Oldsmaniac

For sale a 3spd standard trans built by ford but used in Oldsmobiles because the GM unit could not handle the torque of an Olds engine. The case is cast iron and its a top loader. Actual condition unknown. I bought it for a project but did not use. Must pickup in Central NJ no shipping 100.00 as is. Have a Hurst shifter too for extra $$. No picts now but can get next week. j.blusnavage@att.net

rocketraider

Well, now you've done it. Now all the insecure freaks are gonna start screaming about how Olds couldn't have POSSIBLY used a Ford transmission.

But they did, and so did Pontiac. Not sure about Buick. No more three-speeds than any of them sold behind the big engines, it would have made absolutely no sense to try and beef up the Saginaw to handle those engines, when the folks across town had one on the shelf that could and were willing to sell.

I've also run across Ford freaks who could not believe their 70-71 big-inch Fords had (gasp!) ROCHESTER QUADRAJETS- with Ford linkages no less. Oh the horror! the humanity!

Then look at AMC, who bought stuff from everybody.

66-3X2 442

The correct terminology Olds & Pontiac used for the Phord 3 speed top loader trans was "Dearborn". That way nobody would know it was a Phord.

rustyroger

I didn't know that, I know GM used to drop Pontiac bodies onto Chevy chassis/drivetrains on for RHD export models (I think it was something to do with clearances for steering gear on the "wrong" side).
Anyone know of any other unlikely hybrids?.
Roger.

66-3X2 442

The Phord top loader was used 65-69 in 442 & Cutlass models. If you ordered a 442 with a 3 speed those years,you got it. In 66 442's a three on the tree Phord trans was available until later in the model year and was dropped. I'm not sure about 65 but if your ordered a 66-69 Cutlass model with a floor mounted 3 speed shifter,you got the Phord trans. The reason was they didn't offer a floor mounted 3 speed shifter for the standard Saginaw 3 speed trans.

joe_padavano

Actually, the Dearborn manual three speed was the base trans with the 442 package at least through 1970. It was also used in the Delta 88s with three-on-the-tree. This is why Olds/Pontiac bellhousings from that period have two sets of bolt patterns where the trans bolts up. The Dearborn trans used a GM input shaft and bearing retainer, but the case retained the Ford bolt pattern to the bellhousing.

TK-65

The heavy duty Ford 3-speed became available on Feb 5th 1965. Before that the three speed was on the column. Dan Macal and Roger Green both owned examples of the column shift cars. Have to be the only ones ever built, or close to it.

RAMBOW

I've still got the original Dearborn 3 in my car. (floor shift, no console)

rocketraider

Gotta love Service Guilds! A lot of the obscure information is found in those, including "authorized" factory repairs like the transmission case leak fix above. Just because you find a "jackleg" repair on your car, doesn't mean that isn't the way the factory recommended repairing it.

Didn't Curt Anderson have a 66 442 column shift 3-speed?

Bill Lawrence had a 70 D88 convertible with this 3-speed. Not sure what happened to it after he died.

joe_padavano

"Jackleg"??? But that JB Weld even has a factory part number...

Oldsmaniac

Thanks for keeping the thread alive now if only someone could come up with some cash.... LOL

66-3X2 442

Yes Curt still has a 66 442 Club Coupe three on the tree he got from me. That car would literally haul @$$,getting it to stop was another deal. I have a buddy with a documented 66 442 3 X 2 Convertible with a 3 speed in the floor. Talk about rare,reckon how many of those were built?

66-3X2 442

Joe

I've never heard of a 70 with the top loader,sure about that? I've never seen a 70 with a 3 speed but then again,I haven't seen everything.

TK-65

There is a guy up here with a bronze Cutlass 442 hardtop 3x2 3 speed car that his dad bought new. Only other option on it is rear antenna.

