MPG on auto vs manual

My first 3rd gen M/T (2016 OR AC, manufactured 09/15) was notchy as hell when new. Reverse could be a bugger at times and 2-3 gave a hearty chunk when going in. It loosened up nicely over time, buttery smooth except the 2-3 chunk was still slightly there. No issues over the 4 years I had that truck.
The '19 has been smooth as silk right off the lot. You still feel the synchros 2-3, but not nearly as noticeable as the '16.
These gearboxes are fully synchronized, including reverse. 1-3 have triple cone synchronizing ring sets.

Oh, there was an issue with some early M/T trucks that was addressed by TSB - the shifter would not come out of 6th (maybe 5th as well, not sure) after driving for a while. Newer trucks don't have this issue.

Get the M/T

 

But it also provides a good deal of engine braking. If you need to slow that quickly that's great, otherwise you get more distance per fuel by neutral coasting.

 

Depends on the gear

 

My 50km commute today. Winter gas and winter tires. 6mt TRD sport. Thats 21.5 MPG

 

Got an auto tranny and with my lead foot I'm only averaging around 15-16 MPG around town. I suspect since the engine has no low end torque even if I had the manual I would still be averaging the same since I won't be shifting until at least 4,500 RMP+ to the next hight gear...and my lead foot doesn't help either.

 

Coasting in neutral uses more gas than slowing down in a higher gear because the ecu shuts off the fuel when the truck is pushing the engine.

 

Exactly what I have seen, including the summer and winter MPGs. 2016 Manual Trans

 

Who hyper miles in a truck!?

 

Ive always owned trucks for utility purposes. I’ve always liked challenging myself to get the best mileage I can in my vehicles for entertainment purposes. Ergo, I use a few hypermiling driving techniques when not pretending its a rally car haha.

 

Look up the EPA estimates. /thread/

When i was researching the 2019 model, offroads were rated 20mpg highway with the manual, 24 with the automatic

 

Once you slow down you correct. However at higher speed coasting down for farther at 200+mpg you gets you farther per unit of fuel than the faster deceleration that you end up with in dfco (deceleration fuel cutoff).

 

Even in 6th there's significant deceleration compared to neutral.

 

I do a bit. A 5 to 10% increase in mileage in something like a Prius doesn't really pay off. When you get less than half the mileage even hypermiling lightly works out without increasing commute time.

 

That's not bad on winter gas... stock sized tires?

 

Better than I'm doing with my fairly short commute.

 

275 70 17. One size up from the stock 65.

Took that stupid plastic lower air dam off and Borla exhaust.. thats it!

 

And that holds true for all modern day vehicles. A person simply can't shift as fast or at the most advantageous shift points as the computer controlled transmission. We bitch about the 3rd gen's transmission, but it has been programmed for optimum mileage at the cost of performance. Where it get's defeated is high speed highway driving where the slightest torque requirement causes it to change gears where a human driving a manual might live with a bit of lugging and stay in high gear longer. Anyway, that's my theory and I'm sticking to it.

 

Part of the switch from manuals to automatics having better fuel economy is that in the last decade(?) or so manuals have been more tuned for "enthusiasts" with tighter and more sporty ratios. Combine that with how much better a modern electronically controlled automatic and in an EPA drive cycle a(and driving that is similar)an automatic will beat a manual.

 

the primary difference here isn’t shift speed — it’s gearing. The automatic has taller overdrives as well as a taller differential ratio. That’s the difference in highway mpg

 

Sure, I'll agree with that but with MPG in general, which for most people includes a fare amount of stop and go driving, the MT lags behind. Overdrive gears don't play a big part in this sort of driving.