Well mountainbike, I don’t know if its a matter of disagreement or personal preference. First, I don’t think a car is really broken in until it hits about 150K or so. I haven’t bought a car with less than 100K on it in about 20 years. So to me even 200K is still “young.”
So let’s just say that I, personally, would rather the near 100% certainly of clutch replacement in the first 200K than whatever the probability is of having automatic trans problems in that time. I hate being at the mercy of techs with computers. I get clutches. When they have a problem I can handle it. On whatever the probability of a problem with an automatic is in the first 200K, I suppose we might disagree. But I know of no actual data source that could settle the matter. I do know, going back to George’s original question, that one frequently sees reports of problems related to automatics, but rarely with manuals. Of course, your routine clutch burnout won’t generate a lot of questions. It’s not mysterious the way auto problems are, so we take that for what we will.
As it stands though, I also have had good experiences with automatics. My Escort’s 4EAT is approaching 250K. And some would say that is a problematic transmission. Lots of the Fords are unless you service them regularly - in which case some are just fine - apparently. Had I ignored servicing this one I’m quite sure it would be dead.
All clutches are wear items that need to be replaced eventually.
That’s often true with manuals.
But with automatics, how often is the repair needed “because the clutches are worn”? Isn’t the repair usually due to another reason (valve body, varnish, dirt related)?
If the clutches are worn, isn’t it usually a secondary effect from hardened/defective seals causing a pressure loss, or defective electronics, or worn bushings, etc? I thought it was rarely from worn clutches.
@Auto-owner, you’re dead wrong on what apparently are false assumptions about transmission fluid and the cause and effect on automatic transmissions of aged fluid. Aged, higher mileage fluid can lead to transmission failure at worst, shifting issues, or piecemeal repairs of automatics.
You state that you would consider fluid replacement “if I saw dirty ATF on the dipstick”. If the fluid appears that way to you the fluid is not “dirty”. It’s dark due to heat oxidation and/or friction material from the clutches. In a nutshell, the transmission is damaged and plans for a replacement transmission or car is in order…
Changing the fluid regularly helps to prevent the fluid from becoming “dirty” as it’s referred to.
I’ve got a friend who has been a strictly automatic transmission service pro for 40 years. He’s stated that almost every barbecued transmission he’s seen failed due to lack of service; a.k.a. lack of fluid changes.
I think, absent flawed design, a clutch should last 150,000 or more…which is about what I’d expect as a “mean time before failure” for the entire AT.
Has anyone had a MT put out of service due to wear and tear…not neglect? I’ve driven some pretty high-miles MTs and I’ve encountered a tempermental snychro or two, sure, but I figure if you merely keep it lubed, its really, really tough to break a gearbox (short of nonsense like pairing it to a much more powerful engine and making a habit out of dropping the clutch!)
I’ve done a lot of work on manual transmissions and can’t say that I’ve ever seen much of a problem with them design wise.
Most of the units that needed work usually had problems related to an unattended oil leak, hard shifting habits, problems caused by an iffy clutch, or shift fork and/or synchronizer hub wear due to driving around with the weight of the hand on the gearshift lever.
I vote for automatics. A bit of maintenance on one gives a lifetime of good service without extra cost, generally. With a manual, the clutch commonly wears out and results in a big repair bill.
I vote automatic also because my view of a car is to make life easier, and automatic shifting does that. Also, there are times when power braking is helpful, which could only easily be done with the handbrake on a manual, and would wear the clutch.
I understand that some people differ and like manuals for a sporty feel, however.
Cig, I think where we disagree is in the need for repairing an automatic vs. the need to replace a manual’s clutch. I believe that an automatic should be, and usually is, reliable for the life of the car. For this debate I define “life of t he car” as meaning that the car will ultimately head for the boneyard due to the rest of the car being worn out with the tranny still working.
Our preference is the same. I too prefer driving manuals. I can no longer realistically do so, but I prefer them.
Mountainbike, yes, sorry to hear about the back. My wife has gone through many years of degen disks herself. It is challenging to say the least. Living hell if I wanted to say it in one or two words.
I have to say though, that defining “life of the car” as “the rest of the car being worn out” moves ambiguity from one place to another. Keeping in mind, though, that I do keep cars on the road a really long time and tend to buy them when others think they are used up. The “rest of my cars” don’t fall apart b/c when there’s a problem I fix it. So in my world I always figure that the 2 things most likely to send one of mine to yard is, in this order, 1) a transmission problem that I can’t solve or 2) an engine failure for one reason or another. Those are the two things that I can’t handle with minimal pro tools and jack stands in my garage.