66-3X2 442

Curt Anderson told me that Don Henrichs parted a 66 442 3 X 2 floor mounted 3 speed convertible out years ago. That makes 3- 66 3 X 2 three speed cars I have heard/known about. My buddy was trying to sell his 3 speed 3 X 2 convertible to a guy and the guy told him that an Olds expert told him it was bogus. He said the guy said that all 66 3 X 2 cars were 4 speeds. The only requirement for a 66 3 x 2 car was manual trans,3 or 4 speed.

hurst68olds

I'm working on a '67 442 400 3-spd (no console) ..... anyone have a "SUPPORT" as pictured above, or the part number?

Buicks used the "DEARBORN" 3-spd also.

rocketraider

I'd always thought the 70 used it too, but the shop book shows 442 used a side-cover three speed floor shift as standard equipment, optional on 32-36-4200.

The HD Dearborn three-speed was still used in the Delta 54-64-6600, column shift only, which doesn't make a lot of sense since 1970 BB engines were at the pinnacle of torque. Maybe Saginaw had seen the light and spec'd a 3-speed that could take it for the A-body by then, since I expect there was some corporate pressure on them to do so. Still looks like an awfully limited market- most people wanting stick went for the four-speed by then.

71 was the last year for three-speed stick in the B car and it was again a Ford toploader.

Maniac, wish ya luck selling it. The post has brought out some great discussion and information.

TK-65

This 67 was a three speed. I bought the starter off it and got the cable tube with it. Weird thing was the tube was the longer 65 style.

Charlie Jones

Not quite true! By 67 or 68 most insurance companies were jacking the insurance rates for four speed cars into the stratosphere. Especially if they were to be potentially driven by under 25 drivers.
The 3 speed thing was a way around this, at least for a while.
I remember some guys complaining that the insurance on their 4 speed cars was almost as much as the payment!
It was this, and the arab oil embargo, that killed the muscle car!

rocketraider

Charlie, good point but not sure I'm following you. The VIN is generally what jacked up the insurance rate and GM transmissions could never be determined from that- even engines could not until 1972.

Insurance companies being licensed master thieves, they may have had a way to run a VIN against a factory order and tell what the car had. I don't put anything past the sneaks.

slantflat

" Now all the insecure freaks are gonna start screaming about how Olds couldn't have POSSIBLY used a Ford transmission. "


Ford put the GM Hydramatic in Lincolns in the 50s.


Mike

ferndaleflyer

I have had 2 of those 3spd 442s----one which I parted out was a floor shift with a console. The other which is my 66 race car was a 3spd on the column. Niether were 3x2 cars.

rocketraider

As did Rolls Royce.

A lot of carmakers used HydraMatic in the early days of automatics because it was simpler and cheaper to buy a proven unit from GM than to develop their own in-house. The 1953 HydraMatic plant fire forced most of those folks to do their own or do without an automatic.

And Oldsmobile got reduced to using DynaFlow until the HMT plant was rebuilt. Sad irony, since they had pioneered automatic transmission development, and then Buick would have nothing to do with HydraMatic. Buick claimed it "wasn't smooth enough or reliable enough" for a Buick.

Smooth enough for a RR and a Cadillac, but not a Buick? Reliable enough for a tank, but not a Buick?

The real story was Buick didn't design it, so they wouldn't use it.

MDchanic

Rolls also used the TH400 and Saginaw power steering through the '70s, and, I think, the '80s, as far as I know, so it's not just an old-timey thing.

- Eric

D. Yaros

I have never known, and would love to find out, who manufactured the 3-speed synchromesh trans that came in my 1960 Olds from the factory. Anyone know?

Charlie Jones

Buick! As were all Olds stickshifts from 51 to 64. This was the same trans as Buick used in their Roadmaster and heavier models from 1937 to about 1963.

slantflat

I saw a picture of an Olds with the Dynaflow script on the back end. Was that the agreement with Buick, use their trans put on their script?



Mike

wmachine

Joe, if you still have it, can you get me the dates from the trans and shifter?

It was through '69. In '70 GM made their own for the A-bodies.
And interestingly, the "Dearborn" bolts up with a slight tilt too. IIRC, it is about 3 deg toward the passenger side.


