(first posted 5/2/2014) I’m a big believer in five speed manual transmissions, and have been for years. When I was a kid, my father introduced me to the advantages of five speed gear counts and overdrive gear ratios, and since then I’ve preferred five speed shift-your-own transmissions over those containing a torque converter and planetary gears. In fact, I’ve upgraded three separate cars to five speed transmissions, despite the fact that the effort expended far outweighs any increase in vehicle value. Still, that work provides solid proof of my five speed passion.
If I had been a child of the sixties and grew up surrounded by big torque V-8s mounted in front of Muncie and Borg Warner 4 speeds, these five speed boxes may never have seduced me. Up until 1972, five speed gear boxes only arrived in the US mounted in European exotics with peaky small displacement engines. But in 1972, Toyota offered a five speed transmission in a single model, looking to test the American waters. Based on history, they were clearly happy with the results. The rapid growth in five speed transmissions brought on by this pioneering model forms the basis of this article.
Dad’s car, right down to the color.
Because my father bought a five speed Toyota in 1973, I had a front row seat to this product line transformation. He had spent several months researching new car options, and through these efforts discovered a new and unique model, the Corolla five speed Sport Coupe. After a test drive, he decided it was the car to have, placed an order, and waited for delivery. This was the only time I remember Dad waiting to get the car he wanted, so I’m going to spend some time talking about this little Corolla Coupe.
1971 Corolla Picture Courtesy of Kevin Martin
In the Fall of 1970, a new generation Corolla arrived on the scene. The base car (shown here) came with a motor displacing 1,200 cc’s (the 3-KC) and a four-speed manual transmission. In September of 1971, a larger 1,600 cc engine became available (the 2-TC). This engine provided a big jump in power, giving the Corolla first rate performance. In fact, there were some who said a 2-TC equipped Corolla offered more bang for the buck than the BMW 2002.
In early 1972, without a lot of fanfare, Toyota started to offer a five speed transmission option behind the 2-TC. This upgrade was available in the two door coupes (but not the two door or four door sedans) and included radial tires and a small mini console. This transmission shared most components with the four-speed manual transmission, but included an additional gear set in the rear of the case that provided an overdrive fifth gear. The transmission provided quieter highway cruising, and decreased the larger engine’s fuel consumption.
A 1974 Corolla S-5 Sport Coupe. I’m not a fan of those big bumpers, but this car still has the factory stripe package.
For the 1973 model year, five speed coupes added the following features: a tape stripe running along the top of the front fender and door, wood grain finish on the steering wheel, dash face, and shift lever, and a tachometer. It now included wider tires compared to the base car (155 SR70-13), but the body did not have fender flares. Having driven one for a number of years, I can tell you it also came with a smooth shifting transmission with a gear set designed to maximize the power available from that little 2-TC four banger.
(1974) SR-5 Sport Coupe
1973 also included a higher trim level model called the SR-5. This car included all the Sport Coupe features but added: wider wheels and larger tires (175 SR70-13), fender flares to cover the wider tires, upgraded suspension components, and red piping in the seat upholstery. This was the first appearance of the SR-5 in the Toyota lineup, and represented the Top Dog Corolla (in some other markets this Corolla received a DOHC engine, but this engine was not offered in the US).
A Japanese market car showing the Sport Coupe roofline and the SR-5 style fender flares.
All SR-5 models included badging on the front fenders, and as the top Corolla trim level, received the most attention from the automotive press. Because of this, most enthusiasts remember the Corolla SR-5, and think all five speed coupes came in this trim level. In reality, many of the cars came with the Sport Coupe package, without the fender flares and increased wheel width.
1973 Corolla Sport Coupe (Japan Market Car).
1974 was the final year of this generation, and the cars carried forward with few changes. The Sport Coupe gained a front fender badge reading “S-5,” and both cars received bigger bumpers and modified emission controls.
A green 1972 Gran Torino (mine wasn’t this nice). What was I thinking?
Sad tale: when it came time for my first car, I bought Dad’s ’73 Corolla Coupe. A few years later, I sold it for something bigger and louder, but far less interesting (see picture above…). Today, I’d love to find a replacement five speed Corolla Sport Coupe, but there just aren’t any unmolested examples available. Most of the Corolla Coupes of this generation now pack dual overhead engines, turbochargers and roll cage interiors. While there’s nothing wrong with these modifications, these street legal Go Karts are no longer the car I remember driving back in 1978.
New 5 Speeds for 1974
Enough reminiscing, let’s get back to our five speed history. In 1974, Toyota also added five speed transmissions to two other models- The Celica GT and the Corona SR Coupe. Since these cars used the 22-R four cylinder, Toyota had to develop an entirely new five speed for these cars. Clearly, they thought the five speed transmission offered a lot of bang for the buck.
The next generation of Corollas: Five Speed Heaven!
This bring us to 1975 and the next generation of the Corolla. The ’75 Corollas were longer and wider than the previous car, and with the gas crisis in full swing, Toyota relied on their five speed transmission to deliver superior fuel economy while maintaining good driving dynamics. The top of the line models remained the SR-5, but you could now get the five speed on other models by selecting the E-5 (Economy 5) option. In addition to broadening five speed availability in the Corolla line, customers could now buy a Toyota Pickup with a five speed transmission.
I don’t have sales figers for 1972 through ’74, but we can safely assume assume the numbers came in at less than 10% of total sales in the first two years. 1974 sales would be interesting to see, since Toyota offered the transmission in three models, but the data just isn’t out there.
However, I did find five speed sales data broken out seperately starting in 1975. That year, 21.9 % of the Corollas, 48.6 % of the Celicas and 19.6 % of the Coronas came with the five speed. Added all together, just over a quarter (27.5 %) of the Toyota cars included the five speed.
In comparison, here are the percentages of five speed manuals among Toyota’s import competition:
Japanese Brands:
Datsun- 0% Mazda- 1% Colt- 1% Honda- 11.2% Subaru- 21%
European Brands:
Volkswagen/Audi- 0% British Leyland- 0% Volvo- 0% Saab- 0% BMW- 0%
Peugeot- 0% Fiat/Lancia- 39 % (all Lancia) Porsche- 98.4%
Clearly, Toyota had a jump on the other imports. They were no longer the only low price car with a five speed option, but their product line provided the most five speeds, and the public was clearly warming to the technology.
For further proof, let’s jump forward two years. In 1977, 48 % of the Corollas, 70 % of the Celicas and 42 % of the Coronas came with the five speed. For the first time, over half (54.7 %) of all Toyota cars came with this option. The next year, buyers could not get a 1978 Celica with a four-speed manual–the five speed was the only manual option.
But the five speed transmission was not only a Toyota phenomenon. Looking at the competition, The Japanese manufacturers (and a few European brands) also found a way to increase the percentages of 5 speed transmissions sold in their lineups.
Japanese Brands
Datsun- 25 % Mazda- 41.8 % Colt- 19.8 % Honda- 34.4 % Subaru- 15.9%
European Brands
Volkswagen/Audi- 0% British Leyland- 23.8% Volvo- 0% Saab- 0% BMW- 0%
Peugeot- 0% Fiat- 38.4 % Lancia-100% Porsche- 28.8 %
It’s pretty clear the Japanese were on board with the program, but the Europeans were still holding back. In fact, Porsche went from an extremely high percentage of five speeds in 1975 (98.4 %) to a mere 28.8 % in ’77. Why? Because the new 911 Turbo and 924 both used a 4 speed manual transmission. I’m not the guy to break down the whys and wherefores of the European cars, but I invite you to share your thoughts on the subject in the comments section.
The Perfect Shift Pattern
So there’s the story of the first five speed overdrive transmission offered in a low price car. Toyota really nailed it in the Corolla- A sweet shifting transmission with a perfect shift pattern. But the story would not be complete without discussing how the US manufacturers responded to this new technology.
While GM, Ford, and Chrysler must have observed the growth of five speeds on the import side, their response was very tepid. Until 1980, neither Ford or (domestic built) Chryslers offered a five speed transmission. However, in an attempt to cash in on the fuel economy advantage of an overdrive, both manufacturers revised the ratios in their existing four-speed transmissions to include an overdrive final gear set.
The four speed overdrive- A swing and a miss
The problem with this approach? Gear spacing. Driver’s accustomed to the flexibility of a four-speed transmission found themselves back in the bad old days of the three-speed. Since fourth gear was now relegated to highway duty, drivers often found themselves jumping back and forth between second and third, looking for a gear to suit their needs. In some cases, it felt as if the engineers left out a gear, thanks to the uneven spacing between gear ratios. These four speed overdrive transmissions may have been an expedient and inexpensive option, but they did not deliver the goods as nicely as Toyota’s five speed.
GM’s T-50: A foul tip
GM did deliver a five speed transmission in 1976, reflecting the fact they had the deepest pockets of any automotive manufacturer at the time. It’s interesting that GM stepped up to the five speed plate, since a huge percentage of their vehicles came equipped with an automatic transmission (the percentage of GM cars with an automatic from ’77 to ’80: 92.6, 95.7, 94.3, and 93.2). In fact, GMs reliance on automatic transmissions makes comparing them to Toyota rather pointless. In the seventies, a majority of Toyotas still came with manual transmissions. Still, it does reflect GM’s attitude toward small car sales, often described as arrogant indifference.
For example, their five speed placed first gear down and to the left of the standard “H” pattern, creating an unnatural shift pattern for city driving. The pattern did reflect the pattern used on some high-end European cars, but it was a racing pattern, designed to allow the driver to use the H portion of the pattern at speed and only drop into first gear while entering and exiting the pits.
Driving in the city, this GM shift pattern was the pits. To prove that point, the transmission made an initial splash in 1976, when 1.3 % of GM’s cars came with the five speed option, but the numbers quickly crashed. In the following three years, the totals were 0.3, 0.2 and 0.2 percent respectively.
