So re-reading the cool “Cars of the Classic '30s” book (part of the multi-volume “Cars Of” series, it seems around 1938/39 auto manufacturers start pushing column mounted gear shifts over floor mounted shifts. These vehicles were almost all manual shifters, automatic transmissions being new, rare and complex in that era.
I believe these manual column shifters lasted well into the 1950s at least (“three on the tree” and such).
While I’ve used with column shifters before, these were for automatic transmissions which are more or less ‘set and forget’ e.g. shift to reverse to get out of the driveway, shift to forward and go; manually shifting in general is more involved than that, and it seems to me a column shift is a lot more PITA than the (well now) more common floor or console shifter (which also seem easier and less tiring on the arm and wrist, particularly in stop and go traffic which was NOT uncommon by the 1950s). Wiki (of course) has an entry on manual transmissions which mention gear shift lever locations, and gives as the advantages
Really? The non-obstruction of passenger seating, maybe I can see - but the not letting go of the steering wheel? That seems rather lame, even with manual steering the rule.
Were there any better reasons for column mounted manual shifters?
(BTW, if this is more IMHO, I can live with it being moved)
I learned to drive on a column-shift car (late 70’s). I don’t get the statement about not having to let go of the steering wheel to shift, since it required your right hand - the same as a floor shifter.
I do remember getting the shifter jammed, which required opening the hood and using a screwdriver to unjam the linkage.
Until the mid 1960s the vast majority of American cars had bench seats. While a floor shifter is far simpler, they don’t work very well with bench seats.
I have driven some cars where on a column mounted shifter, the 2-3 shift could be done by leaving the wheel between your thumb and index finger and extending your middle finger to pull the shifter down into third. Obviously you let the wheel slide as you move your right hand downward.
I also suspect that your girlfriend would like not getting nudged in the boobs on every 2-3 shift on a 3 speed and every 1-2, and 3-4 shift on a 4 speed. (although this might be considered a positive by the male driver)
I don’t understand that “without letting go of the steering wheel” statement either, you must use your whole right hand on a column shifter (even an automatic one!) Manual column shifters lasted into the 70s actually. And automatic column shifters are still not uncommon today (though mostly on consumer trucks, suburbans, vans etc.) The main (really only) reason I can see for their invention was as the article said, to allow room for a third front seat passenger.
Big disadvantage is that, compared to floor shifters, manual columns are a real Rube Goldberg contraption that can become a nightmare when they start to wear out.
I had a 3-speed column shift manual (1964 Ford truck) years ago. That truck was my daily driver for four years, it was a beast. I was teaching my little brother to drive and the shifter came apart, fell right out of the column. Luckily in second gear, and not too far from home.
Had a floor shifter mounted because it was the cheaper fix.
I learned to drive a manual with a floor shifter and column shifters just seemed weird after that. Kind of a retro feel maybe, but I think they would have been annoying with 4 or 5 gears. My friend had a Ford Fairlane with a column shift in High School, this was maybe 1973, it seemed totally out of date by then.
Could be. I did the same thing on a 66 F100. It was only cheaper because I could do it myself. Cutting a hole in the floor pan seemed easier than dealing with the chaos of the column.
Yup. I did this fix on a 61 Falcon. There actually was room even with the bench seat, but the cab on that car was really big.
There’s another issue with a driver of a manual really wanting to be able to set the seat exactly how he or she wants for good reach of the shifter and clutch pedal, so it’s good when the two front seats move independently. When I drove someone really tall in the Falcon, and I wanted the seat kind of close, my passenger had to put up with the seat being moved up pretty far. Now, when I am driving, and my husband, who is about a foot taller than I am, is in the passenger seat, his seat can be all the way back and reclined, while mine is halfway forward, and straight up.
The huge mechanical disadvantage of the column shift is that the linkages are thinner and make more turns, so they get bent and tangled more easily. Now that there is no such thing as a 3-speed manual being manufactured, you won’t find a column shift on the market. Putting six or even seven (five or six speeds plus reverse) in a column just wouldn’t work.
Also, the Falcon had a mechanical clutch. I’m not sure how the modern hydraulic clutches would work with a column mount-- maybe fine, but I’m not sure.
Years ago I owned a 66 Pontiac Lemans, it came from the factory with a 389 V-8 and a 3 on the tree. It had enough torque to lift the left front tire off the ground when launched from a standing start. The only thing I didn’t like about it was changing the oil. A previous owner installed headers, the only way to remove the oil filter was to drop the right side header. Besides the cost of the oil and filter, I had to include a new header gasket and plan on a couple hours of work.
Big disadvantage when the motor mounts got soft. Would tend to fall out of 2nd when engine braking. But really, as others have said, there was just too much monkey motion involved in the linkage. A floors shift lever can drone the fork directly, with one ball/sliding joint. A tree shifter has like 8 connections or bearings per fork.
A floor shift should mechanically work better - it’s usually tied directly to the transmission - but these column shifters weren’t meant for performance. Two real advantages were that a pickup truck can have a nearly flat floor and carry 3 people easily and that one can see the shifter with their eyes on the road rather than grabbing blindly toward the floor.
I practiced driving in my Dad’s '67 Chevy pickup and being able to visualize the gear positions was very helpful for a beginner. Chevy used these in trucks up into the mid-70’s.
This is probably true. I’ve been driving manual for more than 20 years, and I don’t even think about it anymore, but when I was learning, when I was 20 and had been driving for a few years with only automatics, mainly column shifters, and then I learned on a manual 5-speed floor shift, finding the gear was really hard. In the beginning, I had to practice shifting and clutching separately. I just operated the clutch while my “teacher” (my friend Blaise), shifted, then I just sat with the engine off, and practiced trying to find the gears without looking.
Given the state of automotive technology since, say, the year 2000 forward … has anything specific kept push-button gear-shifting from becoming a big thing? Basically, a “manual transmission” that is electronically and remotely controlled – you press a button on the steering wheel, and the car responds by depressing the clutch, executing the shift, and then releasing the clutch.**
Or is that kind of scheme so similar to what an automatic transmission does that’s it’s just not worth the trouble to develop? That having your hand and foot directly handling the physical shifting mechanism makes all the difference, and you’d lose that with push buttons?
** Thinking better of it … maybe the clutch could be electronically controlled with a left-thumb accessible steering wheel button, while actual shifting could be done with buttons on the right side of the steering wheel. Maybe gives the driver a little more control over the timing of the shifting steps.