Hey, I've got a '63 Dynamic 88 that i'd like to upgrade the tranny, it's got the origional 3 speed jetaway that works great ... but it's just unnatural the way that thing drops from 1st to 2nd.

I need to know if a TH350 is the answer and the trouble that i'm gonna run into when I do it

thanks.

 

'63 big cars had 4 speeds, and were not called "Jetaway" in the FSM.

Make sure the engine is in proper tune. Then set the idle speed to 500 RPM, in drive, and give it a try.

Norm

 

so what you're saying is that i've probably got a 4 SPEED tranny, when i'm driving , I only
count 3 (unless you are counting reverse) and the RPM drop from 1st to 2nd is rather steep.

by the way ... what's the proper name for the trans. that origionally came in the 1963 Olds D-88?

 

The transmission you have is a Hydramatic, or, the Slim Jim Rotohydramatic. They are pieces of junk! I have one in my 64 98 and it is DEFINITELY the weakest link in my car.

Like 88 Coupe suggested you should tune up your car before you decide to do anything expensive and difficult (yes you can put a modern tranny in your car). There is a mechanical throttle valve linkage with the Hydramatic and it is difficult to get right. To set it you have to make sure the throttle valve on the tranny is in the zero position at the same time your carburetor is in the zero position. When you hook up the throttle valve to the carb you take the adjustment out until there is no slop in the throttle valve linkage.

I know it sounds difficult but if you look at your set up then it should make sense. If you need more guidance then just let me know. I have the orignial shop manuals for my 64.

 

unnatural the way that thing drops from 1st to 2nd.

Just what I should have expected.

Read it again. This time, read what is there. Not what you think is there.

What I'm saying, is, what I said.

I did not say probably.

If your use of CAPS, is an attempt at intimidation, it did not work. If was intended to be rude, it did work.

I do not do trannys. http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=tranny

You can find the fourth one, using a tachometer.

I do not do steep. http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=steep

Using the context of your statement to translate "steep" and assuming your trans is based on the '56 to '60 Jetaway Hydramatic: You are talking about the 2-3 shift.

Read it again. I did not say anything about reverse?

It is called Hydramatic (4-S) in the '63 FSM.

Norm

 

Disregard the above advice. It does not apply to this situation.

A 2-1 downshift would be called a "drop" to a lower gear. With the improper term in mind, I used 2-1, to which the advice would have applied.

My apologies to everyone.

Norm

 

He asked for the "official" name. Is that it?

How, and why, are they "junk"?

Since the engine and rear end are nearly "bullet proof", being the "weakest link" does not make the trans "junk".

Norm

 

I disagree Norm. I have done alot of reading on the Slim Jim and from everything I've read it is not a strong transmission at all. In fact, in the past month that I have been posting regularly on the site I have seen about 5 or 6 people with negative comments on the early Oldsmobile transmissions.

I mentioned that the "official" name of the transmission is the "Hydramatic" if you buy parts for it from Kanter or Fatsco transmissions then it is referred to as the Slim Jim. These are the only two suppliers I know of for parts for this transmission.

Also, if you are going to quote a dictionary use a real one.

http://www.m-w.com/dictionary/tranny

 

WOW ...I guess that Olds64 really told you , huh Norm? And by the way... it's NOT a 4 speed "tranny" in my '63, but it IS a 3 speed "tranny", how do I know this ? because we had it on the hoist TODAY at my friendly neighborhood "tranny" shop and guess what, they told me the samething that Olds64 told me

Oh, and by the way ...the word "drop" is referring to the massive RPM decline thats between 1st gear & 2nd gear.

 

By the way, thanks to Olds64 for all of the info on my questions thus far

 

I have been reading the same thing, since I have been on the internet.

How does that answer my question?

What were those comments based on?

Norm

 

Fighting on the internet is like the Special Olympics, nobody ever really wins!

Big Al, I do agree with Norm that the Hydramatic is a 4 speed. The final gear is direct drive 1:1 ratio. You might have to get the car up to speed to experience the final shift. As I recall, my shop manual says that the direct drive doesn't kick in until about 75 mph. Or, your tranasmission could be doing the same thing that my transmission does and it just can't shift into that gear. When my car gets up to 70 - 80 mph it whines and pulsates because there is too much slop in the transmission. It can't build up enough pressure to fully engage fourth gear.

If your car has a three speed then it is the Jetaway. However, the Jetaway was not stock in the big cars. The shift indicator on my car is P N D S L R. You can identify the Slim Jim becasue the transmission case is two pieces and is split down the middle (it bolts together). The Jetaway is a one piece tranny case. Also, if you drop the inspection cover for the flywheel you will see a torque converter on a Jetaway, the Slim Jim (or Hydramatic) has no torque converter on the flywheel because it uses an internal fluid coupling.

 

then I definetly have some version of the Jetaway transmission Olds64, (one peice aluminum housing, tourque converter definetly present) Either way... I'm gonna replace it.

The new question is , do I want to go THD350 or R700 4spd?

 

Having a problem answering a legitimate question?

Not exactly what it says. Read the following.

At full throttle, yes. In this instance, 3rd gear is called "passing gear".

At light throttle, 3-4 shift should occur under 30 miles per hour.

If you have your own trans problem, you should start a new thread in the proper forum.

