cruiserfan

Is it just me, or did Olds seem to make a disproportionate number of automatic cars versus it's competition? I mean sure there were autos offered in Chevys, Fords, Pontiac's etc. But it seems like in the muscle department Olds seemed to embrace the auto compared to the competition. No real validity to these statements, just something I've noticed as a casual observer; feel free to correct me if I'm wrong. I actually find it kind of cool the number of auto equipped cars, as I have cerebral palsy, and consequently an auto is a tad bit easier for me. It's good to know that I can enjoy American muscle while still having an automatic transmission without having to go the resto mod route.

TripDeuces

Considering that the Olds high performance offering was called a 442 kind of debunks your theory. 4 barrel, 4 speed, dual exhaust = 442. Yes you could get them with automatics but many preferred the standards for performance stuff. The extra gear made them slightly faster but a properly set up auto will shift faster and practically negate the advantage. It all comes down to personal preference I guess. I love the feel of a stick but an auto is much more consistent at the track and probably more reliable too. I think all brands had their fair share of autos available. You have to remember Olds was the middle of the road option in the GM lineup (Chevy, Pontiac, Olds, Buick, Caddy) and was considered more upscale than Chevies and Pontiacs. That would account for more autos also. Adding things like AC to your muscle car probably got you an automatic outright.

Jamesbo

I'm not real sure about this but I believe the intro of the 400 transmission had alot to do wit it. Earlier automatics just couldn't hold up to the HP/Torque of the early muscle cars.

snowballs442

Oldsmobile was considered the "executive hot rod" for many and because of this and the fact that we had an older following.

Rickman48

GM came out with the TH400 in mid '65, mostly for the hi-torque big cars.
Was offered in '66 in the A-body cars, except for models with solid lifters. [Chevy]
Usually an auto car had a milder camshaft to promote a lower idle on the hi-po cars.
A/C was usually unobtainable on the highest HP models, regardless of lifters - at least on Chevy! [LT-1, L-78, L-88, L-89]

oldzy

Mine was apparently called the 'Little Limousine"

cruiserfan

Well yeah, but aside from the 442's it seems like a lot of their stuff had autos. Cutlasses, Vista Cruisers, H/O's, Toronados, etc. My dad had a 73 cutlass supreme with an auto when he was in high school, and he tells stories of having a shift kit put in without my grandfather's knowledge; and apparently my grandfather was caught off guard the next time he drove it let's just say the shifts were a looot faster.. My grandparents also both had 1st gen Toronados at one time or another, 455's if I recall correctly, and apparently those were no slouches in of themselves. Dad said it was kinda odd, as if you weren't careful you could burnout the front wheels. His buddy had a 2nd gen Vista Cruiser with a 455, again, fast.

rocketraider

Stop and remember who effectively "invented" the automatic transmission.

The Lansing folks were pretty doggone proud of their HydraMatic Drive and wasted no opportunity to sell or promote it. And if that meant putting it in their hot cars, well, that was no problem.

Even though the 350/400 series traced back to Buick Triple-Turbine Dynaflow, GM's transmission division was still called HydraMatic Division GMC.

4rims

I have an automatic, 1968, 442. I call it a 400ci, 4bbl & dual exhaust

The shift kit makes a nice chirp going into second without pushing to hard. AC in Texas ......a Must! Dave

mmurphy77

As was mentioned, Oldsmobiles (and Buicks for that matter) were a more upscale choice so subsequently many were ordered with Automatics and A/C by their more upscale/affluent clientele. Some data suggests that over 75% of Olds had A/C. The 'radio/heater/carpet/ps delete' crowd would buy a Chevy with a 4-speed.

oldzy

Curious why the TH-350/400's were only 3-speeds compared to the Muncie 4-spd. Cruisin around town in 3rd 1:1 gear in a TH trans is no fun.

