American car makers really dragged their feet with the development of fully-synchronized manual transmissions. VW got its first gear synchronized back in 1961 and most other European cars did too by around this time. But Americans were still grinding gears on some new cars through 1972 and light trucks all the way through 1976 if they tried to shift down into first without coming to a complete stop, unless they had mastered the intricacies of double clutching. But even that technique didn’t always guarantee a silent shift into first.
Let’s see who the leaders and laggards of first gear synchromesh were:
Ford was the leader, at least with big cars and trucks. In 1964, their new “toploader” 3.03 three-speed was fully synchronized, a companion to the new four-speed version of the same basic unit. It was long overdue, as driving conditions and expectations had changed significantly from the 1930s and ’40s, when traffic was slower, less crowded, and stopping fully to shift down was just part of the routine. As this ad shows, Ford made a bit of hay out their new three speed box, although I don’t really get the “3½-speed” thing.
But as the ad further up makes clear, the 3.03 three-speed was only used on the large Ford six and eight, and the V8 versions of the Fairlane, Falcon and Mustang.
That made the Mustang six with its standard three-speed, a quite common combination, anything but genuinely sporty. In 1967, the Mustang six finally got the fully-synchronized three speed, along with the Falcon and Fairlane sixes.
In reality, it should have been the other way around, with the sixes getting a fully synchronized box first, ideally starting right in 1960 with the Falcon and its new smaller three-speed transmission, as the little Ford sixes were always meager on torque and power. But the Big Three really pinched the pennies with their new 1960 compacts, and none of them got a synchronized first gear.
Synchronized first gears came to GM cars in 1966, and apparently completely across the board. Everything from the Corvair to Buick to Corvette. But GM light trucks had to wait until 1968, at least some of them.
Now we come to the laggard. As progressive as Chrysler often was in their engineering, there was no first gear synchromesh on their all-new 1960 Valiant and its new A903 three speed manual, also used on the big six cylinder cars. And not only that, but the shifter was on the floor, from where it had migrated on essentially all American cars since the 1930s. Why? Since the optional push-button automatic didn’t require a column shifter, Chrysler saved money by not having a column with any shift capability.
This was also the case with the big C-Body Chrysler Corp. cars from 1961-1964, as in this ’61 Newport. The big cars with V8s used the New Process A745 from 1961 through 1970, also with a non-synchronized first gear.
The 1960 Corvair had a floor shifter too, but that was a bit more obvious with its rear engine and more overt sportiness. The Corvair was originally intended to come standard with Powerglide, but that was going to be too expensive. So a three-speed manual was added late in its development. A Road and Track test showed that the Powerglide equipped ’60 Corvair was actually slightly quicker 0-60 than the three-speed version. That’s actually not surprising, as the two-speed PG had better torque multiplication and was very efficient.
The Corvair’s three-speed was essentially the same “Synchro-Mesh” (non first gear syncro) as used in other Chevys. But the Chevy engineers were able to cobble up a fully-synchronized four speed out of the three-speed for 1961. Its gear ratios weren’t perfect, but it was a big improvement.
The Dart and Valiant did get column shifters for 1962, but unfortunately no synchromesh on first. And that went on for way too long, all the way through 1972. No wonder Dodge was offering a free automatic by then, as part of a package of other high-margin options.
I’m all too familiar with this transmission, as my father’s ’68 stripper Dart had that balky column-shifted A903 behind the little 170 inch slant six. I plumbed the very depths of what was possible from it on the back roads of Baltimore County. The transmission was that car’s weakest link: the 170 six was quite willing to rev, and the handling was essentially neutral, but that car really cried for a four speed. Well, that’s the case for all of the smaller sixes, at a bare minimum. The gap between second and third was way too large, something we covered here in more depth.
1973 finally brought a fully-synchronized three-speed to the passenger cars, but the Dodge pickups and vans extended the misery through 1976, no less, with the A250. Grinding gears in your cruising van was not at all groovy.
Not surprisingly, AMC was a bit late to the fully-synchronized ball too. The Borg Warner T15 and T16 were fully-synchronized three speeds, and adopted starting in 1968. But the old non-synchro first gear T96 was still used in the Gremlin and Hornet with the sixes through 1972. It would make a VW driver pretty unhappy to have to deal with that, but then I doubt there were many (any?) that switched to Gremlins. More likely a Toyota, with a slick-shifting 4 or 5 speed.
