The preslector gearbox

[mr_rye89]

Originally Posted by Sandy G

Do NOT limit yrself toa small car. Maybe you don't need something as huge as my Excursion-Even I don't need it ALL the time-but some day you WILL want/need to have something that can hold a LOT of stuff.

This. My daily driver/commuter cars have become progressively smaller and less practical (91 Supra->91 Geo Prizm GSi->01 Miata) So now I have a "stable" of cars. One being a 90 Dodge W250 single cab long bed where I can slide full sheets of plywood in it and close the tailgate, and pull anything I want. The other is an 85 Peugeot 505 wagon, rear seats fold down flat and there's 7+ feet of floor to play with, it has a limited slip rear diff, and it floats over shitty roads like a magic carpet.

On a more related to the thread note, I've yet to own a car with an automatic transmission. All manual here. I don't really like automatics because they always seem to shift too late/soon and seem to lug the engine. There's this Ford E250 van at work I had to use to take a sound system (4 big JBL EONs and stands) up to Santa Fe from Albuquerque (a 2100 foot climb in elevation) and it was a hard drive. I had to turn O/D off a couple of times and it always seemed to be lugging the engine. It might be due for a tune up though.

Also Miatas are no fun in auto......

[Sandy G]

The thing about the Mighty Valdez is that w/its ginormous size, V-10 power, all the rest, I've never felt like I had "Topped it Out"-No matter how much Junque I've had in it, how much weight it had, I still had a a LOT more weight, or size of stuff to go. I've been "Shanghaied" moving people & their stuff a number of times, & trust me, it just is a helluva lot easier to be "Over-trucked" in one of those situations.

[Telecolor 3007]

Sandy G, this is the test that you are talkin about? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fPF4fBGNK0U

[MadMan]

Originally Posted by Telecolor 3007

Sandy G, this is the test that you are talkin about? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fPF4fBGNK0U

That test is fake.

Well, I mean, ok, it is real. And I admit, those old cars from the 50s-70s were not built to be crashed, and behave very differently in a crash than a modern car built to pass crash test regulations. And to that effect, were not as safe as modern cars. Of course, I'm talking only about structurally, negating the lack of airbags, seat belts, and head rests. But, you can literally see the rust cloud coming out of that old Chevy on impact. I am a mechanic, in a place that salts their roads, I know car rust. That is not like a little bit of surface rust or something, that is A LOT of rust. There's one shot where you can see the rust literally pouring out of the frame onto the floor! That Bel Air was not as structurally sound as it was when it was built.

Besides, it wasn't a fair fight anyway.

You wanna see old cars fighting old cars? Check this out :P

[Electronic M]

Originally Posted by MadMan

That test is fake.

Well, I mean, ok, it is real. And I admit, those old cars from the 50s-70s were not built to be crashed, and behave very differently in a crash than a modern car built to pass crash test regulations. And to that effect, were not as safe as modern cars. Of course, I'm talking only about structurally, negating the lack of airbags, seat belts, and head rests. But, you can literally see the rust cloud coming out of that old Chevy on impact. I am a mechanic, in a place that salts their roads, I know car rust. That is not like a little bit of surface rust or something, that is A LOT of rust. There's one shot where you can see the rust literally pouring out of the frame onto the floor! That Bel Air was not as structurally sound as it was when it was built.

Besides, it wasn't a fair fight anyway.

You wanna see old cars fighting old cars? Check this out :P

Also the X frame GMs introduced in 59s were among the least crash safe chassis of the era...add rust to that and about the only thing that could make that car less safe is if they packed it with dynamite.

[benman94]

Some of the history of GM's Hydramatic has been a bit bungled.

The Hydramatic started as a Cadillac development in the early 1930s, and was continued under the auspices of Central Research. Cadillac, Olds, and Buick lent engineers out for the early development work. This lead to the Automatic Safety Transmission that required one to operate a clutch to move between reverse, neutral, and the forward position. Once in the forward position, you could switch between forward gears at will without using the clutch. This was offered for a model year or two on Olds and Buick. It wasn't exceptionally popular.

It was decided to give the fully automatic Hydramatic transmission to Olds in late 1939 for the 1940 model year in case the design was a flop. This pissed off the Buick engineers, and thus they waited for Oliver Kelley's transmission, which would eventually become the Buick Dynaflow transmission. The Dynaflow saw some use during the war in military applications and would become and option on Buicks starting in 1947 for the 1948 model year.

Olds and Cadillac engineers were able to iron out some minor flaws with the Hydramatic, and it became an option in late 1940 for the 1941 model year on Cadillac. The Hydramatic was a hit in the prewar years and would return when postwar production resumed at both divisions. After the war, Pontiac was given the Hydramatic as well. The original Hydramatic is actually fairly efficient for an early automatic. The Olds 303 V8 paired with a Hydramatic transmission was pretty good on gas for the time.

