Carryfast:
On that note many drivers don’t buy all the auto nonsense.So why not just agree to disagree and employers just base buying policy on the idea of providing drivers with the choice.
You have never driven an auto truck which to the auto is crap brigade is an automated manual transmission.
I do three trips a day to a landfill site in a artic never do I feel I’ve got stuck where a manual would of kept me going.
As soon as I go off the road it’s in to manual and I choose the gears. Same as in certain conditions on road il over ride it to get the best out of it.
Like any computer or mechanical system it’s only as good as what it’s programed or told what to do.
I didn’t say autos are crap especially what seems to be the I shift which just seems to be a fuller that looks after itself and never has a bad day.While modern locking converters are also a game changer regarding some of the downsides of torque converter autos.
I said that even the best of them have no fine control over clutch slip for tight manoeuvreing and no eyes to see what’s happening ahead of them.Added to which some drivers also instinctively prefer to use a conventional clutch and box which I’d count myself among.Which then just leaves the question,other than certain applications like working mostly in an urban environment,is the automated manual’s advantage,of never having a bad day,or loss of concentration,worth all the extra complication and expense bearing in mind the above.Or for that matter the pointless on going bashing and attempted brainwashing,of those who just want to be given the choice in that regard,by the auto fan boys.
Actually to be fair the current iShift has iSee which is terrain maps that know the lie of the land way before its visible, it works beautifully.
I’ll chuck my tuppence in and say I’ve driven manuals and autos, currently in an auto and although there are some moments where I would run over a child for the chance of a manual, I much prefer the auto overall.
The scania auto is good and being able to use the manual option is as good a compromise as needed.
Carryfast:
On that note many drivers don’t buy all the auto nonsense.So why not just agree to disagree and employers just base buying policy on the idea of providing drivers with the choice.
You have never driven an auto truck which to the auto is crap brigade is an automated manual transmission.
I do three trips a day to a landfill site in a artic never do I feel I’ve got stuck where a manual would of kept me going.
As soon as I go off the road it’s in to manual and I choose the gears. Same as in certain conditions on road il over ride it to get the best out of it.
Like any computer or mechanical system it’s only as good as what it’s programed or told what to do.
I didn’t say autos are crap especially what seems to be the I shift which just seems to be a fuller that looks after itself and never has a bad day.While modern locking converters are also a game changer regarding some of the downsides of torque converter autos.
I said that even the best of them have no fine control over clutch slip for tight manoeuvreing and no eyes to see what’s happening ahead of them.Added to which some drivers also instinctively prefer to use a conventional clutch and box which I’d count myself among.Which then just leaves the question,other than certain applications like working mostly in an urban environment,is the automated manual’s advantage,of never having a bad day,or loss of concentration,worth all the extra complication and expense bearing in mind the above.Or for that matter the pointless on going bashing and attempted brainwashing,of those who just want to be given the choice in that regard,by the auto fan boys.
Actually to be fair the current iShift has iSee which is terrain maps that know the lie of the land way before its visible, it works beautifully.
That’s brilliant. Will this new " iSee " system be able to tell when you are approaching let’s say Windy Hill on the M62 and select the " icoast " mode ? Will it also pop it back into gear with the usual cloud of smoke when you get to the bottom ?
Regards. John.
Carryfast:
On that note many drivers don’t buy all the auto nonsense.So why not just agree to disagree and employers just base buying policy on the idea of providing drivers with the choice.
You have never driven an auto truck which to the auto is crap brigade is an automated manual transmission.
I do three trips a day to a landfill site in a artic never do I feel I’ve got stuck where a manual would of kept me going.
As soon as I go off the road it’s in to manual and I choose the gears. Same as in certain conditions on road il over ride it to get the best out of it.
Like any computer or mechanical system it’s only as good as what it’s programed or told what to do.
I didn’t say autos are crap especially what seems to be the I shift which just seems to be a fuller that looks after itself and never has a bad day.While modern locking converters are also a game changer regarding some of the downsides of torque converter autos.
I said that even the best of them have no fine control over clutch slip for tight manoeuvreing and no eyes to see what’s happening ahead of them.Added to which some drivers also instinctively prefer to use a conventional clutch and box which I’d count myself among.Which then just leaves the question,other than certain applications like working mostly in an urban environment,is the automated manual’s advantage,of never having a bad day,or loss of concentration,worth all the extra complication and expense bearing in mind the above.Or for that matter the pointless on going bashing and attempted brainwashing,of those who just want to be given the choice in that regard,by the auto fan boys.
