Auto VS. Manual trans

[fishcleaner]

I have no experience with the automatic trans and just wanted to get some input from you guys about the pros and cons of the 413 vs a 555 trans. I'm shooting for 400hp and the car will be raced, but driven to the track.
questions I have:

Is the auto faster?

Is the auto shifter as bad as the manual?

What trans is more durable?

[cordes]

A 555 with a plate won't need an expensive converter and a lot of mods to make it live day in and day out. Everyone is right when they say that the 413 can be made to live, but it can't be done for what I would want to pay.

Plus all the cool kids have 5 speeds. :nod:

[fishcleaner]

for what I would want to pay
I hear ya, I have a 555 with a plate but it needs a quaife so I'm looking at a price of expensive or more expensive. the shifter sucks on the 5sp and I don't hear to many people praising their clutches, thats why I was thinking about an auto. Has anyone switched out to an auto and gone faster without any engine mods?

[turbovanman²]

I really prefer auto's- pro's are easier to launch, more consistant, easier to build boost at the line. Con's are converter costs but thats coming down and considering the price of a clutch, I think a converter is a better deal.

I think I've read an auto is slightly faster but lower MPH and 5 speed is vice versa. Either way, its up to you and what you prefer, rowing gears or shifting 1-2-3. Oh, RMVB also makes it easier although I still am in auto mode so far.

[t3rse]

Auto will always be quicker when setup properly...downside is cost.

[Vigo]

it wont ALWAYS be quicker. it really only becomes quicker if you cant hook up your 5 speed or if you are making a bunch of power. on slicks 5spds go plenty fast, but because of the difficulty and danger to the trans and car of shifting it REALLY fast its hard to get et's representative of your power when you've got an 11 or 12 second car.

it takes more power to run and doesnt have as good of gearing and will get worse gas mileage and is less fun to drive and does take money to build up... but you get consistency which becomes important when you have a lot of time and money and effort into your motor and you want to be able to see the results on paper at the track.


personally, i would pick 5 speed for lower-powered cars with higher rpm powerbands and go auto for cars making huge torque and not having a lot of rpm to play with or those cars trying to get into the 12s and 11s or lower.

[88_pacifica]

personally, i would pick 5 speed for lower-powered cars with higher rpm powerbands and go auto for cars making huge torque and not having a lot of rpm to play with or those cars trying to get into the 12s and 11s or lower.

I agree totally. This is the key that all people should read regardless of mfgr. An auto will always "shift faster" because the distance needed to travel to create the shifts is much reduced(stick movement) as well as removing the "human error" factor. However, as Vigo noted, you lose a small percentage of power spinning the converter, but you make it up shifting faster, so you tend to get there(et's) quicker. A standard shift is more "efficient" but in upper power ranges can slip(clutch fade) and the action of "shifting" is slower.

As a general rule of thumb, auto's are bracket raced and used in all out "professional" racing. Most "heads-up" and weekend warrior racers prefer the standard as they like to "feel the shift" and enjoy "sliding through the slushbox." Unless you are in the low 12's and hunting deeper into the 11's and tens, a standard is much more cost efficient than a built up auto. The 413 is difficult to help survive behind excessive hp and tq...

[t3rse]

A properly setup auto on a 300+ hp car will reach the finish line first. How many 5 speed FWD cars cut 1.40 60 foot times?

Personally, I'm a 5 speed man, but I'm not going to lie to myself.

[RoadWarrior222]

If I was gonna stay below about 300HP and wanted to do track days and autocross etc, and take it for blasts on twisty roads, I'd take a manual. If it was all about the quarter mile, it would be the auto for sure. Cost.. well there's a couple of good build up pages on the web, it looks like you can build an auto rather cheaply to the point where you're more likely to have axle troubles than tranny troubles. Seems to me that you get into spendy custom clutches that are awful on the street a few HP before you need $$$ auto upgrades. Convertors.... I am not real sure you necessarily "need" a convertor upgrade for the first 350 HP or so ... you just have to build and drive it different, if you're way too excitable, you'll push it too far and break it, if you put a huge turbo on, you'll succumb to temptation to power brake too long and break it etc. You'd also be burning out stock and mildly upgraded clutches in a manual before then.

Also Vigo makes a good point, if you're building a screamer, 5 speed it, don't think you want to take an auto much beyond 6500. If you're building a slogger, auto it is, and you really only need 2nd* :D

(* j/k it will really only get you to about 80, so maybe for the 1/8th..)

[88_pacifica]

Also Vigo makes a good point, if you're building a screamer, 5 speed it, don't think you want to take an auto much beyond 6500. If you're building a slogger, auto it is, and you really only need 2nd* :D

(* j/k it will really only get you to about 80, so maybe for the 1/8th..)

