How many of you have driven a car with a manual transmission with the shifter on the column? I've driven at least 5 pickup trucks: a 1959 Ford, a 1965 Chevy, a 1965 Ford, a 1966 Ford, and a 1983 Ford. All were six cylinder half tons except for the '66 Ford, which came out with a six but had a 351 Windsor that my dad put in it. I seem to remember driving one more but I can't remember what it was.
I've driven:
'72 complete beater F-150 that my parents use just to plow their driveway- no tags, no insurance at this point. They got it for $600 with a plow already attached in 2005, for some idea as to the condition of it.
'78 Chevy C/K that was actually our department's work truck when I worked at a marina at a resort in Idaho. By far the coolest work vehicle I've ever had. It was a beater too- that thing refused to die. I haven't worked there in four years now, but when I go home and drive by the resort, I still see it sometimes.
and then a '57 Chevy I randomly got to valet
I've got my eyes open right now for a serviceable beater truck in the $1000 range that I can use for in-town driving/hauling furniture- looking for a 6 cylinder half ton 68-77 Ford or 67-87 Chevy with three speed.
I actually have a car with a 3 on the tree. It's a 1962 Ford Galaxie 500. It came from the factory with a 223 cid 6 cylinder engine, 3 speed manual transmission, and 3.50 gears. It's missing the engine, transmission, front seat, and a few minor items. My plans are to put a big block in it with a heavy duty (probably from a truck) 3 speed manual with electric overdrive. That way I would have 6 speeds but still use the column shifter.
Here's a picture of it lurking in the weeds:
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi167.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fu126%2Fbugo348%2FIMG_1440_zps307dd3cc.jpg&hash=17a96d407be4e9e072d0f4e87c966e34a85ffce2)
The shift lever can be clearly seen on the right side of the column pointing down. It's where "low" would be on an automatic, meaning it's in first or third gear.
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi167.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fu126%2Fbugo348%2FIMG_1443_zps254e1654.jpg&hash=53087a667e2931dece21876836be6d87b7b80f13)
I also have a white '62 that I drove in high school. It's complete but needs a total restoration. It's a 390/automatic bench seat car.
(https://farm7.staticflickr.com/6205/6055960515_d65f89d898_z.jpg)
As you can see, they both need a lot of work. But the bodies of the cars seem to be pretty solid and rust is minimal on both cars.
I have never driven a car with any sort of manual transmission, and have rarely ever even been in one. Almost everyone around here drives automatics.
Quote from: Stalin on March 02, 2013, 08:26:11 PM
How many of you have driven a car with a manual transmission with the shifter on the column? I've driven at least 5 pickup trucks: a 1959 Ford, a 1965 Chevy, a 1965 Ford, a 1966 Ford, and a 1983 Ford. All were six cylinder half tons except for the '66 Ford, which came out with a six but had a 351 Windsor that my dad put in it. I seem to remember driving one more but I can't remember what it was.
1966 Chevy C-10 with a three-on-the-tree and a 250 cid I-6.
I currently drive a Ford F-250 with a six-on-the-floor with a 7.3L V-8 Diesel.
Quote from: corco on March 02, 2013, 08:33:58 PM
I've got my eyes open right now for a serviceable beater truck in the $1000 range that I can use for in-town driving/hauling furniture- looking for a 6 cylinder half ton 68-77 Ford or 67-87 Chevy with three speed.
Why exclude the '78s and '79s? Was there a major change in '78?
I had a '77. I should have kept it. It had a 3 speed with a floor shifter, and I was the only person who could drive it because the shifter was so badly adjusted that you had to push the shifter to the left, then to the right and up to get from 1st to 2nd. The truck was awesome, even though the transmission sucked. I would recommend a '73-'79 Ford for sure. I don't like the post 1980 Fords as much. They were smaller, and not as rugged. My dad had 2 '83s and my '77 was a lot tougher.
