I posted this in the special productions too. What is the performance difference between the stick and auto in this car? One person replied and wondered why I would want an auto. This is the closest you'll probably ever see to an automatic Cobra. The heads and cams are the same, but doesn't have the forged bottom end. Also the Mach doesn't have the IRS to hamper traction.
Mach auto or stick?
- Thread starter skywarp
- Start date
-
Sponsors (?)
Well, first off, it's a Ford auto tranny. We all know how well Ford auto's perform in stangs 
Second, the auto doesn't have the forged cobra crank. Why? I have no clue. And third, the ECU settings for the auto are garbage. The thing shifts a whole 1K before redline. The performance gap between the auto and 5-spd. in the Mach is pretty big.
Second, the auto doesn't have the forged cobra crank. Why? I have no clue. And third, the ECU settings for the auto are garbage. The thing shifts a whole 1K before redline. The performance gap between the auto and 5-spd. in the Mach is pretty big.
merc123 said:
LMAO, are you serious?
Manuals lose 12-15% of power through the drivetrain, while automatics lose 15-18%. A manual is definitely fun to drive and will give a slight power advantage, but an automatic is no dog. Add gears and converter and some sticky tires and you'll be just fine in an automatic.
I run 13.0s on drag radials with minimal mods in an automatic and i'm not complaining.
downsouthman1
Member
Another big difference is that the redline in the AT is actually lower than the redline in the ST. ST is 7K RPMs, & Auto is like 6K. Not that it matters much cuz peak HP is the same for both, 6K RPMs. There's a lot more info about Machs @ mach1registry.com. I'll post a thread for you if you want, if I can't find the answer to your question. From what I hear you can assume about 15% drivetrain loss through the ST & 20% through the AT.
BlkMachWon
New Member
- Jul 1, 2003
- 36
- 0
- 0
Either way it's a great car with good performance.
But yes a manual has a bit more.
Downsouthman is right, go over to the mach1registry.com and poke around, do a search, look at the quarter mile lists, they designate manual or autos, etc.
But yes a manual has a bit more.
Downsouthman is right, go over to the mach1registry.com and poke around, do a search, look at the quarter mile lists, they designate manual or autos, etc.
hognutz
New Member
I don't like auto's in low displacement cars like ours. now that being said they can be made to run just fine. auto's really shine when set up properly but that costs$$$$. not to mention the auto is a $900 option I think.
my .02 is drive them. I mean I drove both in 01 when I bought mine and it was a no brainer. auto was slower and more expensive. now if I had a ton of stop and go driving I would consider an auto.
my .02 is drive them. I mean I drove both in 01 when I bought mine and it was a no brainer. auto was slower and more expensive. now if I had a ton of stop and go driving I would consider an auto.
yellow5.0cobra
Founding Member
OKAY one very big difference between MANUAL and AUTO MACH 1's are the CRANK.
In automatic MACH 1's, the crank is cast crap.
In 5spd the crank is FORGED.
I say go with the 5spd only because the crank is so much better in the long run(if you plan on building an engine, and it will save you $800).
5spd is also so much more fun. Putting the car in D and pressing the gas is BOOOORING.
In automatic MACH 1's, the crank is cast crap.
In 5spd the crank is FORGED.
I say go with the 5spd only because the crank is so much better in the long run(if you plan on building an engine, and it will save you $800).
5spd is also so much more fun. Putting the car in D and pressing the gas is BOOOORING.
hognutz
New Member
if the crank is forgred that is a good point. I say 5speed all the way. I don't know where the cam discussion cam from? was it due to the post on the redline being diffenent?
As people have pointed out the 2 major differences are the crappy crank in the auto (why did ford do that) and the fact that the auto shifts WAY too early compared to the manual. MM&FF (I think) did a test with both, and the auto got its ass kicked by the manual. The difference was huge.
This coming from a guy with an auto... get the manual... I wish I had done.
This coming from a guy with an auto... get the manual... I wish I had done.
I didnt have a choice with my auto, but if it was my choice Id go with manual. BUT auto does have its pros, its very consistant and obviously easy to drive. Although after a while manual almost becomes automatic (because you get so used to it). You see these pros or people that have been driving manual their entire lives are the only ones that actually run amazing times. For example Ive heard of the Mach 1 running a 13.0 and even high 12's, now obviously the majority of the people wont be able to do that. Thats when auto has its advantage, we can go out there and consistantly run good times. We dont have clutches to worry about or shifting and our launches are pretty easy for the most part also. Remember its only 1 second between a 13 sec 1/4 mile and a 14 sec pass. You spin 1 extra second and your done. All Im saying is auto is easier to race on the track, but manual is a hell of a lot more fun. We all have our own opinion.
RIP 112
New Member
Auto Mach 1's are rated at 308hp while manuals are rated at 310 at the crank(reported by MM&FF April 2004) Torque is rated at 323 for the auto and 335 for the manual. But of course, it all depends on the driver and the condition of the car and weather. It's the little things that count.
Similar threads
