Automatic vs Manual
 

Okay,so I'm looking at purchasing either a 64 GMC long box,or a 65 short box. I've been told that automatic transmissions are better, but I am still not sure.From what I 've understood manuals make more power and have better mileage. I dont think learning how to drive a standard will be a problem for me and honestly thats what I prefer. So I just want some opinions on this and some pros and cons. Also would their be any difference as far as installation.

Re: Automatic vs Manual
 

I'd say it depends on what kinda drivin your gonna be doin. I have a four speed and I love it! :metal: Its ALOT more fun to drive makes you "feel" more like a part of the truck than an automatic does, but it sucks in freeway traffic... or if you carry three people alot cause the middle person is ALWAYS knockin the stick outta 4th... :cuss: So as long as you dont gotta do alot of traffic driving I highly recommend a stick! :burnout:

Re: Automatic vs Manual
 

It really comes down to personal preference in this day and age. When domestic automatics became widely available in the early 50's, they were anything but nimble, and earned their nicknames. Chrysler and others started out with partial automatics such as Fluid Drive. It was a standard transmission with a torque converter replacing the clutch. They were actually fun to drive because you could choose to use the clutch pedal or not. The trade off – they were dog slow.

Chevy had vacuum shift which was a boosted shifter on the standard 3 speed, and later the 2 speed Powerglide (powerslide or slip-o-glide). Although the Powerglide has gone on to be famous and dependable in racing circles, it was generally unappreciated on the street, being limited to 2 forward gears, too low and too high. Pulling a long hill was a dreadful experience. Buick had the Dynaflow (Dyna-slow) as an alternate offering which was a continuous fluid coupling and was supremely smooth, and lazy. GM had the excellent Hydramatic, but it was heavy, complicated, expensive and only available on specific brands. For many disabled war veterans these were a godsend allowing a person to drive at all, but mainstream America remained with the stick shift until about the mid 50’s.

30 years later was a different story. The Turbo 350, 400, Chrysler Torqueflite, and Ford C4 and C6 variants came along. All excellent, dependable and efficient compared to earlier products. And these have essentially been superseded by newer electronic, overdrive, lock up automatics.

In the 60’s you just weren’t a man if you didn’t drive a stick shift. I’m not sure that matters to the young male ego anymore. I’m old now and have back and knee problems and I still drive a 4 speed manual. I just love the experience. But for a daily driver, or if you live in a hilly environment, or sit in stop and go traffic, an automatic is much easier to live with.

If you look at door slamming drag racers today, most have automatics. They’re much more consistent than shifting a manual. With a modern automatic, the gas mileage difference compared to a stick will be negligible, especially if the stick shift gets beaten harder because it’s more fun to show off with.

Installing either in a 63-66 Chevy truck is pretty straight forward. The Powerglide, Turbo 350 and manual 3 and 4 speed passenger car transmissions all have the same dimension from the back of the block to the tailshaft transmission mount. If you go with a 700R4 for example, the transmission is longer which will require moving the trans crossmember to the rear and using a shorter driveshaft, and probably a different slip yoke.

You’ll need a shifter for either application, and with an automatic you’ll need some type of kick down linkage that connects to the carburetor, and either a coolant connection to the radiator or an external cooler. Beyond that there aren’t a lot of installation differences.

Some of the decision may be simplified by what the truck already has in it, since staying with a stick or automatic is cheaper and easier if that’s what is already installed.

Re: Automatic vs Manual
 

^^^^Well put.:clap:

Re: Automatic vs Manual
 

ryansiki:

Welcome to the forums from Kansas City, KS.

markeb01:

Thanks for sharing.

Corts60:

My sentiments exactly.

Re: Automatic vs Manual
 

Ok, automatic trannys need more care and maintenance, right? So how much more care would it need,and which one could handle higher mileage?

Re: Automatic vs Manual
 

Modern transmissions really don’t need much in the way of maintenance. Automatics are prone to premature wear (or failure) if they are overheated, making effective cooling essential. They also need regular fluid changes, which keeps wear particles from circulating throughout the system increasing internal wear. If driven sensibly an automatic will generally last until the engine needs a rebuild, and sometimes longer depending on the brand and how the vehicle is driven.

Although not many owners do it, a manual transmission will also benefit from routine lubricant changes. If the gears aren’t damaged by abuse, and the synchronizers aren’t beaten by power shifting, a manual transmission will last almost indefinitely.

Re: Automatic vs Manual
 

there is a bit more work changing over to a a/t from a manual in these years. rear mounting for a manual is at the bellhousing, so one should remove that crossmember ( and you may mention the Lord's name in vain a few times removing it) and find and install a rear transmission crossmember or fabricate one. you may have to alter the d/shaft depending what a/t that you use. Ypu may also have to do some work to the floorboards for clearance thought that also depends on what trans was orig in there
ron

Re: Automatic vs Manual
 

Just a quick point to be noted, with modern automatics they can shift under full throttle conditions, a manual will always require a momentary lapse in power. I'm a manual guy if I have my choice, but automatics are very convienent.

Re: Automatic vs Manual
 

One can also shift a manual under full throttle but one has to condition your mind though in order to successful. the automatic though doesn't have a conscience and it will be more reliable over the long run for most people.
the wind resistance would be a greater deterent to these rolling bricks
ron