Note: this is a revised version of an older post, which can be seen here as well as all its comments
Related CC Reading
Automotive History: Two-Speed Automatics vs. Three-Speed Manuals – When 2 = 3, More Or Less by PN
1929 Cadillac/LaSalle Synchro-Mesh Transmission – “Shifting Is Made Simple And Clashing Of Gears Is Ended” by A. Severson
Automotive History: Which U.S. Cars Of The 1960s Most Often Had Manual Transmission? by A. Severson
Curbside Unicorn Hunt: 1970+ Full-Sized Cars With Manual Transmission, Part 1 – GM Edition by T. Halter
Curbside Unicorn Hunt: 1970+ Full-Sized Cars with Manual Transmission, Part 2 – Ford Edition y T. Halter
Curbside Unicorn Hunt: 1970+ Full-Sized Cars with Manual Transmission, Part 3 – Chrysler Edition by T. Halter
Auto-Biography: 1968 Dodge Dart 170 Two-Door Sedan – The Neurologist’s Car Of Choice by PN
I’ve drove 3 on the tree 3 speeds for many years, I’ve never found it necessary to downshift into first.
I’ve not driven a single 3 speed manual, synchronized or not. But I came here to say the same thing, basically. I’ve driven 5/6-speed manuals off and on my whole driving career, and next to never need to shift into first, except from a complete stop.
Realistically, do you ever come to just an almost complete stop at Stop signs on quiet suburban streets when there’s no cross traffic? I admit to that, and statistics show that a high percentage of drivers do. That’s when a synchronized first gear makes the key difference.
And there’s times in stop and go traffic where one would like to shift down into first at a walking pace when traffic picks up again.
I’m quite aware of this when I drive my ’66 F100 with a non-synchro first gear, but not when I drive my xB. I don’t think we realize that we may not always be at an absolute dead stop when we shift into first gear.
Interesting. I virtually never find a need to shift into first while still moving. Mostly, I have no problem doing whatever I need in 2nd, and truth be told, often start off from a dead stop in 2nd (this is easier in the BMW than the 50 year old Volvo, but I can still do it in the Volvo if so-desired). But usually, I’m in first at a light/stop sign when I fully stop and then proceed.
I can drive in 2nd at a walking pace if so necessary.
I’ve gotten ticketed (more than once!) for the “California Stop” (seriously), and I guess in my old age, that makes me fully stop even on suburban streets.
Maybe you’re forgetting a fairly important detail, that second gear in a 4, 5 or 6-speed box is significantly lower than it is in a 3-speed, whose 2nd gear straddles between 2nd and 3rd in a 4 or 5 speed. Yeah, I could start in second in my F100, but it does not feel right. But yes, in ,my xB, which is geared quite low all-round, it’s a lot easier and I do it quite often too. But this post is all about three speeds.
I just used first gear a whole lot on 680 NB this afternoon. Traffic crawls and I don’t like using my brakes if I can. So I am always using first and second in that I shift up and down depending on whether I am at a crawl or 10 mph. So synchro is a very big deal every commute day of the week. How else would my front pads last 200,000 miles. Of course, I am double clutching the whole time which is routine for me.
On city streets either I am at a full stop or almost and still shift into first. The car doesn’t particularly like trying to take off in 2nd between 0-5 mph as it causes the rpm to lug. Now, I have never driven a 3 speed or 4 speed in my life.
That’s fair.
This makes me like I’m not alone! I learned to drive on a 1960 Falcon wagon, three on the column in San Francisco- Daly City, California. I didn’t understand why my friends were driving to the mall and I was bucking around in a parking lot. Funniest thing my mother ever said, as we were rolling backward down a hill was” this isn’t an airplane, pulling on the steering wheel won’t help”! After that. I could drive anything!
My friends 1st car was a ’72 340 Demon w/ that 3 speed. Not for long, it got a new crossmember and a four-speed and a shorter drive shaft.
Drove a 63 impala 283- 3 speed on the column. Constantly double clutching especially when you had to down shift when making a right and left turn.
