2015 auto or manual trans?

[SnoKing]

When there is a much better solution available this begs the next question, WHY????? :-laf

Because someone's CowBoy hat is pulled down to far on their head? SNOKING

 

[cerberusiam]

Because someone's CowBoy hat is pulled down to far on their head? SNOKING

I never though of that as a valid reason! :-laf:-laf

 

[RVTRKN]

Get your 150K miles out of it and replace it with an NV5600, and you'll have pulling machine, without 3:42 or 3:73. The manual transmission needs the 4:10 to get the best pulling performance heavy as well as MPG.

 

[SnoKing]

Get your 150K miles out of it and replace it with an NV5600, and you'll have pulling machine, without 3:42 or 3:73. The manual transmission needs the 4:10 to get the best pulling performance heavy as well as MPG.

However with their less steep OD they become freeway pigs running bobtail with 4:10's. I think I have read here that NV5600 availability is an issue along with parts. SNOKING

 

[RVTRKN]

Yes, empty your right about that, but at GCWR 4:10 is the best combination. Blumenthals now produce all parts for the NV5600, not sure on the trans case, but they make parts in-house for them.

 

[Newsa]

Basically, toss the transmission because it is inadequate in most if not all areas.

Has to be purely a philosophical thing to buy a truck with a manual that is an out and out fail, even by the proponent's estimation.

When there is a much better solution available this begs the next question, WHY????? :-laf

That's a wish list. Not an admission of it's flaws.

I doubt I'll ever damage the G56 with my 2500. I have only pulled 15,000 # with it. Not 30,000 # like some. My 2500 maxes out at 16,300#. Don't need the dually

 

[Newsa]

NEWSA,

I assume you have though of manual front hub for your truck? this would make for nice and easy two wheel low backing.

Yes. Have considered it. Sounds like a big job though

 

[Newsa]

Because someone's CowBoy hat is pulled down to far on their head? SNOKING

Just loosened up my hat. Still got a G56.

 

[Newsa]

Basically, toss the transmission because it is inadequate in most if not all areas.

Has to be purely a philosophical thing to buy a truck with a manual that is an out and out fail, even by the proponent's estimation.

When there is a much better solution available this begs the next question, WHY????? :-laf

Because it's $3000. And both Eaton and Alison can be had cheaper. But that's probably just me. And anyone else who is happy with a tradesman.

 

[Newsa]

See post here by Evanson
https://www.turbodieselregister.com/threads/253121-68rfe/page3?highlight=Eaton

 

[RVTRKN]

It's flaws are 1) DMF, just wait to convert to SMF. 2) ATF, change it to appropriate oil. 3) Aluminum case, run a cooler to keep it cool and it will hold up to the torque without stretching.

 

[Deleted member 995608]

Wow. This debate is sounding like the stupid chest thumping threads that occur on the CumminsForum. TDR is much higher class than those brand jumpers.

 

[Newsa]

I'm assuming you would prefer a lower reverse ratio for backing trailers and such, me too. Wouldn't mind a lower first too, but that's less important. Of course differential gearing options would help here too, instead of 3.42:1 for everyone. Agreed, I've not owned a 'perfect' transmission yet.

Back In The Day I really liked how a granny box 4-speed drove (generic term for any non-synchro 4-speed w/ 1:1 4th), but I don't care to go back to having no overdrive, low power, carburetors, etc. For all the weaknesses tossed upon the G56 and its OE clutch ( I'm definitely not a DMF fan), there are plenty of examples of the gearbox giving good service. This includes a local buddy who pulled heavy often, and went well over 100k without issue, his wife has a G56 truck too.

Another transmission that ran hot, had an aluminum case and was not the most popular or respected was/is the ZF-S5 in my (sold) 1996 F-350. It needed a DMF replacement before 100k, but is still working well at 140k+, and it drove and still drives well (with Red Line MTL in the case).

Have to give a nod to Toyota's 5-speed A/T in my V8 4Runner, 3.52:1 first and 0.72:1 overdrive work well...and much better driving 4.88:1 gears.

Your mileage will vary.

What fluid did you run in the Ford ZF-S5 transmission?

 

[photowrite]

What fluid did you run in the Ford ZF-S5 transmission?

Red Line MTL.

The ZF-S5 had/has a well deserved reputation for running hot, and my sample surely did in overdrive/5th. I saw 240+ on a mechanical gauge I had on it plenty of times. For most of the truck's life under my care I changed the ZF oil very 10,000 miles, but it also only held about 3.5 quarts.

