And your real problem is....

[Ed - N3LHB]

Found On Road Dead

RAM!  (speaks for itself)

DODGE ! ( also speaks for itself)

JEEP (Just Empty Every Pocket)

Waiting for someone to do PONTIAC!

GTO (Gas, Tires & Oil)  My first car was a '69 goat... hauled azz fer sure!

[W3SLK]

John said:

Mikey, I think you're thinking of the Chrysler FluidDrive.  It had a column shift with high range and low range.  Each range had two gears that would shift when you lifted the gas.  Although it had a torque converter you needed to use the clutch (which it also had) to shift between high and low range, or into reverse.

May have been but it was stuffed into ~1950's Olds 88. This is the classic story of my buddy finding this automobile in a barn with green paint spilled on it. It had only 3200 miles on it, (this was the late '70's)! Anyway, he took it in to get inspected and the guys in the shop were so amazed they tore everything down and put new gaskets in. The engine hadn't even been 'broke in'. I was reading somewhere on the  WWW that the GM factory that made transmissions for Olds was destroyed by fire. They may have sent out a few with MOPAR boxes in them.

[The Slab Bacon]

You guys are talking about 2 different systems. GM came out with the original 4-speed turbo-hydramatic back in the early 50s, it was a big, massive casting and full automatic. Available on Olds, Pontiac, Cadillac, but not on chebbies. They got the 2-speed cast Iron Powerglide.

The Chrysler Fluid Drive was just a manual transmission with a torque converter in series with the clutch. Chrysler developed the cast iron 2-speed Powerflite, which evolved into the 3-speed cast iron Torqueflite, and then the aluminum 3-speed Torqueflite.

Johnny,
           That ALLPAR site is pretty FB!! A lot of good MoPar and info history there!!
I liked the fact that they even mentioned the turbine car. I still have an original dealer brochure for them from back in the 60s!!   

[w3jn]

The *original* Fluid Drive was indeed a 3 speed manual with a torque converter.  Starting about 1948 they introduced the semi-automagic Fluid Drive transmission.  The page I linked details the history.

You could get a HydraMatic in Oldsmobiles and Cadillacs (and perhaps Buicks) starting about 1940.  That was a 4-speed fully automagic, with a more or less conventional (as we know it today) shifter, with all gears in a line.  Reverse was all the way down and the neutral position didn't separate reverse and first, it was further up the chain as I recall.  I drove a '41 Cadillac with a HydraMatic and it worked surprisingly well, considering it was one of the first automagic trannies on the market.  However it was a slug compared to my dad's '38 Cadillac with the conventional 3 on the tree. 

The Fluid Drive, on the other hand, had gates similar to a 3-speed manual column shift.  The first gear position was missing on the semi-auto Fluid Drives, there being only a high and low range (each range had two speeds).  Reverse was in the familiar towards-you-and-up, low range was forward-and-up, high range was forward-and-down.  And you needed the clutch any time you moved the shifter.

Back to the '50s Olds, a bit of research indicated that the HydraMatic plant did indeed burn down and Oldsmobiles were saddled with the POS Buick DynaFlow which was a ttwo-speed manually shifted tranny with a torque converter.  Normal driving was with it in high range but you could manually shift it from low to high - it didn't shift automagically.  I've never driven one of these but I can imagine it would be painfully slow.

[WQ9E]

Some more good information on the early automatic drives from Popular Science April 1950, I remember seeing this article years ago and with the wonders of modern google books and search it is now easy to find:

http://books.google.com/books?id=DC0DAAAAMBAJ&pg=PA98&dq=dynaflow&hl=en&ei=N8UdTf_7GIGKlwf86bCnDA&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=2&ved=0CDgQ6AEwAQ#v=onepage&q=dynaflow&f=false

[WA1GFZ]

well, Transmission guy just called and the truck is fixed.
I asked about driving in third and if that would have helped hauling heavy loads. He said the early 700R4s had some design issues but the electronic control on the 4L60E fixed those problems. He told me some Ford transmissions get better life if you down shift because the torgue is spread over multiple clutches.
Third and fourth gear clutches were just worn out no other problems

[flintstone mop]

My uncle had a HUGE Chrysler sedan 1950 something and it was a beauty. I called it the magic car coz he could make it shift by taking his foot off the gas. It looked like a stick shift and had a clutch. You could hear a clank sometimes when it shifted.

Fred

[W1TAV]

Great Popular Science Article!  My understanding was (and the article  almost got into it)" was the Fluid drive and or hydraulic torque converter was perfected during WW II in some of our tanks or tank like vehicles.

The Planetary Drive systems that Henry Ford (and others used) was right off the factory line shaft drive systems from the 1800's. I go to a Maine Boat builders show in Portland that is held in an old factory on the waterfront and pieces of the old line shaft and " planetary transmission" are still in place.  Henry's genius was to close in the drive and keep it quenched in oil.

