I also dislike autos but many magazine reports I read say that in some situations an auto is better than a manual. Sand driving is one example. Towing is another. Most reports I read on the Discovery diesel suggest that the auto is better because it seems to lessen the effect of turbo lag. A friend has a 1999 auto Patrol and I've never heard him complain about the transmission.
I've now had two 80 series petrol Landcruisers, the first was a manual and I now have an auto. I definitely prefer the auto. It's easier to drive in town, and is great in the bush. It handles the rough stuff at least as good as the manual, and in most circumstance better.
Sand driving is a breeze, as is slow stuff over rocks, etc. The only drawback is the reduction in engine braking when going down steep hills. This is no big deal, just means you have to use the brakes with a bit more finesse than usual.
The 80 series petrol manual was a bit of a pig to drive. Because of the amount of backlash in the drive train they are very tricky to changes gears smoothly. Even after driving it for a few months, smooth changes didn't seem to come naturally. I thought it may have been just mine, but I drove a few others and they all seemed to be the same. The diesel manuals seem to be not that bad though, probably due to the engine output being a bit more sluggish than the 4.5L petrol motors.
My two previous 4WDs before the Cruisers (a Patrol & a Pajero) were manuals, but I don't think I'd ever go back to a manual now. My advice would be however, that if you are going to go auto, make sure you get something with a bit of zing. An auto in heavy vehicle with a gutless motor is not a good mix.
Hey Bird, I agree with Rob & Daryl, don't knock one till ya try it. I drive a 3 litre V6 Challenger with a slush box. At first I mainly got it for the missus to make it easier for her to punt around. Haven't regretted my decision for a minute. The engine/auto combo has enough stick to leave sedans scratching their heads when you kick it in the guts at the lights and makes hill climbs in the crumbly stuff a real breeze. I use the gear lock on steep decents and don't seem to have any problems when working out with the guys using manual gearboxes in my club. I also agree with the other comments on this subject re- making sure you get a good engine match for you slushbox. You might say you're cippled but I'm sure if you select wisely, you wont find an auto the handicap you think it might be. Cheers. John Quinnell
> I've now had two 80 series petrol Landcruisers, the first was a manual > and I now have an auto. I definitely prefer the auto. It's easier to > drive in town, and is great in the bush. It handles the rough stuff at > least as good as the manual, and in most circumstance better.
> Sand driving is a breeze, as is slow stuff over rocks, etc. The only > drawback is the reduction in engine braking when going down steep hills. > This is no big deal, just means you have to use the brakes with a bit > more finesse than usual.
> The 80 series petrol manual was a bit of a pig to drive. Because of the > amount of backlash in the drive train they are very tricky to changes > gears smoothly. Even after driving it for a few months, smooth changes > didn't seem to come naturally. I thought it may have been just mine, > but I drove a few others and they all seemed to be the same. The diesel > manuals seem to be not that bad though, probably due to the engine > output being a bit more sluggish than the 4.5L petrol motors.
> My two previous 4WDs before the Cruisers (a Patrol & a Pajero) were > manuals, but I don't think I'd ever go back to a manual now. My advice > would be however, that if you are going to go auto, make sure you get > something with a bit of zing. An auto in heavy vehicle with a gutless > motor is not a good mix.
> Rob
> "Bird" <b...@fl.net.au> wrote in message > news:3A04E96B.D892C617@fl.net.au... > > Ok... > > looks like now that Im a cripple Im going to be FORCED to drive an > > Automatic..
> > I would rather eat rat poison than drive an Auto...
> > So my question... whta are Automatics like off road? Are they as > > lifeless as they are on the road?
Well of all things my 90 Hilux is an auto,,, the 1st auto ive had since i HAD to have one... and i have to admit it goes great Carries the engine & transmission straight out of a V6 commodore with a switchable lock-up torque convertor...can still get a fair amount of engine braking with that.
