7 speed Manual Transmission more reliable long term

[AZshot]

My hypothesis is automatics break more often than standard transmissions. That was the case after the muscle car era when we were driving them 10-15 years old. It was the case with the early Japanese era (Datsun 210s, etc). It was the case in the late 80s-90s American cars. It was the case in the 90s-2000s for several quality American, Japanese, Korean and German cars. So that's why I ordered the 7 Speed manual for my Bronco.

All the chatter is about how the new Bronco automatic is the less strong 60 version. Then someone said "yeah, but the 7 speed is rated for even less torque..." So? I don't think there is much to break in a standard. Yes, you may wear out a clutch or two over a 300,000 mile lifetime, but that's cheap and normal wear. Plus, I drive a stick very smoothly and many of my standard drive transmissions have lasted well over 200,000 miles (on original clutches). Come to think of it, I have a 53 year old Honda motorcycle and a 43 year old one, both still shifting fine....manually.

What do you think about the reliability long term for the Bronco with a stick?

Sponsored

 

[Tonka Bronka]

I hope it’s good because I ordered it also, for your stated reasons plus I saved a ton of money with the 2.3 stick, and still 300 HP. I mean my 69 Camaro 350 had 300 HP and it was kind of fast.

 

[Drex]

No, you are completely wrong on the muscle cars (by definition a two door intermediate sized car with the largest (or strongest) corporate engine installed). Mustangs/Camaros were pony cars and not muscle cars. (pony, Mustang....sinking in yet?). Those automatics were 400TH, C6, 727TF transmissions, they were indestructible and lasted forever. The M21 and similar manuals would bend linkages and eat bearings long before an auto would burn through a set of clutches. Now, on to modern times; the manual in the Bronco will need repair, syncro's, the occasional clutch (if you consider that part of the transmission), and so forth. I would opine that the total cost (parts and labor at a shop) to rebuild and repair the manual for 300K miles would be less than just the initial cost difference to get the automatic. Also when I manual fails, it can generally be worked around and get you home. When a slushbox goes, you need a tow truck.

 

[Itchysquatch]

I also ordered the 7 speed. That said, Today’s autos are miles ahead interns of reliability and efficiency than 20 years ago. The worry with this model manual is it’s made in China (hopefully with Getrag German QC), and it’s a new design. I’m more than willing to give it a whirl, as I have yet to drive an auto that I’ve loved (and yes I’ve driven many different manufacturers). I did “dry” shift the Bronco manual and was impressed. Clutch felt light, but not cheap, and shifts were smooth and solid. Nothing beats the control of rowing your own gears..... off road is a different story... autos are king... but I like a challenge.

 

[AZshot]

I've had manuals most of my life, including one in the Super High Output Taurus back in the 90s. That one did wear clutches pretty fast, but it shifted nice and I sold the car with 200,000 miles, still felt like new. I had a 1964 Falcon Sprint with a Getrag 4 speed, that always shifted nice for a 30 year old car. I'm just going to watch the reports for the first 3 years during the warranty period, and see if I should keep it long-term at that point, or trade up to a newer one.

 

[Rivers90]

I have never had a manual transmission fail.. the clutch did need to be replaced on one car I had but that was after a lot of burnouts and hard driving. I have had 2 manual transmission cars reach about 300,000 miles with no problem. I had one auto die by 200,000 miles and one make it to 300,000. But I have never kept a car over 300,000 miles.
So in my experience a manual lasts longer then I would keep a vehicle but the auto may or may not.
But both should be good for many years. I would worry about something else first.
I have had other cars but sold them before the number of miles needed to really tell.

 

[Efthreeoh]

I keep cars well longer than a decade and a half and to multiple hundreds of thousands of miles. All but one of those cars are manual transmission, mostly with a Getrag or ZF German transmissions. A few have needed clutches well past 200,000 miles. Other than clutches, no other repairs have been required.

If we are talking a 300,000 service life, it takes decades to drive 300,000 miles even at a rate of 40,000/year like I drive. That's a lot of daily driving, which I expect few if any Bronco owners will do.

Now rock crawling and severe off-road use may shorten the Bronco's manual transmission life, but I'd bet the automatic would suffer the same fate.