Chevrolet would introduce the Powerglide transmission, which was a tangential development from the same work done by Kelley on the Dynaflow. They're extremely similar to one another, but were developed more or less separately from 1946 onward. The Powerglide is fairly efficient for an early automatic; the Dynaflow turned Buicks into even bigger gluttons. Then I suppose if one could afford a Buick you wouldn't have been worrying about the price of gas either...

GMC trucks inherited the Hydramatic from Pontiac in the early 1950s as they shared engineering talent often, due mostly to proximity. It was beefed up and modified a bit for use in light duty trucks, but is otherwise more or less the same as any other post-war Hydramatic.

Chevrolet was originally supposed to receive a larger Dynaflow transmission for their trucks; such a design had been worked out during the war for the Hellcat tanks, etc. But due to the sharing of components between GMC and Chevrolet trucks that already existed, it was decided to simply use the same truck Hydramatic for both makes.

[Sandy G]

Something I'd about give my Left Nut for-And I know y'all are gonna Hee-Haw at me is a 1954 Chevy Model 3807 Tonne Panel wagon w/the Truck Hydramatic, full chrome grille fender stripe mouldings, passenger seat, tinted glass, AM radio, & 7.00 X 17 wheels & tires... Why, you ask ? Why NOT,,,, I'd reply. Last year of the legendary "Advance Design" light truck styling, 1st year for the slushbox, & I guess I'd have to drop a at least a 350 in it, as well-They only came w/a 216, or maybe a 235, neither of which could pull a greasy string outta a cat's rectum. I'd fix up the interior w/carpet, insulation. & the 3 bench seats from a period Suburban, except of course I'd redo 'em in leather.. I'd paint it maroon, or go w/that dark green Chevy used on their lt trucks, & paint on the side "Sandy's TV/Radio Sales & Service" in authentic 1950s script... Now would that toy be the Cat's @ss or what ?!? But a dreadful lack of Dinero will make it, sadly, only a dream..

[Telecolor 3007]

Tastes are varying from Europe to U.S.A.
But still I wonder why British stoped making those cars, since in Great Britain not all car had syncromesh for all speeds in the '50's + it would have had been an intresting export thing to continental Europe.
Here is one lady drivin a preselector gearbox car (I want that model of car): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x00aXHI2tTY
I want to buy brochoures for British cars with preselector gerabox, but, man, they are expensive!

[KentTeffeteller]

Originally Posted by benman94

Some of the history of GM's Hydramatic has been a bit bungled.

The Hydramatic started as a Cadillac development in the early 1930s, and was continued under the auspices of Central Research. Cadillac, Olds, and Buick lent engineers out for the early development work. This lead to the Automatic Safety Transmission that required one to operate a clutch to move between reverse, neutral, and the forward position. Once in the forward position, you could switch between forward gears at will without using the clutch. This was offered for a model year or two on Olds and Buick. It wasn't exceptionally popular.

It was decided to give the fully automatic Hydramatic transmission to Olds in late 1939 for the 1940 model year in case the design was a flop. This pissed off the Buick engineers, and thus they waited for Oliver Kelley's transmission, which would eventually become the Buick Dynaflow transmission. The Dynaflow saw some use during the war in military applications and would become and option on Buicks starting in 1947 for the 1948 model year.

Olds and Cadillac engineers were able to iron out some minor flaws with the Hydramatic, and it became an option in late 1940 for the 1941 model year on Cadillac. The Hydramatic was a hit in the prewar years and would return when postwar production resumed at both divisions. After the war, Pontiac was given the Hydramatic as well. The original Hydramatic is actually fairly efficient for an early automatic. The Olds 303 V8 paired with a Hydramatic transmission was pretty good on gas for the time.

Chevrolet would introduce the Powerglide transmission, which was a tangential development from the same work done by Kelley on the Dynaflow. They're extremely similar to one another, but were developed more or less separately from 1946 onward. The Powerglide is fairly efficient for an early automatic; the Dynaflow turned Buicks into even bigger gluttons. Then I suppose if one could afford a Buick you wouldn't have been worrying about the price of gas either...

GMC trucks inherited the Hydramatic from Pontiac in the early 1950s as they shared engineering talent often, due mostly to proximity. It was beefed up and modified a bit for use in light duty trucks, but is otherwise more or less the same as any other post-war Hydramatic.

Chevrolet was originally supposed to receive a larger Dynaflow transmission for their trucks; such a design had been worked out during the war for the Hellcat tanks, etc. But due to the sharing of components between GMC and Chevrolet trucks that already existed, it was decided to simply use the same truck Hydramatic for both makes.

Another reason GMC got Hydramatic was due to GMC using Pontiac engines in some of the trucks, especially V8 engines when GMC offered a V8. Those two divisions seemed to share components a lot.