"Bird" <b...@fl.net.au> wrote in message news:3A04E96B.D892C617@fl.net.au... > Ok... > looks like now that Im a cripple Im going to be FORCED to drive an > Automatic..
> I would rather eat rat poison than drive an Auto...
> So my question... whta are Automatics like off road? Are they as > lifeless as they are on the road?
I also have to agree with all the other guys (especially the comments on engine power) except that for some reason my auto forerunner just seems to be just slightly lacking in the "fun factor" compared to my old manual 70 series Bundera. Admittedly the forerunner is a totally different class of 4wd and probably much heavier but the Bundera was down about 50hp on the forerunner and it "felt" just as capable off the road. I'm sure it's all pretty subjective though, perhaps a modern 4wds are too luxurious for their own good when pitted against vibrating, bouncing, noisy Bundera
> Well of all things my 90 Hilux is an auto,,, the 1st auto ive had since i > HAD to have one... and i have to admit it goes great > Carries the engine & transmission straight out of a V6 commodore with a > switchable lock-up torque convertor...can still get a fair amount > of engine braking with that.
Ok... thanks for the brains here for easing my terror...
Now .. Since Im only FORCED into this auto thing, im thinking of buying a cheap 4WD (its also my first 4wd, so I expect to ding it off road), and when Im healed buy my dream 80 series thats at Rockdale in a car yard...
What is the thoughts on the 60 series? anything to look out for Problems wise??
I have found one for $6999 in a car yard, and that would do me at the moment. I dont want to spend a fortune on somethin gthat Im not going to keep for ever...
Ahhh...yep...been there done that....i found that any 60 series under $10,000 was a real shitheap...you might be lucky and get one off an old bloke who has had it for years, but chances are that the 60 series springs are FUBAR...(toyota put soft springs to make 'em more like Toorak tractors)...look for how far the shackle is from the vertical, the more vertical...the better the springs are...
We had two FJ 60 (3F) '85 Sahara's...and they have been faultless (except for radiators, batteries, valves)...yeah...watch for burnt out valves...its a problem that Toyota fixed under warranty for us...but it wasn't in every model...the auto transmissions are fantastic...never had a fault...dunno about the manuals though...don't have one..
watch out for rust of course, and dodgy LPG conversions if applicable...
I gave up looking for a 60 series and bought a troopee for $7.5K...an '84 V8 manual...not exactly a comfort vehicle though...
Bird wrote in message <3A07BAAD.5D12E...@fl.net.au>... >Ok... >thanks for the brains here for easing my terror...
>Now .. Since Im only FORCED into this auto thing, im thinking of buying a cheap >4WD (its also my first 4wd, so I expect to ding it off road), and when Im healed >buy my dream 80 series thats at Rockdale in a car yard...
>What is the thoughts on the 60 series? anything to look out for Problems wise??
>I have found one for $6999 in a car yard, and that would do me at the moment. I >dont want to spend a fortune on somethin gthat Im not going to keep for ever...
> Ok... > thanks for the brains here for easing my terror...
> Now .. Since Im only FORCED into this auto thing, im thinking of buying a cheap > 4WD (its also my first 4wd, so I expect to ding it off road), and when Im healed > buy my dream 80 series thats at Rockdale in a car yard...
> What is the thoughts on the 60 series? anything to look out for Problems wise??
> I have found one for $6999 in a car yard, and that would do me at the moment. I > dont want to spend a fortune on somethin gthat Im not going to keep for ever...
well i wouldnt call it common, most engine management comp's do it automatically but only once the vehicle has reached a certain speed... but mine has a switch in the console so its totally manually controlled.
Rod.
"Steve Pickering" <uqunder...@emucities.com.au> wrote in message
> > Well of all things my 90 Hilux is an auto,,, the 1st auto ive had > since i > > HAD to have one... and i have to admit it goes great > > Carries the engine & transmission straight out of a V6 commodore > with a > > switchable lock-up torque convertor...can still get a fair amount > > of engine braking with that.
