever been stuck in traffic because your auto tranny has jammed itself in gear and you can't move, and it's rush hour, like I once did. Then it's good to have a reality check sometimes.
I really don't understand the allure of driving an automatic. I didn't jump into an auto 4-wheeler until I was in my mid 20s. Such is the case in many countries where autos are not commonplace.

 

I didnt own an auto until I was married and the wife could not drive a stick.
It was mentioned about these autos going down hill, can they even climb well? It doesnt seem like an auto can take a steep incline too well. I also was always under the assumption that manuals got better fuel mileage. I know with all my manual cars they got better plus I had more power.
I guess autos can be good for the idiots who grind the gears too much or run the rpms way higher than supposed to be but I believe every person needs to know how to drive a manual at least before he gets behind an auto.

 

LOL 'olhand. When I typed that I had just parked. 5 hrs to load and secure, then 350 miles through Wilmington, Lancaster, Harrisburg with a 12 wide so I can make the crane appointment on time. Then I just got told my delivery was delayed 24 hrs. Funny thing though....all that traffic and I never wished for an auto.

 

I have a serious auto question. I have driven an auto...a 6 speed Allison but I forget.

You know how in a manual you can coast....I mean like when you take your foot off the fuel in high gear and just let it lug itself down to ~900-ish rpm then you can skip shift from say 13 to 10th? You have just used the vehicle's momentum to coast ~3/8' of a mile right? How does an auto handle that? Does it down shift through every gear keeping the rpm up the whole time? If that is the case, it seems to me like the autos won't coast as far and would use more fuel because of it.

 

Most auto have to hit every freekin gear on the way up and on the way down. You can force them to skip shift but it is more of a pain in the arse then just grabbing the gear shift and doing it yourself.

They are no way a fuel saving design.

Their claim to 'fuel economy' relies on the theory that every other 'truck driver' is dumb as a stump and does not care to maximize economy. By factoring the dumb drivers out fuel economy for fleet is supposed to increase with a computer guessing at the best shift points. That is the theory behind the automatic being more efficient. It is not that the automatic is more efficient by design, it is that you can factor out the crappy drivers with it. The automatic is less efficient by engineering standards.

 

Have you ever driven a auto?

 

Roger that!

 

Auto shift trans. have many electrical connections which begin to experience moisture problems very rapidly. This in turn causes them to fail to shift or worse yet, hang up in gear. If you are lucky, disconnecting the batteries will blank the computer and get you going but don't count on it. Swift might rethink their decision after these "autos" are lined up 10 deep for the shop.