Why isn't there a manual transmission standard shift pattern design?

[Popsy]

I'm a bit embarrased to be a "car guy" and not have learned to drive a manual until I bought my MG in 2015 at the age of 27.

Nothing to be embarrassed about! At least you did learn, which is more than most people will do
I started learning driving at 16 (legal age for license is 18, but you can participate in some circuit events from the age of 16) to get my license at 18. You're learning and getting your license with a manual in my country (unless specific circumstances, but that will be noted on your license and then you can only drive automatics), so that's kind of unfair to mock people who only knew automatics.

After all these years of driving manual, I still have to find an auto trans that I really appreciate. Maybe a CVT would be the closest (unpopular opinion), with a big enough engine behind.

 

[NitroM3]

MGBs and Midgets both had left hand and right hand drive versions. The drivetrains for the UK and US versions were pretty much the same, other than the smog equipment.

My 79 1/2 MGB had the manual with electric over drive. So if you modified it to shift over gear in all instead of just 4th it made for cruising speeds a little nicer. Reverse in all MGB were a challenge to get to go into gear. The only solution was a tear down and polish the counter shaft gears or to replace them altogether with PG straight cut gears. That was in my other 305 V-8 MGB had that kool sounding gear drive whine.
Now my 1960 MGA had a Blown 391 Chevy with a Rock Crusher 4 speed, 6.14:1 spooled gears in a 9 inch Ford housing and a Hurst V-gate shifter. You could NEVER miss a shift but reverse was an interesting task. Although I could only go about 80mph before red lining the engine somehow hazing the tires at 50MPH would scare the crap out of anyone challenging me on the street. LOL

 

[Rmay635703]

When you think about it,
Three-on-the-tree disappeared in new vehicles over 40 years ago. Some mid-1970s American pickups were the last to have those.

False you could still buy 3 on the tree in a 1986 pickup

Now Is Your Chance to Own One of the Last 3-On-the-Tree Vehicles Ever Sold

This 1986 Chevy C10 pickup has the incredibly rare column-shift 3-speed manual transmission.

www.autoweek.com

 

[ekrampitzjr]

False you could still buy 3 on the tree in a 1986 pickup

Now Is Your Chance to Own One of the Last 3-On-the-Tree Vehicles Ever Sold

This 1986 Chevy C10 pickup has the incredibly rare column-shift 3-speed manual transmission.

www.autoweek.com

Wow. I stand corrected. I wonder if that was even mentioned in the sales brochures of the time?

 

[andyd]

Yah they disappeared along with vent windows

 

[CharlesInCharge]

What a strange thing to get upset about. Unless there is no indicator or you are unfamiliar with the vehicle it's not a problem. The US made all motorcycle gearchanges on the same side and same pattern back in the '70's...at the time all my bikes had the opposite, and thought it was a weird thing to do. So of course now every bike is the same.

We had a couple of cars, both made by BMC at the time, both 4 speed column shift...my Austin A40 had 1st down and away, and the neutral gate came up for 3rd and 4th. My wife's Morris Oxford had 1st up and away, neutral gate down for 3rd and 4th...we seemed to be able to cope with each others car.

I once worked for a trucking company that had a fleet of Fuso trucks, the first in the country, the 5 speed/ 2 speed was removed from new and a Roadranger fitted...4 speed with a range split then a gear split to give 12 gears. Some of them had a different shift pattern, and it wasn't until you were smashing every gear that you bothered to look on the dash and see the shift pattern plate they put there for a reason.

And yet, brake, acceleration, and clutch pedals seem to all be in standard locations. And as you pointed out, motorcycles have seemed to adopt a standard up and down pattern. Nobody to my knowledge has made the gears go 1, 4, 2, 3, R, nor 2, 1, 3, R, 4, nor odds and then evens, or put R at the top of the shifts...

