Manual vs Auto

Shopping for a current gen taco and I really want a manual because I prefer the direct interaction it gives over auto. I thought a manual trans would give better mpg cuz they usually have one more gear but the EPA says the autos on current gen tacos are better on gas. Are any of you seeing this? What pros and cons are there between the two transmissions?

 

theres like 20 threads on Auto vs Man FYI. try a search.

but real quick, Autos are just as strong if not stronger than Manuals. They get about the same mileage. the Autos don't have many if any issues. Some manuals have TOB issues but you can search to find out more

 

Lots of people here complain about the manual tranny. I have one and have no complaints/problems with it. I was not going to buy the truck if I couldn't get a manual in it. But, I had to order one to get it.

 

Thanks, I think unread most of them but I was looking more for observed fuel economy or issues with either tranny. For example I'd heard some of the complaining 6gears is referring to. And I'd heard that the auto was one of the best around as far as trucks go, but I thought an enthusiast forum would be a more reliable source for this type of info. Thanks for your input guys.

 

Speaking from experience ... I've had both types of trannys on a Toyota.
I did have a 5-speed on my rock crawler, but it had Marlin gears, locked, etc.
I now have an AT in my mostly stock 4x4 Tacoma.

AT advantages:
- no more embarrassing stalls going slow over obstacles, even with stock gears
- no more expensive clutches to replace every few years
- wife not afraid to drive it
- easier on the drive train (IMHO)

AT disadvantages:
- can't push start it
- only 4 gears to choose from (in my '99)
- not as cool
- more likely to overheat ? (not sure about this, no problem so far)

A wash:
- gas mileage (about the same) I get 19-23 mpg overall
- still can choose from all of the 4 gears by moving out of 'D'

YMMV

 

x2

 

If you're going for the 6-cyl, the AT is more efficient because they geared the MT WRONG.

AT OD ratio: 0.71:1.
MT OD ratio: 0.85:1.

Now there is actually a bit more to this story than just saying one is more efficient than the other. In fact, the AT is only more efficient under certain circumstances; flat or downhill constant speed. In circumstances of acceleration (increasing speed or climbing hills), the AT will be LESS efficient.

For the 4-cyl, the difference is small/negligible/non-existent. The ratio spread between the AT and MT is lower, and the engine is less sensitive to it.

 

Thanks for all the input guys