I am looking for general information on the 365 & 390 and hydromatic transmissions. Are there any knowledgable people on here? Or should I just skip the HAMB and look for a Cadillac site. I already tried the Cad Motor groups without any reply.
Not sure when Cad stopped using the Hydromatic. I think before the 390. My 56 Olds had a Jetaway in it. Not as strong but smoother shifting. I'm sure you will find some expert advice but you need to be more specific.
You can try here. Cadillac social group here on the HAMB. http://www.jalopyjournal.com/forum/group.php?groupid=234 My 59 is powered by a 390 with a hydromatic.
I do not have a Cadillac cruiser. The Jetaway is a hydro-matic transmission and they were still used until 1964 in some models. Specific? Looking for some people that have put them in a hot rod. What type of maintenance should be done to the tranny?
The hydramatic (4 speed) family was used through '64. It is the basis for the B&M Hydro-stick. Built right, they are bulletproof (behind a vintage engine). Can be a PITA to build right, especially if the tranny has been done wrong or grenaded in the past. WAY more complex than a TH400. There are several generations, with differences between them. Be sure to positively ID it unless you are positive what car it originally came in. If you are going to pay to have it built, send it to a specialist - your corner tranny shop will ruin it. Fatsco Transmissions in Jersey is the authority on them, and they have everything you need. 800-524-0485 Well, that exhausts my knowledge of them Good luck.
Thanks again for the info. I am positive it is a 1960 it came out of a low mileage car and the same with the complete motor right down to the motor mounts and generator. The car sat for 40 years and was just started with a gas can feed. The frame and most of the body was gone but it was in a barn. I was looking for some recommendations as far as changing over to electronic ignition maybe rebuilding the oil pump ETC
I think the famous B&M hydros were built from 55 and earlier hydromatics. The 56-64 Cadillacs use a different trans called a Jet-A-Way. The 60 Jetaway is externally smaller than the 59's.From my experience this is not the transmission you want to use in a Hot Rod. They shift super smooth when they work properly but to my knowledge they don't have any shift kits or easily available parts to upgrade the internals of the Jet-A-way. The Jet-A-way has a serious flaw that has been discussed on the Hamb before.. It uses a cast aluminum front torus cover that presses into the torus housing. This aluminum has keys cut into the perimeter that locate the cover into the housing. This cover has two tangs in the center that drive the front pump. The design was poor to begin with and the current reproductions are porous Chinese made castings that fit loose in the housing. every time the car starts and the tangs turn the pump, this cover ratchets back and forth and breaks this cast cover apart. I've met an owner of a 60' at a car show that's been through 3 of these covers. When the cover fails the pump stops turning and the car stops....mine failed 200+ miles from home... There's a diagram of the Jet-away here http://www.autotran.us/jhmparts2.html There's a list of parts available here http://www.autotran.us/jhmparts1.html Depending on what your putting it in, the 55 and earlier trans may be what you want. 59-62's used a 390, which is a great engine...The 63 is one year only engine before they changed to the 429.... Hope this helps, Dave
i dont wanna hi-jack this, but are those hydros the same lincoln used in 53 i also have a 4 speed hydro im my 53 linc?
Well that gives me an idea what to do with the transmission. Does anybody know about the 390 motor? I have a 60 & 62 the earlier motor needs a rebuild kit.
Cadillac used the grand-daddy 4 speed hydramatics till 1955, then in 56 went to "Jetaway", which was used up to 64. 64 was the introduction year to the turbo 400 (in some models) with remaining models using "Jetaway" (aka SUPER HYDRAMATIC). If you are contemplating using the early hydramatic, which had it's shifting quirks, but was bombproof, then you have only one year to choose from, 1955. This is because 54 and back Cadillac V-8s had an extended bell housing, a la Olds rockets. The 55 engines lost the extended housing and are compatible with later 365 and 390's. (Not sure about oddball 63 engine). IMO Jetaways are not for big hp engines, and they sure don't shift real tight either. Jetaways also made use of two sprag clutches, in place of bands, and IMO sprags are WEAK. The old hydro does not use any sprags, only bands and annular clutch paks. The 55 and back Cadillac hydros are basically the same box, with different flywheel, bell and tail housings. I have a 54 Lincoln capri with one in it. Still shifts great, nice tight shifts.
the Jetaway has a torque converter the last Hydramatic (with torus wheel) in cars was 1956. GM kept the name but they weren't the same. 1955 all the GM cars except Buick and Chev passenger cars
speedway has rebuild parts--can't attest to the quality. Kanter Automotive has a full line of rebuild goodies--their slogan is do it once and do it right. they're not the cheapest, but I've found them VERY knowlegable and helpful. most of my stuff came from them. as for the electronic ignition, I'd just go with an off the rack Petronics kit for the distributor and high output coil. that's all I did to mine and have had no problems yet. simple, easy and relatively cheap. as for the tranny they're great as long as they're not broken. IMO not worth the expense of a full rebuild.
First gen Jetaways 56-64 still used a fluid coupling, which does not convert torque. (All GM did was to smooth out shifts via a different approach, but the Jetaway still is a 4 speed unit, with 1st gear a very low gear to give the necessary torque for fast starts. Roto hydramatics were the first attempt by Oldsmobile to impliment a torque multiplier. Second gen Jetaways (ST300) used in Skylarks, F-85's, and tempests (64-69) do use a torque converter, as does turbo hydramatics.
There should be no functional difference between a '60 and a '62 engine, if that's what you have to choose from. Aside from one needing a rebuild (which isn't cheap) and the other not. I would use the good 390, and sell the worn out one and the Jetaway to fund buying a tranny and adapter to run a modern ('64+) tranny. I like the Crane kit better. A few bucks more, but easier to install correctly, and more reliable. Plus, they have a built-in rev limiter. Tranny plant fire at Ford = Hydramatic in your Lincoln. Tranny plant fire at GM = Chrysler tranny in your Caddy. AMC had NO original ideas Easy way to ID a torus vs a torque converter - Toruses come apart with bolts, converters are welded together. You usually have to dis-assemble the torus to split the engine and trans (the front half of the torus bots directly to the crank). The ST300 was a little 2 speed tranny. That's the one that Olds called a Jetaway even though it was a completely different tranny than the 4 speed Jetaway. It's a Powerglide with a BOP bolt pattern, and a few minor internal differences. It has a PRNDL shift pattern and a torque converter. I could be wrong, but I'm pretty sure. Besides, wikipedia agrees with me (and they're never wrong, right?).
The Jalopy Journal