Ford’s 5 speed- A line drive outside the foul post
In 1980, GM dropped their five speed entirely. At the same time that Ford offered a new one as an option in the Mustang and Capri. Once again, a domestic five speed transmission came with an oddball shift pattern. This time, Ford placed fifth gear alongside fourth gear in the pattern, requiring the driver to move the shift lever forward, sidewise, and then back again. I’ve driven one of these Mustangs, and found myself skip shifting from third to fifth. While bogging the engine down a bit, choosing to skip shift provided the most natural motion. Once again, strange did not catch on and Ford only equipped 0.2 % of their 1980 cars with a five speed.
Oddly enough, in 1982 our friends at AMC finally cracked the five speed code. The first American manufacturer to offer Borg Warner’s T-5 transmission, 11.0 % of their cars came a five speed that year. I guess we shouldn’t be surprised that America’s small car expert led the way in five speed market penetration.
Finally, in 1983 the domestics got it right. Ford and GM equipped their pony cars with the T-5, and both manufacturers offered five speed transmissions in their front wheel drive compacts. AMC continued to grow their five speed business (placing them in 33.9 % of their cars), and even Chrysler offered five speeds in their domestic products (the Omni/Horizon twins and the K-cars). A breakthrough year, 1983 marked the first time the domestics sold more five speed than four speed manual transmissions, finally recognizing the value of this transmission.
So 1983 wraps up our tale and leaves the door open to another significant event: the success of the T-5 transmission. This transmission went on to have the longest production run of any domestic manual transmission, and was used by all four domestic brands (if we count Jeep as a Chrysler brand). But I’ve already covered more territory than I initially set out to tour, so let’s save that tale for another day.
Edit- I meant to incorporate this reference into the article, but during development it just slipped my mind. If you enjoyed this article, check out Paul’s take on the joys of overdrive, linked here: The Joys of Overdrive. D/S
Good History Dave and a good article. My 79 Datsun truck had a 5 speed. Smooth as butter. Had a six speed in the 2010 cube but really didn’t see much of an improvement there. The five speed in my 95 4runner fills the bill and I don’t find any missing places no matter what I do. Tow or go on the highway. When I’m in the pasture if I need it I also have a 4L range that serves as a grannie gear. I’m happy and a fellow fan.
Datsun also offered a 5sp with Reverse to the Left and up and 1st left and down. Apparently they were afraid that it could cause confusion and possibly accidents so they were equipped with a back up beeper that was inside the car. A friend had one of the B210s equipped that way.
“In fact, there were some who said a 2-TC equipped Corolla offered more bang for the buck than the BMW 2002.”
For a short while in my parents driveway there was a BMW 2002 and a Corolla 5 speed. I got to drive both regularly and I can not agree with the bang for your buck… The Corolla purchased new was gone in less than a year. The BMW was around for at least six years.
If your folks paid the bill, how can you speak to bang for the buck? I agree the 2002 was the better car, but were there superior cars avaliable at the Corolla’s price point?
I was well aware of the prices paid… As far as “superior” cars at the Corolla price point, I did/do not know, but I did have a direct comparison sitting in the driveway to “sample” anytime I was in town.
The engineering department of a govt facility I worked at had Corollas as runabouts two so naturally they got raced on private roads a few times and driven to their limits pretty much from brand new both made the magic 100k and got sold at auction still running fine 74 models they still read in miles however both were 4 speeds we got mostly base models and even got our 5door wagons imported from Aussie and got the 2door van type wagons assembled locally in Aussie they only came with the K series engine and you need certification to fit a T and the two types are a bolt in swap Ive done some the Toyota parts bin is an amazing place for in brand engine transmission swaps.
Snap! …i worked for a govt org back in the late 70’s and they used Percy’s rentals of Hobson Street whenever the fleet pool vehicles were over-allocated ..the fave ‘Percy’s’ car was either the dark brown Mazda 808, or the mid-green Corolla 2K ! Both were “delicious” vehicles to drive after the awful british junk constituting the vehicle pool (Mini 850, Chevette 1256, and the Mk 2 Escort 1300) ..the japanese vehicles were an eye-opener for us back then as to just how totally superior they were to the non-jap crap we had to put up with.
The 2K (1166cc?) and 4 speed combo was a delightfully revvy and powerful little machine, and the 808 was probably even a tad smoother… brother did they get a thrashing from us
One of our guys (an ex-aussi cop) tried this on an absolutely brand new Avenger 1600 pool car (Mitsi based engine??) and seized it up rock solid after about only about 15 minutes at 6000rpm ..waaaaa?? ..the little jap engines LOVED this sort of treatment
Toyota put out a bigger 1500 version (the 5K) that also an amazing piece of automotive design excellence .. that was also an unburstable engine ..as smooth as silk ..and beautiful to look at ..laying in there on it’s side as it did
The small japanese automotive engines of this era had such character and individuality ..
..where has this gone ? 🙁
The first vehicle I drove that had a 5-spd manual shifting transmission was my stepdad’s 1978 Toyota Pickup truck. My first very own car that had a manual shift was a 1986 Toyota MR2. My favourite of the two, the vehicle I’d buy again, would be the 1978 Toyota Pickup truck. It was simple, it had a small, but powerful 20R 2.2 litre 4 cylinder engine. I loved driving it, I MISS driving it.
I wrote about my 1979 Subaru FE a while back. It had a five speed, with the oddity of both 4th and 5th gears being overdrive ratios.
In your mention of shift pattern it reminded me of a Gillig school bus I drove umpteen years ago that the shift pattern was R-1-5-4-3-2. Very strange to drive that.
We had the Austin Maxi with a 5 speed,another lost opportunity for BL/BMC in 1969
We got that gearbox as an extra-cost option on the Morris 1500. My aunt bought a fully-optioned one off the showroom floor. Terrible car, and not just the gearshift. but the fifth ratio made the car usable on the highway without screaming its head off.
couldn’t agree more. the sr-5 was a revelation to me and my teen friends. we could keep up with the euro imports and out maneuver anything american.
I knew of the GM 5 speed in 1976, but I never knew it was doglegged, it was only available on the H and H-Special cars and….oddest of oddites, the big Colonnade Cutlass Supreme, but I don’t think it spread to any of the other A-body cars. It could have been combined with the Oldsmobile 260 V8 from what I recall, but I’m not sure if it was ever combined with any of the other V8’s.
Edit: I also found out you could get it in an Omega too, but not any of the other X-bodies from what I recall.
A five-speed in an Omega with a 260 would be a cool find.
I had one. Was nothing but trouble. These units had marginal torque rating, even a 260 was too much for it.
I know of a 3 on the tree Omega Brougham Hatchback with the 260.
Carmine-
You piqued my interest, so I checked the records.
According to Ward’s Automotive, the first year GM offered the 5 speed, you could get it in the H-bodies, 2 X-bodies (Omega and Skylark) and 2 A-bodies (Cutlass and Lemans).
The estimated A-body five speed production numbers: Cutlass- 2001, Lemans- 192(!).
I had forgotten about the Chevette, though I thought it was a 4 speed until the early 80’s. Never heard of the Skylark offering it, I wonder if it was offered on the downsized LeMans, I know that Olds kept offering it on the post 78 downsized Cutlass, you could even combine it with the short lived(in both cases) 260 diesel V8.
I had the 5-speed in both my ’76 Monza 2+2 and ’79 Monza Kammback. It was a good transmission, shifted nicely, came with a reasonably decent clutch. However, as mentioned, the shift pattern was annoying in town, especially moving out from a red light. You want the straight shift pattern between first and second to minimize lag in the shift. By the time you’re ready for third, you’re already at the speed limit on most city streets (35 or so), so you can take the time for the jog in the shift pattern. Putting that jog in between first and second was mildly annoying.
I believe all GM cars in the seventies used the Borg Warner T-50. As Sykle stated, it worked fine with a Buick V-6 or an emasculated V-8 (say a 260 or 305).
However, the H-body blogs all say if you put one behind serious small block power, they grenade in short order.
Not criticism per se, but a T-50 equipped car would not provide a good foundation for a typical hot rod project.
Must’ve been sturdy as heck in a 1600 (cc and lb) Chevette, though…
Upon further review, a Chevette five speed did not arrive until 1982, and used the T-5. Since the T-5 can live behind the 5.0 in the Mustang GT, it was indeed sturdy as heck in the Chevette.
Great piece, Dave. A lot of this is new info to me as I was not in the sort of cars where the 5 speeds were getting started. Until fairly recently, I had always thought that a Toyota SR-5 had (at least at one time) always designated a 5 speed. Apparently not, and certainly not more recently.
Originally SR-5 did mean that the vehicle came from the factory with a 5 speed gear box but it also got you some other “sporty” equipment.
…and like so many marketing names, it lost meaning with the passage of time. Later on, you could buy a Toyota SR-5 Pickup equipped with an automatic transmission.
Dave, I think that change came in the 90’s sometime…but SR5 to me will ALWAYS mean “five-speed overdrive manual transmission”. As it was in 1977….
The Alfa Romeo Giulia had 5-speed gearbox in 1962.
And an absolutely gorgeous 4 cylinder engine !
And the Fiat 124 Spyder followed about five years later. What you had was the Alfa being the first although in a somewhat exotic (by American standards) car. The Fiat further democratized the movement by putting the five speed into something less expensive and more mainstream. Toyota finished the progression.
My parents 1970 Fiat 125 S had a five speed too. Best shift of any car I’ve driven.
The significant difference between the Alfa five -speed and the Toyota and other later five-speeds is that the Alfa’s gears were closely spaced for sporty driving, and fifth was not a true “overdrive”, based on the overall ratio.
In Europe, five speeds had been a round for sometime; Mercedes offered one too starting in the sixties. But these were known as “sportgetriebe”, because fifth was geared to give maximum top speed, not to save fuel. After the energy crisis, overdrive five speed boxes (“spargetriebe”) increasingly replaced them.
Yes, quite…. It seemed and sounded like you could bury the needle before 15 mph in first. Sort of a “reverse” 5 speed, adding a low range gear to a four speed. Definitely an Italian preference at one time. Tight quarters over there. They loved to upshift and downshift as much as possible in small spaces on short roads.
