The Stovebolt Site Forums The Shop Area Engine Shop Hey grandpa do you remember......

Hi guys I was wondering if any grandpa could tell us what that he remember about the automatic transmission powerglide in comparatives term of use with the modern ones. Is a fact that the brakes in those years are very different from today. Also if this was a extra why we don't have much trucks with this option?
How was the first gear? can we compare with the low gear from the manual 4 shifts?
Thanks

The Powerglide in the early 50's was not a option for trucks.
I belive in 1954 a Hydramatic 4 speed was a option.

From Wikpedia-http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Powerglide

All Chevrolet Powerglide transmissions had two gears.

Of course the early Powerglide vehicles (1950 Chevrolet passenger cars) had different types of brakes than the disc brakes (with ABS) that are used today.

Truck Hydra-Matic transmissions (1953 in GMC and 1954 in Chevrolet trucks) were used with the same brakes as manual transmission trucks. The 4th gear is a 1:1 drive just as in the 3 and 4 speed transmissions. First gear in the Hydra-Matics is not as low as the first gear in a standard (SM420) 3-speed. The transmission shifts from 1st to second at around 5 mph (it can be adjusted but the adjustable difference is minimal for the first-to-second shift point).

Tim

If I remember right the first automatic put in GM trucks was the 4 speed hydramatic,which was a very good transmission.Most people shied away from automatics in trucks, at that time. I had a 1953 Olds with the 4 speed hydramatic and it was very fast for its time.The Powerglides were a two speed automatic,and were not much for speed when installed with the old six bangers.however they were great when driving on snow and ice.As Chevy later on went with the small block V/8s the Powerglides worked out pretty good,course that was a lot more power.The Buick Dynaflow was also a slow two speed automatic,but with the straight 8 motors they got around pretty good.The older ones you are referring to,were the first automatics of that time and most people who bought them were not looking for performance.It was the same with Fords they had the Fordomatics, Mercomatics,etc.It was the early to mid 60s before Chevy started using the hydramatic units.Whereas Pontiac,Olds,and Cadillac started using hyramatics in the late 40s and early 50s. In fact Oldsmobile started using hydramatics in 1941,and I believe Cadillac also.

As a teenager in the 50/60s I couldn't afford an automatic. In fact I couldn't afford anything that cost money. My neighborhood was so poor you'd see rats eating onions and crying.
My uncle was a F*%$ salesman back then and he always told me not to get any old car with an automatic tranny; said if that thing went out it would cost more than the car was worth to fix it.

The GM Hydra-Matic transmission was first used in the 1940 Oldsmobile (that were available for purchase in late 1939).

These heavy cast-iron transmission were used ("battle-tested") in tanks and other military vehicles in WWII. By 1954/55 (I think), GMC sold a version of the Hydra-Matic in heavy trucks.

In 1955, there was a GMC heavy-truck 8-speed Hydra-Matic (7 forward and 1 reverse) that had two stacked gear trains (resulting with as much as a .70 overdrive). An additional 2-speed or 3-speed reduction-gearbox was attached directly to the rear of that seven speed Twin Hydra-Matic transmission (giving 14 or 21 forward gears). The lowest range of the 3-speed reduction gearbox was called the "creeper" range by GMC.

Tim

Yeah,your bringing back memories now. While doing my three years in Uncles Sams Army I drove a GMC duece and a half truck with the heavy duty hydramatic.Got out of the Army and bought a 1957 Ford conv. with the 312 cu.in.TBird Special engine,245 HP.and naturally a three speed standard,I did not want nothing to do with automatics back then. That old 57 Ford beat a lot of fast cars drag racing. I remember the first day I had it I raced a guy who had a 56 Merc. with the same engine and automatic.I left him sitting and he could not figure how he got beat so bad.One that sticks in my mind was a friend of mine had a 1953 Olds 88 with hydramatic. I beat his Olds but if I would have missed a gear he would have won it.It was that close.I had more fun with that Ford than I have ever had with any other car.Since then automatics have been improved a lot and if ya wanna go drag racing an automatic just might be the answer.

do you remember vacuum booster brakes

Yeah, I still have Vacuum assist brakes on my 80 International 27 passenger school bus.