Tom442

Yup, I remember in the 60's..you were stylin when you had an automatic...then I learned to drive and figured out how fun a 4 speed is. I think when the 68 is together and running...my 70 F85 should become a manual.

WhatIf

Oldsmobile was at the forefront of automatic transmission and torque converter development. That may explain why they preferred the auto trans over the stick shift. That, and the fact most 4-4-2's were not ordered for dragstrip duty, they were street cruisers, so most got automatics. I personally would rather have the automatic for drag racing anyway. No missed shifts, and faster gear changes than anyone could do with a stick. But I think the fact remains that most 4-4-2's were ordered with auto transmissions is because the majority of them were loaded up with options, and sold to the more upscale buyer.

BlackGold

Two comments:

1/ 4-speed overdrive automatics hadn't been invented yet. Well, OK, there was probably some manufacturer that made one (someone will correct me), but they were not generally available.

2/ Not even the 4-speed manual transmissions had overdrive. Their fourth gear was the same 1:1 ratio as third in the automatics -- and the cars with manuals trans tended to have "steeper" rear gears than the automatics. So if you don't like cruising in third with an automatic, chances are you'll like cruising in fourth with a manual even less.

BlackGold

Let's talk real numbers. This is for 442s built during the 1970 model year (but is accurate only through June of 1970):

1/ Over two thirds (71.6%) were automatics. One quarter (26.3%) had the 4-speed. The remaining 414 cars (2.2%) must have had the 3-speed manual.
2/ Despite the high number of automatics, only one in five 442s (19.8%) had the Hurst dual-gate shifter, so that's about a quarter of the automatics.
3/ A whopping half (47.3%) of all W-30s were optioned with both M40 (automatic transmission) and JL2 (power disc brakes). There were W-30s built with M40 and manual disc brakes, too, but that number is not available.

WhatIf

Wasn't there an add-on trans thing that attached to the tailhousing, I think it was hone-o-drive or something like that? I think that made a trans an overdrive if I'm not mistaken. I know it was aftermarket, but I seem to recall reading somewhere that guys with 4.88 or 5.13 gears were using these things so they could drive around on the street, and it knocked their overall ratio down to around a 3.50-3.60 for driving around town. But I think you had to pull a lever to activate it, nothing automatic. I think I read where it was all bolt-in, but you needed a shorter driveshaft.

I think these are Gear Vendors (?) overdrives now, but I'm pretty sure these reduction things were around back in the 60's and 70's.

droptopron

I would tend to disagree with that. 442 stood for that for one year only.
Think about it that Hurst Olds were just about all automatics.

stevengerard

I bet that's even higher for the convertible W30s in 1970

Rickman48

Overdrives were available on 3-speeds, but never saw one on a GM!
Maybe in the '50's!
Dad had one [T-85] in a '59 Squire wagon with a 3:89 gear + a 352 - it did run! Lifted your foot to activate, and it had a kickdown switch.
Don't forget gas was under $.50 a gallon, and noone cared much about economy!

oldsonharmont

Insurance companies were adding a surcharge for 4 speed cars at the height of the muscle car era. (which made the automatics a more attractive choice)

coltsneckbob

Actually I would say Olds was more in in the top (high end) tier together with Buick since Caddy never really made a muscle car per se back then......though you could argue that a car like the Eldorado probably had some good HP numbers and was a 2 door which was kinda of a basic mark of a muscle car.

firefrost gold

Buick didnt make a muscle car back then . what was the Gs or the GSX even the riv's were bad *** .

rcorrigan5

Personally, I was (and still am) most grateful that there was/is an automatic transmission. I have two brothers and a sister that can drive the heck out of a manual transmission car, but me? Well, you can smell the clutch burning a mile away! I never mastered all the moving parts. Fortunately, I can just put it in drive, and go!

