3 on the tree questions???

[FADEC]

Had a discussion with some buddies from work the other day. We are all between 40-50 years old, and most of us had driven a three on the tree at one time or another.
Some questions..
What was the last US car to offer one as standard, or option??
What was the last US truck to offer one as standard or option?
Seems I remember driving a late 70's or early 80's Chevy truck that had one.
What was the purpose of one..I mean it seems like lot of linkage to make it work..wouldn't a floor shift manual, with the gear shift basically going directly into the transmission be a better design?? They were NEAT to drive though!!

 

[addyguy]

I agree entirely about whether 'on the tree' linkages make any sense. Your transmission is under the floor - surely having a link right into it makes more sense that one snaking up the steering column? How could that be cheaper?

 

[FADEC]

Did a little searching on the web and found this.

However, the column manual shifter disappeared in North America by the mid 1980s, last appearing in the 1986 Ford F-150

Still wonder what the last passenger car was that had it.

 

[labman]

What I think is a joke are the FWD cars with the long, convoluted cables running from the floor shifter to the transmission that is closer to the rack and pinion.

 

[addyguy]

Originally Posted By: daddi
Did a little searching on the web and found this.

However, the column manual shifter disappeared in North America by the mid 1980s, last appearing in the 1986 Ford F-150

Still wonder what the last passenger car was that had it.


If I had to guess, I'd say an 'old school' car like an AMC in the late 1970's.

A base Chevrolet Nova, or a Ford Fairmont, or the AMC Concord probably still had one around 1979.......

 

[The_Jeff]

My dad had a 4 speed floor shifter in his 1980 Fairmont and I doubt the new for 78-ish fox platform allowed column shifting. He also had the bench seat; I assume room for the middle passenger was the point of the column shifter. There was not a middle front seat belt though so officially it only held two in front.

Ford was cheap enough to use a 3 speed transmission in some fairmonts. Saw a floor one. Dad's went 1-2-3-OD like the marketing dept got to engrave the shifter knob.

To find 3 on the tree in a car you'd want to find something that sat lots of passengers on bench seats... like a checker cab if they were masochists.

 

[mpvue]

I had a '83 F-100 (IIRC it was also the last year for the 100) w/ a 3 on the column.
probably had a lot to do w/ convenience, or need for 3 across seating.

 

[demarpaint]

I had a 1974 Chevy Suburban 250 I6 with a 3 on the tree. The linkage was shot so I converted it to a Hurst 3 speed floor shifter. I had a 1980 Ford Granada 200 I6 with a 3 on the tree, ran great.

I think the whole purpose of the shifter was to allow sedans to seat 3 passengers in the front seat. Any other configuration would only allow for 2 front passengers. I'm thinking they went out early to mid 80's.

 

[PT1]

My last column shifter was my 1966 Chevy C-15 pickup. Bench seat. That linkage was a PIA.

 

[getnpsi]

I agree with the bench seat to sit three statement. You won't see 3ontree on the performance packages either. I am casually shopping for a late 1960's ford f-100 truck, and it's hard to find the 6 cylinder or small v8 with 5 lug that doesn't have the 3 on the tree.

 

[PF52]

Originally Posted By: addyguy

A base Chevrolet Nova, or a Ford Fairmont, or the AMC Concord probably still had one around 1979.......


I owned a 71 and a 79 Nova; the 71 had a 3-speed but the 79 was an automatic; however I'm about 95% certain the owners manual mentioned the 3-on-the-tree still being available in 1979. I'll have to see if I still have it.

I recall back about 1990 I was working at a construction site which had a couple of company-owned Ford pickups. One was older and had a 3-on-the-tree and more than once I was sent on errands driving people or materials around in it because no one knew how to drive it.

 

[FADEC]

The few times that I drove one I thought it was cool. Don't think I would want one in a daily driver though. Seemed like you were really "driving" the vehicle, winding the engine out in each gear.

 

[ARCOgraphite]

Originally Posted By: demarpaint


I think the whole purpose of the shifter was to allow sedans to seat 3 passengers in the front seat. Any other configuration would only allow for 2 front passengers. I'm thinking they went out early to mid 80's.
My thinking exactly - what ever happend to three passemgers in the front? The ridiculous and ubiquitous "center stack" console design has eaten up way more space than it should. Must be part of meeting federal crash spec ...

 

[ARCOgraphite]

In the early eighties, I was ordered a base Malibu v6 with 3 speed on the floor and HD suspension and wide oval tires. I made a factory order, then was told 3 mo's later they stopped production. Dissapointed, I went ahead and ordered a base S10 short box truck with 2.8L V6 w/vari-jet carb and 4 speed mitsubishi(?) manual trans. That ended up being a great and fun to drive vehicle - other than the rust away painted bumper. One of the five best vehicles out of over 60 that i've owned through the years.

 

[demarpaint]

Originally Posted By: ARCOgraphite
Must be part of meeting federal crash spec ...


Now that could very well be, first came the air bag, then dual air bags, then possibly tripple air bags with 3 on the tree. They should have made the dashboard one big inflatable pillow then!

You could very well be onto something, that and the insane linkage to get the 3 on the tree to work.

 

[Kestas]

Yes, the three-on-a-tree design was for seating purposes.

What I found interesting was when they introduced the floor shift design in the 70s, the automakers marketed it as a "sport" option and charged more for this feature... even though anyone could see that this design was simpler and easier to manufacture.

 

[rshunter]

Originally Posted By: labman
What I think is a joke are the FWD cars with the long, convoluted cables running from the floor shifter to the transmission that is closer to the rack and pinion.

I take it that you're citing the fact that the steering column is already running close to the gearbox as a possible plus for a column shifter. The big problem is that a three speed set-up is a pain, and anything beyond that would be absolutely absurd from a design standpoint. On the operator side, can you imagine trying to keep track of gear position and hitting the correct gate with a six speed transmission? No thanks! Not to mention that there's no practical purpose for the system on a modern automobile...

Cable-actuated shifter mechanisms are not technically complex, and are quite easily adapted to different platforms. Adding a little extra cable to allow for variations in mounting distances is a no-sweat proposition.

 

[rpn453]

Originally Posted By: labman
What I think is a joke are the FWD cars with the long, convoluted cables running from the floor shifter to the transmission that is closer to the rack and pinion.


Yeah, I'll agree that rods are superior, if that's what you're getting at. But I don't think it makes that big of a difference. IMO, the shifter on my buddy's Civic is no better than the one on my Mazda3.

 

[ClarkB]

Originally Posted By: css9450
I owned a 71 and a 79 Nova; the 71 had a 3-speed but the 79 was an automatic; however I'm about 95% certain the owners manual mentioned the 3-on-the-tree still being available in 1979...


I know that Chevy kept the three on the tree in their trucks until at least '79, not sure of the cars though.

Clark

 

[Steve S]

I had a 79 Ford F150 with a 300 CI 6 and a 3 on the tree .I got me everywhere I wanted to go. If i was Rick the racer it wouldn't be the best choice though.