It's a very reasonable question and discussion to have, at least to learn about something that is curious. Please find where I stated I'm "upset about" this or cannot "cope" with it. I could likewise say, it is odd to care to engage in a conversation for which you apparently don't care about. This is a conversation being had by people who are interested in it. I would not walk up to a group of people having a conversation I did not care about, and butt in and chastise them.

 

[CharlesInCharge]

Because they all have some kind of lockout on reverse so it doesn’t matter? Not going to be able to go into reverse unintentionally. I would be more worried about going from redline in third to second. ZING!!!

While you might be correct, I'm a fan of uniformity on important features and also a fan of redundancy. Vehicle gear lockouts might very well work. I have never tried engaging the wrong gears for obvious reasons. But mechanical designs can and do fail. By putting the R in a logical location (low gear side, to the left, and backwards next to 2 or forwards next to 1) with an additional measure to engage (pushing down, pulling up on the gear shifter) all but eliminates the need to rely on a mechanical lockout. It would then be inconceivable to go from higher gears into R, and would have to be a deliberate measure.

But if a person has several manuals including a 6 speed, and then takes this 5 speed out and has a human error (they do happen) s/he might be doing some spirited driving and by muscle memory accidentally shift from 5 to R. We hope a mechanical lockout works, but if it fails (which machines do from time to time) it can be a disaster in a layout such as this. All averted if the R is in the logical location to the left of the low gears, because R is a very low gear.

 

[Pew]

But if a person has several manuals including a 6 speed, and then takes this 5 speed out and has a human error (they do happen) s/he might be doing some spirited driving and by muscle memory accidentally shift from 5 to R. We hope a mechanical lockout works, but if it fails (which machines do from time to time) it can be a disaster in a layout such as this. All averted if the R is in the logical location to the left of the low gears, because R is a very low gear.

I have done that accidentally and failed to put the 5-speed in the Evo in reverse from fifth after driving my 6-speed focus. You cannot engage it while the car is moving above 3 mph and virtually impossible to money shift from fifth to reverse; it'll just push you to neutral as if reverse wasn't there. It's saved me a few times. Of course, that's mechanically locked out and if it doesn't lock out, then I probably needed a trans rebuild.

OEM shift knob on the Evo:

 

[Jetronic]

While you might be correct, I'm a fan of uniformity on important features and also a fan of redundancy. Vehicle gear lockouts might very well work. I have never tried engaging the wrong gears for obvious reasons. But mechanical designs can and do fail. By putting the R in a logical location (low gear side, to the left, and backwards next to 2 or forwards next to 1) with an additional measure to engage (pushing down, pulling up on the gear shifter) all but eliminates the need to rely on a mechanical lockout. It would then be inconceivable to go from higher gears into R, and would have to be a deliberate measure.

But if a person has several manuals including a 6 speed, and then takes this 5 speed out and has a human error (they do happen) s/he might be doing some spirited driving and by muscle memory accidentally shift from 5 to R. We hope a mechanical lockout works, but if it fails (which machines do from time to time) it can be a disaster in a layout such as this. All averted if the R is in the logical location to the left of the low gears, because R is a very low gear.

In that configuration the reverse is not synchronised if there's no lock, and you can't get into reverse while moving forward.

 

[supton]

Self-correcting problem here--manuals are well on their way on going away stateside. Most anyone driving one now is doing so because they specifically sought one out, and when that is the case, then I would guess they are the sort to look at the shifter knob and figure it out.

 

[CharlesInCharge]

Self-correcting problem here--manuals are well on their way on going away stateside. Most anyone driving one now is doing so because they specifically sought one out, and when that is the case, then I would guess they are the sort to look at the shifter knob and figure it out.

Okay, thanks for the obvious explanations. Not to be argumentative, but there's a concept called muscle memory. And, what about what about 40 years ago? That's the purpose of this discussion. Long before any hint of phasing out manuals, when they were indeed very popular, why did the industry not standardize decades ago? Not talking about tomorrow here.

