New shifter - MTI Racing

**Rich Z** · 06-09-2006, 07:41 PM

Last week I got in a new shifter by MTI Racing in Georgia. I heard some people saying some good things about it over on CorvetteForum, so I figured I would give it a try. I now have a Hurst shifter, but not sure I really like it. Some days I do, and others I don't. I had to remove the bias springs because it was just TOO stiff shifting to fifth, sixth, and reverse for my liking, but now that the springs are out, yes, it is somewhat easier, but the tradeoff is that it feels much sloppier then before. So I am hoping that maybe this would be what I am looking for. Which is a nice solid feeling shifter that works smoothly, firmly, and effortlessly.

In the pic, the MTI is to the left and the stock shifter out of my 2002 Z06 is on the right.

I haven't installed it yet, but have been looking it over to see what the differences may be. Unfortunately the Hurst is still in the car, otherwise I would put that in the pic as well. Compared to the stock shifter, the MTI is notably shorter then the stock. It also feels like the pivot point is slightly higher than stock. What becomes obvious looking at these things is that there really isn't all that much to the shifter at all. Basic a stick we shove back and forth to move the linkage levers to change the gears. Nothing really fancy at all about it. And it also appears that the amount of variation between one shifter and another has to be rather small. About all you can do is to change the hand side of the handle's length and perhaps move the fulcrum of the lever slightly as well. That's about it. And there will necessarily be tradeoffs to deal with no matter what you do.

With any system based on leverage, you can only change 3 things: the length of the lever on the top, the length of the lever on the bottom, and where the fulcrum is positioned. And in this case we have a constant that must be adhered to: The ball at the bottom of the shifter MUST engage the linage levers from the transmission. Any and all of these variables can directly affect the leverage you can exert while moving the shifter handle and are directly related. You can shorten the stroke of the top side of the shifter arm to create an apparent increase in the distance the bottom part will travel in relation to your hand movement. In effect shortening the amount of distance your hand must travel to effect a gear change in the transmission. The tradeoff here is the amount of effort needed to make the movement of the lower arm is greater. I suspect there is probably not a whole lot you can do with the amount of movement the lower arm can move, as this is probably limited by the transmission itself in how much movement the linkage will permit. Which means that if you lower the fulcrum (pivot point), the amount of distance the lower arm can travel will be reduced unless you lengthen that lower arm to compensate. There obviously must be a minimum amount of travel needed in order for the gears to be engaged in the transmission, so I would assume this is a rather critical measurement for any shifter. On the other side of the coin, you really don't want the lower arm of the shifter to travel TOO far, otherwise you could be jamming the linkage and subsequent engagement within the transmission beyond what it was designed to do.

Picturing this all in your mind, you can see how the shifter's design must be quite limited in the number of variables you can play with. The lower arm can only allow so much change between where it is not enough to engage the gears and it is too much to possibly cause damage within the transmission. This in turn limits how much the pivot point can be adjusted as it's location will determine the length of the lower arm. Which in turn controls the length of throw of the upper arm. The lower the pivot point, the shorter the lower arm yet the longer the throw on the upper arm, but with less effort. Raise the pivot point, and the lower arm must be longer, and conversely the upper arm can be shorter however the effort increases.

So is there a magic number for the dimensions of these interrelated sections? Is one combination of all factors going to be noticeable better then ones that almost, but not quite, hit the mark? Maybe. I guess that is what I am hoping for. A shifter that hits this "magic" number.

Also, notice that the stock shifter has a weighted section on the hand section of the shifter. This is likely a good thing, as the additional mass there certainly would help the "feel" of shifting. That additional mass would just help the shift effort to feel lighter then it really is. Plus it appears to be insulated from the lower part of the shaft by a rubber or plastic insert, which probably reduces transmitted noise somewhat.

Now with that in mind, I can recall people describing their shifters as being "notchy". But what exactly is that? What is "notchiness"? And why would one shifter feel differently then another when ALL of them merely appear to be sticks of metal shoved down into the console area to move around the linkage?