I've never known anyone personally who's owned a 3 on the tree. My dad's second Mustang (a 1966 High Country Special) had a 4-speed, I think, with a Hurst shifter. Every manual vehicle I've driven has been a 5-speed to this point.
3 on the tree..pfft! Want some real adventure for finding reverse? Go get a Peugeot with a 4 on the tree...LOL! My grandparents loved those French cars back in the Sixties.
Lordy, I have driven plenty of 3 on the trees in my day.
Rick
Quote from: nexus73 on March 03, 2013, 11:34:48 AM
3 on the tree..pfft! Want some real adventure for finding reverse? Go get a Peugeot with a 4 on the tree...LOL! My grandparents loved those French cars back in the Sixties.
Lordy, I have driven plenty of 3 on the trees in my day.
Rick
It's an age thing. I was in the generation after they went away, but we usually drove older cars and trucks so I grew up around a few. Corco is the youngest person I've ever met who can drive the 3 on the column.
Quote from: nexus73 on March 03, 2013, 11:34:48 AM
3 on the tree..pfft! Want some real adventure for finding reverse? Go get a Peugeot with a 4 on the tree...LOL! My grandparents loved those French cars back in the Sixties.
Lordy, I have driven plenty of 3 on the trees in my day.
I drove a SAAB 95 with a four-on-the-tree.
I didn't drive a 3 on the tree but I saw some Youtube clips.
Here a 1962 Morris Oxford with a 3 on the tree.
I drove a '60 Galaxie and a '64 Falcon. Loved seeing the pics!
And yes, although both cars were automatics, my father had an old 1967-ish Ford (F150?) pick-up "on-the-tree."
My father had a late example, a '76 GMC with the 250ci I6 and a 3 on the tree. I drove it several times on my learner's permit (and quite a bit around the farm beforehand). After a decade and a half of use, the shifter linkage had a tendency to jam during the 1-2 shift.
In the 55mph era, it was certainly adequate. But that 6 was spinning pretty fast at anything above 60. It also rusted away depressingly quickly.
My '77 Ford F100 had a 3 on the floor. The gears were spaced too widely and on some roads, it would tach too high in second gear but lug in third gear. Once I drove Indian Highway from Honobia to Talihina in Oklahoma and quickly got aggravated at it.
I drove a '62 Chevy II back in college in the late 70's. It had a 3 on the tree. The reverse is the up position closest to the driver.
Here a 1984 Ford F-150 with a 3 on the tree http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dLfraWhlPYg
Various sources said the 1986 Ford F-150 and 1987 Chevrolet/GMC C/K pick-ups (Cheyenne/Custom DeLuxe/Scottsdale/Silverado) was the final year of the 3 on the tree.
Here a 15 year old Nissan Cedric who was used as a taxi car in Hong Kong with a "5 on the tree" http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ogn4DQ8qwFU
Quote from: Stephane Dumas on March 03, 2013, 03:39:37 PM
My 1966 Chevy C-10 had a three-on-the-tree that shifted just like this.
Interesting how little it changed in 10 years.
Personally, I've never driven a 3-on-the-tree manual but a friend of mine many years ago (1980s) briefly test drove a '67 Pontiac Tempest w/such that somebody was selling. While he had some experience w/a manual transmission (4-on-the floor, though); he couldn't quite master the 3-on-the-tree due to its loose linkage.
The only tree or column-mounted shifting I've done were automatics with my first 3 cars being 3-speed automatic variety ('69 LTD, '74 Impala & '76 LTD). I know, not the same.
As a matter of fact, the only car with a floor-mounted shift I've owned is my 2007 Mustang.
Never driven one, the Aries was 4 on the floor, & the others were 5 on the floor. I'll bet I could though. It's just shifting after all.
I've driven 3, 4, 5, and 6-speed manuals, but always on the floor. And I've driven automatics on the column, a little bit. I don't see any reason I couldn't drive a 3 onna tree if I had need to.