In that configuration the reverse is not synchronised if there's no lock, and you can't get into reverse while moving forward.

We get it, there's a lockout on the gears. But, repeatedly stated, mechanical designs can fail. A zillion recalls or poorly designed items in cars demonstrate this fact. Repeating that there's lockouts is something raised in my original post, and ten posts since then. Any theories on why a lack of a industry agreement on WHY not a standard, like we see a standard agreement on the location of the foot pedals, location of mirrors, etc?

 

[eljefino]

Yah they disappeared along with vent windows

My 95 f150 had vent windows

and they were awesome

 

[bunnspecial]

My 79 1/2 MGB had the manual with electric over drive. So if you modified it to shift over gear in all instead of just 4th it made for cruising speeds a little nicer. Reverse in all MGB were a challenge to get to go into gear. The only solution was a tear down and polish the counter shaft gears or to replace them altogether with PG straight cut gears. That was in my other 305 V-8 MGB had that kool sounding gear drive whine.
Now my 1960 MGA had a Blown 391 Chevy with a Rock Crusher 4 speed, 6.14:1 spooled gears in a 9 inch Ford housing and a Hurst V-gate shifter. You could NEVER miss a shift but reverse was an interesting task. Although I could only go about 80mph before red lining the engine somehow hazing the tires at 50MPH would scare the crap out of anyone challenging me on the street. LOL

A bit of history on this:

The OD circuit from 68-80 consists of three parts-the dash switch, the OD lock-out switch on the transmission, and the OD solenoid. 62-67(3 sync) is the same except there's also a vacuum switch incorporated into the OD circuit.

On 68-76 transmissions, the OD lockout switch was "on" in 3rd and 4th gear both, so OD worked in 3rd and 4th. This was true of both the "black label" top-fill 1280tpm speedo transmissions and 74.5-76 blue label side fill 1000tpm speedo transmissions. In 77, the box was modified to only engage the OD lockout switch in 4th gear, so on these late boxes OD only works in 4th.

3 OD is a surprisingly useful gear. It's a bit under 1:1, so gives a tiny bit more grunt than 4th but not really a noticeable amount. The big advantage is on a windy road going 50-60mph(where these cars are really at home, even though they'll do 80 all day with or without OD) the 3-4 shift is common. If your OD switch is on the column like mine, you can cruise in 3 OD comfortably, then drop back into straight 3 with just a flick of your fingers and without even taking your hands off the wheel to pull out of a curve or whatever, then just click it back on. No clutch, no moving your hand off the wheel, it just happens.

My car has a blue label box out of a 1980. I didn't install it myself and I actually chronicled a few issues I had on here with the shop on getting the car. When I really started leaning on them after it had been there for 8 months, they had to throw together an OD harness in a hurry(never mind that I'd bought one from Moss and supplied it, but that's one of many things I just have to forget about...) and didn't wire in the lockout switch. So, for now, I have OD in all gears. I have to be careful because OD in reverse is bad news(cone clutch shedding bad news possibly even in a few hundred feet of operation) and it's supposedly hard on the OD in 1st and 2nd although not fatal like reverse. I need to crawl under there and hook up the lockout switch, but also don't want to lose 3 OD .

One of the OD masters up in Pennsylvania can convert 4-only boxes to 3-4, and I'm really regretting not having him do that(and give it a general overhaul before installation even though it works fine).

 

[dlundblad]

No need for a standard. You must become one with whatever you’re operating.

 

[dlundblad]

My 95 f150 had vent windows

and they were awesome

When my dad restored his Jeep Comanche, the goal was to find doors with “smoker windows”, but they are as rare as hens teeth and apparently highly collectible.

 

[supton]

Okay, thanks for the obvious explanations. Not to be argumentative, but there's a concept called muscle memory. And, what about what about 40 years ago? That's the purpose of this discussion. Long before any hint of phasing out manuals, when they were indeed very popular, why did the industry not standardize decades ago? Not talking about tomorrow here.