I can't speak for trucks but as far as Powerglides in cars... The average person liked them because they didn't have to deal with a stick shift. Performance minded drivers despised them and stuck with stick shifts.

There is no comparison between a Powerglide and modern automatic transmission. It's like comparing a 6-cylinder engine from then to a 6-cylinder engine of today. Apples and oranges.

Drum brakes in those days had weaknesses compared to today's disk brakes but they worked just fine because people didn't drive like morons the way they drive today. You'd be hard pressed to find a traffic light today without skid marks where people lock up their brakes to stop because they are constantly driving on the edge while yakking on the phone. Back then, that NEVER happened other than in VERY rare occasions. If you want to know just how dramatically society has changed, drive a 1950s car.

It cracks me up to read someone wondering if they can drive their "babbit pounding 216" 25 miles... Dang man, that engine moved people and freight all across the planet in it's day and it can still do it today, just a lot slower. These old vehicles wouldn't have survived all these years if they were on the verge of failure the way people portray them today.

Does that answer your question... sonny?

Not only do I remember vacuum assist brakes but I remember the 46 oz. OJ cans that were used as vacuum reservoirs.

The Powerglides with early sixes would barely get out of thier own way. Pushing on the gas pedal compares to stepping on a wet sponge. But I also remember them behind the big W block engines and taking a LOT of abuse and standing up to it. Something that could never be said of the Buick DynaFlow or the Chevy TurboGlide.

I agree with Czechman. That is an excellent post!

It is my understanding that the early powerglides were a two speed tranmission that did not shift automatically. You would normally start off in drive which was high but you could select low to get moving faster and then shift mmanually into drive. This information came from a very good source on the VCCA.

Dear grandpas,
thanks for all Valuable information. The modern automatics transmissions have a radiator. How can the old ones cool the system?
thanks

Those early automatics were much more primative than todays models in driveability; although they were probably more reliable than most of todays units.

Like todays automatics the early ones sucked down the gasoline. And I still don't like them. Manual choke, manual steering, manual brakes, manual transmission AND GOOD FUEL ECONOMY for me!

Jon.

"Slip and Slide with Powerglide"!! My very first car a 51 Chev hardtop had this boat anchor of a transmission. Any other car with a stick shift could beat one of these in a drag race. When you really stomped on the gas not much happened, at first, then the car would begin to moan like a very sick cow, then it would begin to roll. It was like watching the first 20 feet of a soap box derby race and once the groaning stopped, it was nice and quiet.

In regard to Truckernix question on how the PG shifted I would have to disagree that it took off in high range. As I remember them they started in the low range and shifted to the high range as would a F*&dOmatic or Hydramatic. You could feel the shift point. The L position was to keep it in the lower range and allowed manual shift to the high gear. It could also be used as a grade retarder.

I think the info you got was describing how a TurboGlide worked. It had only one range and a Gr which was used as grade retard. There was no discernable shift point in a TG which was the same as a Dynaflow. The TG was total junk and only lasted for a couple of years. People didn't trust them and with good reason.

Heres hoping all are having a great Thanksgiving day.

Concerning your question about brakes:

Hydraulic drum brakes (standard equipment from the mid-1930's on) worked very well most of the time. These brakes WOULD lock up in panic situations. The two biggest drawbacks to drum brakes then (and now) were fading with lots of continual use (the drums do not dissipate heat as quickly as discs) and failure to work well (if at all) when wet.

It may be a surprise to younger or urban readers, but driving through water as late as the 1970's was a rural fact of life. Lots of "low water bridges" (these were simply areas of concrete placed in the bed of a stream) and streams flowing over the road with every hard rain. After driving through water, it was necessary to keep one foot on the brake petal and another on the footfeed for a couple of hundred feet to dry the brakes. The first vehicle I owned with front discs was a mid-1960's Corvette. After demonstrating the brakes in water to a number of rural Missouri neighbors, LOTS of new cars were sold in that area of Missouri with OPTIONAL disc brakes just because of the water.

But other than these two issues, brakes worked very well, although some of the early versions that required adjusting were somewhat of a pain. Once the self-adjusting brakes were standard, they worked, for the most part, as well as discs.

