Is it possible to convert a manual transmission car to an automatic transmission?

[consumer]

I hope it is. Because i can do that instead of buying a 2nd hand car.

[lewdicrous]

You can afaik, but, depending on your situation, you'd have to question whether it's worth all the time, money, and effort.

[Holmes108]

I had never considered this. Just took a look around, and found this article, that claims you "most certainly can" and says that, while it may vary a lot, the estimated cost is $1000-3000 for labour AND parts, which I find shockingly low compared to what I would have guessed. I'd still take that quote with a grain of salt perhaps. Or perhaps it's just easier than I thought (although still clearly not a trivial investment).

 

https://cardetailingart.com/can-you-change-a-car-from-manual-to-automatic/

 

[Blue4130]

11 minutes ago, Holmes108 said:

I had never considered this. Just took a look around, and found this article, that claims you "most certainly can" and says that, while it may vary a lot, the estimated cost is $1000-3000 for labour AND parts, which I find shockingly low compared to what I would have guessed. I'd still take that quote with a grain of salt perhaps. Or perhaps it's just easier than I thought (although still clearly not a trivial investment).

 

https://cardetailingart.com/can-you-change-a-car-from-manual-to-automatic/

 

If you use a 1980 Chevy with a 350 and a turbo 400 maybe, but any recent car is going to be much more expensive.

[Blue4130]

43 minutes ago, consumer said:

I hope it is. Because i can do that instead of buying a 2nd hand car.

What's the car? Why not just use the manual transmission?

[Inimigor]

What do you mean? Swapping the Transmission out or making an Automatic Transmission act like a manual transmission?

There are cars where the Transmission swap is pretty simple and there are entire companies dedicated to Manual Conversions, I've seen people do transmission swaps on many automatic cars (Nissan 350z, Lexus IS300, VW Golf, Civics, etc) that are almost plug and play, you buy the kit that comes with everything you need to do the swap, and with bit of cutting, grinding, adjusting trans tunnel clearence and overall prepping the car, you can do it at home with relatively simple tools.

On the other end of that spectrum, there are also some companies that are now making automatic cars behave like a manual-sequential with a clutch and everything, all without changing the actual transmission out.

Here's a video from AdamLZ showing the A90 Supra with a sequential for drifting. This is the development car for HTG, who makes this mod a vailable and there are more videos showing the progress.

[Yoinkerman]

No it's much less expensive to just buy another inexpensive car

[Needfuldoer]

It's much less work to buy another example of the same car that already has an automatic.

 

The specifics will vary from car to car, but in general it's a ton of work to swap a modern electronically-controlled automatic into a modern car.

[Beerzerker]

5 hours ago, Holmes108 said:

I had never considered this. Just took a look around, and found this article, that claims you "most certainly can" and says that, while it may vary a lot, the estimated cost is $1000-3000 for labour AND parts, which I find shockingly low compared to what I would have guessed. I'd still take that quote with a grain of salt perhaps. Or perhaps it's just easier than I thought (although still clearly not a trivial investment).

 

https://cardetailingart.com/can-you-change-a-car-from-manual-to-automatic/

 

No, for anything with computer controlled automatic transmissions it's a pain if not an outright headache even if you have a parts car with all the stuff because you still have to swap it all over and get it right.
Older vehicles that are rear wheel drive are much easier to do, a snap in comparison.
Even with that you have different flywheels, starter housings of different lengths, different bellhousings and so on to get right because those can vary by year even if it's the same basic powerplant, depending on the application intended for these parts vs the originals.

Let me put it like this - I had an 87 S10 Sport with a 350 V8/TH350 in it that was done and some of the named parts had to be found since it didn't all come together as a package - If it had that would have made it a simple drop in job and done but it didn't turn out that way.
Flywheel/ring gear had to be matched up correctly to the crankshaft end itself to mountup properly, trans/bellhousing and starter, starter itself took a little doing to get right (No grinding) but in the end it all worked out.
And all that was for a non-computerized setup.

When you get into the computerized partof things, it can go well beyond all that most of the time.
 