I'm thinking that a shorter arm on the hand side of the shifter would reduce this "notchiness" simply because it reduces the distance where the shifter might hit between gears in the transmission linkage. The shorter that "gap" the less likely you are to hit it while shifting.

Anyway, as they say, the proof is in the pudding, so I guess I just need to install this MTI shifter and see what it just FEELS like. I am hopeful it will be better then the Hurst, but I have to wonder how much of this is just a placebo effect. The Hurst shifter felt better then the stock when I put it in. For a while. Then the Hurst felt better after I removed the bias springs then it did WITH the springs. For a while. So if I come back here raving like a maniac about how much better this MTI shifter feels, give me "a while" to really wring it out. What is needed, I guess, are identical vehicles with the different brands of shifters installed so you can just easily see the difference in a side by side comparison. Yeah, it's really no big deal to change a shifter, but the bloom goes off the rose pretty quickly after you do it a couple of times. It's not just like changing a channel on the radio. And in reality, I'm not so sure there will really BE all that much difference between shifters at all. It just doesn't appear to be that much leeway in the variables to allow dramatic changes.

Oh well, just thought I would share my thoughts on this. Stay tuned.....

MADN3SS · 06-09-2006, 09:06 PM

There is always the Antivenom shift mod. It's supposed to make it easier shifting. Contact Greg. You'll find posts on CF or Z06Vette.com about it.

3318C5 · 06-10-2006, 01:52 PM

I have the hurst also and at first I loved it. I then changed the shfiter ball and started to dislike it. I put back the original shifter ball on the Hurst and I enjoy the shifter again. To me the ball/handle made the difference.

**Rich Z** · 06-10-2006, 04:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 3318C5

I have the hurst also and at first I loved it. I then changed the shfiter ball and started to dislike it. I put back the original shifter ball on the Hurst and I enjoy the shifter again. To me the ball/handle made the difference.

Yes, I agree. I believe the height of the shifter handle changes the leverage ratio and can make a BIG difference in feel.

That being said, I installed the MTI shifter today but I haven't taken it for a spin yet. Seems OK, but I had a snag in that I couldn't use my C6 shifter knob I bought a while back. But I believe that is the fault of the knob and not the shifter. It has been gradually loosening up the whole time I have had it and it appears I have finally run out of threads to spin it another turn to tighten it. So now it bottoms out 180 degrees from where it needs to be aligned. I suppose I could mount it on the drill press and take a little bit of plastic out of the top, but that is going to be a pain in the butt trial and error thing. So I had to mount another style knob I had laying around here that is a bit taller then the C6 knob. I may need to look around for something else that is a bit lower yet has a locking ring for it. These ones that fit on the shifter just by tightening them don't seem to hold up before getting loose over time. Maybe just one of those plain old Hurst 8 ball knobs would be best.

But in any event, the play in the Hurst shifter without those bias springs is very obvious. The shifter obviously needs those springs in place otherwise the shifter has vertical play in it. Can't have it any other way. The springs will increase the lateral motion force needed for shifting, but they also keep some of the sloppiness out of it by holding the shifter down into position.

The MTI does not have this problem and is more like the stock shifter without those springs. It also uses the standard lower boot, so I didn't have to use the jury rigged one I made up for the Hurst shifter. Luckily I bought a spare a while ago, otherwise I would have been stuck trying to de-modify that jury rigged contraption of mine.

Maybe tomorrow I will take a spin and see how the new shifter feels. But honestly, I think you can make a world of difference just in your selection of knob you use. It may not even be necessary to change your shifter at all, since from what I have seen, there doesn't seem to be any substantial differences between them as for as the way they accommodate the leverage variables available.

**Rich Z** · 06-11-2006, 07:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 3318C5

I have the hurst also and at first I loved it. I then changed the shfiter ball and started to dislike it. I put back the original shifter ball on the Hurst and I enjoy the shifter again. To me the ball/handle made the difference.

Just out of curiosity, was the shifter handle you liked on the Hurst taller or lower then the one you didn't like? And what was it you didn't like about the other one?