In any case, my opening remarks in this thread were limited to the transmission alone without specific consideration of clutches. While a clutch in a manual is part of “transmission” it is not part of “the” transmission. Looking at “the” transmission alone autos are much more complex with more things that can fail and more ways for them to fail (including clutches). As such people will come with more questions about problems with automatics rather than manuals.
With that said - I have to go replace some vacuum lines on my son’s Neon. Who ever thought that those tiny little molded plastic vac lines were a good idea? I guess those who think a Neon should be in the boneyard by 133K. Brittle as can be. I just broke one trying to check the coolant.
I’m of the opinion that plastics are used too extensively in today’s cars, used in places where they should not be.
I know how these things are put together. I understand the difference between an automatic clutch and a manual clutch. I have to admit that I had to go back to the original post to realize that the discussion started with the question about the trannys themselves without including a manual’s clutch. I guess in rethinking this, placing it into the context of the original question, my answer would have to be that a manual tranny is more robust and reliable than an automatic. But to me, without including a manual’s clutch as part of the package (we do generally consider torque converters as part of the tranny after all), it’s like comparing apples to oranges.
“I think, absent flawed design, a clutch should last 150,000 or more…which is about what I’d expect as a “mean time before failure” for the entire AT.”
I think that’s possible, I’ve seen it, but to expect it isn’t real. You’d have to live on a prairie with no traffic. Every time you shift you’re using up a little bit of that clutch. The Seattle area can be quite hilly and has some of the worst stop and go traffic in the country. Those two things mean shorter clutch life. A few months ago I had the “pleasure” of driving 60 miles on the freeway during the evening rush. Took me almost 2 hours. I don’t know how many times I was at a dead stop followed by brisk acceleration in that time.
Around here I don’t see anything unusual about a worn clutch disc at 60K. If you get over 100K you’re a real easy driver.
I’ve personally kept the original clutch way past 150,000 miles on many manuals, but I’ll also be the first to say that it isn’t realistic to expect that kind of use. I’m pretty easy on clutches. I don’t baby the car/truck, but I only use the clutch to connect and disconnect the drivetrain, nothing more. I don’t use it to absorb the difference between the engine speed and the drivetrain speed. I actively rev-match. I’m not sure that’s common. And I never use it to “hold” the vehicle at stop lights at inclines, a practice that I think is too common.
Gee, I must be doing something right! I owned a Sentra (SR20DE engine) and put 130k on the clutch before massive electrical problems killed the car. When I replaced the clutch along with concentric slave (damned rodents!) on my '94 F 150 (M5OD, 145k), the clutch was either original or factory replacement. The only slipping I’ve encountered was on a beat-to-hell '89 F 150 with a “3 plus granny” at around 195.
And that’s living (for the most part) in and around hilly Pittsburgh, and parallel parking daily for on-street parking. I rev-match/DC downshifts, but not upshifts (figure I have to work for a living…so should my synchros).
The last time I had a clutch I ran it to 185K in mixed driving, though a lot of it was highway / rural highway, and little of it particularly hilly or mountainous. I’m sure I could have made it go longer though, had I driven it differently. My dad taught me downshifting to decelerate up to stops and turns. Eventually I asked myself why I would sacrifice the clutch (expensive!) to save the brakes (not expensive!), so I changed that habit at some point.
Mountainbike, it’s true that limiting discussion to “the” transmission is fairly artificial since “the” transmission in a manual is scrap metal without a clutch between it and the engine.
On my little Toyota truck, I was not easy on that clutch at all. I used it to tow and my driving style can be referred to as spirited driving. Basically, I flogged the crap out of it, even got that burnt clutch smell more than a few times. It was my daily driver for 15 years, so it saw a lot of heavy commuter traffic. And the original clutch lasted me over 150,000 miles. The aftermarket replacement lasted another 100,000. The second replacement clutch was doing a great job right up until the retaining wall totaled the truck at 325,000. The transmission was aces, got a steady diet of GL-4 gear lube every 60,000, and never gave me an issue. I even sold it after the wreck to a guy restoring a junkyard rescue, and its probably still on the road.
My '81 Accord got a new clutch at ~140k miles when a trans bearing failed.
My '88 Accord got a new clutch at ~160k when the crankshaft seal leaked bad enough to annoy me.
In both cases the trans had to come out, so why not toss in a new clutch?
Both had plenty of lining left on the disk.
My '06 Matrix needed a new clutch at 33k because the first owner abused the clutch in the 8k miles they owned it.
The flywheel and pressure plate were discolored from overheating.
My guess is the owner never got the hang of a manual and sold it after a year.