Hi everyone. I'm looking for information on the manual boxes Oldsmobile was using from 1951 to 1959. I'm upgrading my Lap the World http://www.jalopyjournal.com/forum/threads/lap-the-world-in-a-1950-olds-88.1022181/ 1950 88's drive train with componentry from around '57 or so but am struggling with what to do for a manual gearbox (pref 4 spd) and can't quite get to a landing on whether anything Olds was using during this period might just be made to work. My 1950 had (one year only) the 3 speed Caddy/Lasalle and I read online general commentary that the post 1950 Olds 3 spd manuals were basically rubbish but cant work out what specific box was actually used as the listings I've found just say '3-speed'; so what was being used and when and how did Olds go 4 spd. Was the '51-'59 manual a specifically Olds made unit of some sort? From what I can work out elsewhere in the GM universe: Buick and Pontiac used a specifically Buick made 3 spd unit. Chev mainly used Saginaw boxes and/or was using Borg Warner T-85 3 speeds, some with an O/D unit, until the 4 spd Muncie in the early '60s. The Corvette in '57 or '58 started using an alloy case Borg Warner T-10 which is a good box but the alloy isn't strong and tends to flex over time or break if too much is put into it, and at least the Impala in '58 used a steel case T-10 I'm pretty sure that I'm going to end up with an out-of-make and out of decade gearbox which would be a shame so I'd like to just run this to ground first. Cheers Erik ____
All of the olds gear boxes from 51 or so and into the 60s used what they called a one armed bandit.Olds as you may already know used that same basic block from 49 to 64 and never made anything but a 3 speed standard trans other than the automatic of course.I have a 61 olds 88 conv with a factory stick which is quite a bit stronger than the earlier unit but is still a one armed bandit. The 59 up 3 speed trans would probably hold up well since its behind a high torque 394.Olds never used a 4 speed till 65 when they changed there block design. The later 59 to 64 trans is very difficult to find.The only transmissions that bolted up to the olds bell were the Pontiac 3 speed to 57 which was also a one arm.Pontiac changed the engine design in 58.The buicks in the 50s also used the same trans but had a closed drive shaft.If you want to use a 4 speed you can get an adapter to adapt a Muncie trans.Hope this helps you.
Selector was 51-64, with a larger diameter output shaft in 57 for the new 371 At that same time, the new shaft had a bolt-on yoke, the earlier was slip joint. I can't imagine an earlier 51-56 trans to be considered too weak for that 50. Some of us on hamb do what was done decades ago, by putting all the Olds internals into a 36-38 Buick topshift transmission case from a larger series like Roadmaster, not the Special. they shift really nice If I was forced to go to a full syncro, I'd go with a T-10 as they date from later 50s. But I prefer the Buick/Olds I have. The Olds motor has enough torque to do just fine with highway gear, and just 3 speeds, and no syncro on first. It rarely needs first, if moving
If you want a 4 speed that is sorta fifties correct, its pretty easy to sort out the options, theres only one thats practical, T-10. You could also use a jag trans, but thats a world of headaches to adapt to an olds.
Ist 4 speed for GM was 1957 as you know. The 37 up Cad/LaSalle box was first choice for hot rodders who wanted a strong transmission in the fifties. If that is what the 50 had you won't do better. There may be an overdrive version, that I don't know. There are some great transmissions available like the Tremec 5 speed but in the fifties, it was all automatics and 3 speed manual.
Thanks everyone. I'm unsurprised but saddened that there isn't a genuine Olds 4 speed option. I've (rather reluctantly) decided I can't use the Olds 3 speed as I don't get the width of range I need. Running a Ross Racing 371 at cruising speeds I need a fairly tall rear but combine that with the tall 1st on the 3 Spd and I'm going to chew clutches in the low slow sections I will encounter. The ERA organisers give a free selection on transmissions, so I am now choosing between a Muncie, Super T-10 or Richmond 5spd w o/d. The first two are pretty well known but does anyone have reports on long term use of a Richmond? It is going to do 20,000 or so fairly hard miles in 2years. Cheers, Erik Sent from my iPad using The H.A.M.B. mobile app
Erik, there is a poster on the HAMB Classifieds who's selling a bunch of OLDS standard shift parts and transmissons. He's from Georgia. Do a search. I believe he has just what you need. Gary
Erik found the classified add. His name is Eddie phone # 478-967-3362. Looks as if you might have waited a little too long. Some stuff has been sold but he still has a 37 LaSalle transmission and some other goodies. Hope this helps. Gary
I'm with F&J on this one but I get what you are saying about optimal gearing for specific conditions, and that if the ERA is open to any transmission you need to look at all options. I'd go with an aftermarket adapter bellhousing like most such suppliers offered in the mid to late '50s and put a Chevy 4 speed in. that said, I also did like Frank and put my '58 Olds sincromesh 3 speed guts in a '37 Roadmaster case. no car to put it in right yet but plan to build something around it some day.
