Manual vs Automatic Transmissions

I just gotta say that the whole idea that driving a manual transmission somehow makes you more of a man is just ridiculous. I'll be getting out of trucking school this week and at 50 I have nothing to prove to anyone especially regarding what type of transmission my truck has. That said I ruled out all the automatic only companies because I don't want to limit myself down the road. I need experience with manuals because I have no idea what is going to be available to me down the road. I would hate to start with automatics and later find a fantastic job opportunity that I couldn't apply for because I have no manual experience. But certainly down the road I would have no aversion to driving a truck with an automatic transmission. I've driven cars with manuals and cars with automatics. Neither changed who I am as a person. I don't see a truck changing that either. It's just a machine. Either I change the gears or they change by themselves. I still have to know how to handle it, back it, corner in it, keep it on the road in all weather conditions, and get it to my destination safely. There's a whole lot more to driving a truck than moving a stick back and forth.

 

I'm curious, who said that?

 

I still say , learn to drive with a stick , then you can drive any thing the boss tosses you the keys to! Why limit your job choices. Looks like my company is going all autos but the trainer trucks will remain 10 speeds manuals .

 

Wise man right there! Doesn't want to be painted into a corner! As long as it's safe , legal and up to the job at hand , toss me the keys and pay me!

 

I still say, why are you even wasting any time worrying about what folks learn to drive? I have had every endorsement on my CDL since the CDL kicked in back in '92, so my choices are not limited, but I could give a rip if anyone else has all those endorsements on theirs. Likewise, I could really give a rip if someone else learns to drive a manual or not. I only concern myself that they can drive what they are in, keep it between the lines, and not get anyone hurt or killed.

 

Guess bring a trainer , the mind set may be a little different ? ( not a insult) Looks like even after our fleet goes to autos , we will continue to train on sticks. After spending 6 weeks training someone , you want them to do well . But yes as long as he is safe is the main thing . We want to turn out the best drivers we can , not just fill seats. ( at least our company )

 

Here is my take on the auto-manual controversy.

The eaton-fuller transmission is cheap, light, efficient, and easy to rebuild. And that is why it has dominated the trucking market for the last 50+ years. Now everybody and there brother wants a piece of the truck transmission market that Eaton has locked up. The route to get that is through selling a new class of transmission and convincing everybody that they need one. Since they are unlikely to provide a manual at any engineering advantage over fuller design, they have to concentrate their marketing hype on Automatics.

Among that hype is that 'automatics' provide better milage and more durability. Both claims, better milage and durability, might be true when you compare both transmissions in the hands of the worst of drivers. If you assume, like the mega-crap, that all drivers are dumb as a stump and cannot read road conditions or shift without grinding, the automatic looks like a good choice. However, that is the only condition the automatic is more efficient and reliable then the manual.

The automatic is more complicated and can only adjust to road conditions based on secondary factors. The driver has more knowledge and can make more efficient decisions. The most reliable of the automatics are the automated manuals, and even they have computer, wiring, and solenoid problems that do not haunt manuals. The auto clutching device has always been both a weak point and a point of great inefficiency in all designs. So I do not buy the hype.

I have driven both of course. There is no way I can see the automatic is more efficient. I get the same information that the auto device sees plus I can see the road conditions. I can use gears only as needed and not waste time and energy on needless shifts.

Having worked on them, I have not found them more reliable. All that complication adds cost and more chance of failure. More failure is what they do have. And their claim to reliability lies in the theory that they shift smoother then the driver. I have found that not to be case. I have sat in many a cab with drivers, like me, that can shift soo much smoother than any auto.

 

Been driving a pete w/ a ultra shift. They don't preform well loaded on a hill @ 105k.

 

So this is why Eaton is pushing the auto shifts of it's own? Because they want to dissolve the market you claim they have locked up? Every ad I see anymore when I read an article from any of the trucking related rags is Eaton pushing it's own auto shift. They never even mention their manuals anymore.

On the automatic side of things, Allison has never made any claims against manual transmissions in their ads, only the auto shifts. They have their own market "locked up" and only feel the need to address the other brands who are trying to play in their territory. They are not really wasting any time railing against manuals. But your claim that Eaton has the manual market locked up, Eaton is not defending it, but rather pushing the auto shift game as much as anyone. Seems weird. They seem to not have the love affair with their manual transmissions that some others have. Just a casual observation that has me curious. Why are so many trying to defend something that even the manufacturer really puts no effort into defending?

But I also wonder if what you call an automatic is the auto shift and not the true TC automatic that Allison builds. You claim to have driven "both", but you did not claim to have driven all three... manual, auto shift, and automatic. The latter two not being equal by any stretch of the imagination. They use completely different gear sets.