**Rich Z** · 06-11-2006, 08:01 PM

Well I took a short drive with the new MTI shifter. Shifting is definitely easier then with the Hurst, but I'm not sure how much of that may be from the taller shifter knob I had to use. So it makes a direct comparisons rather difficult. The taller knob would make shifting easier on any shifter with the increased leverage. Shifting does seem very firm and positive, and the gears seem very easy to find with no hunt and peck shifting. Getting into reverse is even what I would call "easy" after struggling with the Hurst.

As for the Hurst shifter, I would not recommend anyone just taking out the springs like I did. Lateral play even while in gear was substantial. When I had the shifter out on the work table I noticed that there are some lower spring support disks that were all cockeyed. I would imagine that if you had those set screws in at the right depth, it would be possible for those disks to be on edge and could get jammed up between those lateral arms on the shifter and screw, which would keep you from making lateral motion with the shifter in that direction. For instance, if it happened on the left side of the shifter, you would not be able to move the shifter far enough to the right to be able to get into reverse. I guess I am just lucky that didn't happen to me, but I think there is a very real possibility of that happening.

All in all, I still think the Hurst shifter looks like a very high class piece of equipment, but the spring arrangement just is not suitable for my kind of driving. Maybe hopped up on adrenalin at the track it wouldn't matter a whit, but for just pleasure cruising, it made shifting just much more of a chore then it should be, in my opinion. Maybe a taller knob would have fixed that problem for me. But in any event, the MTI is in there now, and feels real good with the knob on it, so that's the way it will likely stay unless I find a reason to get into the console area again and have to remove that knob. It does make the shift length a little bit longer, but all things considered, I would rather have the effortless shifting over the shorter shifting.

Oh, btw, I contacted the guy I got that C6 shifter knob from and he told me to send it back to him and he would replace the plastic threaded insert with a metal one for me. He said that would fix the problem I had with it. I will probably do that, but in reality, I think that any knob with a shifting diagram on it, or otherwise position sensitive, it really needs a locking nut so you can position it exactly where you want it. With the ones that just thread on till tight, you have to just hope that you can tighten it at the place where it needs to be, and it won't loosen up over time. Because if it loosens, all you can do is to turn it another full turn to get it tight again. A few times doing that, and sure as heck you are eventually going to bottom it out and you are then out of luck.

**Rich Z** · 06-17-2006, 10:03 PM

OK, so I still don't have a short knob for this MTI shifter, but I've been driving the Z around every chance I get and I just find this shifter SO much easier on my arm then the Hurst was. It feels solid and sure, with no slop, and doesn't make me curse at people because I have to slow down and downshift.

The Hurst without the springs was too sloppy feeling, yet with the springs (at least the regular strength ones) it was a chore with lateral movements off of the center mark. I never did try the lighter springs, but honestly, ANY springs would increase that lateral motion tension over a shifter that doesn't have them, I think.

Hopefully next week or so I will have my C6 shifter knob repaired and returned, and get that black ball shifter knob I ordered in so I can try both of them. The one on it now just sits too high for my aesthetic tastes. I'm just hoping the lower knob doesn't change the leverage geometry too much to where I am back in the same boat with an arm wrestling event to shift gears.

Formula Outlaw · 06-22-2006, 08:48 AM

You could just put an older style Hurst "T" handle on it....

**Rich Z** · 06-22-2006, 01:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Formula Outlaw

You could just put an older style Hurst "T" handle on it....

Hah! I actually had one of those on my GTO back in the stone age, and I liked it a lot. But no, I just don't think it would LOOK right in a Corvette. Just my opinion, of course. Which reminds me, I got to figure out who I ordered that black round shifter knob from and find out where the heck it is. I should have gotten it by now..........

Formula Outlaw · 06-22-2006, 01:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rich Z

Hah! I actually had one of those on my GTO back in the stone age, and I liked it a lot. But no, I just don't think it would LOOK right in a Corvette. Just my opinion, of course. Which reminds me, I got to figure out who I ordered that black round shifter knob from and find out where the heck it is. I should have gotten it by now..........

I had one on my 70 Ram Air IV GTO as well....