Manual vs auto, which accelerates faster?

33 IMP said:

None that i can remember reading that were apples to apples. The autos always seemed to be saddled with extras the stick cars didnt have (a/c, p/s etc.)and the autos always had less rear gear. (And often a milder camshaft)

Click to expand...

66 Sat said:

Have a look at these figures from a Motor Trend test in 1969 of 3 Road Runners.
Note the auto has 3.23 gears against 4.10 for the 4 speed, and weighs 350 lbs more. Unfortunately the article doesn't list the specs for the cars so the weight of the 383 auto may be a misprint, or the 4 spd car was very basic and the auto had every option known to man including a/c.
View attachment 1087357 View attachment 1087359

Click to expand...

PERFECT example!

66 Sat said:

Have a look at these figures from a Motor Trend test in 1969 of 3 Road Runners.
Note the auto has 3.23 gears against 4.10 for the 4 speed, and weighs 350 lbs more. Unfortunately the article doesn't list the specs for the cars so the weight of the 383 auto may be a misprint, or the 4 spd car was very basic and the auto had every option known to man including a/c.
View attachment 1087357 View attachment 1087359

Click to expand...

Interesting figures nonetheless.

The hemi fuel economy is also way better than i would have expected with the 8 barrels.
Pedal to the metal my 560 SEC also only gets about 8 mpg despite smaller displacement, fuel injection and being built 20 years later.

33 IMP said:

Yes, in the vintage of cars we are talking about,(in other words, before overdrive transmissions), both high gear in a four speed and in an automatic were direct 1 to 1. Engine speed and trans output speed would be the same (disregarding converter slip in the automatic).

Click to expand...

Was this only the case on mopars or also on gm's, ford's etc.?

Michael_ said:

Interesting figures nonetheless.

The hemi fuel economy is also way better than i would have expected with the 8 barrels.
Pedal to the metal my 560 SEC also only gets about 8 mpg despite smaller displacement, fuel injection and being built 20 years later.



Was this only the case on mopars or also on gm's, ford's etc.?

Click to expand...

I remember seeing similar skewed tests of GTO's (early goat autos were powerglides, hardly fair against a four speed), big block chevelles, and cobra jet fords.

I'm not sixty years old, but have had manual cars virtually my entire life. Z06 Corvette, SRT Challenger, Saleen Supercharged Mustang. Ran an 833-4 speed behind my Turbocharged RB for awhile, sold it before it ended up scattered all over the highway. The biggest issue I have is that an auto car is much more durable and forgiving when you start making (big) power on the drivetrain, not the 275-ish NET HP of a 383 HP. With the correct torque converter, it's not even a contest in the modern era which is faster or even more consistent. My M6 SRT Challenger was a solid 6 to 8-tenths slower than a comparable A8 (8HP70) SRT Challenger. Look at the Hellcats with the M6 (Tremec TR6060), they had a very hard time breaking into the low-12's, in fact, A8 Scat Pack's were outrunning manual Hellcats. Now, as a drivers car of course I'll choose the manual - every day - but as a drag car, if you're interested in going the quickest from point a to point b, it's going to be an auto.

The more powerful the driveline is, the likely the more there is to gain going to an auto.

Michael_ said:

So lets say

1970 Dodge Coronet R/T 426 3 speed auto
vs
1970 Dodge Coronet R/T 426 4 speed manual

I imagine the 4 speed manual equipped car probably has a higher top speed because of the extra gear.
As far as i know you loose about 10% more power with the automatic but it also shifts faster...
So which is faster 0-60?

Click to expand...

For your example, there are too many variables that are not fully controllable to give an answer without the words...."it depends"

The A883 will transfer more power from the motor to the ground, without question. Furthermore, in your specific example where we're talking factory 727 and factory converter, the rpm range is narrower with the 4 speed, meaning more time is spent closer to peak power-less rpm drop on shift recovery. This means higher average hp. With everything else equal, that would result in the 4 speed being a faster (mph) and quicker (e.t) car. However, rarely can you find someone good enough with a A833 to actually drive/shift it to quicker ets than a 727 even though the mph would be higher.

Cranky said:

I assume you were running a rev limiter?

Click to expand...

That was back in 1974. I probably didn't even know that existed.

Ron H said:

drag racing legends such as Dick Landy, ran the pushbutton

Click to expand...

He was great for neutral drop starts too !!

Yep, the modern ZF A8 (TorqueFlite) shifts fast. Head snap fast.

Whichever one I'm driving.

Darter6 said:

He was great for neutral drop starts too !!

Click to expand...

Did plenty of those but never on the track. They would run you off if they didn't ban you if caught doing it....and I'm surprised that I never blew one up even though I tried hard to lol.

Yeah they got their nuts bunched up if caught. I doubt they said anything to Mr. Landy.
Match racers brought in the spectators money !

I can shift a stick faster then an auto . I ly when we get into exotics will that change . Maybe the new vettes but in most newer car's I chan shift faster

I bracket raced a 4-speed 340 Dart back around 1977 until I rolled it in 1982 and I loved racing the 4-speed. Even back then about 75% of the bracket cars were auto's. Now one thing I know is in the 60's and 70's the torque converters were not as good as they are today. My buddy raced a 340 Dart auto and he always seemed to be changing converters as none just seemed to work great and be streetable which he wanted and this was the late 70's. And thats why Pro Stocks in the 70's when they started went right to 4-speeds. The extra gear for better accelerating and no converter slip for the most power to the ground. Now today in the 2000's converters are way better as mine works perfect on the street and works good at the track. I will say I was pretty damn good with a 4-speed as I was always faster in any stick car I drove then my friends were. My brother was running 12.70's in his 340 Cuda 4-speed and he let me drive it one day as I felt he never ran it hard enough. Now this is no lie as my first pass was a 12.22 in his Cuda he ran 12.70's in. And I drove a stick car buy running the living hell out of it as thats why we race them. Our mph's were almost the same but he never did get the car out of the 12.70's that day and I ran it once more running a 12.21. Its funny as even at our house when I unloaded the car off the trailer my mom and sister in the house said.....we could tell it was you driving it ?? I guess I just reved it up more. But one thing I learned is that the stick car is harder on parts if you drive them like me. One night at the track a racer asked me what I leave the line at and I said floored. He looked at me and said you mean 4000 and I said no I mean the gas pedal on the floor as when I let the clutch out the gas pedal is on the floor and I never had a rev limiter on my cars. And the gas pedal stayed on the floor until after I cross the finish line. But today even though I love the 4-speed I am glad my 63 is an auto since it dont break many parts and I am on a tight budget and I know it would have broke driveline parts by now if it was a stick. I do agree that today they are very close because the auto's work very good and converter technology is awesome. Ron

Remembering way back when.....the FASTEST shifting 4 speed Hemi 'Cuda I've ever seen was dtiven by the late Ronnie Sox of Sox and Martin fame. IMO....he shifted the A833 faster than a trick 727B TF....but perceived vs actual event time is difficult to determine.
BOB RENTON