The OP has stated that he needs a broad range of ratios from a tall top gear to a short first gear, and he's not likely to find that with any 3 speed, nor a 4 speed with a direct top gear in anything but truck trans with"granny" first gear. To me the only 2 ways to go are an overdrive 5 or 6 speed with a sorta short rear axle ratio, or something like the Richmond 5 speed with a short first gear, and a direct 5th gear coupled to a tall gear in the rear axle. Another possibility is the Gear Vendors OD on the back of a 3 or 4 spd trans. with a fairly short rear axle ratio. This setup has a good reputation for long term durability also.
This may be a stupid question but what is wrong with the original 4 speed Hydramatic? They were considered the best, and toughest automatic of their day. They used them in army tanks. There are experts like B&M that can build a Hydramatic that will go through hell and back. Seriously, for your use, if you asked me which was more durable and reliable, the Hydramatic or manual trans I would say 'take the Hydramatic'. With your engine and a Hydramatic you can creep along at 1MPH if you want, then accelerate to well over 100MPH with no sweat.
If you're bound and determined to stay with 50s trans. I agree on the 4 speed Hydra Matic. GM in early 50s introduced what they called a "dual range" hydra matic that came a shift quadrant that had a super and a drive position. The super locked out 4th gear and it used tall gears (for the time) of 3.08:1. I had one in a '53 Hudson Super Wasp. Was used in the '56 Chev. sedan delivery IIRC, and they were modified and beefed by B&M and others and won a lot of drag races.
I wholeheartedly agree with Rusty and dirty. I swapped out my cad Lasalle Trans for a 55 pontiac single coupling hydro and rebuilt it in high school shop class using hot rod magazine articles as a guide. Turned the drums, added clutches, upped the pump pressure, etc. First test drive I busted both engine mounts. For as long as I had the "original" 49 with the 58 pontiac tri-power, it shifted really firmly. .Guess I must be lazy 'cause I never did like shifting gears. Hahaha
You made a wise decision not to use the gear ratios of the 51-64 Olds 3 speed. You have a heavy car and a souped 371, so that setup can handle a gear in the high 2.00 axle ratio, but in first gear, the car will be awful. The clutch won't survive. Here is what I found out when getting several big heavy 34 LaSalle cars running for an estate: The first one I got running was a conv, and it was a pure joy in first gear taking off., These 34-36 Las transmissions look nearly identical to the Buick shown above, so I assume first gear is about the same. the second one was coupe, and the clutch grabbed a bit high, so I knew it was worn. I could not understand why this one was such a awful dog in first on the first parking lot test. The car would not climb the car trailer ramps unless I got a moving start. I then found out someone put a 54 Olds 3.08 rear in it. Most likely the car came from out in the plains where there are no hills? With that 3 speed, you won't be able to find a compromise on rear end ratio for what you are doing with that heavy car. It will either be a stone in first if you want good cruising speed, or if you go to a higher numerical rear to get a so-so first gear, it will scream at 65-70 mph. I know nothing about the T-10 ratios, but if there was one with a higher numerical first gear, then you can go to a much lower numerical rear end ratio.