For my first G56 oil change I put Red Line MT90 in the box, close the the Mercedes spec, though I might use MTL in the future. I'm putting 7 quarts in the G56, and plan on using an interval of 20-30k until I have more data, and/or decide on an interval I like better.

James

 

[RVTRKN]

I've seen my G56 at 250* at only 15K GCW. That's why I developed my cooling system, so now it gets to 180* and I cool it back down to 165*. Didn't the Ford manual have a cooling system using the radiator like an auto trans would? I saw a picture of one, just don't remember the trans model.

 

[jkalchik]

In August, I ran 1,300 miles with a gross weight of just over 15k lbs (2012 2500 4x4, 18' trailer.) As soon as I stopped in front of the house, I grabbed my IR thermometer and shot the G56. I only saw about 135 degrees, IIRC, certainly nowhere near 200 degrees F. I'm not hard on equipment, OTOH, I'm not the easiest, either.

Me, I like manual transmissions. I'll probably drive sticks as long as I can get them.

 

[kcv67]

My thoughts are personal preference I enjoy shifting gears and I am comfortable in selecting what gear I want with a clutch and a stick.


Casey

 

[RVTRKN]

IR is not accurate, unless you had the sensor at 6" from trams maybe, but they average the area temp of the diameter of the cone, and the farther away it is, the wider the average. Unless your looking at oil temp it's hard to get the true trans temp.

 

[AH64ID]

Thats interesting because the power loss of the G56 has never crossed my mind. I just hauled across the state over 33K lbs and never once thought that I needed more power. Just how fast do people have to go and at what level will torque and HP become enough? The truck is only so big and in my case my trailers are constantly rocking back and forth, I really don't need to be breaking any speed barriers (never over 65 with a full load). Put out the feelers for another truck order (x3) and found 15 G56 trucks around the west. They were all sold (except a red one, I don't do red) within the 3 days I was looking. Not too many handshakers out there but those that like em are still buying them. Approaching 100k on my stock clutch and getting a solid 24+ on the freeway now. So glad I get to make the decisions on the power band and not some computer.

The stock power is not bad, but even the Aisin is a power loss from where I am at now. The stock G56 is 2/3 the power I make now and that will be noticed. I put 415/850 to the ground which is about 480/1000 at the crank. Why would I buy a G56 and deal with the power loss or warranty loss..and transmission upgrades. I really do prefer a manual transmission for how I use my truck but IMHO ram has put the manual on the off ramp. Now if they could give us a manual that had the Aisin output I would buy that over an Aisin.

Agreed, Never seen an automatic do this. If you have an automatic, you spend most of your time accelerating when not even at ideal rpm as reported by the torque curve. An automatic will put you at a higher RPM than where these engines like to pull.

Not really. These newer engines have a peak hp of 2800 rpm so when towing or heavily accelerating you want to run the rpms up. You should be driving between peak tq and peak hp when loaded. At peak torque the horsepower is low so you can't do the work as fast, downshift and grab some rpms for more hp and do the work faster. The gearing will more than makeup for the torque difference.

There is a reason the engineers run the rpms up when loaded. Not only does the engine make more power but the increased rpms reduce the stress on the engine/transmission. Maybe this is another reason they limit hp/tq on the G56.

I used to limit my rpms low, around 2200-2300, but now I will tow at 2500-2600 if needed and the engine is much happier. I don't always rev it that high but have no issues if it is needed.

At peak torque a G56 truck makes 188hp and at peak hp it makes 656 lb/ft of torque. So where should the rpms be when heavy?

 

[cerberusiam]

That's a wish list. Not an admission of it's flaws.

Wish list, hardly. Those are all the reasons the G56 fails to impress. It amounts to settling for less just to get one more pedal, not a lot of other ways to look at it.

Because it's $3000. And both Eaton and Alison can be had cheaper.

What is $3000, the AISIN option? Do you really believe putting an Ally or Eaton in these trucks is less than that?

An Allison is the best route and to do it right is about $10-11k. Eaton has nothing better for power and gears in a single counter shaft transmission than the G56, a double counter shaft transmission is a huge fabrication project easily out costing the $3000 for the AISIN option. If there WAS a better cost effective option we would all know about it and the waiting list would be so long it would be impossible to get on.

The LD truck line simply does not have enough profit margin to offer a manual transmission to handle the HP race and avoid class action lawsuits, recalls, etc. Look what happens even here every time there is a little glitch or problem, at least 15 people are advocating class action suits and dragging the manufacturer down into the mud because THEY think it is unacceptable. Absolutely no incentive given the market to upgrade a manual solution.