 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
Car Forum / Volvo Cars / November 2004Automatic Shifter On The Column?
My dear old Mom needs to replace her 83 K-car. The early/mid 1990 Volvo's look to be about the same size and shape of her K-car. Need to know if Volvo's offered a column mounted automatic transmission shifter in any of the 1990 to 1996 models. If so, what models? A quick check on E-bay shows only floor mounted shifters. Don't know that much about Volvo's other than they are a quality car. Can any of the experts here help me out. Thank you. No they didn't.... Column shifters seem to be pretty much an American car thing. I'm pretty sure your mother could figure out a floor mounted shifter, I find them much more user friendly then column shifters... Tho she might engage the wipers a few dozen times the first month while trying to back out of the driveway. > My dear old Mom needs to replace her 83 K-car. The early/mid 1990 > Volvo's look to be about the same size and shape of her K-car. Need [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > > Thank you. > No they didn't.... Column shifters seem to be pretty much an American car > thing. Actually, several English cars from the '40s and '50s still had column shifters (for manual transmissions). Also, some Italian Fiats in the '50s and '60s had column shifters, also for manual transmissions. We still had these in Rhodesia in early '70s. Then there was the French 2CV -- that had a weird dash mounted shifter, but by Jim -- that car had a simple engine to work on! Beverly  SignatureMany a smale maketh a grate -- Geoffrey Chaucer >> No they didn't.... Column shifters seem to be pretty much an American car >> thing. > >Actually, several English cars from the '40s and '50s still had >column shifters (for manual transmissions). Indeed so, in fact right up into the 60s and later. And not just for manual transmissions, but autos too. Not sure what the latest generation of Rolls Royce have, but they always seemed to favour the column shifter. I could never really see the point of a column shift, particularly with a manual gearbox. The few occasions I've driven one, I certainly never found them easier to use, and the linkage must have been a bugger to design, especially accounting for differences in LHD and RHD. >Also, some Italian >Fiats in the '50s and '60s had column shifters, also for manual >transmissions. We still had these in Rhodesia in early '70s. > >Then there was the French 2CV -- that had a weird dash mounted >shifter, but by Jim -- that car had a simple engine to work on! The Renault 4, et al, were like that, too. IIRC it was because the gearbox was mounted in front of the engine. SignatureStewart Hargrave For email, replace 'SpamOnlyToHere' with my name A 3 speed manual on the column were a hoot to drive. Back in my high-school days (71-75) a buddy had a 55 Ford with one we go whooping down dirt roads on. Then a girlfriend had a Ford Falcon with it and a 289 V-8. That car flew, hid second gear and give it gas. Any way, thanks for getting back to me on this. Will keep looking for her. Thanks. > I could never really see the point of a column shift, particularly > with a manual gearbox. The few occasions I've driven one, I certainly > never found them easier to use, and the linkage must have been a > bugger to design, especially accounting for differences in LHD and > RHD. The obvious advantage, at least in larger vehicles, is that it allows more comfortable three-abreast seating on bench seats. Chip C > I could never really see the point of a column shift, particularly > with a manual gearbox. The few occasions I've driven one, I certainly > never found them easier to use, and the linkage must have been a > bugger to design, especially accounting for differences in LHD and > RHD. Never really thought of that, though as complex as the linkage must have been, that was one of the few things that *didn't* ever break on my friend's Ford. > I could never really see the point of a column shift, particularly > with a manual gearbox. The few occasions I've driven one, I certainly > never found them easier to use, and the linkage must have been a > bugger to design, especially accounting for differences in LHD and > RHD. My guess is that it was to make room for a center passenger in front. Mike >> I could never really see the point of a column shift, particularly >> with a manual gearbox. The few occasions I've driven one, I certainly [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] >> >My guess is that it was to make room for a center passenger in front. Yep; as others have mentioned, too. Thinking about it, all the column shift cars I have know in the UK had bench seats at the front, so theoretically three people could sit in the front. Much easier in the US, where the cars are at least five times as wide as our modest ones. Either that, or it seems they were intended for two people to sit close enough for thigh contact. But I had a sheltered upbringing, and think that would make gear selection very difficult to concentrate on, wherever the lever was. SignatureStewart Hargrave For email, replace 'SpamOnlyToHere' with my name >>> I could never really see the point of a column shift, particularly >>> with a manual gearbox. The few occasions I've driven one, I certainly [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > theoretically three people could sit in the front. Much easier in the > US, where the cars are at least five times as wide as our modest ones. Stewart, you are such an exaggerator! UK cars are about 200 cm wide, US cars are about 200 inches wide. Just about the same, really! Mike >Stewart, you are such an exaggerator! UK cars are about 200 cm wide, US cars >are about 200 inches wide. Just about the same, really! I would never exaggerate anything in a million years. Actually, browsing through the conversion menus of Calc98, there seem to be several things where the same unit represents different quantities in the US and UK. Not just the gallon, but nautical miles, therms, drams, firkins and shipping tons, to name some. Plus, of course, the standard unit of car width. SignatureStewart Hargrave For email, replace 'SpamOnlyToHere' with my name Sorry, can I get that number in furlongs per fortnight? blurp On Wed, 24 Nov 2004 19:02:08 +0000, the illustrious Stewart Hargrave <SpamOnlyToHere@MiserableOldGit.Me.uk> favored us with the following prose: >>Stewart, you are such an exaggerator! UK cars are about 200 cm wide, US cars >>are about 200 inches wide. Just about the same, really! [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] >therms, drams, firkins and shipping tons, to name some. Plus, of >course, the standard unit of car width. >My dear old Mom needs to replace her 83 K-car. The early/mid 1990 >Volvo's look to be about the same size and shape of her K-car. Need [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > >Thank you. With tongue in cheek, 60's 120 series Volvo's with automatics did have the gear shift on the steering coulmn. Joe >>My dear old Mom needs to replace her 83 K-car. The early/mid 1990 >>Volvo's look to be about the same size and shape of her K-car. Need [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > > Joe My father's 1966 Ford Corsair had a column shift and a bench seat in the front. I could take my girl out sitting thigh to thigh - nearly as good as a fumble. |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2008 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.