ZWilson07

i was just wondering somthing i know that most manuas only come wt the 4.6 or 4.2 motors usually and that this is prolly more of an opinion thing than anything else but which do you all think is better? not just for the fun factor but i mean more on realibilty and longtivity. it always eems like themanual goes out first but yet is cheaper to fix than a automatic usally. my friends 97 4.2 manual hes had to have rebuilt twice but it does have like 230.000 miles so thats to be expected but i just ees like the automatic usually last longer but its more expensive to rebuilt so its really ur opinion but i was jw what ual had to say about it

kmac1036

it all depends on how you drive them. I had a 98 B2500 w a 5 sp, 4cyl w 130k when I traded it, never touched the trans or clutch the whole time other than fluid change, I had it 8 years, had 57k bought used. now, dad's 96 powerstroke had to be rebuilt due to the junk 2 pc shock absorbent flywheel they put on them. its a ZF (german) & wasn't all that cheap to get rebuilt. the clutch & flywheel weren't either. whole project cost him over $2500 I think. no issues since. he yells at me whenever I drive it, accuses me of speed shifting & not using the clutch right when I never had any issues with mine

people ride clutches & burn them out, so it seems like they are worked on more than the autos. if you know how to drive them (I had to reprogram myself when I bought my '10, has the 6sp auto, kept revving the engine at stoplights )

my new 6sp locks up the torque converter quite a bit compared to the prev autos. if u like the stick & can't stand autos then I'd say this is a pretty easy choice, esp. if u ain't scared of doing the clutch or pulling the trans, if it would ever need it, then it's likely to have savings in the longer run over the autos. clutches aren't cheap tho to go thru them all the time. to do flywheel, clutch, slave cyl, was over $400 in parts, for a 4cyl. not sure what it would be for an f150.

02Screw

I had a 95 f150 with a stick that used the mazda transmission. I put three transmissions in it for three hundred each. I couldnt justify spending 1400 bucks for a rebuilt trans. Now I have a 2002 f-150 with an auto trans and it is gonna need a transmission sooner or later and for me to do it its gonna run me about 300 bucks from a guy who has one outta a totaled truck with 70k on it. At the end of the day you can very easily spend some money on either one. All depends on what your driving style is if you are in alot of city traffic that is stop and go you will prolly wanna go with an auto to save your left knee. All and all its more of a preference then anything else.

JJ1983

I think that truthfully, a manual transmission doesn;t do anything much better than an auto these days (the have the newer autos down to an art). But, in the long run, I personally believe that autos can cost some coin in maintenance and repair if not properly taken care of.

Stadard transmissions I have owned in the past, only one of them needed a clutch, and the parts to do the complete job (1983 Chevy C10 305ci 3 speed Saginaw) were about 150 altogether, plus some beer for me and my buddy...add another 30 bucks, we got drunk before the job was complete. All in all, it comes down to presonal choice. I have an auto now, but coming from a standard, I prefer a manual transmission because I miss shifting the gears, nothing more or less. Both get the job done though....