My Uncles early 70’s Fiat 128 had a ” crash box 1st” as we used to call it . Pretty sure my friends Dads 6 cyl 3 speed 1968 Chevy C-10 had non synchronized first gear.
If the first gear in that 128 was not synchronized it’s because it was worn out. It was absolutely fully synchronized when it left the factory.
Yup. That I know from experience as a young/learning driver on a 128…where I had no reason to assume that there was no sychro on first.
While i definitely appreciate the aliens who passed along the unexplainable wonders of synchromesh dogs, i really feel like non-synchro boxes are only a problem when its not just a non-synchro box, but when its part of a car or truck package probably called “give the poors a worse, harder to maintain and repair vehicle”. Combining non-synchro with a soggy, often fragile and suseptible to bending (or become unusable with saggy drivetrain mounts) column shift linkages is a decision up there with giving Kissinger the nobel peace prize.
But i have nursed more than my share of cars (triumph tr-6’s mostly) wirh glitterized throwout bearings, and old 4 speed racing boxes, and once you have a feel for the differential in revs between gears, or can apply a little pressure towards the next gear and recognize when the vibrations change, theyre pretty indistinguishable from synchro boxes. Until you stop at least haha.
FWIW, the GM BOP intermediates (Buick, Oldsmobile, Pontiac) used Ford 3.03 three speed fully syncronised transmissions. My first car was a 1964 Falcon with the 260 ci V8 and factory AC, 3 speed fully syncronised.
Were these non-syncro manual transmissions the source of the phrase, “If you can’t find ’em, grind ’em.”?
“grind me a pound” we used to drive one particular school bus driver crazy saying that. Early 70s Ford
Only 3-speed manual I ever owned was my 1937 Buick Special. Which was no different from the cars you’re describing here, other than the shifter still being on the floor. Given the performance and driving dynamics of that car, it never occurred to me that I’d want to shift into first while moving.
The newest I’ve driven with a non-syncho 1st was a 1972 International pickup. My ’71 C10 had the Saginaw “seven bolt” (number of bolts holding the side plate on) three speed vs four bolts on the older one. GM did not go top loader like Ford.
I didn’t think they went to synchro first until later than they apparently did. Having driven a bunch of them I must have caught the last ones, and multiples of them. And while always a fan of 3 pedal cars, I still drive a M/T BMW today, I at the same time hated those non synchro first ones. Maybe there was a cost factor, but I guessed it was the, “we do it this way because this is the way we’ve always done it” syndrome. And having lived in the mountains and on dirt roads I’ve had plenty of times when I wanted to go down to first. While floor is usually nicer, except if you have 3 in the front, I care less about where than if it’s synchronized or not.
While driving my ’46 Plymouth I find that there is never a need to shift into first while driving in normal traffic. Only when I I have to come to a complete stop, like at a stop sign. If I have to come to an abrupt slowdown to an almost stop, I’ll downshift into second and slip the clutch a bit to keep moving. The big fear for new drivers is stalling out in traffic or when starting off. On traffic signal controlled intersections, or on expressways, I have to decide if a complete stop will be needed as I approach the intersection. Many times I’ll come to a complete stop quite far back from the car ahead of me if I’m in a line of vehicles slowing for an existing red light, then downshift into first and move up. The engine can handle speeds as low as 30 mph. in third, and still accelerate acceptably. I find that I can drive as low as 10-15 in second gear when turning into parking lots. It’s pretty easy to downshift into second as needed, and I can start in second on level or slightly downhill streets, but I don’t want to be so hard on the clutch. The car really trundles along at very low speeds in first with the clutch fully disengaged. The engine and gearing is designed for that kind of driving, but you can’t hurry the shifting. I suppose that with a full load of passengers and luggage, first would be needed more. In situations where there are several stop signs close to each other in a row, I’ll just keep it in first and rev it up to 15 to 25 mph.
Paul is right, when a driver slows a modern car to a crawl at a stop sign and downshifts into first, the car isn’t at a complete stop during the gearshift. Paul’s old truck is just like a car from the 40’s, lots of low end torque and low gearing.
A fully synchronized three speed box is a great improvement. I guess that Ford felt that since an unsynchronized three speed had been standard before, the synchro first was an “extra,” therefore a half speed better. Driving my old car is a very involving process, it’s fun because of the novelty. I wouldn’t want to drive it as my only car, but back in the old days it was just like every other car.