> > "Bird" <b...@fl.net.au> wrote in message > news:3A04E96B.D892C617@fl.net.au... > > > Ok... > > > looks like now that Im a cripple Im going to be FORCED to drive an > > > Automatic..
> > > I would rather eat rat poison than drive an Auto...
> > > So my question... whta are Automatics like off road? Are they as > > > lifeless as they are on the road?
"Rod" <rod...@optushome.com.au> wrote in message ... > well i wouldnt call it common, most engine management comp's do it > automatically but only once the vehicle has reached a certain speed... but > mine has a switch in the console so its totally manually controlled.
sounds like a retro fit as the T700 auto box locks up at around 70kph but is is just a sensor which uses the speedo input to operate so should be easy to tap into
> So normally a torque converter would only lock at high(er) speeds?
> The switch that you have, is that part of the commodore auto box, or > is it something that was retrofitted?
> Steve > -- > Steve Pickering > 1983 MQ Patrol > http://www.emucities.com/emu/hobbies/uqunder10s/ > "Rod" <rod...@optushome.com.au> wrote in message ... > > well i wouldnt call it common, most engine management comp's do it > > automatically but only once the vehicle has reached a certain > speed... but > > mine has a switch in the console so its totally manually controlled.
> So normally a torque converter would only lock at high(er) speeds?
I have a friend with an XT commodore and it seems to lock at about 80kph. Another friend with an EB ford complains because his only locks at about 95kph. Has to sit on 100 to keep it locked. Drops below 95 and it unlocks. Must be factory set in the auto box electronic control system or by the auto box manufacturer.
> The switch that you have, is that part of the commodore auto box, or > is it something that was retrofitted?
> Steve > -- > Steve Pickering > 1983 MQ Patrol > http://www.emucities.com/emu/hobbies/uqunder10s/ > "Rod" <rod...@optushome.com.au> wrote in message ... > > well i wouldnt call it common, most engine management comp's do it > > automatically but only once the vehicle has reached a certain > speed... but > > mine has a switch in the console so its totally manually controlled.
yeah, it is a retro - and it is very simple to do, just another switch - i fitted an LED indicator on the dash to let me know when its in the LOCKED posotion.
"Bird" <b...@fl.net.au> wrote in message news:3A04E96B.D892C617@fl.net.au... > Ok... > looks like now that Im a cripple Im going to be FORCED to drive an > Automatic..
> I would rather eat rat poison than drive an Auto...
> So my question... whta are Automatics like off road? Are they as > lifeless as they are on the road?
are there any implications in having the torque converter locked when the transmission tries to change gears (like gear crunch) or do you only lock the converter when you have locked the transmission on low?
> yeah, it is a retro - and it is very simple to do, just another switch - i > fitted an LED indicator on the dash to let me know when its in the LOCKED > posotion.
OK a quick lesson in Torque Converters the Torque converter is a fluid drive system there is no mechanical connection between the front and rear sections of the converter a converter consistes of two finned plates, and placed very close together when the engine turns it spins the front plate which picks up the trans fluid and throws it against the rear plate, the force is enough to start the rear plate spinning, similar to spraying water at a fan blade. There is always a difference in speed between the the 2 plates, this is what makes an auto un-economical, now if you add a locking mechanism to the converter so that to two plates are locked at the same speed then what you get is a direct drive to the transmission, thus making it more economical and getting faster response to acceleration, and an added bonus when used as described by Rod, it gives good engine braking
> are there any implications in having the torque converter locked when the > transmission tries > to change gears (like gear crunch) > or do you only lock the converter when you have locked the transmission on > low?
> Rod <rod...@optushome.com.au> wrote in message > news:SAMP5.3228$BU4.9182@news1.blktn1.nsw.optushome.com.au... > > yeah, it is a retro - and it is very simple to do, just another switch - i > > fitted an LED indicator on the dash to let me know when its in the LOCKED > > posotion.