Well, also, in the era before electronic fuel injection, dual-runner intake manifolds, etc., a lot of high-revving, twin-cam small (under 1,600cc) fours could barely get out of their own way under about 3,500 rpm, so you needed a rather low (high numerical) first to get moving without brutalizing the clutch and you didn’t want to let the revs drop too much between the upper gears.
The 928 was never offered with a four-speed manual. I think the only four-speed Porsches offered at the time were the 930 Turbo (which had too much torque for the 911’s five-speed), and early 924’s, which I don’t think were offered with the five-speed box until 1977, and then only as an option. Otherwise, a sterling essay, Dave!
I don’t think it was a torque issue on the 930, but the simple reason the 5-speed simply didn’t fit with all the turbo plumbing going everywhere.
Eric-
That makes more sense, as the 924 was a relatively high volume car for Porsche, and those sales would quickly erode the percentage of Porsches with five speeds. I’ll update the text.
Ingvar-
I clearly remember an introductory article stating that the existing Porsche five speed would not handle the turbo engine’s torque. The article also indicated that the new found power more than made up for the missing gear.
It was indeed the power. The 5 speed in the 911 at the time (the 915) is not very robust. The exhaust plumbing in the 930 is not restricted by the transmission since the tranny is in front of the motor.
I also distinctly remember reading that it was a torque issue that necessitated the four speed in the 930.
The other reason that the 930 used the 4-speed is because staying in each gear longer better made use of the turbocharged engine’s power band.
I don’t know when Volvo got their first five-speed, though they had overdrive as an option for the four-speeds up until the late 80´s, at least. The overdrive was from Laycock de Normanville, and over a million Volvos was shipped with that unit from the 60’s onwards. I think it’s quite incredible they went to a third party provider for solving that problem for so very long, instead of making their own box. Must’ve been costly, but good for business for Laycock. Volvo must’ve been their biggest single customer by far.
“Over a period of 40 years, Laycock Engineering manufactured over three and a half million overdrive Units, and over one million of these were fitted to Volvo motorcars.”
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Overdrive_%28mechanics%29
That was more like the British approach. A four speed manual with an optional overdrive. Works quite well but a straight five speed is more simple.
My ’73 MGB GT had a Laycock overdrive. It would work on 3rd and 4th gears only and could be shifted like a 6 speed, though in practice using it as a 5 speed was most practical. It made a HUGE difference on the highway. The later MGB roadster I had didn’t have overdrive and it was painful at highway speeds.
The unit on the early TR4 could also be used on second, which gave you seven speeds forward. It sounds pointless, but the rally drivers were very fond of it because overdrive second took care of the otherwise rather steep gap between second and third.
I’ve always assumed the British fondness for accessory overdrives had to do with lower tooling costs. With a RWD car, you could put one of the LDN units behind your existing gearbox without having to make a lot of engineering changes.
So long as it fits in the tunnel just shorten the driveshaft, arrange the on/off switching, and you’re in business.
A mate put one in his ’48 Standard Vanguard (yep, a real early one), along with a TR3 engine. Easy job, as the Vanguard’s engine was basically the same block. Cruising along the highway at 70mph, when he spies a cop car busily radaring the traffic. Too late to go for the brakes. As he went past, he saw the cop shaking his radar gun and thumping it – obviously didn’t believe the reading. 🙂
I had one of these 4+OD in my ’87 740 GLT. Quite a nice fit IMO. These boxes are still preferred over the “true” five speed by the turbo brick crowd over here, since the latter tend to get noisy in 5th gear with mileage. Though a buddy of mine is running a long term experiment in his 940 – there seems to be nothing wrong aside from the noise, for 50k mls so far.
My 940 GL got the M47 manual five gear box from factory. More than 510.000 km (318,000 miles) until today – no problems.
Aware that this is an old post, but these do get recycled and reposted.
The Volvo M46 4-speed was considered a very durable transmission. The OD unit did have issues, mostly electrical, there was a switch on the shift knob. Not unusual to see multiple posts on The Brickboard Volvo forum about the OD not working. By the mid-80’s drivers were accustomed to a straight 5-speed and the switch must have seemed as alien as a spark-advance lever.
Somewhere 86-87 Volvo switched to the M47 5-speed.
The M47 was not regarded well for being durable, some opined that it was because they needed a higher fluid level than the fill hole positioning would allow. This is not an isolated thing; the rear drive units on Moto Guzzi loopframes had fill plugs so wrongly positioned that the standard advice was not to bother to check the fluid level, but to drain and add the correct amount from the top.
After digging deeply on my rural dialup connection, I bought some Redline MTL, drained the M47 on my 240 Wagon, and then tightened the drain plug before jacking/propping the car up at about a 45 degree tilt.
I then carefully filled with the MTL until the hole drooled, installed the fill plug hand-tight like I was defusing a bomb, and began lowering the car in steps.
The next morning was cold. I had to go to work early and jumped in and took off. A few miles later I realised that there had been none of the usual cold-notchiness, it had gone into gear and shifted like it was already warm. That began a long relationship with MTL, which I also used in my Honda Element until Honda redid their MTF formula and made it more MTL-like (thin). For a while some folks mixed them 50/50 to get a nice shift feel but I liked the tactile mechanical feel of the MTL and the new MTF is close enough and now cheaper.
The M47 went on to work perfectly until I let the car go from rusted body. I used it to haul like a pickup, drove it hard on steep grades, used it over the road to go to work assignments, and through it all it worked like new. I could have bought an earlier model but preferred the 5-speed so I wouldn’t have to deal with yet another Volvo wiring issue.
The M47 five-speed was introduced with MY 1983.
The originator of offering a 5sp trans in a vehicle for the average consumer in the US was International Harvester. The started offering the 5sp transmissions from their MD truck in their pickups and Travealls in the 60’s. One was a 5th direct and it used what is commonly referred to as a dog leg shift pattern.
124
R35
Since it was originally intended for MD trucks and 1st was a low or super low gear it made some sense. There was also an OD version they whipped up for the Light Line products that made for a double dog leg shift pattern.
12OD
R34
This was done to make it so they only had to change the ratios of the gear sets in the center, down and right, up positions and allowed the direct coupling of the input shaft to output shaft for the direct drive for the new 4th to remain the same. Since they kept the close ratio versions 1 and 2 gears the same ratio and put a new ratio in the 3rd position they are known to have a big “hole” in the spread. What had been 4th had its gears swapped from a reduction set to an OD set. However it was a cheap way to put an OD trans in the Light Line vehicles. They did last through the 70’s but weren’t ordered very frequently.
I learned to drive a truck on a ’56 Dodge with a most exciting pattern:
25R
341
Now THAT was an adventure! Makes one appreciate Toyota even more.
Alright, I know it wasn’t a mainstream consumer product, but it was my first 5-speed,
First was a super-low, but why 5 was where it was, I have no idea, unless the very cramped cab made it necessary to get the gear lever away from the driver for cruising.
Oh, and it had a rip-roaring 125 hp flathead six pulling an 18′ body rated for 3 tons. Zoom!
Well I would guess that it started as a 4sp and then they added the granny gear in the available Right, down position and then when they decided to add an OD they put it in that position for the same reason that IH did it left the direct coupling gear in the same position so there was no need for moving that mechanism.
Thank you for your enlightenment, Eric. And, furthermore, in those pre-synchro, crashbox days, there was no need for, and no understanding of, quick shifts, which we take for granted now. In fact, slow shifts were necessary. And no thought of keeping up with traffic in such a vehicle.
Glad to know there was a mechanical/ design reason – makes excellent sense. But what an awful thing to drive when compared with almost anything newer!
I won’t ask how many times you got the wrong ratio – I’m sure I’d do worse!
The 1963 TK Bedford we had as a backup spare for my butter run was a 5 speed dog leg shift, in practice you only use the top four ratios unless pulling away fully laden uphill, 300 petrol motor single speed diff and air over hydraulic brakes other than the gearbox it was pure 50s mechanically.
So why did Toyota feel a need to go from 4.10 to 4.111 gears for 1974?
In a Japanese company, the technical specs sometimes change thanks to an improved translation of exisiting information.
Unless someone has torn down both rear axles and can establish there is a difference, I would imagine the 4.111 spec is simply a more accurate measurement of the existing axle ratio.
I think the 1973 ad was simply a matter of the ad copy being wonky. The Japanese specs list the axle ratio as 4.111. Maybe the copywriter saw that, wrote “4.1” and then had a proofreader add the 0; who knows. It was not a specification change.
(That’s nothing compared to whatever happened with Mazda’s U.S. press kit during the same period. Somebody apparently rounded most of the English body dimensions to the nearest whole inch, which means the U.S. and JDM specs don’t match up at all.)
The Owner’s Manual for my Sport Coupe included a heading reading “Cigalette Lighter.”
I so want to know if that was an honest typo, or one of the US editors slipping it in as a joke on their Japanese partners.
I had a fleet of mid-70’s Corollas, at one point installed a diff from an automatic on a manual to get a better cruise. Can’t recall the numbers but it was noticeable.
I’m fairly sure a Chevette could be had with a 5-speed in the 70’s.
That’s correct, and those cars counted toward the GM five speed sales referenced in the article. But Chevette five speed sales never came close to matching the sales Toyota notched up by offering a five speed in all their models.
Edit- The Chevette did offer a five speed manual, but not until 1982 (the Borg Warner T-5).
Mitsubishi parts also had that description on the parts tag for a “Cigalette Lighter”. So it was either a common translation error or some jokester really got around!
Dave,
Do you remember the Volvo M40/M41/M46 4-speed manual gearboxes with the Laycock de Normanville overdrive? I had one in my ’85 240 DL sedan and I thought that transmission worked just as well, if not better, than a regular 5-speed.
In fact, some people have told me that the OD-equipped Volvo manuals are a perfect substitute if you don’t wish to have a 5-speed in a car. It works just fine. And I think those M-series gearboxes last longer than any vintage manual transmission. Just ask Irv Gordon – he’s got 3+ million miles on his M41-equipped ’66 P1800 and it has the original transmission.
