Re: The History of Packard

Posted by Owen_Dyneto On 2008/10/8 17:20:57

Brian, you make your points very well. I was tempted to jump in earlier when I read it said that the Ultramatic was a "one speed", of course that could only be true if the torque converter had zero multiplication factor, so obviously that statement is incorrect. But I guess I didn't want to get involved in another debacle like the last series between those two eminent folks who seem to so enjoy baiting each other and stirring the pot.

When I was a kid (in the 50s) we called Hydramatic "leap and lurch". It did many things well but a relatively seamless transition between speeds wasn't one of them, 1-2 was a whiplash experience with heavy throttle. I think Packard was looking for SMOOTHNESS more than exhilirating performance, and smoothness they got. I'm a bit suprised no one has brought up the other automatic trans of the day, Dynaflow. Now that was smooth, and seamless, and if performance from the light was your thing, it was, all other things being equal, even poorer than Chrysler's Fluid Drive, Gyromatic, Tip-Toe, etc.