I know exactly what you mean about new drivers. I thought I was doing pretty decent when taking out my father’s 72 911E on the flat freeways until I got off in San Francisco one day. I had to get back on the Bay Bridge at 1st and Harrison. If you know first it is uphill to Harrison with a light. Across Harrison is a Bay Bridge entrance. It is a very quite Sunday and I hit that stop light and couldn’t get the car shifted into first and moving before going backwards. Backwards meant all the way down a full block for three tries. Fourth time I crawled up the hill in 1st hoping to catch the light and I did. Finally! My pride somewhat damaged and I never drove a stick again till my 1980 Civic.
Cars back in the ’40s and earlier had quite low (high numerical) rear axle gearing, as that was important given the weaker engines of the time and the slower speeds. Starting in 2nd was fairly common back then. This changed in the 50s and 60s with higher highway speeds.
Cars that came with overdrive always had a lower (higher numerical) axle so that they could be normally started in second gear and then use 2/OD for most in-town driving without having to shift. That was the major point about overdrive initially.
My complaint was Detroit was soooo resistant to a 4 speed manual.
Every manual I’ve driven (both Asian & European) have been 4 or 5 speeds.
Yet, Detroit ran the clock out to the bitter end of time with a 3 speed manual.
Even the Vega came with 3 speed manual as standard in 1975.
https://www.auto-brochures.com/makes/Chevrolet/vega/Chevrolet_US-Vega_1975.pdf
As mentioned, older drivers mostly (?) learned to double clutch, I still do it at times .
Yes, I make a full. stop. wheels stationary . at every single red light and stop sign, even at 0-Dark:30 when there’s no one else around .
-Nate
I do now after getting pulled over for the first time in what seems like 97 years!
What do the officer accuse me of? A rolling stop. He didn’t ticket me (great driving record and all) but did give me a warning. So yup-a full stop going forward.
I haven’t driven a manual car in forever. Last time may have been in 1982 driving my dad’s 1977 Corolla SR5 hatch back.
I owned a 1953 Plymouth while in college. It did not have a synchronized first gear. It also did not have a whole lot of power — just 100 gross HP from it’s 218 cid I-6. Second gear topped out at just under 50 mph (the whole car topped out at a bit over 80 — if you had a very long stretch of road) and it wasn’t very peppy in Second at 10 or even 20 mph. In traffic I often dropped down to First gear when I wanted to accelerate at at least a moderate speed rather than at a slow speed in Second. I learned, after some experimental grinding, how to double clutch. Double clutching worked, but a synchronized First gear would have worked MUCH better!!!!!!
I would have guessed it was the Iraqi Malibu’s three speed manual. Which is a head scratcher in itself that it didn’t just have an automatic, with a cop car grade aux cooler and fleet type lock out of first on the selector. Takes abuse better and wouldn’t have made the car that much more expensive.
My father’s work truck was a ’72 Dodge Maxi-van with a 318 / 3 sp column shift. My summers were spent working with him and I don’t recall him grinding gears. He was also a rolling “stop” guy.
It’s surprising Detroit took so long to synchro their transmissions, but I wonder if it had something to with the ever lowering take rate of manual transmissions?
It doesn’t surprise me Europe was ahead of the game with fully synchronized manual transmissions given their sticky take rates and if I recall correctly their generally subpar automatics.
For fun I used to practice no clutch shifts on my manual transmission cars and trucks only clutching at stops. I also played around with double clutching despite no need.
I couldn’t edit my comment, but manual transmissions seemed to remain popular on economy US cars for a while.
the 64 ford ad touting “a good chunk fo that sports car feeling” With the full size pictured as the halo car! i had a 63 galaxie 500 with 3 sp column shift. ( my first car purchase, in 1984.) That 19 foot whale with a trunk lid large enough to use for ping pong table surface, not really the vehicle i would ever describe as a Sports Car, with or without synchro 1st gear.
When I had had my first car, a ’68 Saab 95 V4, for about a year, I borrowed a friend’s ’46 Ford pickup to move some stuff. The Saab, which naturally had synchro on all 4 gears, was the only stick-shift car I’d had much wheel time in. I was a bit baffled when I couldn’t shift smoothly into first while on the move in the pickup.