PJ-
I just added a link covering (external) overdrives that Paul wrote some time ago. It’s at the very the end of the article- Check it out!
Thanks, D/S
My first two cars were both 1984 VW Rabbit diesels, the first with a 4-speed and the second with the 5-speed. The extra gear was helpful for keeping the engine in a good range for getting up hills and still mostly keeping up with traffic. I hated the second Rabbit for other reasons though, and replaced it about a year later when my dad gave me his GMC van. I occasionally missed rowing my own gears though.
When I met my wife, she was driving a 2001 5-speed Honda Civic. Having two kids necessitated a bigger vehicle, so we bought a 2006 CR-V, also with a 5-speed, and sold the Civic. If we had replaced it with something with an automatic, I would’ve been tempted to hang onto the Civic as well.
Sadly, when it comes time to replace the CR-V, it will probably be with an automatic, since there will be no family-friendly vehicles still made that have a manual option. While I certainly wouldn’t kick one of my big old Chryslers out of the garage for one, it’s fun having a vehicle with a manual transmission in the fleet.
I should also add – Volvo finally got on the 5-speed bandwagon and installed the M47 gearbox in manual-equipped 240s starting in 1987. However, for some reason the 740s, both GLE and Turbo, still used the M46 4-speed +OD when equipped with a stick.
In 1990, Volvo gave the 740s the M47 but equipped very few cars with it. The M47 was only offered in the lineup for two years before quietly being dropped at the end of 1991 model year, but continued to be offered in 240s until that model stopped production in 1993.
The last Volvo to offer the option of a manual gearbox was the hatchback C30, which was discontinued at the end of 2013. It could be had with a 6-speed transmission.
” However, for some reason the 740s, both GLE and Turbo, still used the M46 4-speed +OD when equipped with a stick.”
They say, the M47’s limitation is the torque. Doesn’t cope with more than 190 Nm. Even a pedestrian B230F mill delivers 185 Nm (or something like that).
Also of note… you compared the Toyota introduction of the 5-speed in 1972 with the Big 3 having only 4-speeds.
Almost a false comparison. While four-speeds could be had in certain American models, I have a strong suspicion that the bulk of manual transmissions installed in 1972 American cars were actually 3-speeds.
Think about it… Most Americans wanted automatics by 1972. The small portion that didn’t were (I’d bet) mostly cheapskates – buying cars like the 1972 Dodge Dart, with a 170 c.i. Slant Six and a three-on-the-tree.
I had a 1979 Chevrolet C-10 that came from the factory with a 250 c.i. I-6 and a three-on-the-tree.
An interesting trivia question might be: What was the last new vehicle you could buy in the States with a 3-speed stick?
The article noted the vast difference in the Japanese versus domestic approach, but made the point based on automatic transmission sales-
“In fact, GMs reliance on automatic transmissions makes comparing them to Toyota rather pointless.”
Regarding three versus four speeds, the Chevette, Vega, and Monzas rarely came with a three speed manual, and those cars (along with the same platforms in the other divisons) made up the lions share of all manual transmission GM cars sold in the seventies.
Yes, I suppose you’re right. The B-body 3-speed was fleet-only by ’72. Although the A-bodies could be had with 3- or 4-speeds (at least until they became the G-bodies) I can bet the take rate was ridiculously low.
I don’t think the Big 3 gave a darn about their compacts until the Omni/Horizon of 1978.
Speaking of which, I recall reading an article years ago in which engineers of the Omnirizon had to do battle with Townsend’s bean counters who wanted to fund only a 3-speed for them. The engineers prevailed, evidently.
The last 3-on-the-tree new car would have been the 1979 Nova and company X-body. In trucks, the 1987 Chevy-GMC pickup.
If you are talking 3-speeds irrespective of where the shifter was, I would say the 1983 Malibu and possibly other A-body siblings. These were still offered with a 3-speed floor shift.
A Ford Falcon ute or panel van could be had with a three on the tree until about 1990 or 1991, still with a carby engine. Or you could also get a 5 speed!
I’d say that in 1972 the tide had turned from 3sp to 4sp as the most common manual trans in US built vehicles thanks to the success of the Vega and Pinto which had a relatively low take rate on Automatics. Yes the Vega could be had with a 3sp but it was pretty rare. The average consumer of the larger cars had pretty much shifted to automatics so the fact that the US compacts like the Nova, Maverick and Valiant had 3sp manuals doesn’t mean that a large percentage of people didn’t opt for the Automatic in them. Once you moved up to the intermediate and full size cars a manual trans was pretty much unheard of except in the performance oriented intermediates and those usually got a 4sp.
The Vega had a wide range of transmissions over its 7 years, Saginaw 3 speed, an Opel sourced 4 speed, the Borg-Warner 5 speed, the “shiftless” Torq-Drive 2 speed, Powerglide and the light duty air-cooled Turbo 350.
Great right-up, Dave! I learned stick in my 76 Celica GT 5-speed, and am currently in love with my new-to-me 87 Corolla FX gearbox. Shifts as fast as I can move.
Apart from my 90 LS400 the only automatic Toyota I’ve ever owned was an 85 Tercel wagon, and that was strictly by accident. It was only $500, and I had gotten a ride from a friend up to Salem, an hour north on the interstate, and I had just assumed it was a stick, even though the craigslist ad had no mention of the tranny. It was worth buying, and gave me two solid years of service, but damn it was slow.
Very informative post, thanks.
The most peculiar trans I can think of is the Doug Nash 4+3 offered on the early C4 corvettes, i’d love a history lesson on that cobbled together, multi-overdrived unit.
Dave; great article on a subject I’ve long wanted to see covered here. Thanks.
I find that five gears are really what every car rather wants and needs, unless they’re very powerful. When I converted my F100 six from a three-speed to a “five speed” (Warner T-87 w O/D, manually available on all gears), it made such a difference. Having a third gear (second/OD) is perfect for in town residential areas, and “5th” (third/OD) makes highway speeds so much more pleasant (1800 rpm @ 60). I don’t bother with first/OD, because it’s almost the same as second. But the other five gears are very well spaced.
Yes, I’ve driven a number of six speed manuals, and agree with you- Five is all I need.
The T-56 mounted in the Viper, Corvette, Challenger, Mustang and Camaro may be an exception. The tranmission uses overdrive in both 5th and 6th, and big torque V-8s may justify a second overdrive ratio to maximze highway fuel economy. In more pedestrian rides, it’s hard to jusitfy the greater weight and drag of the T-56.
Lily’s Mini Cooper S is a six speed. Just driving around town it does feel like there are too many gears. And I inevitably put it in 6th to back up. On the track or a fast country road I’m sure all six gears are welcome.
I think it really depends on the engine and the actual ratios. Some of the more high-strung Honda and Toyota performance models could have benefited from a properly chosen six-speed. The third-generation Prelude is a good example — the five-speed’s ratios were just fine for around-town use, but I frequently yearned for a taller cruising gear because 4,000 rpm at 70 mph got old in a hurry. There was no reason the engine couldn’t have pulled a taller top gear and it would have made the Prelude a much more pleasant highway cruiser (not to mention improving its unimpressive highway fuel economy). I suppose they could have made fifth taller, but either a taller axle ratio or shortening third and fourth would have been less ideal in the city.
Unfortunately, when Honda did finally put a six-speed in the S2000, they kept top gear ridiculously short and just spaced the intermediates even more closely, which might make sense on a racetrack or a dragstrip, but seems a needless hassle on the street.
Good point. In my ’05 2 litre Mazda 3 (no powerhouse) the gear ratios feel all wrong. First runs out of puff too soon to the point where I often take off in second, and it could certainly use an extra ratio on top of 5th – 3100rpm at 100km/h is noisier than I’d like.
Still, I’m thankful for small mercies. I remember small cars before overdrives or 5-speeds became common – and the short engine life that resulted from prolonged highway cruising.
I have a 2.3-liter 3 of the same year and the gearing seems fairly well-suited to the engine. It’s geared for about 23 mph/1,000 rpm in fifth, which is acceptable if not ideal. (The engine would probably be happy enough with a slightly taller top, but that’s quibbling.) My major objection to the gearing is the broad gap between first and second. If you short-shift in first, you get an annoying moment where you don’t have enough torque multiplication and the engine speed is too low to give you much grunt to work with.
Unfortunately, there wouldn’t be any easy answer: First needs to be very deep because the car is really fairly heavy and there’s not much in the way of off-idle torque. Making second shorter would help in that regard, but then third and fourth would have to be respaced as well or you’d get the same problem higher up the speed range. A better answer would be to either bolster the engine’s torque down low (continuously variable valve timing on both cams would probably help) or make the car a bit lighter, which is in fact that Mazda did.
Wow looking at that add I’m amazed that Hot Rod did new car tests back in those days of anything other than a domestic.
Although as a current subscriber they had the guts to say that Nissan IDX concept reminded them of the great Japanese sports cars of days gone by and that “was a good thing.”
The one Toyota that I considered buying was a 78 Corolla Liftback with the SR5 package, which Dave did a CC on a few months ago.
The one fly with the trans was engaging reverse required pulling the lever up to get around the lockout. With reverse on the lower right, that would be easy in a JDM Corolla, but a really awkward angle in a left hand drive model. My 85 Mazda GLC and 98 Civic had reverse in the same location, but no lockout.
I figure, if you *must* have a lockout on reverse, do it the way Chevy does in the sport option Cruze, with a collar on the lever you pull up with your finger tips as you row the lever.
The lack of headroom in the Corolla was the other deal killer. I haven’t looked seriously at a Toyota since then.
I preferred the method that Ford used on the lock out on their 70’s era 4spds push down on the lever, easier than the collar or pulling up on the lever.
Ford kept that system on european Escorts of the 80’s.
