|
|
Post by wally324 on Nov 6, 2014 10:21:36 GMT -5
I want to upgrade the transmission in my 65 Cutlass. I have a choice between a Saginaw 4 speed and an old Hydramatic that came out of a '55 Olds. Would it be crazy to use that old Hydramatic? They were a super strong trans. I checked and I can get a rebuild kit for it. Am I crazy to do it? |
|
|
|
Post by stan65cutlass on Nov 6, 2014 13:01:25 GMT -5
well, i would definitly go manual shift but dont know a thing about the hydramatic
|
|
|
|
Post by wally324 on Nov 6, 2014 13:42:43 GMT -5
The Hydramatic was a 4 Speed and was the transmission that B&M used as a basis for their drag racing transmission. It was the predecessor to the Jetaway.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 6, 2014 15:36:49 GMT -5
I want to upgrade the transmission in my 65 Cutlass. I have a choice between a Saginaw 4 speed and an old Hydramatic that came out of a '55 Olds. Would it be crazy to use that old Hydramatic? They were a super strong trans. I checked and I can get a rebuild kit for it. Am I crazy to do it? This is going back some. The key word I see in your post is "upgrade" Things to consider, 55 was AROUND the transition. The hydromatic your looking to buy could be either a single or dual coupling. Completely different transmissions. The dual coupling is not (to my knowledge) able to hold first gear. And as your probably aware, there are no similarities to the 2 speed switch pitch at all. JUST THE NAME Get the numbers, check the patterns, check starter fit. If you have a lot of time, a sharp pencil, and your bored ? |
|
|
|
Post by wally324 on Nov 6, 2014 15:56:52 GMT -5
Dave, I have the transmission already. In fact I have both a Hydramatic and a Jetaway. The transition occurred in 1956 when the Hyrdramatic plant burned and they had to make a switch to the Jetaway. The reason I call it an "upgrade" is the hydramatic was a four speed and tough.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 6, 2014 16:32:11 GMT -5
Dave, I have the transmission already. In fact I have both a Hydramatic and a Jetaway. The transition occurred in 1956 when the Hyrdramatic plant burned and they had to make a switch to the Jetaway. The reason I call it an "upgrade" is the hydramatic was a four speed and tough. Alrighty then, looks like you have things under control |
|
|
|
Post by looney1 on Nov 6, 2014 19:46:34 GMT -5
Not mention, heavier than a dead preacher!
|
|
|
|
Post by wally324 on Nov 6, 2014 19:47:50 GMT -5
Just talked to my machinist. He told me that the crank in a 330 is not drilled for a pilot bushing. Both the 4speed and the Hydramatic require a pilot bushing. What do I do now? Pull down the 330 and get the crank machined to accept a pilot bushing?
|
|
|
|
Post by stan65cutlass on Nov 6, 2014 21:57:27 GMT -5
thats what it sounds like to me, its possible to flip it upsidedown and just pull the crank. i had one of those trans in a 64 bonneyville, 4 speed auto, 1st was real quick to shift alrite. most people missed it and figured 3 speed
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 7, 2014 10:07:48 GMT -5
I had a 1955 Olds 98 with the 4 speed auto trans. First gear just gets the car rolling and up shift by 5 MPH. (these old cars were heavy with small motors) As other have said you can miss the shift. The nice part was, even with the small motor/big car, you could spin the tires off the line.
Your best alternates are 200R4, turbo 350, turbo 400, or jetaway, in that order. The 55 trans is way to much work for a light car.
|
|
|
|
Post by 64b09 on Nov 7, 2014 16:07:45 GMT -5
Would it even bolt up? I thought older trans had different bell housings.
|
|
|
|
Post by wally324 on Nov 7, 2014 19:23:18 GMT -5
Jamie, It would require an adapter to mate the Hyramatic to the 330. The 324 it came off of had a portion of the bell housing cast to the back of the block. The more we talk about it, I'm thinking the 4 speed Saginaw is the way to go.
|
|
|
|
Post by john442 on Nov 7, 2014 19:31:14 GMT -5
I prefer 4 speed manual to auto. If you already have the 55 trans and can do the rebuild that makes the decision easier but you still have to deal with the hastle of pulling and reinstalling the motor and getting the crank drilled. Not to mention the added cost for the drilling, new bearings and the trans rebuild kit.
Isn't a t400 also a 4 speed trans and isn't it as strong (didn't they use it 427, 454 and 455's)? |
|
|
|
Post by oldstata on Nov 7, 2014 21:18:29 GMT -5
I prefer 4 speed manual to auto. If you already have the 55 trans and can do the rebuild that makes the decision easier but you still have to deal with the hastle of pulling and reinstalling the motor and getting the crank drilled. Not to mention the added cost for the drilling, new bearings and the trans rebuild kit.
Isn't a t400 also a 4 speed trans and isn't it as strong (didn't they use it 427, 454 and 455's)? I believe the th400 is a 3 speed the 200r4 has over drive but I think they need a good rebuild to hold up but can be built strong the 700r4 is a 4 speed also but I am not sure if they were made bop or not |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 7, 2014 21:24:26 GMT -5
I want to upgrade the transmission in my 65 Cutlass. I have a choice between a Saginaw 4 speed and an old Hydramatic that came out of a '55 Olds. Would it be crazy to use that old Hydramatic? They were a super strong trans. I checked and I can get a rebuild kit for it. Am I crazy to do it? This is going back some. The key word I see in your post is "upgrade" Things to consider, 55 was AROUND the transition. The hydromatic your looking to buy could be either a single or dual coupling. Completely different transmissions. The dual coupling i s not (to my knowledge) able to hold first gear. And as your probably aware, there are no similarities to the 2 speed switch pitch at all. JUST THE NAME Get the numbers, check the patterns, check starter fit.If you have a lot of time, a sharp pencil, and your bored ?Just in the event my first post was in invisible ink. And since the title of your post was " Is this a crazy idea? " And I was trying to be civil by highlighting SOME of the negatives. I`ll now leave my civility at the door and give my first thought. Not only is it a CRAZY idea, it`s nonsensical |
|
|
|
Post by wally324 on Nov 8, 2014 6:23:54 GMT -5
Hey Dave, tells us what you think.
When I said "upgrade" I was talking about going from a two speed auto to a four speed auto.
Since I have to machine the crank for either trans I have made the decision to go with the 4 speed manual.
As far as I am concerned this is what a forum is all about, throw out ideas and see what people think.
|
|
|
|
Post by stan65cutlass on Nov 8, 2014 10:58:37 GMT -5
go wally, join us clutch dumpers
|
|
|
|
Post by joepadavano on Nov 8, 2014 15:42:03 GMT -5
I'll concur. This is nonsensical. Neither option is an "upgrade". If you want a 4 speed AT, get a properly built 200-4R. If you want a stick, get a Muncie and either have the crank machined or use the conversion pilot bearing sold my most Olds aftermarket houses.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 8, 2014 15:57:38 GMT -5
I'll concur. This is nonsensical. Neither option is an "upgrade". If you want a 4 speed AT, get a properly built 200-4R. If you want a stick, get a Muncie and either have the crank machined or use the conversion pilot bearing sold my most Olds aftermarket houses. Long ago I mentioned that you had the patience of a saint when it comes to questions that are somewhat off the wall. For this I give you a thumbs-up. I have exactly the reverse reaction, too me it`s like pissin in the wind !! Your only gonna get your shoes wet |
|