Quote from: kkt on March 04, 2013, 05:51:21 PM
I've driven 3, 4, 5, and 6-speed manuals, but always on the floor. And I've driven automatics on the column, a little bit. I don't see any reason I couldn't drive a 3 onna tree if I had need to.
I agree.
The difficult part of a standard transmission is the clutch. Once you have mastered that, the shifter should not be much trouble. A shifter on the column is not any more difficult than one on the floor.
QuoteThe difficult part of a standard transmission is the clutch. Once you have mastered that, the shifter should not be much trouble. A shifter on the column is not any more difficult than one on the floor.
Precisely.
This may sound odd, but I actually find the transition from floor manual to column manual easier than the shift from floor automatic to column automatic- some of those column mounted automatics require a careful touch to get into the right gear, particularly the 89-98 Chevy pickups and other vehicles on that body. If I haven't driven one of those in a while I always slip right past reverse and into neutral the first time I shift it.
The gears are much more well defined in a column manual than a column automatic because you're on multiple planes.
Here a 1961 Ford Fairlane with a rare "4 on the tree".
Quote from: Stephane Dumas on March 04, 2013, 08:56:13 PM
Here a 1961 Ford Fairlane with a rare "4 on the tree".
I like the four-on-the-tree, though I have never seen a lever like that on the dash for reverse. Sounds like this car is equipped with a V-8 engine, too.
However, the driver is making one mistake that will lead to premature clutch failure - keeping the clutch disengaged as a substitute for putting the transmission in neutral
That is
not a good idea. When the driver wants the transmission disengaged and is not shifting between gears, the trans should be in neutral and the clutch should be left engaged (pedal out). Now I realize there are times when this is not practical (such as waiting for a green light on an uphill sloping road), but in general, leave it in neutral and prolong the life of the clutch.
The "four on the tree" is an N rigged setup done by the owner. It's not any more rare than any other modification.
Quote from: cpzilliacus on March 04, 2013, 11:38:19 PM
Quote from: Stephane Dumas on March 04, 2013, 08:56:13 PM
Here a 1961 Ford Fairlane with a rare "4 on the tree".
I like the four-on-the-tree, though I have never seen a lever like that on the dash for reverse. Sounds like this car is equipped with a V-8 engine, too.
However, the driver is making one mistake that will lead to premature clutch failure - keeping the clutch disengaged as a substitute for putting the transmission in neutral
That is not a good idea. When the driver wants the transmission disengaged and is not shifting between gears, the trans should be in neutral and the clutch should be left engaged (pedal out). Now I realize there are times when this is not practical (such as waiting for a green light on an uphill sloping road), but in general, leave it in neutral and prolong the life of the clutch.
This is true. It also gets quite heavy on the left foot depressing the clutch for longer than needed.
That guy rides the clutch a lot longer when he starts from the stop than I assume is necessary too- I've never driven a car that required that much time with the clutch partially engaged, and I've driven sticks with some pretty low-end torquey engines.
My guess is this guy is learning to drive a stick and they filmed it
Quote from: Stephane Dumas on March 03, 2013, 03:39:37 PM
I didn't drive a 3 on the tree but I saw some Youtube clips.
Hey, that's practically the same thing! :-D
Seriously, as other people have said on here.... I've never driven a three in the tree, but I don't see why I couldn't do it. The topic is "Can you...". Sure, I can!
Quote from: corco on March 05, 2013, 03:31:46 PM
That guy rides the clutch a lot longer when he starts from the stop than I assume is necessary too- I've never driven a car that required that much time with the clutch partially engaged, and I've driven sticks with some pretty low-end torquey engines.
My guess is this guy is learning to drive a stick and they filmed it
I thought that too when I first watched the video. I chalked it up to a poor camera angle and really hoped he wasn't "riding the clutch," as it appears he is. However, you make a good point in that maybe he is just learning to drive a manual. In which case those mistakes make sense, I guess. He just better learn how to do it correctly quickly, otherwise he better have deep pockets and be good with his hands.