My father had one with a 5 speed. But he didn’t know it had that lock. So he kept ranting about the gearbox and how it was difficult to catch”reverse” during the 6 years he had the car…
I figured it out after he sold the car when I drove a 2nd-gen VW Polo which had exactly the same kind of lock.
My father had one with a 5 speed. But he didn’t know it had that lock. So he kept ranting about the gearbox and how it was difficult to catch”reverse” during the 6 years he had the car…
Gee, Europeans are as loath to read the instruction book as Americans are? 40 years ago, it was little more than a pamphlet, 40-50 pages, vs the 300 odd pages for my new Jetta.
Maybe he got the car secondhand and it didn’t have the manual. When I got my Prelude years ago, the previous owner didn’t have the owner’s manual (I don’t remember what he said happened to it) and I never got around to getting another, so there were a couple of things I either had to figure out the hard way or never figured out (like the manual seat memory device).
When I got my Prelude years ago, the previous owner didn’t have the owner’s manual
As much as some of us hate going near a dealership, they do generally have that information. A former coworker of mine bought a second hand Accord. No manual. He went over to the dealer and asked how to adjust the steering column. The service writer showed him how it worked and he was on his way in about 3 minutes. He had another question, so called Honda owner relations. Got the answer, and also discovered his car had been repainted as the guy in OR told him what the original color was.
When I needed a new rear wiper for my Ford Taurus X, and discovered it was a dealer only item, the dealer’s parts guy bent way over backward to knock a couple dollars off the exhorbitant price of the blade. He first asked if I worked for Ford (this dealer is across the street from a Ford plant). Nope. He asked if anyone in my family worked for Ford. Nope. He asked if anyone in my family had ever worked for Ford. I said “well, my mom and dad worked at the Rouge in 48” He said “good enough!” and gave me the A plan employee discount.
Have a question? Ask the dealer. The worse that can happen is he tells you to fly a kite, so you go to the next dealer, or call owner relations.
Another way to get a manual is to find one in the glovebox at a wrecking yard. Been there, done that.
Oh no, my father bought it new and had the manual. But he never had the idea that the thing was normal. He didn’t like the car and had some actual mechanical issues woth it. So I guess he figured the difficulty to put it in reverse was part of the package…
And at the time, I wasn’t old enough to drive. So I had no idea what was actually wrong with that gearbox.
I preferred the method that Ford used on the lock out on their 70′s era 4spds push down on the lever, easier than the collar or pulling up on the lever.
In a VW, you push down on the shifter to get past the lockout, which is at an easier angle for left hand drive, with reverse at upper left. Tried it in a Golf. For whatever reason, my forearm doesn’t like doing two things at once. I liked the Cruze a lot better.
All academic as all the Jetta wagons that were in stock were automatics anyway, so, after 34 years, I’m shiftless again.
Dan, by 1974 Hot Rod was VANtastic…the good times of 6-second 0-60 times weren’t just OVER, the young ‘uns of that day were more concerned about upgrading the stereo and getting some MPGs. Or making love in their shag-carpeted Chevy Van. There was still some hot rod culture but it was no longer a given. Now we had skyrocketing gas prices, skyrocketing insurance for performance cars and a first-time-ever dread of destroying the planet with pollution.
Against that crappy backdrop…flogging a Corolla actually made a modicum of sense. LOL
And now…the entire 1970’s summed up in 2:59…
I never shoulda played this. Now it’ll be in my head for the rest of the weekend…
I badly wanted to buy that very shift knob, and the Corolla it came with, as my first new car. But WWII-veteran Dad was kicking in the down payment, and he would not buy a Japanese car. (OK with German and Italian, just not Japanese, go figure.) I grudgingly agreed on a two liter Pinto coupe instead. It was fine until it started falling and rusting apart.
My next car was a ’77 Civic CVCC 5-speed in red. Joy! Later on my ’86 Celica GT. More joy! Now my fun project car is the ’93 Miata. Joy forever! Having driven many 5-speeds since I completely agree, this is the right box and the right pattern for any small car.
The first 5-speed I ever saw was in a late-60s Fiat 124 Spyder. Dad very nearly traded his 850 Spyder for one, I was broken hearted when he didn’t.
The standard H pattern with dogleg 5th seems universal now I have 2 in my driveway, one From Citroen one from Nissan same shift pattern as my Hillman.
That would not be a dogleg shift pattern, a dogleg pattern is when 2 gears that are in sequence are placed side by side like the picture above noted as “Ford’s 5sp pattern”
Tharts a hook box or round the corner I drove a V8 Hino with a roadranger that pattern a dogleg shift falls outside the main pattern not inside.
Being from Europe, I learned to drive only manual. Mostly 5-speed, but the last car I bought was a 6-speed – a VW Golf Mk V TDI where I specifically wanted the 6-speed manual instead of the usual 5-speed. I thought the 6-speed was great and loved driving it. But for years, I have wanted to drive an automatic, but the price kept me away from it.
4 years ago, my wife and I bought a VW Touran (a compact minivan) with turbocharged gasoline engine and DSG, so I could finally experience automatic transmission – and what a revelation it was! Absolutely brilliant. A year ago, I decided our household no longer needs a second car, so I sold my Golf. I have only been driving automatic since – except for one week this January when the car was being serviced and we got a replacement car in the meantime. It was a manual with a diesel engine and I discovered I now hate manuals (I also discovered I can easily live without the noise and vibration of 4-cylinder diesels and that I absolutely loathe start&stop systems).
I never again want to own another car with manual transmission.
Manual transmissions are indeed obsolete.
Sacrilege!
Five speeds forever!
Five speeds forever, automatics never!
Good illustration of this in a reality show on TV the other night. Teams were renovating a house. The show’s producers supplied them with utes for the fetch and carry work – but didn’t take into account that maybe some people can’t drive manuals. Oops! Producers actually dared to make fun of them too…..
Second episode saw the two girls who couldn’t drive a stick provided with automatic sedans.
However many forward gears there are doesn’t matter to me as much as whether they’re full synchromesh gears.
Now that’s something we take for granted these days.
I learnt to drive in an all-synchro 3 speed ’69 Falcon, and got used to first gear for low speed corners. Only three gears there, so you use them all. Makes sense.
Fast forward to driving Dad’s no-synchro-on-first ’67 Falcon. I go for first and – oops! What’s that awful grinding noise? I soon learnt why Dad only used first for starting off, and slipped/rode the clutch in second for slow corners! Bad technique, I know – but he learnt to drive in a Model T!
I agree. Whenever I read about manual transmissions today having 6 spd, 7 spd, or even 8 spd., I have to wonder do cars *really* need transmissions with that many gear ratios? Isn’t 5 plenty? My first cars had 5 spd manual transmission, and they suited me fine.
My grandson just brought home a four door dodge pickup. It has maybe an 8 speed and he could have opted for a 12. Probably got the number of gears wrong because I didn’t care. What he said was that he would be shifting at about 3-3.5krpm and that the extra speeds would drag the rpm shift points down to about 2-2.5krpm. They were ZF{(?) units.
Since he lives near the freeway in a small town he didn’t figure that was much help since freeway speeds are either at almost stalled or at overdrive. Seems to be the same sort of difference as between my old glide and a TH350. Where do you do your driving.
Another son has a 5yo (approx) dodge with cummins diesel. He says the narrow power band in it just screamed for an automatic when he test drove the manual. Couldnt get through an intersection without shifting once or twice. YMMV
Krpm? What’s the K stand for?
The Toyota 5 speed was a very slick unit, and it was a pleasure to use. I don’t know how many were made in the early ’70s but it was always the first thing to go at wrecking yards any time an SR-5 showed up. Even though I cut my teeth on 4 speeds with Hurst shifters, I always wanted a 2T-C Corolla with a 5 speed like a high school buddy had. It was a blast to drive and tough as nails.
I agree with those that think 5 speeds is the “right” number. But each to their own.
Nice article on a subject that is interesting to me. I worked for VW starting in 74 as the Dasher and Rabbit were just coming out, I always wondered when VW was going to get their act together and offer 5 speeds when the Japanese had them for years. I knew it was European cars in general, not just VW. I guess the suppliers were just slow to react. A lot of sales were lost because of 5 speeds being rare before 1980. I had a 77 Rabbit 4 speed, when the engine blew up trying to race a GTI that had 4 people in it, (it was close, but when I decided to back off at 105, when I hit the gas a 60 a “death rattle’ told me I blew it). Made it 40 mile to home, under 35 MPH in 4th the engine didn’t rattle at all. No tach in that car. The GTI came with a close ratio 5 speed that was direct in 5th and a lot of people didn’t like the way it wound out on the freeway. Some would put the ‘overdrive’ fifth gear in, but then there was a big gap between it and 4th. Went from a 3 to 4 speed in my truck, it was great for towing but still wound out with the 3.73 rear end on the freeway. Overdrive like Paul put on his ford or a 5 speed would have been great. I have heard that many feel 6 speeds are not worth the trouble, and the comments here seem to also reflect this. Recently bought a base 96 Tercel that has 4 speed, if you try to go for 5th the lever moves to the position and then you can feel the stop in there that blocks the shifter. Must be the same linkage parts, I know a 5 speed is an easy bolt in. When my niece test drove it before she bought it I said, isn’t this nice, now you don’t have to shift so much.
I replaced the ’77’s Rabbit engine with a factory long block, lucky for me VW was selling obsolete stock engines cheap in 1986, I believe I paid $400 for it back then, a mechanic at the dealership had a rebuilt wide ratio 5 speed he sold me for $200, what a difference in highway MPG with the extra gear, and so much quieter as well. Shame it got totaled about 30k miles later.
A couple of my favorite cars from the era, the ’78 VW Scirocco and Datsun 280Z, had optional 5-speeds. That seemed to be the transition year… 77MY 4-speed only, 78MY OPT 5-speed, 79MY STD 5-speed. As used cars the 5-speeds were A LOT more desirable and expensive. The Z may have had an optional 5-speed as early as ’77.
Enjoyed the article Dave thanks.
With a lot of these things, there was a big gap between when a particular item was available elsewhere and when (or if) it was offered here. The Z, for instance, was available with a five-speed in Japan from very early on.