[Holmes108]

43 minutes ago, Beerzerker said:

No, for anything with computer controlled automatic transmissions it's a pain if not an outright headache even if you have a parts car with all the stuff because you still have to swap it all over and get it right.
Older vehicles that are rear wheel drive are much easier to do, a snap in comparison.
Even with that you have different flywheels, starter housings of different lengths, different bellhousings and so on to get right because those can vary by year even if it's the same basic powerplant, depending on the application intended for these parts vs the originals.

Let me put it like this - I had an 87 S10 Sport with a 350 V8/TH350 in it that was done and some of the named parts had to be found since it didn't all come together as a package - If it had that would have made it a simple drop in job and done but it didn't turn out that way.
Flywheel/ring gear had to be matched up correctly to the crankshaft end itself to mountup properly, trans/bellhousing and starter, starter itself took a little doing to get right (No grinding) but in the end it all worked out.
And all that was for a non-computerized setup.

When you get into the computerized partof things, it can go well beyond all that most of the time.
 

 

Yeah, that definitely makes a lot more sense lol.

[cmndr]

Smarter just to flip your car and to get something that was designed around it from the get go. 

[airborne spoon]

yes you can but you're going the wrong way, you should be swapping an auto for a manual, automatics suck ass.

 

Go on any car forum and you'll see threads about this subject find a forum for your brand of car and you'll see people that have done it. but again manuals are 1000 times better than automatics. Also if you wanna toss in an auto it has to be an old one that goes off linkage, cables, and stuff not any of that new computer crap.

[OhYou_]

it's pretty simple but I wouldn't do it if you are trying to save money and not buy one in auto

I've been converting my honda s2000 to automatic since they never came with one and it has costed a lot of money. 
I am currently waiting on a few small things to complete it. 

[mr moose]

Age of car and country you are in?

 

The process is either going to be a walk in the park or a financial mistake in epic proportions.

[cmndr]

On 3/24/2023 at 2:27 PM, airborne spoon said:

yes you can but you're going the wrong way, you should be swapping an auto for a manual, automatics suck ass.

 

Go on any car forum and you'll see threads about this subject find a forum for your brand of car and you'll see people that have done it. but again manuals are 1000 times better than automatics. Also if you wanna toss in an auto it has to be an old one that goes off linkage, cables, and stuff not any of that new computer crap.

What you're saying is YEARS out of date.
In recent years manual transmissions have improved. 
Something about computers getting between 1000-1000000 times faster while humans have not. 
As a human, you cannot physically keep up and your heuristics aren't as good as... basically an array of sensors. 

You should generally expect manual transmission vehicles to have lower performance and lower fuel economy in most situations. If you're a fan of cars from the 1990s, yeah an argument could be made otherwise. 

 

[starsmine]

Yes, but if you have to ask, no. Its something you do as a hobbiest who has had it as a hobby for a decade, it is an awful new person experience. A shop might do it for you, but you are looking at 5-10k minimum due to hours and parts (car make/model dependent)

[airborne spoon]

46 minutes ago, cmndr said:

What you're saying is YEARS out of date.
In recent years manual transmissions have improved. 
Something about computers getting between 1000-1000000 times faster while humans have not. 
As a human, you cannot physically keep up and your heuristics aren't as good as... basically an array of sensors. 

You should generally expect manual transmission vehicles to have lower performance and lower fuel economy in most situations. If you're a fan of cars from the 1990s, yeah an argument could be made otherwise. 

 

Manual transmissions are more fun to drive and easier to repair. And if you wanna talk racing then that is more about driver skill than the transmission but I'll still race with a manual.

Also manuals get better MPG, the brakes last longer too, and are just all around a better way to drive. There is nothing about an automatic transmission that makes it better than a manual

[starsmine]

1 hour ago, airborne spoon said:

Manual transmissions are more fun to drive and easier to repair. And if you wanna talk racing then that is more about driver skill than the transmission but I'll still race with a manual.

Also manuals get better MPG, the brakes last longer too, and are just all around a better way to drive. There is nothing about an automatic transmission that makes it better than a manual

you are still years out of date

Manuals have not gotten better MPG for over a decade. the brakes dont last longer either. 

Automatics(all of them from torque converters, to automated manuals to cvt) accelerate faster, are smoother (less jerk) and are significantly more efficient now, and have been for a long time and are lower maintenance, you dont need to be replacing clutches or worrying about over revving/money shifting.