The advent of the CV transmissions in new cars (take off of a 60+ year old Browning industrial drive system) will likely make the automatic as we know it obsolete in another 10 years. That is if we stick with gas engine technology.

It would be interesting to apply today's engineering to a Steam powered car. There is a parallel to a Steam drive system and Electric drive.  No need for a transmission, infinite torque, near silent operation.  IMHO the issue with electric continues to be with the storage of POWER. Like it or not, the amount of energy stored in a tank of gas still exceeds that of any battery out there. Think what a hyper efficient steam generator could do in say a hybrid.

Looking back (just like reading the 1950's PS article) we cling to what we know. The economies and politics of change have to come into play.  Remember sealed Beam Headlights, (?) of course you do, and there are still a few cars using them. Today we have  replacement bulbs. At one time back in the 60' and 70's the installation of anything but a seal beam lamp was illegal. Why, well there was the case that the non-sealbeams were too bright, however the reality of the situation was the manufacturers of sealed beam lamps had their lobby in Washington to keep things the way there were. I remember when it was a big deal to work on a "Gray Market" import and have to retrofit the head lamps to have it inspected. Removing a superior lighting system to meet our US laws..

Back on Subject:  Frank, how is the new transmission working out? - Steve

[The Slab Bacon]

"Back in the old days" automatic transmixers were troublesome, sometimes hateful devices, surrounded by superstition and mystery. Many mechanics were scared to death to even think about repairing them. Probably 90% of the problems with them were caused by crappy fluids and piss-poor friction materials. the friction materials they have now far, far excede the quality of what they had back then. The lubricants are absolutely no comparison.

A thought to ponder would how long would one of those clunky old Hydramatics last if it was rebuilt with today's materials. Now most of them that get rebuilt for restorations never get many miles put on them. Even the thought of an automatic transmixer lasting 100K was pretty much unheard of just 20 years ago. They were just considered an "expendable" part that had to be replaced periodically, like brakes or tires or sparkplugs.. Lets face it, even the clutch in a manual transmixer car was an "expendable" part, but if you were having it done, it was a lot cheaper repair.

[The Slab Bacon]

Here ya go, Steve,
               If you like Model Ts and steam stuff, you NEED one of these!!    


http://www.wxpnews.com/1TG846/100126-Steam-Powered-Airplane

[K4QE]

Found On Road Dead

RAM!  (speaks for itself)

DODGE ! ( also speaks for itself)

JEEP (Just Empty Every Pocket)

Waiting for someone to do PONTIAC!

http://www.all-acronyms.com/PONTIAC

[WA1GFZ]

Truck back in the yard, pockets inside out.
He replaced the converter. When I asked about it he said he would never reuse a converter. Then took me in the shop to see one cut open. A locking converter has a lot going on inside it.
Shifts very nice now

[W3SLK]

Most excellent Franz. There are tons of nooks and crannies in the those torque converters. Slab is correct about AT's with 100K miles. Even if you flushed your system with fresh AT fluid and changed the filter on the valve body, it was no guarantee that you would achieve longevity with it.
One thing that didn't get mentioned in all this transmission "transmission" was the old Chrysler "push-button" style that were used in the Plymouth Furys, Chrysler Imperials, and I believe some of the Ramblers used them as well.

[Steve - K4HX]

Poor Old Numbskull Thinks It's A Cadillac.

[WA3VJB]

Hey Frank, GFZ -- glad you're rollin' again.
Now go stress that powertrain a little and prove it out.


Frank/AHE -- our 1955 Dodge had the pushbutton shift.
Drove my Mom crazy not having a lever to drop out of Park.

There was a pod over on the left, where you'd find today's A/C outlet.

[WA1GFZ]

HMMMM I got a different version from a famous ham.

I thought the converter was just two sets of turbine vanes with fluid between them
Man was I surprised to see all the stuff inside. Even if it was perfectly cleaned the clutch would be old. He said spec is 50 RPM slippage in lock mode.
My truck runs 2000 RPM at 77 MPH in OD. About a month ago I noticed it closer to 73 MHZ but thought it was just because it was cold. It was going down.
At least it didn't fail in the yard at the beach Thanksgiving when I was moving my Brother's 500 pound wood planer

[WA1GFZ]

One Sunday on the way to grandma's my Brother and I jump in the '57 Ventura and I start pushing buttons. Buttons jam like a mofo so jump in the back and act stupid.
OM comes out and goes to take off....ERRRRR who was playing with my car as he is glaring at me in the rear view. Needed kick in the butt got off easy that time.

[WA1GFZ]

Paul, Still reeling from the pain I'll take it easy.
I had a 1960 Pontiac 389 with an old 4 speed hydro.
I could lay down 100 feet of rubber (one wheel) and never hurt it.
That was a beast.