How are 6-speeds?
Becoming pretty much the norm for manual transmissions. A few months ago I drove a new Toyota Avensis (Toyota’s largest Euro-model) with a 1.8 liter gasoline engine and a 6 speed manual. Just for a few hours because my own car was in for service.
A small green arrow told me to upshift when it already was in 5th gear. That’s the first time I noticed it had a 6 speed. Ideal for highway cruising. Back to 4 though to get some real power again when needed.
Some addenda here:
Toyota’s first five-speed gearbox was in 1967 on the 2000GT. That was a close-ratio box in the Italian mode: There’s a big gap between first and second, but then second through fifth are all really close together. Your axle ratio choices with that gearbox were 4.11, 4.38, and 4.63.
About three months after the 2000GT was introduced, Toyota brought out the 1600GT, an T50 Corona hardtop with a DOHC version of the 1.6-liter R-series four. The 1600GT came standard with a four-speed, but you could also order the same five-speed box as the 2000GT. (Same ratios, same axle choices.) It was a very successful sedan racer in that form.
In Japan, the Corona, Mark II, Celica, and Carina all offered offered five-speed gearboxes before the Corolla did. (In fact, I don’t think any of Toyota’s twin-cam fours was offered with automatic until the ’80s.)
In the home market, a five-speed was optional on both the Celica and Carina from the start in late 1970 and was standard on the Celica 1600GT, which had the twin-cam 2T-G engine not sold here. That was the wide-ratio box, which had the same ratios as the four-speed, but added the 0.861 fifth; it was usually paired with a shorter 4.11 or occasionally 4.30 axle ratio.
When Toyota started putting the T-series engine from the Carina and Celica in the E20 Corolla/Sprinter line, they used the Carina/Celica transmissions as well, so the five-speed became available on the E20 Corolla and Sprinter in 1971, albeit initially only on the dual-carb 1400. (The 2T wasn’t available until a while later in Japan.)
The North American Corolla SR-5 was basically a U.S. version of the new Corolla Levin (the green coupe of which you have a photo there is a Levin), which in Japan was a Corolla coupe with most of the running gear from the Celica 1600GT, including the five-speed and the 2T-G twin-cam engine. The Levin was hot stuff for the time: standing quarter mile in the low 16s, a top speed of 118 mph. The U.S. car was a lot slower because Toyota never federalized the 2T-G. (They probably could have with the later injected version, so I’m not entirely sure why they didn’t.)
I had a 72 MK2 Corona hardtop 2,2L with 5speed in it I pulled the whole lot to use on my 5M sedan, never bothered swapping it over and gave the kit to the kid who bought the car he seemed to think it could go faster with a 5 speed
I am curious, are more gears really necessary? My stepdad’s Toyota pickup truck had a 5-spd manual shifting transmission, and it got around 25-30 mpgs, depending on the load it was carrying. I’m just wondering whether it would’ve made a difference whether it had a 5 spd or a 4 spd transmission.
I’ve upgraded my ’74 Mustang to a five speed with an overdrive final gear. The overdrive drops the highway RPMs by about 1,200 (justification for the change in itself), but the highway fuel economy also increased about 20%.
I hoped for a greater increase since I also upgraded to fuel injection, but at 60 MPH the engine doesn’t care much how the fuel gets delivered. It still needs enough to keep the wheels turning. Fuel injection provides better economy in city driving where it can shut down fuel delivery while decelerating. On the highway fuel flow is determined by load, limiting opportunities for fuel system efficiencies. In contrast, an overdrive reduces parasitic engine drag, benefiting the car at highway speeds.
Broadly speaking, a lot depends on the engine and the actual gearing. An engine that has a lot of torque over a large rev range doesn’t really need more gears except as a fuel-saving measure. If the engine’s useful power band is narrow, then more gears can make a meaningful difference in performance as long as they’re spaced in a way that suits the engine’s power curve.
I don’t have specs for Toyota trucks, but with most of Toyota’s ’70s cars, with any given engine, the four- and five-speed transmissions had the same internal ratios except that the five-speed had the overdrive fifth. On the cars, the five-speed usually came with a lower (higher numerical) axle ratio as well.
If the trucks just added the overdrive fifth and used the same axle ratio, the only difference would be that the four-speed trucks would be running at higher engine speeds on the highway, which would probably cost you some mileage. If the four-speeds had a higher (lower numerical) axle ratio, you’d sacrifice some acceleration and torque multiplication around town and the engine might still be running at higher speeds on the highway.
Good answer. A friend had a ’70 Toyota Crown which came with a 2 litre six and a 3-speed with bolt-on overdrive unit like the British used to use. I think he said it was set up so you could use OD in second or third (this is going back twenty-something years – memory’s going rusty). Anyway, he swapped in a later 2.3 six with a 4 speed (direct top), but kept the diff from the overdrive setup. He found he had fantastic acceleration around town, but a lot of engine noise (& revs) at highway speed. Not ideal.
Ah! Ok. That makes sense. My dad’s 1978 Toyota truck had a 2.2 litre 20R engine and a five speed manual shifting transmission.
Just to make us stickshift fans sad… for 2014, only 4 Toyotas in the US can be had with a manual transmission. For 2015, the FJ Cruiser is dead, leaving only Yaris, Corolla, and Tacoma.
Or visit the Scion store, where 75% of the models still can be had with a manual. Which is also only 3 vehicles.
My first 5 speed was in my ’95 Wrangler Rio Grande. It had the 2.5 engine and the Aisin-Warner AX-5. It was fine right until 90K miles when it grenaded. When it was being replaced, they had an AX-15 from a 4.0L model right next to it…about 3 times the size. The AX-5 would be fine for a small rwd car or a 2wd mini truck but WHY they ever put that underbuilt POS in a Jeep Ill never know. If you max out your options with Mopar products, you generally get good stuff. I remember those T-5 and T-4 trannys in mid 80s Jeep CJs. They were common on GM minitrucks with those little 2.8 V6 engines. No torque so theyd live just fine, but the 258 AMC 6 would twist these right into junk. Both of my 258 CJs had the Tremec 176 4spd. MUCH stronger, these were put behind the 304 and will live behind a mild V8. Still nowhere near as good as the T-18 ‘granny gear’ trannys available in the 70s. Those would soak up torque like a beast!
My turbo PT cruiser had a 5-spd Gertrag transaxle that was used on the Euro-spec diesel PTs. Reverse was up at the top left, as its a similar design to whats used in VW/Audis. PTs with the n/a engine got a borg-warner manual that’s ok I guess. That G288 piece is known for being impervious to torque. The placement of reverse was weird, and I was afraid of hitting it when going into first, but you have to manhandle the shifter to get it there.
Great piece! This is from when the Corolla actually had a soul and personality. These may have been food for rust mites, but they had style and a fun to drive factor. Screw any corolla after about 1990. No coupe = no sale.
I remember that one of the reasons I bought a Nissan pickup in 1985 was that the Nissan came standard with a 5 speed and the Toyotas still came standard with 4 speeds. I was buying the standard version so getting a 5 speed sealed the deal for me. Also back in 1985, the Nissan had a double wall bed and the Toyota didn’t. It was a slick shifting unit for a truck. Wish I still had it. I still drive a 5 speed. Only now it’s a craptastic Suzuki, that has been trouble free knock on wood.
Have had 5 spd ’76 Corolla and ’87 Jetta GLI and currently a ’07 6spd Saab 9-3. I think 6 speeds is just right. The Jetta revved too high on the highway, 3000 rpm at 60 mph. I remember wishing for another gear. I don’t think the Corolla revved as high, but there was more downshifting on upgrades. Ratios and spacing on Saab are just right. Occasionally will shift 3rd to 6th when merging into a highway. Turn about 2200 at 60mph.
A five speed was a must when I bought my first car and I still have one. I expeact to put one in my Mk1 Escort too, to replace the 4 speed.
Fewer gears means wider spacing between ratios than ideal and usually a lower top gear ratio. The benefit of more gears decreases as the number increases, eg is 10 really worthwhile over 9? Not in a car at least. Taking things to extremes I remember my uncle didn’t take the option for 72 speeds (in forward and reverse!) as he thought 36 would be enough.
When I saw this article first I wondered if it was going to be about the popularity of transplanting Toyota five speeds into other cars. A couple of guys I know have done that in the last year.
Great article, I had no idea Toyota had been at this for so long. Part of the reason why they became numero uno. We had an ’80 Corolla station wagon back in the day, with that 5-speed transmission. Can’t say I really adored it though. Awful handling, hearing aid beige and no A/C.
One thing: you forget Citroen’s 5-speed gearbox, which was available on the DS (and therefore was a column shift 5-speed, another oddball Citroen thing) and the SM from 1970.
I recently had a chance to drive the new Porsche 911 with a 7 speed manual gearbox and… I love it. In town you use first, second and fourth most of the time, but the seventh gear is perfect for 100 mph + cruising.
Would I buy it though? No… The automatic in the 991 is far too good to be left on the options list. But if I decided to buy a used 991 – it wouldn’t put me off.
Check the review: http://www.pistonheads.com/porsche/default.asp?storyId=25245
I’ve never been a fan of “overdrive”. I’ve always thought a better way to do it was a lower first gear, a 1:1 high gear, and a tall gear in the differential.
I can’t believe that there was no mention of the Toyota 2000 GT from the late 60’s. That had a 5-speed manual, which was extremely ahead of its time, and was also sold in the USA.
The article is about the democratization of the five speed manual- It’s arrival in the mainstream sedan.
While the 2000 GT was a fantastic vehicle, no one will mistake it for Toyota’s bread and butter offerings,
Can someone please tell me which 5 speed REAR WHEEL DRIVE standard transmission will work on a 1984 Toyota Camry 2.0L DIESEL, FRONT WHEEL DRIVE car?
I was told that a 1984 Toyota Camry 2.0L FWD Diesel engine fits a van that I need to work on, but I forgot which year Toyota 5 speed STD RWD trans fits it.