Randy C.

cruiserfan

Haha, because of some tightness in my legs I'm kinda limited on pedal position as to how aggressively I can drive, and consequently my only two forays into the world of manual transmissions have ended in failure. The first attempt I was driving a 1973 MGB, and it worked alright with the exception of driving in crocs, which that in of itself was a problem, not to mention the engine's a bit warmed over and doesn't really like to run at low RPM's. The second attempt was in an Austin Mini Moke, and to use the parlance of our times, it was an epic fail. I the clutch travel was from here to Alaska, and my shoe kept catching the carpet, causing me to stall right and left. Needless to say I've stuck to an auto for my daily driving needs. If there's an antique car can't be had with an auto that I can't bring myself to part with, or find an alternative to, I with hack and fabricate on the pedal arms until I can actuate them comfortably.

rocketraider

Well, Cruiser- that's what you get for messing with British cars!

I've been to that big Brit car meet up in Waynesboro/Charlottesville a couple times and enjoyed it immensely- I was riding shotgun in a 69 Jag 2+2. My bud with the Jag also goes to the one in Tanglewood Park in Winston-Salem NC every year.

I'd like to have a Brit sportscar. A small-bumper B roadster would be my first choice, because at 6'3" I have trouble fitting in a Midget and to some extent a Spitfire, and at age 54 I don't bend easily to wedge myself into one either. TR6 are OK, but they're like Chevrolets- too many of them around.


You'll be OK with a VistaCruiser- probably 99% of them were automatics.

Did you see the one Harvey Howell is selling on here? He's in Roanoke area.

Jamesbo

What about the Granny Sports?

Jetstar 88

Of course, the number of automatic-equipped Oldsmobiles (of all types) had something to do with Olds being a luxury carmaker, but also remember, manuals were considered poverty specials much more than performance options. No status-minded individual was going to order a four-speed in his Delta 88, no matter how cool we think it is now. As for 442s, i've read the reason they didn't have an auto in 1964 was that the ST300 couldn't withstand the RPMs the 330 was capable of.

firefrost gold

I heard tails of some burning there car to the gound after getting embarrassed
in a stop light rumble ?

firefrost gold

This is my thought's on why lots of them had a auto also with helped with warrantees were faster if in the wrong hands Ronny sox was the row master
Avery good friends Dad worked on the cobra and thunderbolt race team for Ford back in the day and still talks about the carnage of all the clutches and top-loaders he had to deal with.

rustyroger

In the UK Automotive Products made a 4 speed automatic for the small FWD BMC cars in the '60s (Minis, 1100/1300, Austin Allegro and a stronger version in the Ausin Maxi). It came at a hefty premium over stick shift models, a £150 option on a car selling for £800 in standard form.
It was moderately successful, selling mostly to older drivers. However they didn't last very well, one reason was they ran on the same lubricant as the engine - the transmission was effectively the oil pan on both stick and automatic models - and dirty oil rapidly wore them out. 60000 miles was about as long as they lasted with care, lack of maintenance reduced their life expectancy dramatically.
I had an automatic Morris 1100 for a few years when I lived in London, it made city driving much less of a chore, especially as stick shift models had a rubbery imprecise gearshift.
Borg Warner made a 4 speed automatic in the '70s, It was used in the Hillman Avenger, (marketed in the USA as the Plymouth Cricket), again at a steep premium. It wasn't very successful, mainly because stick shift was used in around 90% of small cars in the UK market and wasn't much in demand rather than any inherent faults in the transmission.
Roger.