[The Slab Bacon]

One thing that didn't get mentioned in all this transmission "transmission" was the old Chrysler "push-button" style that were used in the Plymouth Furys, Chrysler Imperials, and I believe some of the Ramblers used them as well.

Mikey,
         That was a cable operated shifter mechanism used on early Torqueflites, both aluminum and cast iron. I found I still had one of the dash mounted pushbutton units  while cleaning out my mom's basement a few weeks back!!

Paul,
      the early Chrysler automatics (cast iron ones) did not have a "park". They relied strictly on the "emergency brake" mounted on the tailstock of the transmission. This could create some unique problems!! I twisted the driveshaft off on my 1960 New Yorker (which I wish I had back) on a hill on a back road. I couldn't even go for help, I had to set there and hold the brake pedal until someone came by to throw a chock under the wheel so I wouldn't drift backwards down the hill. A broken driveshaft meant no parking brake!!

IIRC Chrysler cars didn't get a "Park" until 1961 or 2.

[W3SLK]

The neat thing I remember about the Chryslers and the Plymouths is that the heater controls were pretty much a mirror image of the drive controls! Everything even steven.

[w1vtp]

My uncle had a HUGE Chrysler sedan 1950 something and it was a beauty. I called it the magic car coz he could make it shift by taking his foot off the gas. It looked like a stick shift and had a clutch. You could hear a clank sometimes when it shifted.

Fred

I remember the old Desoto that my aunt had that was like that.  I remember telling my dad to take his foot off the gas so it would shift.  He would tell me to shut up - just couldn't get used to the idea.  I think it just had one gear forward and one reverse and a torque converter.  Very crude

Al

[w3jn]

Paul,
      the early Chrysler automatics (cast iron ones) did not have a "park". They relied strictly on the "emergency brake" mounted on the tailstock of the transmission. This could create some unique problems!! I twisted the driveshaft off on my 1960 New Yorker (which I wish I had back) on a hill on a back road. I couldn't even go for help, I had to set there and hold the brake pedal until someone came by to throw a chock under the wheel so I wouldn't drift backwards down the hill. A broken driveshaft meant no parking brake!!

IIRC Chrysler cars didn't get a "Park" until 1961 or 2.

My '62 Imperial had the pushbutton transmission, but no park position.  There was a foot-operated parking brake that, as you mentioned, operated on the transmission tailstock.  My '65 Imperial had a conventional shift quadrant with a "park" position, but it was still cable operated, and the "park" position was always problematic - I usually just parked it in neutral with the parking brake set.  I believe some of the Chrysler products of the era had the starter engage switch behind the "neutral" button, so you mashed "neutral" to start.  My '62 Imperial had a conventional key start though.

The '62 was truly a cool car.  Square steering wheel, foot-tuned radio, electro-luminescent dashboard, unique door locks (just push the inside door handle down to lock, lift to open), "sparrow strainer" tail lights strapped on top of the tailfins... and it would handily outdo my buddy's '79 TransAm on both the straightway AND the curves, which pissed him off to no end 

[The Slab Bacon]

the Electro-luminescent dash was about the coolest thing since sliced bread!! I used to love the one on my '60 New Yorker!! Even the meter pointers lit up!! It had a small inverter power supply up under the dash that furnished the 100v or so to light it. If you had the engine shut off and it was very quiet, you could hear it hum when you turned on the lights. I thought that instrument cluster was so kool that I saved it when I cut the car up years ago. As a matter of fact, it is still on the shelf in my moms basement.

My '64 Chrysler wagon had park. that was the car that started me NEVER using the parking brake. The cables would always freeze up in the winter, leaving me stranded and looking for a blow torch to unfreeze them!! (that car was the biggest POS I ever owned)  So I guess the parking sprag appeared on Torqueflites in '63 or 4.
I seem to remember the "park" selector being a small sliding lever that went horizontally under the pushbuttons??

[flintstone mop]

The older cars in the USA had so much class. There are archive pictures from my wife's country, Philippines 1950's, and the vehicles there in Manila were American made cars and the familiar Volkswagon.
It's ashame that around the 70's, and the USA's rude awakening that oil was not going to flow so freely or cheaply, was going to stress the auto industry. And the stupid emission standards were addressed so poorly. USA made cars used the cheapest way out and 12 MPG. It seems the higher wages paid to workers really didn't give us a better car.
This thread has been kinda educating. Automatic transmissions are a little more involved than what they used to be.

Fred

[Tom WA3KLR]

My dad's 1953 Desoto had a clutch to start going and then would automatically shift to second.

With the locking torque converters the gas mileage advantage of the manual has gone away.  Despite the complexity of the auto transmission, they've been reliable for me and it's good to have the hands free for the microphone.   The only problem I ever had was a band broke in my 1975 Maverick.

I change the transaxle fluid regularly in my 1997 Camry which now has 223,000 miles, going for 300,000.