Appreciate your info,
thanks, Fer
None. Rear wheel drive transmissions are drastically different in terms of their cases and configuration than front wheel drive transmissions.
It’s possible that those two engines are mostly the same, but the transmissions certainly will not be.
If I had to guess, the same transmission was used on your Camry regardless if it was a diesel or gas engine. But I’m not certain.
Love 5spds too. I used to have a 1977 SR-5 p/u. It was a joy to drive. I currently have a 1978 Toyota Corolla wagon with a disappointing 4spd. I have a few questions for Dave or whoever. Can I upgrade this to a 5spd without replacing the whole transmission? And can a 5spd even go in this model? If so, where can I buy 5spd Toyota transmissions and which years are interchangeable? Thanks for any help folks.
Neal-
If you have the 3TC (1800 cc) motor in your ’78 Corolla, upgrading to a 5-speed only requires a few additional internal components in the transmission. While that sounds simple, you do have to remove and completely disassemble the transmission to install the parts.
Furthermore, given the age of the car, you can’t just order new gears at the Toyota dealership. A nationwide search using car-part.com found a dozen or so complete transmissions (for as little as $200). If I was making the change out, I’d get one used and just swap it in.
However, I suspect you have the 1200 cc 3KC motor, since most 4 speeds used the smaller motor. It uses a completely different transmission, and I’m not familiar with the internal construction.
Using the used part locator, I don’t see any 3KC 5-speeds, but there are two Toyota Starlet transmissions available. The locator does not indicate if they are four or five speed transmissions, but they may bolt in.
Missed this first time around, I think, so thanks for re-posting. My first 5 speed was my ‘75 Alfetta, then back to an awkwardly widely spaced 4 speed with my Fiesta, then on to a lovely 5 speed in my ‘82 Civic DX. I’ve never owned a 6 speed manual car, though I’ve driven a few … our Golf VII has the base 5 speed which is just fine with the torquey 1.8T. However, I’ve had many 6 speed bikes, starting with my ‘75 Honda 400F. And I sometimes think I should have bought a 6MT Tacoma rather the the 6AT I have.
Ford must have had the confusion over shift patterns sorted out by 1988, because if I recall correctly, my Turbo-Coupe Thunderbird of that model year had the preferred “Double-H” pattern shown on the shift knob at the top of the article.
Yes- Sorted out as in replaced by an entirely different 5 speed. The double-H pattern arrived when Ford switched over from their home grown solution to the Borg-Warner T-5 in ’83.
Missed this one the first time too.
When I was struggling with my Triumph TR4 restoration there was a kit being sold that would adapt a 5-speed Toyota transmission.
I was actually considering buying it. Glad now that I didn’t, that would have been more good money after bad.
I missed this one the first time round, three. Toyota’s 5-speed boxes are popular as aftermarket swaps, too; there’s an Australian outfit who provide eyebrow-raisers like this, this, and this, among many others.
It’s hard to believe there’s enough Ford FEs out there to justify developing a dedicated bell housing, but it’s right there for the viewing.
I’m thinking I should move down to Australia- Not only are there all sorts of off beat vehicles plying the roads, it also appears “anything goes” when it comes to engine swaps.
Very informative, thanks for reposting this article.
It’s no wonder how Toyota surpassed GM to became the world’s largest (some years in the top five) automobile company. It’s sort of amazing that Toyota retained the Corolla name since 1966, with a vast array of different Corolla models.
I wanted to buy a friend’s 1973 Corolla with an automatic that somehow ended up with my older brother when I moved to Chicago. In the early ‘90’s I mastered driving (and stopping) with a 5 speed on Seattle’s steep hills in a 5th gen Toyota pickup. When I was back in Chicago in the mid ‘90’s I had a great driving experience with a throughly rusted out 5 speed ‘86 Corolla FX16 hatchback.
Toyota and other Japanese car companies really know how to make a great automobile.
Great article, thanks!
I also missed the first time around.
I didn’t realize Toyota was such leader…but I should have.
As I started becoming more knowledgeable about cars, as a kid in the late 1970s (who had just moved to the US), I though the Japanese in general had adopted the 5-speed, because they offered more value. How hard was an extra cog? Also, all the up-level Japanese cars had 5 speeds, including Datsun, Mazda, Honda, Mitsubishi (Colt/Arrow), and Subaru in the late 1970s. Isuzu eventually (the Buick Opel was 4-speed only)
GM offered it on the…Vega and variants (in 1976, I think you could get a 3-spd manual, a 4-spd, and a 5-spd in the Vega).
Good for Toyota! And good for the consumer.
Toyota, conservative, but clever. If my memory serves me correctly, the original US-Market Toyota Camry (82? 83? or 84?) was the first mass-market front-drive car with a FOUR-speed automatic. Very clever way to really ONE-UP your competitors.
Also, Toyota led the way with 16-valve 4-cylinders. First again for a mass market car. Corolla GT-S. MR2. And then, the 2nd gen Camry base engine…a 16-valve four.
My first 5-speed was a 86 VW GTI. Close-ratio gears, I learned to appreciate gearing that ‘matches’ the car’s weight and engine. I’ve driven several ‘good matches’. BMW 318is. Ford Probe GT (smoooooooth V6). Chevy Cobalt SS supercharged. The gearing ratios contributed, together with good clutch and decent linkage, to the fun to drive factor
The other extreme was a 2017 Chevy Cruze I test drove. The ratios are so far apart, it’s like a domestic 1972 3-speed all over again….albeit with a nice shift linkage. 2nd too many revs, 3rd not enough for the engine. No way I would buy one.
Thank you for that. I grew up with a lot of prejudice against Japanese cars (this was the 80s). These days I see how charming and often technically interesting these vehicles are. The five-speed story is another insight to add to my knowledge.
Super work.
In 1969 Austin Maxi came with a 5-speed gearbox.
Replaced the 4 speed in my old gas engined ’77 Rabbit with a wide ratio 5 speed, increased my hwy MPG and the low RPM’s really quieted it down as well. Big improvement. Missed this the first time, great article.
Never realized the significance of the Toyota 5-speed. I purchased an ‘83 Toyota Hi-Lux 3/4 ton in 1986 equipped with the 22R engine and a 5-speed, to replace my ‘80 F-150 propelled by a 300-6 with a 3-speed. The Ford reportedly came originally with the 3-speed w/overdrive as described in the article, but as I recall those transmissions were problematic in most Ford trucks.
The Toyota really did drive sweet, smooth, and easy, compared to most other manual trannies I had experienced. I wouldn’t recommend trying this at home, but one night while drunk (the only way this could’ve happened) I was traveling though a neighborhood at about 50 or 60mph in 4th or 5th gear on wet roads on a slight downhill slope. As I passed a side street, a bug up my butt decided I should dump the clutch, slam it into reverse, and then floor it…without braking and while still traveling forward. The tire squeal of spinning in reverse while still moving forward must’ve woke the entire block. The truck came to a gradual stop, started to move backward (tires still screaming for mercy) until I reached the side street, then slammed it in 1st and made a screaming right hand turn. All in the space of about 100 feet. The transmission never protested nor suffered any damage. I can only imagine how many pieces the Ford 3-speed would have broken into had I tried that with the F-150.
Way back in 1990 I helped a neighbor move some stuff with his 80s-something Toyota pickup. I remember seeing 30,000 miles on the odometer. I made a couple of runs driving it and enjoying the five-speed, thinking how it was a bit more fun than my ’90 S10, which by coincidence also had 30,000 miles. (We had swapped trucks for awhile) When we were done I told him it was a nice truck, and I mentioned the mileage coincidence. He pointed out that his actually was 130,000 miles, as I hadn’t looked at it correctly.
Wow, Toyota, I thought. I really couldn’t tell as it felt new. I went and traded the S10 for a Corolla SR5 later that week.
(With an auto. I was tired of shifting anyway)
Always baffled me why it took the manufacturers so long to put more gears in the transmission. Crappy acceleration or engines reving to high at cruise speed. My 2012 Boss 302 has a rally nice 6spd trans. 5 close gears and overdrive in 6th. My F150 has a 10 spd auto and its fabulous, especially towing, close gear splits makes pulling hills a breeze.
the lancia fulvia was the first production car to have a 5 speed gearbox
Interesting article; however, it leaves out the TRUE originators of the modern 5-speed – Fiat and Alfa Romeo. Contrary to the comment above about the Alfa not using 5th gear as an overdrive, yes, the majority were overdrives.
Gear ratios for Alfa Romeo 1600 / 1750 / 2000 models:
1 – 1:3.304
2 – 1:1.988
3 – 1:1.355
4 – 1:1
5 – 1:0.791*
*Some cars used a 0.860 5th gear. Now, there may be a model or two that didn’t have an OD 5th-gear, but that is rare.
Some may argue that the Alfas were not inexpensive cars. Still, they did have a significant influence on what was expected from a modern sports car.
Fiat genuinely introduced the 5-speed to mainstream car enthusiasts. Well before Toyota, Fiat offered a 5-speed transmission standard in certain 124 models from 1966. By 1969, all Fiat 124 sport series had 5-speeds as their only available gearbox. These modestly-priced cars were popular in the US and abroad, and that fact was not wasted on Toyota. The Celica was their version of the 124 Sport Coupe, the Fiat being considered the originator of the “super-coupe” concept, according to folks like Car&Driver.
Indeed, Toyota even copied the shift pattern from these 1960s Italians.
You’re leaving out the key element: final drive ratio. That’s ultimately what determines top gear engine speed. Yes, technically, the Alfa 5 speed has an overdrive 5th, but then every air cooled VW also has a top gear less than 1:1. But that doesn’t mean that it really functions as an overdrive, in the practical sense of the word, not the literal/technical.
The Alfa has a 4.56:1 rear axle ratio. That results in a total ratio of 3.92 or 3.606 in 5th, depending on which gearbox it has.
The 1974 Corona SR-5 had a 3.90:1 rear axle ratio. That results in a total 5th gear ratio of 3.23:1, which means its engine is revving considerably slower at cruising speed in 5th.