The (2 speed) "Jetaway", referenced in your "64 manual, is the Buick designed ST300 which was used behind the 330 in the F-85/Cutlass.

The Hydramatic (4-S) used, in '63, in the F-85/Cutlass, was a 4 speed, and to my knowledge, was never called "Jetaway".

In the case of your '64, it was because the 330 and the 394 have totally different bell housing designs/bolt patterns, and the transmissions will not interchange.

In the case of his '63, it was because the 215 and the 394 have totally different bell housing designs/bolt patterns, and the transmissions will not interchange.

As were all "Jetaways" in '56, and all "Hydramatics" from '57 to '64.

Norm

 

Big Al, regardless of what old transmission you have if you decide to change to a new tranny then there is plenty of info out there. There are a few posts here on Classic Olds that are on the subject.

https://classicoldsmobile.com/forums...94-1962-a.html

I believe there is a company called Tanson that makes an adapter for the 394 to adapt it to "modern Chevy bellpatterns." You also might check out the following article, I didn't read it but I found it with a simple search on the internet.

http://www.streetrodderweb.com/tech/...mission_swaps/

Also, check out the following website. If you are going to swap to a modern overdrive tranny then you will need to install a throttle valve.

http://www.tvmadeez.com/

Good luck, and keep the questions coming.

 

Now that's what i'm lookin' for Olds64 , I've ordered an adapter kit for my 394 from TCI and i'll fill you in as the project matures, THANKS!

big-al-D-88 has left the building.

 

Definitely keep us posted. I am considering a similar swap in my Olds, or I might just swap in a 455 and TH 400. I haven't decided yet.

 

dont worry about it big-al-d-88, "88coupe is a complete jerk. he treats everyone that way. its a shame too because he really seems to know his oldsmobiles.but he cant be civil with anyone so people just dont listen. its people like him that ruin sites like this.i'm guessing he got beat up alot as a kid.

 

There is a difference between just seeming to have bad manners and blunt in your responses; and actually name calling and making personal opinions about people. In my opinion, calling someone a jerk or implying that they got beat up as a kid is closer to an action that would ruin a site or cause "flaming". At any rate, you probably could have sent big al a pm to tell him this instead of posting your opinion publicly. It is better to use the pm option when we feel it is neccessary to get personal. I have spoken personally with Norm on the phone about a problem I had with my project and I really don't think he is trying to degrade any person. He thinks analytically and answers specifically without any broad comments or statements. Your recommendation to not listen to him (read his comments) would probably be the best for you if his posting style makes you uncomfortable. I am posting this both as a personal response to you but also as a general statement to all of our members, we can remain civil without making personal comments or suggestions, I hope. Notice how Olds64's reply about the special olympics to Norm was in a way that was sort of light hearted, and Norm's response a kind of tongue-in-cheek statement about not being able to answer a legitimate question; to which Jesse simply did not reply. A little light hearted but fair dialogue that didn't degrade to name calling.

 

light hearted my butt. i've had some dealins with the man previously. i also went back and read all of his posts on this site. it isnt a question of style. anyone with half a brain can see that. i realize you're just trying to keep the peace. maybe you're right about using the pm but frankly i didnt want it to be private. i stand by what i said. it isnt name calling. its an observation that i gaurentee most people will agree with.

 

I'm just new here... thats' all, while I have the attention of the staff & faculty, does anyone know where I can obtain a new set of rear coil springs for my '63 D-88?

 

Well, just be careful rfaller. You might not realize this but by making the comment "anyone with half a brain can see that" implies to me that I don't since I have made a contrary statement previously. In other words, you have just insulted me with a personal remark. But, no insult inferred as I think you didn't really mean it. Just try to be more careful. And if you have an axe to grind with Norm from previous experience, then do it personally via a pm.

 

you're right. i meant no disrespect.the only poblem i have with norm is how he talks to people. i never questioned his knowledge. he seems to know what he's talking about.i was simply annoyed by your comment about it being light hearted because i think we all know its not.but you are right and i'm done commenting on it. his posts will speak for themselves. i apologize for any unintended offense.

 

I appreciate your honesty and willingness to make an apology publicly, many people wouldn't. As you said, let's move on and discuss our Oldsmobiles!

 

Heya, Big Al! If you need new rear springs for your 63 then check out Fusicks. I also think Kanter carries them. I probably need to replace the springs on my 64; however, I think I am going to wait to put an air ride suspension on my luxo barge. I think it would be cool to be able to adjust the ride height of my car on a whim. Then I could go to the local car show and drop it to the ground, or I could drive down the freeway with a normal ride height. Then again, I necessarily don't want it to be a low rider, I have just heard good things about air bag suspensions.

www.fusick.com
www.kanter.com

 

I've found some variable rate springs online at www.racepages.com, and i'm awaiting their arrival via ups ground, should be here by Friday.

 

This post is interesting. I went thru all my Chiltons and Motor manuals from 63 and the Hydromatic is a 3 speed transmission. Years from 61 to 64.
Pat

 

 

Norm

 

Norm is right,
on all three statements!

 

Make that, all four statements.

However, my above statements, regarding four speeds, were not. Seems, the FSM was incorrect, and I was misinformed. The following link:

https://classicoldsmobile.com/forums...ydromatic.html will explain it further.

Norm