Actually to be fair the current iShift has iSee which is terrain maps that know the lie of the land way before its visible, it works beautifully.
I remember reading this was been devolped a couple of years ago and mentioned it on anot her post. Never knew it was out though.
My 15 plate fmx is quite a basic model so I dof my hat to your superior trundle wagon
Muckaway:
Talking to various people recently about the above, it amazes me just how many people dismiss autos without driving them. My boss and his Dad aren’t fans, even though we had a good demonstrator (CF) with one last year, I reckon when a new motor is planned I reckon it’ll be a manual 'box.
Same thing with the Mrs when we bought our car last October. I wanted an auto, not the old style type but a powershift type like the in laws have on their X5. The wife was dead against because "autos are crap, lazy and expensive to run etc etc)and as Kia autos are crap we bought a manual Kia (she uses it 90% of the time anyway, and a good car to be fair).
The flour mill I used to work for wouldn’t buy autos because the self appointed “senior driver” said they were “crap and for lazy [zb].” Ex army do as told without questioning sort…
Even customers on sites slate auto trucks without ever having used one.
And the last time you drove an Eaton 9 speed or Spicer?
If you cant appreciate the difference in heavy vehicle control between some computer controlled hybrid and a full non syncro stick shift box then you really shouldnt ask stupid questions.
Muckaway:
And the last time you drove an Eaton 9 speed or Spicer?
If you cant appreciate the difference in heavy vehicle control between some computer controlled hybrid and a full non syncro stick shift box then you really shouldnt ask stupid questions.
Talk about stupid questions and you pose one. Where did I say “what’s the difference?”
Wind your neck in and your head will uncouple from your sphincter muscles.
To answer your question, about 5 years ago, when the last of the fleet with non synchros were pensioned off.
NB12:
Is it still the case that a well driven manual returns better mpg than an auto?.
I know a driver on heavy haulage who returns far better mpg in his 8 year old manual volvo than the year/2 year old scanias/volvos do.
I get over 9mpg in my auto 450 scania, all over the country, mostly well freighted. It has dropped about .25mpg since someone else was driving it last week.
NB12:
Is it still the case that a well driven manual returns better mpg than an auto?.
Yes I’d say so, the difference between certain drivers on identical daily contract work can be quite striking if worked out accurately and well analysed etc over a week. And then you have to, in reality, take that over a long period of time. The difference can be a few thousand pounds in the operators pocket every year. Its hard nowadays as the trucks computers can be unreliable and there are so many variable factors in the real world of trucking.
But yeah the bottom line is an economical driver will save the operator a few thousand pounds over the course of a year compared to someone who doesn’t drive economically. Drivers are ten a penny these days, the good drivers are impossible to find.
A good driver, (if they give a toss, and the company hasn’t dumbed their job down so much that they’ve lost all pride in their work), will always be able to read the road ahead better than a machine, so better MPG should be a given.
But the auto does give better mpg than the dross driver and the gearbox and clutch are protected from dross’s efforts to destroy them too.
Dave_k, i agree the the good drivers are impossible to find, but whats even more rare is a transport dept that appreciate they have good drivers, if they do, and don’t assume lowest common denominator rules.
I done an experiment a few years ago for this very argument on here.
Driving round London I beat my I shift figures by about half a mpg by driving it in manual using antisipation watching revs etc.
However in the real world I tend to let I shift do the work as my firm give me no extra and I feel more refreshed at the end of the day.
kr79:
I done an experiment a few years ago for this very argument on here.
Driving round London I beat my I shift figures by about half a mpg by driving it in manual using antisipation watching revs etc.
However in the real world I tend to let I shift do the work as my firm give me no extra and I feel more refreshed at the end of the day.
Genuine question… were you driving with the same focus in auto than you were in your manual experiment?
well ive driven Allison auto boxes ,the ones with the Tbar and the world gearbox (push button on the dash ) and to be honest not bad at all was on local, country backroads, towns, not much good I found on ice and snow going downhill back in the UK and the fuel mpg was high , I drove an ishift Volvo for a couple o runs over the Coq (highway to hell ) and very nice indead it was then a Freightshaker(merc) wae the paddles on the steering wheel for a run…this is why my hair is white!