Jon.

In "D" you started off in low gear and the transmission shifted automatically into high once you reached a certain speed. The shift quadrant had a "L" position for holding the trans in low gear.

Early automatic transmissions came in many flavors and oddities... I seem to recall one that you had to clutch but it shifted by itself, but that wasn't on a Chevy... a Kaiser? Geez, am I really that old?

Keep in mind that the main reason for "automatic" transmissions back then was the selling point that you could drive without shifting gears... imagine what an incredible thing that must have been? Not having to deal with clutches, grinding first gear, that column linkage getting hung up, ease of parking, rocking out of a snow rut... The first automatic transmissions were like magic to an awe-struck buying public.

I grew up around the first independent shop in Nashville, Tennessee to work on automatic transmissions. In the late 1940's, my father opened a general automotive shop, after his tour in the USAF as a B-17 pilot. He specialized in precision tune-up, carburetor work, (Carter factory service center), and automatic transmissions.

The Powerglide was introduced in the 1951 Chevy passenger car, along with the early 235 babbit-pounder engine. Chevy and GMC trucks got the 4-speed Hydramatic, a beefed-up version of the Olds/Pontiac/Cadillac transmission. By the early 60's, (1962, I think) a few Chevy pickups were equipped with the aluminum-case powerglide, which was a major redesign of the transmission. It only lasted about 3 years or so, replaced by the Turbo 350.

The first automatic-equipped car to arrive in Nashville was a 1951 BelAir 2-door hardtop, also the first of its kind, accompanied by a huge advertising campaign which was launched to introduce its roll-out, with all the hoopla that a new model received back then. The night before it was to hit the showroom for the first time, an bunch of salesman were out raising hell in the new demonstrator, impressed with its performance, and generally having a good time. It wouldn't surprise me if more than a few drinks might have been consumed along the way. As they were running along at about 80 MPH or so, somebody asked "What happens if you put it in reverse?" Somebody else spoke up- - -"It won't hurt a Studebaker!" (The Stude automatic had a reverse lockout above 5 MPH, something Chevy engineers didn't think about) The driver said, "Well, a Chevy is better than any old Studebaker"- - - -accompanied by a yank on the shifter! Reverse promptly engaged, splitting the transmission housing wide open! I think it trashed the rear end and the driveshaft along the way. Tow truck time! The nearest replacement transmission was somewwhere in Michigan, so the car sat in the showroom for about two weeks, with stacks of newspaper under it, soaking up the drips from the broken case.

Early Powerglides had a cast iron case, and they weren't famous for performance or durability. They did have a torque converter which multiplied engine torque for breakaway from a stop, something the 4-speed Hydramatic didn't have. It used a fluid coupling instead, which got almost a 100% speed lockup, but did not increase torque. A torque converter almost doubles engine torque just before the car starts to move, but it can only achieve a 90% speed lockup. Some of the early converters like in the 1949 Studebaker "Automatic" and the 55 Packard Ultramatic incorporated a lockup clutch in the converter to eliminate this slippage at highway speed, something that came back into production with the 700R4 and a lot of other supposedly "modern" automatics. The Powerglide was a 2-speed, "Too low and too high" was the usual comment about it. The Chrysler Powerflite was also a 2-speed.

Ford used a 3-speed "Fordomatic" that started out in 2nd. gear in the early models and made an automatic 2-3 shift. It had to be shifted to Low range to get 1st. gear engaged. By about 1958 or so, they changed the shift pattern and added a selector position to choose between a 1st. or 2nd. gear start in Drive. This trans got renamed the "Cruise-O-Matic".

Now, Grasshopper, anything else you'd like to know from the oldtimer?
Jerry

Czechman, the 1939 Olds Hydramatic had a clutch. It was used for starting and stopping, but the shifts were automatic. By 1940, GM had figured out how to incorporate a fluid coupling that allowed the engine to idle in gear.