Just adding comparisons to my much lighter Olds powered 32 ford with those Olds/Buick 3 speed gears: My entire eng/trans and rear came from a 55 Olds. The stick ratio was 3.42, the Hydro was typically 3.23. When I was doing over the rear end seals, I decided that because my 32 is a lot lighter than a 55 Olds, I swapped in the A/T 3.23 ratio for better highway/secondary roads. I can still take off on level ground without touching the gas pedal on FLAT ground. My engine is .030 over 324 with mild hyd cam and 2x2 carbs....(and a heavy iron flywheel which is important). That mild cam and heavy flywheel lets the car keep chugging at a rolling stop sign, without needing to get into the non-syncro first gear. That is important to me. I don't dare swap to the 3.08 at this point, because I live in a hilly area, and stop signs at bottoms of hills for first gear usability sake. I am sure that even with the tall 7.60 x 15 tires, my highway driving will be in the slow lane with the 3.23 Your car is much heavier and most likely has the Ross lightweight flywheel , and likely a stiff cam. Not good for a poor first gear ratio when using a highway axle ratio. "it is all about weight, and low end torque below 1500 rpm."
Road race Lincolns used the dual range hydro to win '50s Mexican Road Races - no trouble was ever noted with transmissions.
Thanks everyone, other than being mesmerised by Paul's motor & trans those observations have really got me thinking. The 3 speed Hydra was never a starter and I had generally dismissed the idea of an auto but I'm intrigued by the dual 4 speed Hydra. One of the reasons I chose a '50 88 for the Lap the World was its win in the Carrera Panamericana and in researching that I also noted that for most years it was run the Lincolns completely dominated what was effectively the 'B' division for heavy American saloons. It hadn't occurred to me that they had auto boxes but maybe that is a solution. Does anyone know how heavy that unit is? Another reason for jettisoning the 3sp Hydra is weight bouncing up and down on mounts which consistently ranks as a leading problem in Peking to Paris - the stock rocket assembly is nearly 700lbs and a more recent alloy manual would be half the weight of the Hydra. Cheers Erik
Early Hydramatics were all 4 speed with fluid coupling. They were used in certain army tanks, and by Cadillac, Oldsmobile, Pontiac, some Chevrolet and GMC trucks, Lincoln, Nash,Hudson, Kaiser, Frazer, Willys, Rolls Royce and Bentley. They were also used in many drag racing cars in the 1950s and 1960s. Early cast iron Hydramatics weigh about 250 pounds. There were later offerings (late 50s - early 60s) like the dual coupling Hydramatic and RotoHydramatic but they were rubbish. I don't know what you mean by a 3 speed Hydramatic. That would be the TurboHydramatic from the sixties and newer cars, a much better transmission copied from the Torqueflite. If you choose to restrict yourself to ONLY transmission made in the 1950s the Hydramatic is the best choice. For your use, a better choice than the manual or overdrive by far, both in driveability and reliability. Provided it is rebuilt by someone who knows what he is doing.
Just a brief update & close out. I have now looked closely at the Hydramatic option, including actually tracking down a B&M Hydrostick and a guy who specialises in the Hydras. In many ways that Hydostick option was appealing; period correctness, wide range, and the B&M gave the option of a degree of car control I needed as well as a cool factor I adore. Ultimately, I decided against it for the Lap the World because of weight, leakiness, and the fact that getting servicing or fixing done is now pretty specialised and impossible where I'm headed. For the Lap I have settled on a modern Richmond 5 speed o/d which is permitted by the ERA rules, extremely practical, and in no way enriching my soul. The car's post-Lap life is a bit vague but I am hoping will include 'fun' events such as the Goodwood Revial, Pikes Peak, Bonneville or whatever. I will definitely revert to some period arrangement and at the moment the B&M Hydrostick is way out in front for that. Thanks for all your input. Cheers Erik
Please, keep us updated and if at all possible start a thread giving us a "ride along" when you do the LAP.
Boom boom to Bob Bird Man, I looked at the T-10. It wasn't in any Olds in the '50s although it did come out in an iron case in at least the '58 Impala and in an alloy case in the '57 or '58 Corvette. I thought about using modern Super T-10 internals in a period case (which I presume is possible if you try hard enough) but I am worried that the (now very expensive) alloy cases in particular from that period would have stretched or got out of shape over the years and there was just too much unusual fabrication to give me confidence that it would (a) last under duress, and (b) be repairable in the middle of nowhere. For something that wasn't really a period correct Olds box anyway the balance of risk just didn't seem right for me. I'll definitely be keeping people posted when I hit the road. Kicking it off will be the OCA Nationals at Alburquerque in July next year where the organisers have offered me a display and presentation opportunity. Cheers
The Jalopy Journal
