Which is better: 4spd or 3spd?

C

Confederate1969

Well-Known Member
Joined
Sep 17, 2008
Messages
280
Reaction score
4
Location
Tennessee
This question is entirely educational on my part. I would like to know which is a better transmission to have in a Road Runner: the 4 speed manual or the 3 speed automatic. Since the two operate differently, the manual having a human input, and the automatic having a torque converter which improves pickup when accelerating, which is theoretically better? I have a 4 speed car and won't change that, but I am curious to know if a car would be quicker on the track if having an auto trans with its predictable shift rates and torque converter against a human being shifting gears, which for someone not so quick on the draw, may suffer as a result.
 
An auto would be the racers choice for consistency. They do take a little horsepower away and they are not as fun to drive in my opinion. They also take value away for some. Back in the day there was an auto class and a standard class is super stock and thats where Sox and Martin did so well with the 4 spd. I think it was super stock I get ahra and nhra mixed up :lol:
 
You are correct - it was Super Stock - which became Pro Stock in 1970.

As for the age old question: "4 speed vs automatic?" The racer's choice is automatic for consistency as has been mentioned already. With all the goodies available for the Torqueflite trans its the best way to go for the neophyte racer who wants consistent performance in the bracket racing classes. I really enjoyed the TF/SlapStik combo I had in my '71 Charger. The SlapStik was so easy to upshift - you could not miss a gear. It was really a nice setup but in the heavy Charger with a 440, 280 degree cam, 2200 stall converter and 3.55 gear it only got about 6 mpg in town! Needless to say it was a gas hog.
For pure driving fun I enjoy the 4 speed in the road runner, plus its a real attention getter at cruises. Nothing screams performance to the onlookers like that Hurst shifter!
 
4 speeds are fun, but automatics are consistent, a little easier on the drivetrain and just about as fast if set up right.

Given that everybody isn't Ronnie Sox, the auto takes that part of human error and skill (or lack of) out of the equation. Read that as a poor driver with an automatic will beat a poor driver with a 4 speed.

Its really becomes more personal choice. I've owned both and like them both, but my preference is for the automatic. I have mine set up the way I like it with an ancient Fairbanks kit and cut down governors. It will behave itself in traffic and at WOT it has a hard 1-2 shift and a solid 2-3 without any overlap. I can let it shift itself and it will shift at WOT around 5500 RPM. I have a modified 11" convertor (another ancient Fairbanks piece) that might get replaced with a 10" depending how I finally decide on the engine "package" this time around.
 
Most of the 68 and 69 Runners when I was a kid were 4speeds so that is my preference,I never sanactioned drag raced but auto is the way to gofro what everyone says.I know the 70 Runners offered a 3 speed manual as standard equip.I never saw on in the flesh but the literature I have read said it was available.
 
The ultimate for me would be a four speed bench seat car.

Unfortunately, I only have half of that equation... the not so fun half.

I can alway do a manual valve body to simulate.
 
Plymouthfan said:
The ultimate for me would be a four speed bench seat car.

Unfortunately, I only have half of that equation... the not so fun half.

I can alway do a manual valve body to simulate.
Click to expand...
You get the parts, drive to Indiana and when you get back home you'll have the ultimate. All in one weekend and no labor cost........Maybe just a tat............ :thumbsup:
 
I love my 4 speed. My second '69 had an auto. It would chirp the tires when it banged second. Now, I drive mine alot in the summer, and never tire of the clutch. But, at a big cruise like at The Nats, a 4 speed isn't fun. (just wait untill your knees get fourtyitis. )
 
Hoosier Bird said:
Plymouthfan said:
The ultimate for me would be a four speed bench seat car.

Unfortunately, I only have half of that equation... the not so fun half.

I can alway do a manual valve body to simulate.
Click to expand...
You get the parts, drive to Indiana and when you get back home you'll have the ultimate. All in one weekend and no labor cost........Maybe just a tat............ :thumbsup:
Click to expand...
Holy crap, that's quite an offer! I'm gonna keep that in mind... one day you may see me roll up with a transmission tied to my roof.
 
Hoosier Bird said:
Plymouthfan said:
The ultimate for me would be a four speed bench seat car.

Unfortunately, I only have half of that equation... the not so fun half.