> > Rod.
> > "Bird" <b...@fl.net.au> wrote in message > news:3A04E96B.D892C617@fl.net.au... > > > Ok... > > > looks like now that Im a cripple Im going to be FORCED to drive an > > > Automatic..
> > > I would rather eat rat poison than drive an Auto...
> > > So my question... whta are Automatics like off road? Are they as > > > lifeless as they are on the road?
So, if possible, you should lock it into a single gear before manually locking the torque converter otherwise it would be like changing gears without using a clutch?
Steve
Kevcat <kev...@one.net.au> wrote in article <3A1259E8.C21EE...@one.net.au>...
> OK a quick lesson in Torque Converters > the Torque converter is a fluid drive system > there is no mechanical connection between the front and rear sections of > the converter > a converter consistes of two finned plates, and placed very close > together > when the engine turns it spins the front plate which picks up the trans > fluid and throws it against the rear plate, the force is enough to start > the rear plate spinning, similar to spraying water at a fan blade. > There is always a difference in speed between the the 2 plates, this is > what makes an auto un-economical, now if you add a locking mechanism to > the converter so that to two plates are locked at the same speed then > what you get is a direct drive to the transmission, thus making it more > economical and getting faster response to acceleration, and an added > bonus when used as described by Rod, it gives good engine braking
No, because an auto is not like a manual when it comes to gear changes there is no need to break the drive to change gears as the new autos lock their converters at around 75kph and as you know in some of the larger cars you can be doing 75 in first gear, the converter will lock no matter what gear it is in and will still change through all the gears, it all relies on the use of the fluid and the valves, basically a hydraulic selfchanging gearbox explaining how an auto box does it's gear changing will take quite a bit of space so I might suggest you search the web for info on them
> So, if possible, you should lock it into a single gear before manually > locking the torque converter otherwise it would be like changing gears > without using a clutch?
> Steve
> Kevcat <kev...@one.net.au> wrote in article > <3A1259E8.C21EE...@one.net.au>... > > OK a quick lesson in Torque Converters > > the Torque converter is a fluid drive system > > there is no mechanical connection between the front and rear sections of > > the converter > > a converter consistes of two finned plates, and placed very close > > together > > when the engine turns it spins the front plate which picks up the trans > > fluid and throws it against the rear plate, the force is enough to start > > the rear plate spinning, similar to spraying water at a fan blade. > > There is always a difference in speed between the the 2 plates, this is > > what makes an auto un-economical, now if you add a locking mechanism to > > the converter so that to two plates are locked at the same speed then > > what you get is a direct drive to the transmission, thus making it more > > economical and getting faster response to acceleration, and an added > > bonus when used as described by Rod, it gives good engine braking
In article <3A1259E8.C21EE...@one.net.au>, Kevcat <kev...@one.net.au> wrote:
>OK a quick lesson in Torque Converters >the Torque converter is a fluid drive system >there is no mechanical connection between the front and rear sections of >the converter >a converter consistes of two finned plates, and placed very close >together >when the engine turns it spins the front plate which picks up the trans >fluid and throws it against the rear plate, the force is enough to start >the rear plate spinning, similar to spraying water at a fan blade. >There is always a difference in speed between the the 2 plates, this is >what makes an auto un-economical, now if you add a locking mechanism to >the converter so that to two plates are locked at the same speed then >what you get is a direct drive to the transmission, thus making it more >economical and getting faster response to acceleration, and an added >bonus when used as described by Rod, it gives good engine braking
You might have a point with the latter, if auto's didn't come witch such long 1st gears....often close to 2nd gear in a manual....have fun downhill, even with a locked torque converter....8-))
-- Bye,
Willem-Jan Markerink
The desire to understand is sometimes far less intelligent than the inability to understand
> No, because an auto is not like a manual when it comes to gear changes > there is no need to break the drive to change gears > as the new autos lock their converters at around 75kph and as you know > in some of the larger cars you can be doing 75 in first gear, the > converter will lock no matter what gear it is in and will still change > through all the gears, it all relies on the use of the fluid and the > valves, basically a hydraulic selfchanging gearbox > explaining how an auto box does it's gear changing will take quite a bit > of space so I might suggest you search the web for info on them
> Steve Pickering wrote:
> > So, if possible, you should lock it into a single gear before manually > > locking the torque converter otherwise it would be like changing gears > > without using a clutch?