Note the shifter handle in the pic. That is the way they came in '65, with the whole word HURST at the top of the handle.
Another bit of interesting Olds trivia here too, in that the first OEM Hurst shifter in an Olds was this '65 3-speed unit.

D. Yaros

So, was the 3-speed manual tranny a Saginaw, Muncie, Dearborn or what? Did it have a name/model?

Oldsmaniac

Kurt, I will see what I can come up with on the trans. As for the shifter it is not original to the trans as far as I can tell but will get picts.

chrisneu68olds

I was aware that the 3-speed was a Ford, but here is a good one for everyone. It may have been answered before but I am trying to weigh options for my future project.

Assumptions: Assume that I am building a 400 Olds for a '67 Cutlass. Since there are more TH-400s out there and the price for a manual transmissions can be prohibitive, I am considering building out the drivetrain as a 400 with a TH400 for starters and then moving to a 4-speed (may start with 3-speed depending on availability) when time and money allows. I would need a different spedo cable, drive shaft, pedals, etc., but I think that I read somewhere that the crank is different between the auto and manual transmission? True or false?

Questions:

1. What is the path for moving from the TH-400 to a 3 or 4-speed?
2. What is the path for moving a from a 3-speed to a 4-speed?
3. Should I plan to build out as a manual transmission to start with or is the move from auto to manual simple enough that it is a swap?
4. If this has been done by anyone on CO (Duh, I am sure at least one of you have), what is involved and is there a link on here that explains how you did it?

Sorry for the circular logic here. I am trying to find the best and most cost effective way to work this out.


Thanks!

chrisneu68olds

OH that....Yeah...
I am a Clinical IT Project Manager by profession so that spills over in to everything in life at times.

What I want to do is get her on the road and then "upgrade" as time and money allows. I don't want to paint myself into a corner and end up spending more money than I should have by an avoidable "gotcha."

Charlie Jones

No, Presumeably they were made in Flint, Mich but I have never heard them designated as such.

ferndaleflyer

Most--and I repeat most---automatic cars don't have the provision for the stick shift pilot bearing in the crank shaft. So an automatic will work on a stick motor but a stick will not work on an automatic motor---sometimes!!!!

joe_padavano

The difference between AT and MT cranks is that AT cranks usually do not have the hole bored for the pilot bearing needed for an MT. This hole can be cut by a machine shop. The Search function will lead you to a dimensioned drawing on this site.

The TH400 is longer than the manual transmissions, requiring the crossmember to move rearward. Since this trans was an option for 1967, the frame will have the holes already drilled. You'll need a shorter driveshaft and TH400-unique front yoke (or conversely, a longer driveshaft and MT front yoke when you switch). Also, the different crossmember location requires different front and intermediate e-brake cables.

chrisneu68olds

That's what I needed to know. So, stupid follow-up question, if I get a new crank or have the existing crank turned, should I have the hole done for the pilot bearing (assuming that it is not there of course) if I plan have a TH400 for the short term or is this ill-advised?

Thanks Joe!

rocketraider

I'd do it while the crank is out just to save a teardown. All you'd really be out is the expense of machining the recess and then you'd be set for either AT or stick. Having never had one done, not sure if it will affect crank balance or not.

66-3X2 442

There is a bearing available that let's you use a stick trans without drilling the crank for the OEM pilot bearing. This bearing fits in the torque convertor surface hole in the crank. This area is centered because the torque convertor snout has to fit. You may have to trim/cut a small amount of the end of the input shaft for clearance. The input does not need to be jammed against the end of the crank. This bearing works very well and will save the cost of machining the crank for the OEM pilot bearing. If cost is not a problem,drilling the crank would be OK. I use a brass pilot bushing instead of the OEM bearing,bearings go bad,brass bushings very rarely do. The brass bushing is available from Dorman and is cheaper than the bearing.

Oldsmaniac

Some pictures, Kurt some numbers also. Cant find shifter, which is no surprise in my junk pile!

dc2x4drvr

One of our club members owned a '71 Supreme with a 3 spd on the floor, which he swapped for a Muncie. When he sold the car he threw the 3 spd in the trunk, I think he's still got the Hurst shifter.