I bought my 93 850GLT 5-speed in august and it has always had this problem: I cannot downshift into first gear until I am at a complete stop. I need to wait until the car has totally halted, to the point where it lurches forward a little bit. If I am coasting with the clutch in, i can shift into any gear except first. I physically can't get the shifter to go into the first gear spot. I can get it about half-way in on the grid, but then it just stops. Occasionally it will slip in if I push hard, but it makes a grinding noise. I have tried several things including replacing the clutch, throwout bearing and slave cylinder. After all this and still absolutely no improvement, my dealer says he will try putting an additive into the oil in next oil change. This problem is really annoying me, because I either have to start from second into a slow roll, or shift into neutral, do a complete stop, disengage the clutch, then engage it again, and it will go into 1st. Also, I'm not sure if this is related, but upshifting into second is a little rough, too, although it always goes. Please help if you have any idea. If I left out info, just ask and I'll be back to respond. Thanks.

Sounds like worn synchro rings - oil change won't help. The first gear synchro end to wear the fastest. On upshifts, the synchros act as a brake to slow down the free-spinning gear ring, but on downshifts they have to accellerate the input shaft and clutch disk. With the first gear ratio what it is, the load on the synchro is higher than the others.

On slowing down, I usually downshift to 4th and let the brakes do the rest. I always come to a stop before shifting into first, in part because I have two cars that aren't syncronized into first.

Fred, packard8@delanet.com

98 V70 5 spd 112k

92 SAAB 5 spd 175k

71 Mercedes 127k

69 Volvo 164 56k

42 Packard Clipper 118k

21 Packard Single-Six 36k

Sounds like a worn gearbox to me, too. FWIW both of my SAABS often would not shift into 1st unless the car was stationary when they were BRAND NEW! Legendary weak SAAB transmissions. Eventually (>100k) my first one would pop out of reverse, the other out of 3rd gear. My mechanic - wise man- said "How much time do you spend driving in reverse?" He had a point. So I'd just hold it in reverse. Annoying, but not annoying enough to spend the $$$$ to replace the gearboxes.

Your car SHOULD be powerful enough to pull in second, as were my SAABS, and they had smaller motors. Also, the old British sports cars auch as the MGA and early MGB and early XKE had non-synchro 1st gears, which you couldn't downshift into. So it can, and is done. The 2nd gear problem would be more annoying to me, and you may eventually find this annoying enough to replace the tranny. I'm no expert on Volvo gearboxes, but the manuals don't seem to fail too often, so one salvaged from a wreck may be a reasonable alternative here.

BTW, if your car car is that old, you probably should find yourself a good indy Volvo mechanic, rather than a stealer. The indies are more adept at fixing the things with duct tape and Krazy Glue.

-Groundhog

I think the professional volvo mechanics on the site will probably give you a better answer, but it sounds to me like your gearbox is shot--too many years of an owner who didn't know how to drive a manual tranmission.

Does it go into gear if you accurately double-clutch downshift?

In my opinion, you should rarely (and I mean rarely) ever have to downshift into first. As long as the car is moving, starting out in second is fine, as long as you are not looking to punch-it.

The fact that second is also going says to me that someone was downshifting without double-clutching, in order to slow the car down.

Hmmm...personally I see nothing wrong with selecting first gear as you roll to a stop with a modern full synchromesh transmission. Should not be cause of problems, despite what was implied in a previous post. Of course once stopped you shouldn't sit there with the clutch depressed (but that's a TO Bearing issue, not trans).

Sounds to me more like the clutch is not fully disengaging, not a transmission problem. Is the 850 clutch hydraulic? Were it an Audi, which I know better than Volvos, I would say bleed the clutch, and if that didn't fix consider changing clutch hydraulics--both slave and MC at the same time. Pretty common on older model Audis at ~100-150k miles old to loose clutch hydraulics (fortunately, a pretty cheap and easy fix).

It is possible that the 1-2 synchros are worn, but that is not the only possibility. As an alternative to an "additive" I would suggest changing the transmission oil with a good quality synthetic (Mobil 1, Redline, Amsoil, etc.) and see how it feels after that. Many a balky transmission has returned to a butter-like feeling with a nice fresh dose of synthetic gear oil. Not too expensive to do and worth a shot.

If it winds up being a bad gearbox, I would suggest parts recyclers. Aren't Volvo transmissions supposed to be strong? (Unlike a certain other Swedish auto maker...)

Mike,

You're right, modern transmissions should be able to handle the load. Your further explanation was also very plausable.

My explanation came to mind 'cause, just the other day, I rode in a car with someone who shifted his car as if he was trying out for a Mustang commercial, and downshifted through every gear at at every stop. I've rebuilt about ten manual tranmsissions in my time and, after looking at sychromesh, I'm amazed, in general, they hold up as well as they do, given the punishment required of them. So I am a firm believer in using your brakes to slow down and using your transmission to select the appropriate power range for driving.

synchro was my first guess...

as for the other make (owned by GM)

it's the autotrans that have the bad rep

The automatics were an ancient 3-speed Borg Warner design that was awful. The 5-speed manuals were only "bad" since when they put the 5th gear in the same case as the 4 speed there wasn't a lot of space in there. If they didn't break under normal shifting there were 4 bolts that held the end plate onto the transmission, these would back out over time and you'd lose the oil in the gearbox. (Of course, there's no oil-level warning light for a manual transmission!) Then the gearbox would melt.

-Groundhog

Ken--well put, and you do make a great point. Many years ago a Porsche mechanic friend enlightened me...cost of a 901 transmission (or overhaul) vs. pads and rotors. My own technique is to slip into neutral as I coast/brake to a stop. Of course since I live in California the "stop" seldom is zero MPH ;-) so I slip into first as I am still rolling and am on my way. (Talking stop signs, not lights.) I always try to match revs on all downshifts too. But, gearboxes seem to be pretty durable these days and it is amazing what fresh oil can do (in this case I'm still guessing weak clutch hydraulics--often overlooked when brake fluid is flushed). In the quattro I can even get first from reverse while rolling backwards (I know, bad idea...but it's my car and doesn't seem to be any worse for it at ~190k miles.)

Gian--the reputation I alluded to was manual transmissions and it has been legendary for going on 4 decades now. But then, what do I know? I drive an Audi ;-) (But my "other car" is an 850t wagon.)

I exchange emails with a couple of Saab specialists, and they tell everyone to avoid the automatics on the 900s like King Tut's tomb. The indicate with good maintainance the manuals will last