> > Steve
> > Kevcat <kev...@one.net.au> wrote in article > > <3A1259E8.C21EE...@one.net.au>... > > > OK a quick lesson in Torque Converters > > > the Torque converter is a fluid drive system > > > there is no mechanical connection between the front and rear sections of > > > the converter > > > a converter consistes of two finned plates, and placed very close > > > together > > > when the engine turns it spins the front plate which picks up the trans > > > fluid and throws it against the rear plate, the force is enough to start > > > the rear plate spinning, similar to spraying water at a fan blade. > > > There is always a difference in speed between the the 2 plates, this is > > > what makes an auto un-economical, now if you add a locking mechanism to > > > the converter so that to two plates are locked at the same speed then > > > what you get is a direct drive to the transmission, thus making it more > > > economical and getting faster response to acceleration, and an added > > > bonus when used as described by Rod, it gives good engine braking
> "Kevcat" <kev...@one.net.au> wrote in message > news:3A136B10.D0CC6BCB@one.net.au... > > No, because an auto is not like a manual when it comes to gear changes > > there is no need to break the drive to change gears > > as the new autos lock their converters at around 75kph and as you know > > in some of the larger cars you can be doing 75 in first gear, the > > converter will lock no matter what gear it is in and will still change > > through all the gears, it all relies on the use of the fluid and the > > valves, basically a hydraulic selfchanging gearbox > > explaining how an auto box does it's gear changing will take quite a bit > > of space so I might suggest you search the web for info on them
> > Steve Pickering wrote:
> > > So, if possible, you should lock it into a single gear before manually > > > locking the torque converter otherwise it would be like changing gears > > > without using a clutch?
> > > Steve
> > > Kevcat <kev...@one.net.au> wrote in article > > > <3A1259E8.C21EE...@one.net.au>... > > > > OK a quick lesson in Torque Converters > > > > the Torque converter is a fluid drive system > > > > there is no mechanical connection between the front and rear sections > of > > > > the converter > > > > a converter consistes of two finned plates, and placed very close > > > > together > > > > when the engine turns it spins the front plate which picks up the > trans > > > > fluid and throws it against the rear plate, the force is enough to > start > > > > the rear plate spinning, similar to spraying water at a fan blade. > > > > There is always a difference in speed between the the 2 plates, this > is > > > > what makes an auto un-economical, now if you add a locking mechanism > to > > > > the converter so that to two plates are locked at the same speed then > > > > what you get is a direct drive to the transmission, thus making it > more > > > > economical and getting faster response to acceleration, and an added > > > > bonus when used as described by Rod, it gives good engine braking
> IF you read the rest of the thread and the topic you will see we are > talking torque converters in auto boxes, or the locking of the > converters
> Kev
> Oze_grub wrote:
> > Which vehicles have these locking transfers???
> > CS
> > "Kevcat" <kev...@one.net.au> wrote in message > > news:3A136B10.D0CC6BCB@one.net.au... > > > No, because an auto is not like a manual when it comes to gear changes > > > there is no need to break the drive to change gears > > > as the new autos lock their converters at around 75kph and as you know > > > in some of the larger cars you can be doing 75 in first gear, the > > > converter will lock no matter what gear it is in and will still change > > > through all the gears, it all relies on the use of the fluid and the > > > valves, basically a hydraulic selfchanging gearbox > > > explaining how an auto box does it's gear changing will take quite a bit > > > of space so I might suggest you search the web for info on them
> > > Steve Pickering wrote:
> > > > So, if possible, you should lock it into a single gear before manually > > > > locking the torque converter otherwise it would be like changing gears > > > > without using a clutch?