That is the functional benefit of a true “overdrive” transmission, where the engine speed is reduced to conserve fuel and engine wear.
Some “overdrive” transmission had a 1:1 ratio in top (overdrive) gear, but because of it being combined with a very low (numerical) axle ratio, it functioned like an overdrive.
The functional aspect of an overdrive was to reduce engine revolutions to save fuel and wear. That is not the primary purpose of an Alfa transmission’s gearing in 5th.
Much of the same applies to the Fiat, which also had a fairly high (numerical) rear axle ratio.
No one is denying that Alfa, Fiat, Porsche and others had 5 speed transmissions prior to Toyota. But Toyota revolutionized the field by offering them widely (and affordably) across their line, with the kind of gearing that was oriented to saving fuel, as a consequence of the 1973-1974 energy crisis.
Hi Paul,
The question is when you shift the Fiat or Alfa from direct drive 4th into 5th gear, do the RPMs drop? The answer is yes, they do because 5th is an overdrive. Just like on the Toyotas, the revs drop, and you get precisely the same benefits: quieter cruising, better gas mileage, lower engine speeds.
The fact that the Italian cars use lower final drives doesn’t change that fact. If anything, it makes the O/D 5th gear an even more attractive feature. Remember, these cars have high revving twin cam engines that make their power at high RPM. The low geared final drives keep the engine in its powerband.
The Fiat Twin Cam 1.4L, 1.6L and 1.8L final drive / overall 5th gear ratio:
4.30:1 / 3.78:1
Fiat 2.0L final drive / over all 5th gear ratio:
3.90:1 / 3.27:1
’74 Corolla SR-5 final drive / overall 5th gear ratio:
4.111:1 / 3.54:1
The O/D 5th gear helps the Fiat to cruise the autostrada at the company’s suggested 4/5ths its top speed.
I enjoyed the article and passion expressed, and don’t want to take away from the article’s point, but not mentioning Fiat’s contribution leaves a bit of a hole in the story for the readers. Years before Toyota, the Fiat 124 sport series allowed U.S. buyers to buy a car with a 5-speed (along with a twin-cam engine, 4-wheel disc brakes, etc., but that’s another story) for a modest price. These cars were priced considerably less than a Porsche or Alfa (although they were considered as good within “limits of sanity”*) or other premium European imports and were popular among enthusiasts.
1973 Fiat 124 Sport Coupe $3,498**
1973 Toyota Corolla SR5 $2,443**
1973 Porsche 911T $7,620**
1973 Toyota Celica ST (only 4-speed) $2,898**
1974 Toyota Celica GT w/5-speed $3,569***
True, the Fiat sports were more expensive than the economy-minded mass-market Toyotas, so I get the article’s premise. My point is not to overlook the considerable contributions Italian marques have made to the automotive world and for the average car buyer. I bet a lot of readers would be surprised.
*Car&Driver
**Consumer Reports ’73
***Hagerty
The question is when you shift the Fiat or Alfa from direct drive 4th into 5th gear, do the RPMs drop?
OMG, are you serious? Of course they do. Any time you shift up to a higher gear, rpm drops. Always, in every gear.
The fact that the Italian cars use lower final drives doesn’t change that fact. If anything, it makes the O/D 5th gear an even more attractive feature. Remember, these cars have high revving twin cam engines that make their power at high RPM. The low geared final drives keep the engine in its powerband.
That’s exactly my point. Keeping an engine in its optimum powerband is the opposite of overdrive, which is defined as a gear that keeps engine rpm too low for the car to achieve its maximum speed in that gear, for the sole purpose of saving fuel. That was never the purpose of Alfa’s 5th gear.
Does the Alfa reach its maximum speed in 4th gear or 5th gear? That is the key question here. If it achieves it in 5th gear, than it’s not an overdrive. If it achieves it in 4th gear, than it is an overdrive.
I just found a Road and Track review of an Alfa 2000 GTV (August 1972). here’s what they have to say about its gearing:
though 5th gear is technically an overdrive (meaning a less than 1:1 ratio) applied to the 4.56:1 final drive is in reality a normal top gear, giving 3600 rpm at 70 mph
Here’s the top speed R&T achieved in each gear at exactly 5800 rpm (factory red line):
1st: 27mph
2nd: 45mph
3rd: 66mph
4th: 89mph
5th: 110mph
There’s the proof of exactly what I’ve been trying to tell you. 5th is essentially the equivalent of a direct fourth gear on other cars. 4th gear on the Alfa peaks at 89mph at 5800 rpm. That’s not a gear you want to cruise in. It does mean the Alfa has more intermediate gears, which is of course useful for true sporty/racing driving.
You might want to read the definition of overdrive at Wikipedia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Overdrive_(mechanics)
Clearly, Toyota had a jump on the other imports. They were no longer the only low price car with a five speed option, but their product line provided the most five speeds, and the public was clearly warming to the technology.
The author repeatedly compares Toyota to its direct competition. Alfa Romeo was very much not a direct competitor. Nor was the Fiat twin Cam Sport/Spider. They were in a different league.
The author never once claims that Toyota was the first to sell cars with 5 speed transmissions; only in its low-price segment. The first 5 speed they offered was in a Corolla!
Yes, Alfa had 5 speed well before Toyota, as did Porsche, Ferrari, Maserati and other sports cars. But their 5th gears were not true overdrives.
I phrased my comment like that because it is obvious. I was making the point that if the transmission input shaft is turning less the output shaft, that is the definition of what transmission overdrive is. The Fiat and Toyota transmissions operate precisely the same.
The article you asked me to read states, “Use of the term is confused, as it is applied to several different, but related, meanings.”
By bringing up this overdrive definition of direct drive being the top speed gear, then none of the cars being discussed meet the standard of being a true overdrive. See below:
’75 Celica *
final drive / overall ratio
3.91:1 / 3.32:1
Top Speed
Gear / Speed / RPM
4th / 103 mph / 6000
5th / 104 mph / 5200
’75 Corolla SR5
final drive / overall ratio
4.30:1 / 3.70:1
Top Speed
Gear / Speed / RPM
4th / 95 mph / 6000
5th / 98 mph / 5400
’74 Fiat 124 Sport Coupe
final drive / overall ratio
4.30:1 / 3.78:1
Top Speed
Gear / Speed / RPM
4th / 102 mph / 6500
5th / 107 mph / 5900
The Toyota and Fiat gearing is close to nearly identical. All these cars eke out a few mph more in 5th gear.
Using the final drive / top speed argument would also disqualify Toyota from using the term “overdrive.”
I am using the term “overdrive” how most, including Toyota, use it, and I argue it is most applicable. What gear you achieve top speed in is irrelevant for the majority of consumers. The attributes of an overdrive’s lower engine speeds, better economy, quieter running are the meaning that most fits the context.
Also, obviously, Alfa Romeo is not in the same class as a Toyota. I mentioned Alfa Romeo because they were an early adopter of 5-speeds, the 5th gear ratio is an overdrive (less than 1:1), plus has used that shift pattern for more than a decade before Toyota. I felt it would be informative in case someone misunderstood Toyota came up with that pattern.
Finally, this is from the story and the main reason I posted in the first place.
“Up until 1972, five speed gear boxes only arrived in the US mounted in European exotics with peaky small displacement engines”
The Fiat 124 Coupe is not an exotic car (although it may appear to be to people used to American or Japanese vehicles). While it is priced more than a Corolla and not in the same class, it is about the USA’s average car’s cost at the time and not premium priced car. The Fiat 124 sport series all had 5-speeds as their only transmissions starting in 1969. As such, they were among the first affordable cars available in the US with 5-speeds.
As I said, I agree with the premise of the article saying that the low priced, mass-market Corolla introduced many to the 5-speed. Still, the statement above about “…five speed gear boxes only arrived in the US mounted in European exotics…” is likely an oversight, but is also misleading. It leaves out Fiat’s contribution.
I posted in the spirit to add a little more to the story and contribute to the reader’s knowledge. I believe everything I have written is accurate, and don’t see where I am going wrong.
*Road & Track
overdrive in American English
(ˈoʊvərˌdraɪv )
noun
1. a gear that at a certain speed automatically reduces an engine’s power output without reducing its driving speed: used to lessen fuel consumption and engine wear
overdrive in British English
noun (ˈəʊvəˌdraɪv )
1. a very high gear in a motor vehicle used at high speeds to reduce wear and save fuel
“Overdrive” and “indirect gearing” are not one and the same. Tens of millions of VW Beetles and other air-cooled VWs have an indirect fourth gear (0.82; 0.89; or 0.93), yet no one would ever suggest that these cars have “overdrive”.
Yes, the examples you showed do suggest that these cars could achieve top speed in either 4th or 5th gear, but clearly 5th gear is designed to be a genuine overdrive, reducing engine rpm at higher speeds.
And very clearly, that is not the case with the Alfa Romeo, which could only do 89 mph in 4th gears. The Alfa 5th gear is absolutely not an overdrive gear. That applies to early Porsche 5 speeds, and other Italian exotics. As I said, historically 5 speed transmission in sporty cars were designed for one purpose only: to allow more intermediate gears for racing/sporty driving. Saving fuel was absolutely not a consideration.
Yes, the author did not give quite as much credit to Alfa and Fiat’s 5 speed transmissions. Does that satisfy you?
I’m going to end this conversation now, as I’ve more than adequately explained it. I don’t know why you feel such a great need to debate this any further.
My brand new 1985 sr5 toyota 5sp was purchased from Longo Toyota around September 1975.
After about 30,000 in 1978 transmission failure occurs.
With help from a friend we pull the trans out. Drain the oil which included pieces of metal.
I then took the trans to Longo talk w a mechanic there and was told a 5 bearing in the overdrive side of shaft came apart then mention a 6 bearing is the new replacement fix by Toyota.
Purchased the bearing, mechanic replaced w new 6 bearing, went home and we installed it.
Later that day, started it up, test drove, all fixed!