I would tend to disagree. There are plenty of auto cars running 10K rpm. It is simply a matter of diminishing returns though which is why that's not as common. However, there are plenty of Powerglides and 3 spds singing in the upper RPM ranges....

[Bubba]

Converter selection is key to a good performing auto set-up.

[turbovanman²]

If I was gonna stay below about 300HP and wanted to do track days and autocross etc, and take it for blasts on twisty roads, I'd take a manual. If it was all about the quarter mile, it would be the auto for sure. Cost.. well there's a couple of good build up pages on the web, it looks like you can build an auto rather cheaply to the point where you're more likely to have axle troubles than tranny troubles. Seems to me that you get into spendy custom clutches that are awful on the street a few HP before you need $$$ auto upgrades. Convertors.... I am not real sure you necessarily "need" a convertor upgrade for the first 350 HP or so ... you just have to build and drive it different, if you're way too excitable, you'll push it too far and break it, if you put a huge turbo on, you'll succumb to temptation to power brake too long and break it etc. You'd also be burning out stock and mildly upgraded clutches in a manual before then.

Also Vigo makes a good point, if you're building a screamer, 5 speed it, don't think you want to take an auto much beyond 6500. If you're building a slogger, auto it is, and you really only need 2nd* :D

(* j/k it will really only get you to about 80, so maybe for the 1/8th..)


Auto's can be made to take big power, just takes a bit of money, time and patience.

Only 80, nah, see sig, lol.

I would like a 5 speed too but can't have both on one vehicle and my commute makes a 5 speed a chore now, :(

[88_pacifica]

I would like a 5 speed too but can't have both on one vehicle and my commute makes a 5 speed a chore now, :(

Nah... You're just getting older like the rest of us. Plus, the maintainance is easier. A simple filter and fluid change and you're god to ge vs a clutch assmebly R&R. :thumb:

[RoadWarrior222]

Auto's can be made to take big power, just takes a bit of money, time and patience.

Only 80, nah, see sig, lol.


Yeah, I was just meaning really that is seems you can do a $200 R&R and home beef up, and have it hold up pretty good around 350-400 without abuse, before you spend big bucks. It's the same as with motors, the first few HP is cheap, the next few is $$ and the next few after that $$$$.

Heh, didn't see that was 2nd gear only, I was going on mine which I thought was kinda tall geared topping out at 70 and allowing a few for more rpm. That's wierd though if you can do that in 2nd and yet you're complaining about high rpm on the highway in 3rd.

[mock_glh]

There are plenty of auto cars running 10K rpm....

Not with stock parts! Those cast iron clutch drums will explode when you spin them that hard. This is very common with Torqueflites in rwd cars.

[turbovanman²]

Not with stock parts! Those cast iron clutch drums will explode when you spin them that hard. This is very common with Torqueflites in rwd cars.

I hope no one got hurt but snap, thats awesome carnage, :nod:


I forgot to mention, an updated converter is a must.

[88_pacifica]

Not with stock parts! Those cast iron clutch drums will explode when you spin them that hard. This is very common with Torqueflites in rwd cars.

True, I should've clarified, you got me there. Anybody taking a stock converter past 7K is asking for it anyway. My bad, the devil is in the details..... :thumb:

[fishcleaner]

Thanks for the input guys, I was amazed at what was available for the auto, trans brake, reverse valve body etc. I figure the auto will be faster at the strip and eliminate the human error of shifting into 3rd. I think I'm going to stick with the manual and do some more research on the auto, maybe by the time the clutch takes a dump I might switch it to the auto at that point if the car turns into a race car.

[Bubba]

I have one with the RMVB, extra clutches and high stall converter. I've never raced it or even launched it for that matter, but I'll tell ya, the high stall converter makes street driving not so fun. Mainly because of the slippage, it seems to take longer for the power to come on. I'm sure I'm not the only one who has experienced this. I've got an A523 and plan to go back to a stick either that or swap the converter out for a beefed up stock stall converter.

[turbovanman²]

I have one with the RMVB, extra clutches and high stall converter. I've never raced it or even launched it for that matter, but I'll tell ya, the high stall converter makes street driving not so fun. Mainly because of the slippage, it seems to take longer for the power to come on. I'm sure I'm not the only one who has experienced this. I've got an A523 and plan to go back to a stick either that or swap the converter out for a beefed up stock stall converter.

Its a misconception for our engines, you don't need a high stall. A beefed up stock stall is all you need, :D

[fishcleaner]

I heard the high stall is for NA engines to build rpm to get to the power band, forced induction builds lower so you need more of a lock-up type converter

[turbovanman²]

I heard the high stall is for NA engines to build rpm to get to the power band, forced induction builds lower so you need more of a lock-up type converter


Exactly, we have turbo's so high stalls aren't needed, it just wastes power and makes the setup laggy unless you have a huge turbo.