Now unlike NMM and NEIL I am a prairie driver /MB province and highway camp jobs)and don’t see many big jumpups to speak of and working for the company I am at (and ones I have been at) I drive what would have been scrapped in the uk due to age ,they are all 18sp and 13sp and I try to forget about the kin two sticks (not anymore thank you) and find its horses for courses if I was on distance an going to british Columbia over the hump or east into the GTA an Ishift for me please but otherwise an 13/18sp is more than able and once you get it down pat its no hardship at all, but TBO I don’t care as long as they are legal,heater works and it stops when I want and of course the money is there every two weeks! jimmy
Juddian:
A good driver, (if they give a toss, and the company hasn’t dumbed their job down so much that they’ve lost all pride in their work), will always be able to read the road ahead better than a machine, so better MPG should be a given.
But the auto does give better mpg than the dross driver and the gearbox and clutch are protected from dross’s efforts to destroy them too.
Dave_k, i agree the the good drivers are impossible to find, but whats even more rare is a transport dept that appreciate they have good drivers, if they do, and don’t assume lowest common denominator rules.
Yeah some companies will look after the drivers and treat them ok, but as you say most don’t care and create lots of problems for themselves.
Muckaway:
And the last time you drove an Eaton 9 speed or Spicer?
If you cant appreciate the difference in heavy vehicle control between some computer controlled hybrid and a full non syncro stick shift box then you really shouldnt ask stupid questions.
Talk about stupid questions and you pose one. Where did I say “what’s the difference?”
Wind your neck in and your head will uncouple from your sphincter muscles.
To answer your question, about 5 years ago, when the last of the fleet with non synchros were pensioned off.
simon1958:
Q. Is it true, manual transmissions are optional now?
Yep and some times dearer
SO. Looks like silicon chip’s taking over then; equal . Maybe the acid test would be like this.
Two drivers. Same route. Same drop.
One industrial outlet, two identical units, one with an auto box, the other with a manual. Both outfits tare at the same; both go over the weighbridge @ gross 44tonne leaving site. Now give the challenge as to which driver returns the max MPG over the trip there and back. Now swap drivers on day two. Would the result be looking good on fuel returns? Just a question and no malice on the subject.
At the end of the day, it’s the company’s profit margin that doesn’t want to be soaked with fuel costs especially now the £ at a low ebb .
The problem being those drivers who can be bothered to make the effort to beat the computer, indeed anyone remotely interested, are desperately thin on the ground.
Those interested enough and competent are probably already in the best jobs they can reasonable secure, and you can sure they arn’t on £8 an hour right through all 73 hours or however many some companies expect these days.
Would paying the good driver £15 an hour plus an enhanced overtime rate be cost effective for 1 or even 3mpg, it might but i suspect for most operations that require basically a bum on a seat then probably not.
So much of our industry has been deskilled down to the bottom, to the point where all some of these companies need is a chauffeur who may not be bothered about anything nor take the slightest interest nor pride in their work, but give them a fully automatic lorry, helpfully laden with auto braking and lane departure systems as well as the statutory auto box and even in the hands of the worse licence holder out there the vehicle will return acceptable fuel economy, ok it will get through several sets of brake pads more than the properly driven lorry, but at less cost fuel wise than skilled motivated people will cost, and best bit of all you can stick any bloody fool with a licence in the seat at a moments notice and the job will still be done.
So many fleets are now leased with full R&M contracts so vehicle longevity and resale, by being properly specced and looked after by caring drivers, is of little consideration, hence the fully auto lorry for almost driver proof operation.
That is where we are now at, and why so many times on these forums i have tried to persuade drivers not to be so welcoming of automation designed to deskill and inevitably cheapen their job, and ultimately to replace them with autonomous, every time it is met with derision by those who cannot see.
As with so many things in this country, we are the authors of our own grim destiny…we supposed lorry drivers have voted with our feet for our own deskilling leading to job cheapening and ultimately complete replacement, just as the broader electorate have done in successive general elections, voted for national self destruction.
said they were “crap and for lazy [zb].” Ex army do as told without questioning sort…
back in the UK and the fuel mpg was high , I drove an ishift Volvo for a couple o runs over the Coq (highway to hell ) and very nice indead it was then a Freightshaker(merc) wae the paddles on the steering wheel for a run…this is why my hair is white!