cruiserfan

Now dagnabbit! Why'd you have to go and tell me about that one?!?!?. You have noooo idea how tempting that is. Unfortunately it looks to be a tad too rough for me. It's just as well I suppose, as I'd like to find a 3 seater, and one with factory air as well. Still very tempting though. It's gonna be a while before I get a Vista anyway, need to finish my jeep before I even concider it. Shouldn't really be looking for another project car during college either, oh well. As far as the British stuff is concerned, I know that show quite well. Used to belong to the club that puts it on. Midgets are great cars, my parents had one when I was a little tyke. My dad's a big guy too, and oddly enough he seems to prefer midgets to MGB's. He says that the midgets have a roomier interior. As for me, I tend to prefer the mini's and their derivatives. The sister car to this one was my high school graduation present:

joe_padavano

The dearth of manual transmissions has nothing to do with Oldsmobile and everything to do with the preferences of the buying public. Since the mid-1960s, manual transmissions have represented a shrinking percentage of ALL cars sold in the US. Not sure what the whole point of this thread is, to be honest.

cruiserfan

The point of this thread was to see if my assumption that a disproportionate number of Oldsmobiles from the mid 60's to early 70's featured automatic transmissions, especially when compared to their counterparts. It would appear that that assumption is correct. Nonetheless I'm enjoying the transmission talk in general.

rocketraider

Piffle. Except for the Roto, an early HydraMatic could take about anything you threw at it. With a B&M Hydro kit, it WOULD take anything you threw at it.

Blown 394 Olds, B&M slant-pan Hydro, and 57-64 Olds/Pontiac rear made for some mighty entertaining runs in the Gasser classes. That combo pretty much ruled GS classes until the Ford Cammer and the Race Hemi appeared on the scene, and they were competitive even after that.

hurst68olds

With the production numbers that are out there & taking into consideration that the above percentages are not for the full year - these numbers will be in the "ballpark":

1970 W30 production total 3100 units:

142 4-spd Sport Coupes
120 auto Sport Coupes
262 total Sport Coupes

1032 4-spd Holiday Coupes
1542 auto Holiday Coupes
2574 total Holiday Coupes

096 4-spd Convertibles
168 auto Convertibles
264 total Convertibles

1270 (41.0%) total 4-spd 442 W30s & 1830 (59.0%) total auto 442 W30s
the 4-spds would ALL be manual disc brakes (1270 = 41.0% of the 3100)
364 of the automatics would be manual disc brakes (364 = 11.7% of the 3100)
1466 of the automatics would be power disc brakes (1466 = 47.3% of the 3100)

The manual disc brakes are listed as STANDARD with the W30 package for 1970. I've heard that the disc brakes could be deleted & manual drum brakes were a CREDIT OPTION, is this true? Does anyone have any numbers on this OPTION?

66-3X2 442

I've never seen or heard of a GM 66 A-Body car having a Turbo 400. The 66 442,Buick GS and Pontiac GTO automatic cars had a two speed jetaway,the Chevelle SS cars had two speed powerglides.The 67 model year was the first for the Turbo 400 trans. You're correct that the Turbo 400 was introduced in 65 but only in big car models. If somebody has proof of a 66 A-Body with a Turbo 400,I stand corrected but I need documentation not just I know a guy who had one.

Rickman48

I believe it was an end of the year option, at least on the Chevelle.
I was working at Des Plaines Chevrolet as a car hiker, and was kind of surprised myself! I went to Cadillac in June of '66
Documentation? Check on a Chevelle websight -

rocketraider

I can't find anything in the 66 Service Guilds about 400 trans availability in the 1966 Oldsmobile A car. If it had happened, SG/Tech Bulletins would have addressed it.

I can understand Chevy putting it behind the 396. The PowerGlide was not a performance transmission by any means in stock form. Not that a ST300 was either.

66-3X2 442

I never say never because sure as you do,it comes back to bite you. If you put a Turbo 400 in a 66 A-Body,you have to drill the frame because the trans X-member has to be moved back and there's no holes for it.The mount sits further back on the 400 trans.In 67 the frame was drilled for all of the trans options. If anybody can document the 400 Turbo in a 66 A-Body,I would like to see it.

TripDeuces

I have a TH400 in a 66 and there are 4 holes on the frame tabs to mount the cross member allowing three different positions for it. I never had to drill anything. It could be because it's a convertible, I don't know.