This is Why I Love My Manual Tranny

i once got 21. twice got 20, like 2-3 years ago. now i hover 12-15 always. w.t.a.f.

 

Heading down and back on the Florida Keys doing 45-60 the whole way (mostly the former, as most of it is a 45MPH zone with LOTS of police)

I should add this is also a 6MT. The low final drive gearing makes us get the good MPGs at pretty low speeds. Anything over 70 and my truck is screaming down the road at like 2300 RPMs and getting 19MPG. Not sure you would see the same results with a 6AT.

 

It's a lost skill.

Friend had an RX7 with a slave cylinder that took a dump while we were out. We swapped cars so I could limp it back to the house to repair. Once you get the feel of RPM matching and how to unload the transmission it's easy and not too clunky.

 

Same here.

Give us a 55mph 5th gear and a looong 6th for 75mph+

 

Boy, I was thinking of something else when I clicked on this one.

 

Only because Toyota engineers geared the 6MT 6th gear final drive ratio higher than the autos. No good excuse for it either. The final drive ratios are posted here on TW somewhere. It would have cost Toyota nothing to run a mt 6th gear ratio equal to the auto. If they did that the manuals would excel.

 

excel at mileage? from changing 6th's ratio?

i get under 15mpg, and i don't even use 6th every day.

 

Exactly.

 

You can get 25-30 with either transmission.. if you drive 45. Problem is, no one does that for any length of time.

 

If you are going 40 in a 55 to save on gas then you should just buy a Prius! A truck is not for you.

 

Where the manual has a problem is at highway speeds. 5th and 6th are overdrive gears as the manual reaches 1/1 in 4th. 6th could have been widened and not hurt the performance of the truck in any way. It would have helped it's MPG's above 70mph.

 

So when’s the group buy for a longer 5th and 6th gear?

 

still beats my old RAM at 11mpg, i dont miss that rig at all, well wait, i do, cause im still waiting for my TACOMA!!!

 

Depending on the vehicle, it is a myth to say a taller top gear will provide better fuel economy. My current car, a 2006 Acura TL 6MT gets significantly better mileage than an otherwise identical 2006 Acura TL 5AT, which has a much taller top gear than does my 6MT.

My bet is if a taller 6th would have improved fuel economy even a tiny bit, Toyota would have built it that way, if for no other reason than CAFE standards.

 

No need to hold up traffic. Back when I was Stock with a tonneau and after a fillup in Montesano, WA (about Sea Level) to home (about 350ft ASL) doing about 65 most of the way other than traffic through Tacoma:

 

Over 65, and it becomes more about our brick-like wind resistance. 2,300 does sound a bit buzzy, but it isn't that high. Our Mazda 3 6AT has slightly higher revs in top gear. Our long gone Volvo 5MT turbo would turn about 3k at 70. It was never buzzy and would get about 27mpg on trips.

 

The RC60F has some lusty ratios. That said, when graphing out our RC62F ratios, they look quite evenly spread.

 

Why the sudden interest in fuel economy... it's like someone saw the gas station sign this morning that said 2.149/litre or $8.14/gallon...

 

I'd like to think that it was the fuel spike, but there are like three gonzo threads per week. By tomorrow, we'll have a DTE thread about the rando number right after a fill up. We have nothing else to complain about at this point, other than the cartridge filter conundrum.

 

I agree with that at about 90%.

IMHO in the real world, I think both transmissions are at least on par for normal everyday driving. I feel the test cycles favor an AT and they are engineered for that test, which is hard to replicate in real life. The MT can be driven like the test and is easier to attain those estimated MPGs.