Is this partly why the Manual is not available for the 2.7L Engine?

Broncocito

Badlands
Well-Known Member
First Name
B
Joined
Aug 11, 2020
Messages
432
Reaction score
394
Location
NM
Vehicle(s)
2018 F150FX4 Roush
Torque and price. There's your short answer. It would be drastically more expensive (engineering and materials) to produce a transmission to handle the higher torque output yet have that numb modern feel of an auto.

To make a modern transmission as smooth and unobtrusive as they can, and avoid high wear components such as clutches that slip all day but don't burn out, the price goes up. If the clutch has ANY notchiness or rough engagement then people complain via keyboard and shit-can the "feel".

It's not as if they're going to go back and put a fluid-filled torque converter in there the way god intended in the 1960's.

Frankly, i'd pay an upcharge to have a proper manual on the 2.7, but i'm also happy to get a manual on the 2.3 without charge. That motor is stout and solid. Have driven about 3k miles with a 2019 Ranger and the only let-down on that truck is the 10-speed auto. But i'm not delusional to assume the manual paired with the 2.3 is going to be as smooth and sweet as the gearbox on a Honda S2000. Just hoping it's a bit more forgiving than the stage 3 transmission and clutch from the Evo 9 that I daily drove for a few years.
I have used the M-22 rock crusher on a few high HP-built Chevy engines with no issues. I wonder if Ford had a variant? Although I have owned a handful of Fords in the past I never had a manual one. Yeah, I know the M-22 is an older transmission. Just saying...





Advertisement

 

Rick Astley

Black Diamond
Well-Known Member
First Name
Rick
Joined
Jul 24, 2020
Messages
1,103
Reaction score
3,704
Location
Seattle, WA
Vehicle(s)
'51 Chevy Fleetline, '61 Ford Thunderbird
I have used the M-22 rock crusher on a few high HP-built Chevy engines with no issues. I wonder if Ford had a variant? Although I have owned a handful of Fords in the past I never had a manual one. Yeah, I know the M-22 is an older transmission. Just saying...
Nothing wrong with the M22!!! A stout "Muscle Car" era transmission. Drastically better than the POS cruise-o-matic in my T-bird. That thing even smells speeds over 60 mph and it prepares to achieve critical mass with your credit card.

Ford had the C4 and C6 (what I wouldn't give to not have to fabricate new linkages, steering column and tranny braces to run a C4!) C6 was the Ford equivalent to the M22. Better RPM handling, another gear (in some applications, or overdrive) compared to M22, but heavy as all sin, larger, and more expensive to repair if you actually bested it's robust build.
 

The Bronze

First Edition
Well-Known Member
First Name
Kelly
Joined
Jul 14, 2020
Messages
45
Reaction score
91
Location
Colorado
Vehicle(s)
1986 Suzuki Samurai, 1967 Ford Bronco, 1993 Turbo Notchback, 2006 Sierra K1500, 2013 Sierra K1500, 2014 Sienna Mini-Van
Clubs
 
Just hoping it's a bit more forgiving than the stage 3 transmission and clutch from the Evo 9 that I daily drove for a few years.
I was always going in and reinforcing the clutch pedal pivot that would bend due to my aftermarket clutches on my DSMs. I am no longer interested in the left leg press routine!
 

damarble

Badlands
Well-Known Member
First Name
Mike
Joined
Jul 14, 2020
Messages
1,865
Reaction score
4,723
Location
Spokane
Vehicle(s)
01 Sport Trac, 13 Edge, 09 Focus, 07 Explorer
Clubs
 
The reasons are multi-fasceted:

  • Auto-stop/start is a PITA (we used Forscan to disable this, which cost $200)
  • take-off from a stop is notchy
  • take-off from a stop while on a incline can randomly have a stomach-lurching roll-back
  • mostly incapable of compression braking as it will simply hold 9th gear as you slow down, pushing 100% of braking force to the brakes (this can have some long-term issues when hauling a load, or maxed out and you start getting brake fade)
  • Why am I rolling at 25 mph in 9th gear?
  • If you change the dash display to show the gear you can watch it "hunt" for ways to make you dislike the torque curve of the vehicle (rolling starts in 5th, having to downshift 4 gears to give acceleration, merging on the freeway in 7th)
  • It's singleminded goal in life is to maximize fuel economy in all situations..... In a vehicle that is essentially exempt from tailpipe emissions and puts out about 3x more pollutants than any car in a developed nation, that 1 mpg improvement while polluting 300% more seems a misguided intention.
  • Watch it's gear selection while towing (manually setting the truck to tow mode and trailer sway control) and it's a bit better, but you would be better served with a manual and paying attention to what the F you're doing.
  • This is a transmission which performs better (assuming your only goal with a truck isn't fuel economy... Because if your only goal was fuel economy.... YOU BOUGHT A F-ING TRUCK FOR FUEL ECONOMY???) in manual mode but having 10 gears so close together is semi-truck territory and unnecessary in a production vehicle.

    Ultimately it's a perfectly adequate automatic for what 90% of people buy automatics for. To push a pedal and have magic happen so they don't have to pay attention to anything or understand gearing/load/speed/situation.
This a decent summation of why I can't imagine "upgrading" to the auto. Even Ford's flagship transmission is going to do what it wants, not what you want. You're just along for the ride.
 

Rogues Gambit

Badlands
Well-Known Member
First Name
Mike
Joined
Jan 10, 2020
Messages
2,025
Reaction score
2,297
Location
Eatontown, NJ
Vehicle(s)
'19 Ram Rebel, '07 A4 Quattro
Clubs
 
The aftermarket will soon have Barra swap kits and transmissions that can handle them, maybe a Gojira/Manual kit as well

Be patient, young grasshoppers, the bronco's not even in production yet and the aftermarket is listening
 

Advertisement





 


Advertisement
Top