> > > > Steve
> > > > Kevcat <kev...@one.net.au> wrote in article > > > > <3A1259E8.C21EE...@one.net.au>... > > > > > OK a quick lesson in Torque Converters > > > > > the Torque converter is a fluid drive system > > > > > there is no mechanical connection between the front and rear sections > > of > > > > > the converter > > > > > a converter consistes of two finned plates, and placed very close > > > > > together > > > > > when the engine turns it spins the front plate which picks up the > > trans > > > > > fluid and throws it against the rear plate, the force is enough to > > start > > > > > the rear plate spinning, similar to spraying water at a fan blade. > > > > > There is always a difference in speed between the the 2 plates, this > > is > > > > > what makes an auto un-economical, now if you add a locking mechanism > > to > > > > > the converter so that to two plates are locked at the same speed then > > > > > what you get is a direct drive to the transmission, thus making it > > more > > > > > economical and getting faster response to acceleration, and an added > > > > > bonus when used as described by Rod, it gives good engine braking
Ok Rod has an T700 auto in his Hilux and as most late model 4 speed autos have lockup converters that lock only after the car has reached a certain road speed(usually around 75kph) what Rod did was modify his so that he could lock it via a switch on the dash for when he is using low range when going down very steep hills so that the engine will give full engine braking
> Sorry can't see the whole posting its truncated. > Are any vehicles standard with locking torque converters? > or are you discussing mods?
> Grub
> "Kevcat" <kev...@one.net.au> wrote in message > news:3A18A538.97171070@one.net.au... > > IF you read the rest of the thread and the topic you will see we are > > talking torque converters in auto boxes, or the locking of the > > converters
> > Kev
> > Oze_grub wrote:
> > > Which vehicles have these locking transfers???
> > > CS
> > > "Kevcat" <kev...@one.net.au> wrote in message > > > news:3A136B10.D0CC6BCB@one.net.au... > > > > No, because an auto is not like a manual when it comes to gear changes > > > > there is no need to break the drive to change gears > > > > as the new autos lock their converters at around 75kph and as you know > > > > in some of the larger cars you can be doing 75 in first gear, the > > > > converter will lock no matter what gear it is in and will still change > > > > through all the gears, it all relies on the use of the fluid and the > > > > valves, basically a hydraulic selfchanging gearbox > > > > explaining how an auto box does it's gear changing will take quite a > bit > > > > of space so I might suggest you search the web for info on them
> > > > Steve Pickering wrote:
> > > > > So, if possible, you should lock it into a single gear before > manually > > > > > locking the torque converter otherwise it would be like changing > gears > > > > > without using a clutch?
> > > > > Steve
> > > > > Kevcat <kev...@one.net.au> wrote in article > > > > > <3A1259E8.C21EE...@one.net.au>... > > > > > > OK a quick lesson in Torque Converters > > > > > > the Torque converter is a fluid drive system > > > > > > there is no mechanical connection between the front and rear > sections > > > of > > > > > > the converter > > > > > > a converter consistes of two finned plates, and placed very close > > > > > > together > > > > > > when the engine turns it spins the front plate which picks up the > > > trans > > > > > > fluid and throws it against the rear plate, the force is enough to > > > start > > > > > > the rear plate spinning, similar to spraying water at a fan blade. > > > > > > There is always a difference in speed between the the 2 plates, > this > > > is > > > > > > what makes an auto un-economical, now if you add a locking > mechanism > > > to > > > > > > the converter so that to two plates are locked at the same speed > then > > > > > > what you get is a direct drive to the transmission, thus making it > > > more > > > > > > economical and getting faster response to acceleration, and an > added > > > > > > bonus when used as described by Rod, it gives good engine braking
