Search the Community
Showing results for tags 'why turn away buyers?'.
-
Dear Ford: I drive Fords exclusively. The thought of driving something else makes me sick. Over the years I've had several Rangers, Explorers, F150s, and one F350. One thing I always insist on having is the manual transmission. It appears that Ford has now left me at the alter and doesn't care. My last new Ford was a 2011 Ranger (XLT extended cab 2.3L/manual). That was apparently the last light truck Ford made with a manual transmission. Why can't a manual be offered as an option? I'd pay extra for it. It can't possibly be a business reason; Ford could design/procure one manual transmission that could go behind every gas engine offered in the F150-F350 (think of the old ZF-5/ZF-6 behind everything from the 4.9L six to the big 7.5L V8 or 6.8L V10). Even at a 5% take rate (below industry average which is closer to 10% on models in which it's offered) that would be 10s of thousands of units per year. Surely that would pay for the minor engineering changes necessary for the provision of a clutch system in the existing trucks. Is it because of warranty fears with a clutch? The warranty on my 2011 Ranger excluded the clutch. I've also noticed that the tow ratings are significantly decreased with a manual transmission; even on the old stuff. This never made any sense to me. All my manual Ford trucks easily pulled the full automatic rating - no slipping the clutch or other undesirable operation. My clutches always hold up a long time too, usually at least 200,000 miles. Many automatics end up needing a rebuild in that many miles. In summary, my experience with several Ford trucks is that the manual transmissions hold up better than and pull at least as much trailer as the automatics. Is it because of driving performance? This is where the manual shines. Having a clutch gives a whole new dimension of control of the truck at all times and is the primary reason I insist on a manual transmission. Trying to ease the truck over a ledge in the pavement? The torque converter in an automatic is like a rubber band in that situation - you have to slowy creep the throttle up until it moves but then its hard to stop instantly due to the rotational interia of the converter. With the manual you just hit the clutch which instantly decouples the drivetrain from the engine. Same thing on a slick road with a trailer when you start to slide- hit the clutch and everything straightens out in a hurry. Is it fuel economy? You simply cant beat the power loss through a manual gearbox with its inherent gear-on-gear nature. The same attributes (bands, hydraulics, etc) of an automatic transmission that allow the truck to not move at idle cause it to have a higher inherent power loss than a manual tranmission. Given the same final drive ratio (simply a matter of ratio of the top gear), the manual will necessarily do at least as good as an automatic. This is simple physics and there is no way around it. Trying to argue against this is like trying to defy gravity. While the EPA window stickers often show higher fuel economy for the automatic, it is either because of differences in gear ratio or because the PCM was designed to shift the automatic specifically to perform during the EPA test. Real world results show that you can't defy physics and manual transmissions have lower power losses and thus better fuel economy. Every other major US truck maker (GM, Ram, Toyota, Nissan) offers at least one light truck with a manual transmission. Ford has not offered one since 2011. While not a large share of the market, there are some of us that simply refuse a buy a truck without a manual transmission. Does Ford want to sell trucks to us? Or must we take our business elsewhere? Please don't insult me with a reply that Ford's automatics have a "manual" setting. My brother's 2013 F250 has that feature. It's a **** poor excuse for a clutch pedal.