The Dodge "Gyro-Matic" and the Chrysler "M-6" transmission was an electrically-shifted 4-speed, with 2 speeds in Low range, and 2 speeds in High. It was clutched to engage either low or high, and the next ratio was selected electrically by releasing the throttle back to idle. It could be shifted 1-2-4, or 1-3-4, depending on when the low/high manual shift was made. I found I could let my 1951 Chrysler do the 1-2 shift, manually shift to high range, and hit the electric kickdown switch by going to full throttle, and make it use all 4 gears. I'm amazed that old flathead 6 survived as long as it did!
Jerry

I'm not a grandpa yet, but my first car was a 67 Impala Supersport with a powerglide behind the good old 283. As I recall it would move pretty good from standing still, but 2nd gear came so late that the engine was really whining before it dropped into high gear. Then the RPMs dropped something fierce and the acceleration basically took a dive. Once it got up to 60 you could keep it accelerating a long time, the motor would push it a lot faster than that old car should have gone. It seems to me that if I punched it good at 55 or 60 it would drop down into first (passing gear?), but practically speaking I can't believe my own memory - the motor should have been completely wound out at that speed in first.
It might have been a dependable tranny, but I wouldn't want to drive one now.
Karl

This thread really brought back some good memories; thanks to the thread starter for beginning the thread.

I grew up in rural Missouri in the 1950's and early 1960's. Vehicles were much more simplistic then as compared to today; and MUCH more reliable.

Yes, if you compare todays cars to those 50 years ago; todays versions drive better, ride better, are more comfortable (AC), use more fuel, and break more often.

In the 1950's and 1960's, one virtually never saw a vehicle abandoned along the roadside. Tow trucks were called for accidents and Foorrdd engine fires in vehicles the owner had not yet replaced the leakyholley carburetor. Leakyholley was a single word, simiiiar to damyankee.

Yes, the vehicles had problems: Chevrolet burned up points, and burned out rod bearings, Foorrdd had a water pump issue (plus the aforementioned leakyholley), Studebakers went through rod bearings and leaked oil, and leaked oil, and leaked more oil. I had very little experience with Mopars, as no one locally would buy them. I remember asking my Dad why, and he told me that if a dog lifted his leg along side of a tire (politically correct version, not actual quotation) the Mopar wouldn't start!

Most of the rural population could do most of their own repairs. There were a few repair shops that would do brake jobs, change Foorrdd waterpumps, replace Rochester B carbs with Carters, replace leakyholleys with Autolites, etc. I don't remember seeing a transmission shop until the 1970's.

Mother and Dad used to love to travel, so we made several vacation trips in the 1950's through Canada, to the west coast, etc. A friend of Dad's had a fold-out camper we used to borrow to pull on these trips. The only car trouble I can remember is burning out a voltage regulator somewhere in rural Montana about 4 A.M., and Dad pulling off and waiting until daylight to continue. But we made it to the next town, changed the regulator, and continued our trip.

Dad would never trade vehicles with less than 100 K miles. He did change engines (got a used engine from a junkyard) in an old truck with about 250 K miles. The original engine was still running, but burned quite a bit of oil, and Dad no longer trusted it.

Brand loyalty was fierce. Most kids would buy a used car (when they could afford their first) of the same brand their Dad and Grandad drove.

Again, thanks for causing me to think about these memories.

Jon.

As with Jon I grew up in a a rural area and not many Chryslers around but I seem to recall the 1st semi-automatics they used had a clutch pedal and three on the tree. I thought they used torque ampliphiers or converters which allowed you to take off in high gear. But I'm a foggy on early Chryslers because we were Oldsmobile people.

Now it's time for some football and pumpkin pie washed down with a couple of fingers of Crown Royal so don't make this old grandpa remember anymore today. Pretty hard on my worn down ol' brain.

Dave, the MoPar system used a fluid coupling bolted to the crankshaft, with a conventional manual clutch on a flywheel-like plate at the output of the fluid drive. There were both regular 3-speed versions and the semi-automatic 4-speeds. The fluid drives had their own reservoirs in some applications, while others used engine oil, circulated from the crankcase by the engine lubricating system. I remember a 53 Plymouth driven by a co-worker that took 9 quarts of oil on a change when both the crankcase and the clutch reservoir were drained. The mechanical seal on the fluid drive units had a nasty habit of leaking, and it was a real PITA to replace one. As I remember, some of the semi-auto transmissions weighed close to 200 pounds!
Jerry