 

[HBTFD]

Most people sell the vehicle before either type of transmission needs servicing. Pick the transmission that fits your driving style and move on.

 

[rugbysecondrow]

I ordered the MT because I enjoy driving MT vehicles more than automatics. Second, I also like the "granny" gear the MT offers, which the auto does not (from my understanding). Thirdly, the cost difference. Fourth, I think the benefits you mentioned matter. When automatics have issues, they seem to be catastrophic and expense (see Honday Odyssey mini-van issues in early 2000's. )

All that said, both he MT and the Auto should be high quality builds and serve us for 100,000s of miles. No bad choice, just a matter of how you choose to drive.

 

[dejones64]

I would have to agree with longevity of a manual transmission. I've had them in a majority of my vehicles. Never ever had an issue with the transmission or the clutch. My latest, 2011 Mitsu Lancer with manual. Over 250k miles and going strong (knock on wood). Take care of it and it will take care of you.

I did get the manual in my Badlands order.

 

[Fordmanbob]

My hypothesis is automatics break more often than standard transmissions. That was the case after the muscle car era when we were driving them 10-15 years old. It was the case with the early Japanese era (Datsun 210s, etc). It was the case in the late 80s-90s American cars. It was the case in the 90s-2000s for several quality American, Japanese, Korean and German cars. So that's why I ordered the 7 Speed manual for my Bronco.

All the chatter is about how the new Bronco automatic is the less strong 60 version. Then someone said "yeah, but the 7 speed is rated for even less torque..." So? I don't think there is much to break in a standard. Yes, you may wear out a clutch or two over a 300,000 mile lifetime, but that's cheap and normal wear. Plus, I drive a stick very smoothly and many of my standard drive transmissions have lasted well over 200,000 miles (on original clutches). Come to think of it, I have a 53 year old Honda motorcycle and a 43 year old one, both still shifting fine....manually.

What do you think about the reliability long term for the Bronco with a stick?

The same company that is making the mustang MT (NOT THE TREMEC) that are breaking in the mustangs. To save a few pennies they went with a foreign trans Co. Sad. Hopefully they have it refined by now.......I went auto because I have a top loader in my 68 torino.....

 

[AZshot]

I also picked the manual for the fun of shifting, and I don't commute so there won't be any stop and go highway gridlock, just country roads and long trips. I liked that it's cheaper too. And I expect to get a little better gas milage.

 

[VelocityBrew]

I have never had a manual transmission fail.. the clutch did need to be replaced on one car I had but that was after a lot of burnouts and hard driving. I have had 2 manual transmission cars reach about 300,000 miles with no problem. I had one auto die by 200,000 miles and one make it to 300,000. But I have never kept a car over 300,000 miles.
So in my experience a manual lasts longer then I would keep a vehicle but the auto may or may not.
But both should be good for many years. I would worry about something else first.

I wish I could say the same thing this was one of 4 while in my young and dumb years

 

[BlazinGTO]

I've only had one transmission fail. A 3 speed auto in my 89 beretta GTU. $1500 to replace. I've owned both auto and standard transmission vehicles for 150k miles plus.

Whats nice with a manual is you can possibly limp your car home. When a had a throw out bearing go in a different beretta, I just started in second gear. Plus you can roll start it if you kill the battery.

I have plenty of fun in my 6 speed GTO rowing gears. Ive beat that car hard (drag radials at the strip). Finally needs a clutch at 135k.

All in all, I love manuals but I really don't want one for offroading. But I really hope to get a chance to drive a manual bronco someday.

 

[Deleted member 18388]

I've had manuals most of my life, including one in the Super High Output Taurus back in the 90s. That one did wear clutches pretty fast, but it shifted nice and I sold the car with 200,000 miles, still felt like new. I had a 1964 Falcon Sprint with a Getrag 4 speed, that always shifted nice for a 30 year old car. I'm just going to watch the reports for the first 3 years during the warranty period, and see if I should keep it long-term at that point, or trade up to a newer one.

My biggest regret was selling my 1990 SHO. My goodness that was a fun car. Just about the fastest car one could buy for $1600 lol

Sponsored