# Manual vs Automatic for Light Off-Roading?



## X-Traction (Dec 21, 2004)

I've got a question that's resulted in a disagreement on another forum. Simply, which is better for "casual" "off-road" use, a manual or a standard transmission? I know the accepted wisdom is that the manual is better, but I think that may not hold true depending on the circumstances.

Leaving aside questions of durability, given that both transmissions are 5-speeds, and given that they are in vehicles that have low ranges and are otherwise identical and stock. This means no super-low gearing, and no extra clearance.

The useage is not rock-crawling, mudpits, the Rubicon, or flying through the air, because most stock SUV's can't cut that stuff. And I'm not talking about performance in deep snow or sand.

So we're talking about creeping up and down steep rough roads, with ditches, small logs and rocks as obstacles. Scraping the bottom or ends regularly, but not getting wheels in the air, rolling over, using winches etc.

One view is that the standard, while typically seen as better suited for this, has a stall speed. That speed can easily be too fast to negotiate some obstacles without bottoming the tires, or bouncing on the suspension far enough to slam down on things.

The automatic, on the other hand, allows slowing right down to a stop without stalling, and eeaaassing up over or through things as slowly as necessary.

The standard can be used below stall speed by using the clutch, but eventually three pedals become too much for two feet to operate, and some lurching results. Not to mention the effect on the clutch. Downhill, the standard provides excellent engine braking, and saves the brakes.

The automatic, with only two pedals to operate, could provide much more controlled movements. I imagine this sort of use will shorten the time before a tranny overhaul is needed. I would guess that there is less engine braking for steep descents than with a standard. But I haven't driven a 4wd with low range and an automatic, so I don't really know.

So let the opinions fly - which is better for this casual sort of rough roading?


----------



## johnnyhammers (Oct 13, 2005)

I've owned and abused an 84 Jeep Grand Wagoneer with the 360cid V8 and an auto tranny, andI crrently own a 97 Nissan Hardbody with 4banger and 5spd. Having flogged them both, I still can't answer the question myself. They both have grat advantages over the other and they both can work very well off road. I'd say that the manual gets a bit tricky in a lot of places, but its easily overcome with a little "heel-and-toe" (sometimes it takes a lot). On steep hill desents the auto worksjust fine to slow the truck in low range, or at least it did in my Jeep, and keep in mind that this was the biggest jeep they ever made, totally stock, scraping the ends and t-case pretty often. The jeep was a beast, but loads of fun to take off road, even with the cheapes road tires that Sears would put on it. The auto did nothing but work well and free up my concentration to worry about the trail and what I was going to do about it. 

I guess that My opinion is that automatics are great, maybe best, for folks who are just learning to get around off road. Manuals are better for the more (if only slightly) seasoned off roaders, but they don't nessessarily give anyone the upper hand in off roading prowess. I think that driver skill and equipment come into play and make the transmission a moot point.

P.S. You should move this over to the Frontier forum. This off road forum (while the right place for this tread) sees about as much us as my grandmothers liver. 

Good question, I'm qurious to see the results.


----------



## dvdswanson (Nov 6, 2005)

johnnyhammers said:


> I've owned and abused an 84 Jeep Grand Wagoneer with the 360cid V8 and an auto tranny, andI crrently own a 97 Nissan Hardbody with 4banger and 5spd. Having flogged them both, I still can't answer the question myself. They both have grat advantages over the other and they both can work very well off road. I'd say that the manual gets a bit tricky in a lot of places, but its easily overcome with a little "heel-and-toe" (sometimes it takes a lot). On steep hill desents the auto worksjust fine to slow the truck in low range, or at least it did in my Jeep, and keep in mind that this was the biggest jeep they ever made, totally stock, scraping the ends and t-case pretty often. The jeep was a beast, but loads of fun to take off road, even with the cheapes road tires that Sears would put on it. The auto did nothing but work well and free up my concentration to worry about the trail and what I was going to do about it.
> 
> I guess that My opinion is that automatics are great, maybe best, for folks who are just learning to get around off road. Manuals are better for the more (if only slightly) seasoned off roaders, but they don't nessessarily give anyone the upper hand in off roading prowess. I think that driver skill and equipment come into play and make the transmission a moot point.
> 
> ...



I have to agree. autos are great in some situations and manuals are great in some. personally I prefer the manual just because every 4WD that I have owned has been a manual except for one which was a 95 4Runner. the 4Runner was the wife's and I did take it out a couple of times and never had a problem. 

it all depends on the driver and what they prefer, the only thing that matters is that the driver and passengers have a great time and enjoy the scenery. :cheers:


----------



## X-Traction (Dec 21, 2004)

Thanks for the valuable feedback. I think a lot of people who believe automatics have no place rough-roading, have never tried it or thought about it. I suspect they associate the cruder aspects of off-roading with the idea of a basic manual transmission. I noticed all the more expensive SUV's have automatics, and in the reviews of them, no one lamented the lack of standard transmissions. Some of these, such as Land Rovers and the latest Grand Cherokees, enjoy great praise for their capabilities despite having automatics.

