manual trans vs. automatic

[Mo P]

looking at an 02 sport trac, notice kbb has a diff in price for auto trans as compared to manual, is there a diff in quality of truck from auto to manual. this 02 has about 50k miles and is listed for 9k, is this a good price for a manual?

 

[David Griffith 2]

The manuals are rare in the Tracs... Any car you buy, the manual is cheaper than the auto.. I don't think there's any difference in quality.. Just depends if you're in traffic a lot and can deal with it. For the record I bought my '01 for about 11 and change and it had about 55,000.. That sounds like a good deal.

 

[Rodger Tellefson]

We have a manual that we bought new, and we not able to get the seperate heating / AC controls for the rear because of not getting the big center consol. They only made the manual tranny in '01 & '02. Also, the '03-'05 ST's have upgraded suspension bushings. It just depends on what you like / want. If you do get it make sure the little bag is under the center arm rest.

 

[Adam Smith 2]

Manual transmission should get you a little bit better fuel economy, 1 or 2 MPG, but you work for it if you're doing mostly city driving. The automatic Trac will have about twice the rated towing capacity (5000 vs 2500 pounds of trailer), if that makes a difference to you.

 

[Fudged Undies]

No actual differences, but in my experience manual trannied vehicles seem to last longer. No I don't have any scientific data to back this up but it is something I have noticed between my vehicles and others around me. I never drive my vehicles nicely either.



Manual tranny will also be a base model, without any bells or whistles.



I also have to disagree with Adam. The theory used to be better mileage from a manual vehicle, but I think those days are long gone if they ever existed. Despite Rodger claiming great(er) mileage with tunes and whatnot, I have never done better than the rated mileage for the trac (my experience).

 

[Rodger Tellefson]

Spaceman, We have the data for better milage, using the SCT SCalibrator 2 with the 87 octane milage tune, that we kept in a log book. Also, as long as I shift around 1500 to 2000 rpm I get around 17 mpg city.

 

[Todd Z]

I would have preferred a manual any day !!!!!



Todd Z

 

[Mo P]

ok..

not as advertised.

I found the ad on the internet for a local dealership, ad said 02 sport trac, 49k miles, $8,999, well when I got there and started to look closer at the truck, the paperwork on the truck said 49k mi, but the odometer read., 149k miles, man what a disapointment,,, talk about false advertisement, (I do believe it was an honest mistake) but still what s disapointment... well I will keep looking for the right one at the right price....

thanks for all the post...;l

 

[Jake Levin]

I would love to be able to drop the manual tranny in my trac!

 

[Don Pertz]

Rodger, I have an 03 with manual trans.. Wouldn't have it any other way.

 

[Rodger Tellefson]

jlevin75 '02, The manual tranny that they used in the ST is the same one they used in a Ford Ranger which accounts for the lack of towing ability. If you could put a manual tranny from an F-150 in, that would be great.

 

[Fudged Undies]

Rodger, actually a manual in an f-150 seems to be as elusive as it is in the trac (similar/same model years). I have only ever seen one in SoFla and it was on a v8. Moreover, from part comparisons I've done in the past it SEEMS the manual in the f-150 is the same as the one in the trac (M5OD, i think), at least for the v6 and I doubt the v8 manual would be a bolt on for our tracs. On top of that, our bell housing (M5OD) isn't removable from the tranny so it wouldn't be swappable to another tranny.



If I recall correctly, there is an adapter kit for the Tremec T-5 (I think) which mounts up to the older 4.0. Runs about $1500. This would be a much better choice.



As far as your mileage, though I am questioning your results, it's not intentional as I question most mileage reports above 20 mpg in the trac. I have exactly one instance where I was getting anywhere from 22-25 mpg and it was a pure fluke as I have never been able to reproduce it. I've seen various folks here comment on getting consistent above 21mpg averages and though I won't say it's not possible I don't think it is realistic as I struggle to pull off 20mpg on long distance routes and when I do pull it off, it's usually driving 80-85 consistently not the speed limit. Just my opinion, nothing more.

 

[Todd Z]

If things go right there will be an 01 ST running around with a 351 / T-5 set up in it by 08....



I think the bronco II manual is the same as the ranger and ST...

YES the bell housing doesn't come off, so the swap is harder and you do need the conversion, ALSO have to get your flywheel re drilled for a larger clutch if going heavy duty...



The 4cyl mustang tranny can be used with the adaptor.... I have seen that on older 4.0L like ed said but the towing strength is LOW!!



ED mpg can be achieved, Al franklin is over 30MPg with his 4 door explorer... I know Jeff C gets great mileage, and several other members here do including my self...

Everyone i traveled to Louisville with witnessed me get 23MPG with 1200LBS of crap in my bed.. I know I have gotten 25-27 highway on long trips...



Todd Z

 

[Fudged Undies]

Todd, I've read Al's posts on other boards as well as here and I'm not calling anyone a lier, I just have my doubts, nothing more. I am not capable of driving the way Al states he drives (from memory), especially here in Miami. I've read lots of the posts about getting good mileage and if I can't come close to reproducing the results, I have to doubt it, but that's my issue.