I can alway do a manual valve body to simulate.
Click to expand...
You get the parts, drive to Indiana and when you get back home you'll have the ultimate. All in one weekend and no labor cost........Maybe just a tat............ :thumbsup:
Click to expand...
Chris you might want to find out how much an Indiana TAT is before you get to excited :lol:
 
Plymouthfan said:
Holy crap, that's quite an offer! I'm gonna keep that in mind... one day you may see me roll up with a transmission tied to my roof.
Click to expand...
Give me a few days notice and I'll be waiting on you......... :cheers:
 
These 4-speed vs. automatic questions seem to come up pretty often on some other boards. Is a 4-speed better than an automatic? The answer really depends on the vehicle and it's intended purpose. My Road Runner is a weekend recreational ride, and the 4-speed makes for FUN driving. How can you compare? At the car shows, if I walk up to, say, a 1969 Torino Cobra, I may think to myself "hey, that's a pretty nice car"...when I peer into the interior my respect level goes up several notches when I see a 4-speed shifter, or turns to disappointment when I see an auto on the column. At least, that's how my mind works - I expect a musclecar to be a 4-speed. Not trying to P/O anyone, but that is my humble opinion.
 
airgrabber666 said:
These 4-speed vs. automatic questions seem to come up pretty often on some other boards. Is a 4-speed better than an automatic? The answer really depends on the vehicle and it's intended purpose. My Road Runner is a weekend recreational ride, and the 4-speed makes for FUN driving. How can you compare? At the car shows, if I walk up to, say, a 1969 Torino Cobra, I may think to myself "hey, that's a pretty nice car"...when I peer into the interior my respect level goes up several notches when I see a 4-speed shifter, or turns to disappointment when I see an auto on the column. At least, that's how my mind works - I expect a musclecar to be a 4-speed. Not trying to P/O anyone, but that is my humble opinion.
Click to expand...


You've pretty much captured my sentiments exactly. I waited a LONG TIME to acquire an A12 and IT NEVER ONCE CROSSED MY MIND to consider a grannymatic. I have several cars with autos, including a pro-streeter with a 4,500 stall converter, full manual valve body, and 4.86 gears which could be easily be converted into a bracket car so I understand that there is a place for both - I just also happen know which one is an a$$-load more fun and requires more of the driver. There is a reason why people drop to their knees and bow their heads when Ronnie Sox is mentioned...and it ain't because Jake King built a mean 727 (which he probably did...) - it's because he was good enough at his craft to negate the mechanical advantage of the auto, and we all love it when man triumphs over machine... 'Nuff said... :D

:jester:
 
You've pretty much captured my sentiments exactly. I waited a LONG TIME to acquire an A12 and IT NEVER ONCE CROSSED MY MIND to consider a grannymatic. I have several cars with autos, including a pro-streeter with a 4,500 stall converter, full manual valve body, and 4.86 gears which could be easily be converted into a bracket car so I understand that there is a place for both - I just also happen know which one is an a$$-load more fun and requires more of the driver. There is a reason why people drop to their knees and bow their heads when Ronnie Sox is mentioned...and it ain't because Jake King built a mean 727 (which he probably did...) - it's because he was good enough at his craft to negate the mechanical advantage of the auto, and we all love it when man triumphs over machine... 'Nuff said... :D

:jester:
Click to expand...

Grannymatic! lol!
I do agree with your statement about Ronnie Sox. Also, it does seem to me most of the old-timers I know (guys around when these cars were new or reasonable "used cars") prefer banging their own gears as well. Personally speaking, an A12 car - an old school, bare-bones purpose-built factory race car - SHOULD always be a 4-speed in my little world.
 
ACME A12 said:
airgrabber666 said:
These 4-speed vs. automatic questions seem to come up pretty often on some other boards. Is a 4-speed better than an automatic? The answer really depends on the vehicle and it's intended purpose. My Road Runner is a weekend recreational ride, and the 4-speed makes for FUN driving. How can you compare? At the car shows, if I walk up to, say, a 1969 Torino Cobra, I may think to myself "hey, that's a pretty nice car"...when I peer into the interior my respect level goes up several notches when I see a 4-speed shifter, or turns to disappointment when I see an auto on the column. At least, that's how my mind works - I expect a musclecar to be a 4-speed. Not trying to P/O anyone, but that is my humble opinion.
Click to expand...


You've pretty much captured my sentiments exactly. I waited a LONG TIME to acquire an A12 and IT NEVER ONCE CROSSED MY MIND to consider a grannymatic. I have several cars with autos, including a pro-streeter with a 4,500 stall converter, full manual valve body, and 4.86 gears which could be easily be converted into a bracket car so I understand that there is a place for both - I just also happen know which one is an a$$-load more fun and requires more of the driver. There is a reason why people drop to their knees and bow their heads when Ronnie Sox is mentioned...and it ain't because Jake King built a mean 727 (which he probably did...) - it's because he was good enough at his craft to negate the mechanical advantage of the auto, and we all love it when man triumphs over machine... 'Nuff said... :D

:jester:
Click to expand...
Amen, brothers.......... :thumbsup:
 
Yeah - mention Ronnie Sox to the Mopar faithful and you get the same reaction Black Bart did in Blazing Saddles when he mentioned Randolph Scott! :worship: :worship: :worship:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top