What was the last British (with however many forward speeds) with a crash-low box?
My 1970 Spitfire had crash 1st gear. It was also nearly impossible to double clutch as the accelerator linkage was worn out and extremely sloppy.
My first thought was “well, my 64 Fairlane (V8) had one of those (meaning unsynchronized 1st), and I did fine,” only to discover I got in on the first year of that without realizing…
Ironically, I know exactly what it’s like to drive with an unsynchronized 1st: my Porsche 924 (with the oh-so-desireable dogleg 1st) came with a beat-to-death 1st gear syncro, and I’m just glad it still engages at a stop and holds under acceleration. You have to be very careful to avoid a big crunch – to include shifting into a higher gear momentarily before engaging 1st from neutral. It’s usually not bad, except when you’re in that situation where you’re almost stopped and need to go again (like coasting to a red light that turns green just before you get there). Unfortunately, it’s extremely rare to find one of those gearboxes with a good 1st gear (or usually 2nd too). Nothing inherently weak about them, but the syncros were too small to stand up to abuse, which is what a lot of them got.
Having been inside a couple modern transmissions, I find that most of the wear usually centers on 1st and reverse, and I suspect the older transmissions with non-syncronized 1st and reverse probably lasted longer because you had to be respectful or look like an idiot. The one downside to used cars with a stick is if you get one from a typical driver, they’ll have frequently downshifted to 1st unnecessarily, too aggressively, or both, and the same going between 1st and reverse. Then, when their bad habits catch up to them, they just unload it (and probably blame it on the transmission or clutch). That’s the good and bad thing about manuals: they can’t be idiot-proofed as much as automatics, but that means the person driving a stick is far less likely to be an idiot!
Back in the summer of 1966 I was age 15, I took a high school mandated drivers ed course that was required if you wanted a drivers license when you turned 16. There were a couple of 1965 Pontiacs four-door sedans with three-on-the-tree in the fleet that we had to master. I didn’t have a problem as previously my Dad let me drive my brothers MG Midget, floor shift, around the block. At the time my brother was first year at a university and couldn’t have a car on campus. I don’t think my brother reads these posts so it will remain our secret I drove his MG when I was only 15. I had a new 1970 Nova with a floor shift and in the early 1970s for awhile had a job delivering auto glass in Miami, driving a van with a column shift. I never had a problem manual shifting but have only had automatics since the early 1970s.
When driving a non-synchronized manual transmission it might be helpful to explain double-clutching. I could be wrong but isn’t that when shifting gears you clutch to take it out of first gear, then clutch again to put it in second gear? I could be wrong as its been a very long time. Please explain double clutching for the readers.
You’ve pretty much got it right. A gentle blip of the throttle between clutching when you are downshifting helps. It’s an essential skill when driving large trucks with multi speed transmissions.
I still do it when downshifting the 4 speed in my Corvair, more to preserve a difficult to replace transmission than because I need to.
For quite a while I was the driver examiner for my employer when hiring operators and drivers. In recent years I encountered an alarming number of “truck drivers” who couldn’t do it since all they ever saw were automatics or autoshifts. Around the time I retired we started specing automatics in everything partly because of this.
I’m glad I missed this era, I learned to drive a manual transmission is a 77 Honda Accord and the only vehicles I’ve ever driven with a 3 speed were Benford site dumpers, which may have had no synchromesh at all. I’ve also ridden motorcycles a lot so I have a decent grasp of rev matching.
The closest I’ve gotten to an unsynchronized first gear is probably pickup trucks with crawler first gears but 2-4 are what you normally drive in so I never needed to shift into low while moving
Only ‘crash’ box I ever had was in my HK Kingswood. Syncros on 2nd weren’t much better. The 186 six was smooth and flexible enough that lightly loaded, it would pull away in 2nd.
The non syncro first wasn’t the issue I thought it might have been.
Love the purple Gremlin X in the ad. I learned to drive stick on a three on the tree in 1980 Chevy van. Regina had me jump right into high speed traffic as soon as my ass hit the seat. A very vivid memory. Next step was my 57Chevy 210 sedan. Stopping for first wasn’t really an issue, the linkage locking up from first to second was. Always fun stepping out and popping the hood to free it.