Probably because it would have taken an act of Congress to do so. Look at the PRNDL standardization on automatics--before that, it was any mixture of positions, with or without park, and maybe even using buttons. Took a moment to find but apparently it was "fixed" in 1961. Link. Automakers were historically very against doing anything that impacted their bottom line--or change, really, not unless if they themselves instituted it. Over the last 50 years or whatever, just what would have been the impetuous for these automakers to get into a room and say "hey let's all have the same shift pattern?" what would it have profited them to work together on this?

Heh, I'm reminded of a story that my grandfather told me. At some point in time, he was asked to move someone's car. So he put it into reverse and... darn thing moved forward! Took him a while to figure out. VW Beatle, I'm guessing this had to be in the 1960's when this happened, and he was not the sort to have bought anything other than domestics with good ole 3 speeds at that time.

 

[NitroM3]

A bit of history on this:


My car has a blue label box out of a 1980.

Great write up!
you are/were into MG's. I said 1979 1/2 was a limited edition and one of my 12 or so MGBs including a Sky blue so called 1980 production year So ya I owned several rubber and chrome bumper "B"s. I even had one that was so rusted out I filled the interior with dirt and made it part of my flower garden in my front yard. It fit because at the time I lived in the ROSH Lumbar often mentioned (in a sarcastic reference) town of Rio Linda California. LOL Oh I modified my transmission in the limited so I did have a selection of OD in all gears.

I was a Moss and British Victory Parts Distributor and wrote technical articles having to do with MGB called How to Americanize your MGB in a world wide distribution news letter on British cars from around 1980-1983 then sorta lost interest in MGs and moved back to where my businesses were making the most income which was American Muscle Cars.

 

[bunnspecial]

Great write up!
you are/were into MG's. I said 1979 1/2 was a limited edition and one of my 12 or so MGBs including a Sky blue so called 1980 production year So ya I owned several rubber and chrome bumper "B"s. I even had one that was so rusted out I filled the interior with dirt and made it part of my flower garden in my front yard. It fit because at the time I lived in the ROSH Lumbar often mentioned (in a sarcastic reference) town of Rio Linda California. LOL Oh I modified my transmission in the limited so I did have a selection of OD in all gears.

I was a Moss and British Victory Parts Distributor and wrote technical articles having to do with MGB called How to Americanize your MGB in a world wide distribution news letter on British cars from around 1980-1983 then sorta lost interest in MGs and moved back to where my businesses were making the most income which was American Muscle Cars.

I've only owned the one, but not for lack of trying . I have a friend with a 68 GT waiting for me to say yes, and a wife who needs a lot of persuading for me to say so . His is a nice and straight Pale Primrose-he's customized it a bit to his taste including a 72-76 console/armrest and a nice aftermarket steering wheel, but the super nice Banjo wheel and all the other stuff he removes comes with it.

I have a soft spot for the 79/80LEs, although the late smog engines with their 8.0:1 C/R and the lousy catalytic converter manifold zap a lot of power from them. Still, though, that can all be fixed. Some MG guys turn up their noses at the cast crank in the late engines also, but I've talked to a few guys who know engine design and say that the cast crank is the best balanced and smoothest running of all the 5 or so different ones used over the years, and that for street use it's still overbuilt and more than strong enough.

They're definitely fun cars when they're not rusting before your eyes.

 

[Carmudgeon]

I've always like this ad.

Sadly, the company that produced it is less and less capable of such a boast now..

 

[Chris142]

Knew someone that reportedly put reverse while on 4th on the highway with a Renault 4 like that. Apparently one piston went through the hood.
I still have a hard time believing it, all the manual I drove really didn't want their reverse gear being engaged while the car was moving forward, but I suppose you can force it /depend on the design.

A good friend of mine had a Scout. He wound it out in 3rd and hit 2nd instead of 4th. Scattered a 304 IHC all over the street.