I took a rwd automatic car with limited slip diff to its clearance limits frequently for many years, and actually found the automatic to be a pretty good substitute for not having a low range. For uphill, at least. It was totally useless for creeping downhill, and I went through a lot of brakes. I've also used a 4x4 5-spd in low range a lot, and I know it's not the perfect answer either.

I've placed a deposit on a new suv that comes with a low range only if it's combined with an automatic transmission, so I was concerned about the conventional thinking that says automatics have no place in the rough stuff. The automatic in question is a 5-spd, apparently with an unusually low first gear. So I think it will be just fine.

Johnnyhammers, How do you think a system with traction control using the ABS braking system compares to something set up like the old Grand Wagoneer?


----------



## johnnyhammers (Oct 13, 2005)

X-Traction said:


> Thanks for the valuable feedback. I think a lot of people who believe automatics have no place rough-roading, have never tried it or thought about it. I suspect they associate the cruder aspects of off-roading with the idea of a basic manual transmission. I noticed all the more expensive SUV's have automatics, and in the reviews of them, no one lamented the lack of standard transmissions. Some of these, such as Land Rovers and the latest Grand Cherokees, enjoy great praise for their capabilities despite having automatics.
> 
> I took a rwd automatic car with limited slip diff to its clearance limits frequently for many years, and actually found the automatic to be a pretty good substitute for not having a low range. For uphill, at least. It was totally useless for creeping downhill, and I went through a lot of brakes. I've also used a 4x4 5-spd in low range a lot, and I know it's not the perfect answer either.
> 
> ...


Well, my Wagonner had open diffs, so I think the ABS traction control will be a big help off road. I think it should be fine on the road too. With open diffs you really only have one wheel working; two if you're in 4wd. I think the ABS system would be great for what you want. I've tried to figure out something similar to it on my current truck (97 hardbody xe 4x4). Actually it's more similar to "cutting" brakes found on most farm tractors and on some desert sand rails (the old VW variety). I've place brake line lockers in the rear brake lines. These are often used on the front wheels of drag racers to lock the front brakes independently of the rear so they can do those spectacular burnouts. I put one one each side of the rear brakes so I can lock each rear wheel independently of the rest of the brake system. in effect is can brake the wheel that's in the mud or in the air and transfer the power to the wheel that has (hopefully) some traction. It's a great theory, but the rear brakes don't have much power, so it only makes a slight difference. A real ABS control system would work great.

Ah yes, me and my cock eyed schemes.
BRILLIANT!!! :thumbup:


----------



## X-Traction (Dec 21, 2004)

Well, I've heard you can simulate traction control by applying the brakes and increasing the throttle to keep from stalling. This presumably stops the wheels lacking traction from spinning. I'm not sure you can do this with a standard transmission unless you have three legs. So your home-made system makes perfect sense, and you get full marks for creativity.

Suzuki only allows you to get a low range on their top-of-the-line 2006 Grand Vitara. It is only available with an automatic, and comes with 17" wheels. A triumph of marketing over common sense. It means their most capable drive train is not available with a standard trans, and comes with their least suitable wheels. There are damn few winter or A/T tires available in that size. Long-time Suzuki offroaders are justifiably angry that there isn't a cheap version available with the low range.

It has traction control, but there are times when it's better to be able to spin the wheels. Trouble is, if you shut the TC off, you're left with what amounts to an on-demand 4wd, with no limited slip differential or equivalent. Compromises, compromises.


----------



## johnnyhammers (Oct 13, 2005)

Three pedals, two feet? Hell yeah I can get 'em all at once. Heel-and-toe baby, Heel-and-toe. I very often need all three pedals at once, and you gotta figure something out. On road driving skills directly translate to off road capability, and off road practice is a great place to perfect your whacky moves. 

I can also complete a U turn within two lanes, one and a quarter really, never touching anything but the center line when I cross it. I got pretty good with using the clutch, brake, gas, E-brake, and steering all at the same time. Try that without spilling your Starbucks! Yeah, I did some pretty stupid stuff when I was younger. Owning a truck is fun, but I still miss my little VW GTI, and my Fiat X1/9. I've still got my wifes Subaru, but it's just not the same.

Ah the fun of making the most out of any vehicle
:cheers:


----------