I say this as someone who likes driving, who likes manuals. Manuals are just worse at everything now (but fun)

[RollyShed]

I tend to say, those over 60(?) 70(?) should drive a manual as you have to switch your brain on.

Those instances of people driving into shops because they put their foot on the wrong pedal because they were not thinking. If you can't drive a manual then you don't really know how to drive.

 

As for braking / slowing the automatic we have certainly doesn't slow the way taking a foot off the accelerator on our van does. This means less wear on brakes in a manual vehicle. Use the engine. Going down hill, too many with automatics don't change down so the brakes are being used all the way but a manual drive, driven properly, the engine does the job.

 

When I rode my bicycle up the Californian coast I always knew if the hill ahead was steep by the smell. The smell of brakes.

[starsmine]

3 hours ago, RollyShed said:

As for braking / slowing the automatic we have certainly doesn't slow the way taking a foot off the accelerator on our van does. This means less wear on brakes in a manual vehicle. Use the engine. Going down hill, too many with automatics don't change down so the brakes are being used all the way but a manual drive, driven properly, the engine does the job.

There is literally nothing stopping you from forcing a downshift in an automatic to engine brake. 

[RollyShed]

36 minutes ago, starsmine said:

There is literally nothing stopping you from forcing a downshift in an automatic to engine brake. 

True but... so many auto drivers don't seem to know that. If brought up on a manual they might, just might.

[Godlygamer23]

54 minutes ago, RollyShed said:

True but... so many auto drivers don't seem to know that. If brought up on a manual they might, just might.

Depending on the individual, they may simply not want to. I know at least one person who hates manual mode on automatics. 

[Beerzerker]

22 hours ago, starsmine said:

you are still years out of date

Manuals have not gotten better MPG for over a decade. the brakes dont last longer either. 

Automatics(all of them from torque converters, to automated manuals to cvt) accelerate faster, are smoother (less jerk) and are significantly more efficient now, and have been for a long time and are lower maintenance, you dont need to be replacing clutches or worrying about over revving/money shifting.

I say this as someone who likes driving, who likes manuals. Manuals are just worse at everything now (but fun)

Wrong - Automatics do not have the same braking effect a manual trans has.

Manuals, since the are linked directly/mechanically to the engine do provide a better braking effect when you take your foot off the gas vs the braking effect an automatic has.
Automatics are more reliant than manuals on it's brakes to slow a vehicle in general, I can make a set of brakes last much longer with a manual than they will with an automatic because of it. Stopping-wise they are and do about the same overall, that much I will say but for times when it's just let off the gas vs tapping the brakes to check your speed, a manual does it better meaning less wear on the brakes period since you're not using them nearly as much to do it. Automatics by their nature at low speeds tend to keep pulling, so in such a case it does put more wear on the brakes too vs an manual when in traffic that's not moving much or even just creeping along (Stop and go), the downside to that with a manual is it does make the clutch wear faster but it's not enough to really matter...
But tell that to your leg if it's an extended period of this kind of driving.

Been there, done it and it's no fun, esp if driving a big truck with a manual that's loaded in really heavy stop and go traffic and I've done it too many times before that way.
The heavier clutch will give your leg a real workout under these conditions.

[Godlygamer23]

43 minutes ago, Beerzerker said:

Manuals, since the are linked directly/mechanically to the engine do provide a better braking effect when you take your foot off the gas vs the braking effect an automatic has.

I don't know if this is actually true. I have a manual car, and an automatic. They both behave similarly when engine braking - I'm usually downshifting in the auto, so I have a direct comparison. Modern cars also do not consume fuel when coasting(unless necessary to keep the engine going), so the 'pulling' effect is nonexistent, since the effect is derived from the torque converter input side spinning against the output side due to the engine and there always being a 'link. Even in my 2000 Civic, if you put it down to a lower gear at a higher speed(say going from 3rd to 2nd), I still feel like I had the same braking effect. Many modern cars with a torque converter will also use a locking torque converter, so the mechanical link is there.

[Modengine]

You can but it's expensive and you would need a really good mechanic