|
Re: Ultramatic by Borg-Warner?
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
 
|
Quote:
You have to read the blurbs carefully. Packard is usually touted as "the only independent to develop it's own automatic", though more correctly, one source I have seen gives Packard credit for being the only independent to develop an automatic <b><i>entirely on it's own</i></b>, because Studebaker codeveloped the DG with B-W, rather than simply buying a B-W trans. As for why the lockup torque converter fell out of favor, I would guess it was so torque converter operation was available, even in top gear, for acceleraton. At that time, the electronic controls of today were not available, so the trans only knew what the driver was doing by throttle position and vacuum. Short of using the full throttle kickdown, acceleration in top gear might have been leasurely in direct drive.
Posted on: 2015/1/7 10:33
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Ultramatic by Borg-Warner?
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Quote:
Many safety standards are bought and paid for by the insurance industry, in an effort to reduce their claims expense, with the compliance cost fobbed off on the automakers and their customers. Stability control, being phased in as mandatory, is probably auto industry "protected free speech" at work. The obvious solution to SUV rollovers would be to mandate a lower CG. But SUV customers want to sit high, so we pay for another technology bandaide, so automakers can make the top heavy vehicles their customers want, without a high claims expense that would upset the insurance industry. Fortunately, Packard never had to deal with all this, because they didn't have the money to buy the legislation that would have benefitted them.
Posted on: 2015/1/7 10:41
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Ultramatic by Borg-Warner?
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Forum Ambassador
 
|
So I must have been living under a delusion that the direct-drive clutch automatic was a Packard exclusive.
I was rather amused by some Chrysler ads of the late 70s - early 80s when all the mfgs were scrambling in response to the gas crisis. In the ads Chrysler claimed to have developed a new torque converter transmission that featured a lockup mode to save fuel. I thought at the time that it was a prime example of "creative" advertising and it was obvious no one in their advertising dept must have ever heard of Packard or Studebaker -- or maybe they just thought no one else had.
Posted on: 2015/1/7 11:12
|
|||
|
Howard
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: Ultramatic by Borg-Warner?
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
OK, so in spite of the OT aspersions cast at today's (very useful IMHO) traction and stability controls, it appears that the Packard had the direct-drive clutch automatic transmission all to itself from 1949 until B-W made its unit starting 1956. It apparently then fell out of favor until Chrysler "invented" it again in the late '70s" (not with the greatest of results, at first).
Further... Quote: 55PackardGuy (me) wrote: Quote: Tim Cole wrote; "...with Packard" seems to be equating both the Ultramatic and TWIN Ultramatic I was referring to: "[Twin Ultramatic] had a "D" range ... with two positions. In the first, the transmission operated as usual, starting out in 1:1 ratio plus torque converter, locking into direct drive when the vehicle came up to speed. In the second "D" range, the unit started in low, later shifted to 1:1 and still later locked into direct [drive]..." Does that sound like "slush" to "super slush"? It sounds to me like two shifts, the second one into direct drive. Maybe the "later" B-W offered something different, but the original B-W unit of 1956 was more comparable to the original Ultramatic of 1949-54, not the Twin Ultramatic of 1955-56. Quote from of Packard a History of the Motor Car and the Company, Beverly Rae Kimes, Editor, Copyright 1978, Automobile Quarterly (page 588). Italics added.
Posted on: 2015/1/9 23:42
|
|||
|
Guy
[b]Not an Expert[/ |
||||
|
||||
|
Re: Ultramatic by Borg-Warner?
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Hi
Why was the lock-out converter deleted from automatics by the later 1950's until the early 1980's? Cheap gas in an era of relative rising affluence! Whereas economy was emphasized when the general population felt the need to economize, that was replaced with an emphasis on performance when it wasn't. The big V8 engines delivered what was desired in spades. With gas at .25-.30 per gallon, what the heck, we enjoyed profligacy while it lasted! For the skinflints, there were Ramblers, Falcons, Chevy II's, Valiants and VW's. When you saw one, you just knew the type of person driving it......and rarely were you wrong. Steve
Posted on: 2015/1/10 9:01
|
|||
|
.....epigram time.....
Proud 1953 Clipper Deluxe owner. Thinking about my next Packard, want a Clipper Deluxe Eight, manual shift with overdrive. |
||||
|
||||
|
Re: Ultramatic by Borg-Warner?
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Forum Ambassador
|
OK, so in spite of the OT aspersions cast at today's (very useful IMHO) traction and stability controls, it appears that the Packard had the direct-drive clutch automatic transmission all to itself from 1949 until B-W made its unit starting 1956. It apparently then fell out of favor until Chrysler "invented" it again in the late '70s" (not with the greatest of results, at first).
I believe the original Stude Automatic Drive had the DD clutch from it's inception and was a feature shared with Packard thruout most of the early 50s. When Stude changed to their version of the trans used by Ford, AMC and others in the mid 50s they lost that feature. I don't believe the DD was resurrected in the US until the late 70s and don't know how long Jaguar kept using the original Stude co-developed unit or if theirs had the DD so it may have been absent for a period of 20+ years. I think but won't swear to it that Chrysler was first to bring it back but GM was also starting to make their version around the same time. Cost and complexity as well as cheap gas may all have been reasons for it's mid 50s demise.
Posted on: 2015/1/10 10:29
|
|||
|
Howard
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: Ultramatic by Borg-Warner?
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
The DG Studebaker automatic transmission introduced April 1950 on the Land Cruiser 245 cubic inch six later used on the Champion with 170 cubic inch six. This was three speed with lock up. Used until 1955 when replaced with the Flight-o-matic on 1956 line which was three speed without lock up converter. Reason for change was the newer trans was cheaper to manufacture. Early 1956 Champions used the older lock up DG. They V8 only used second and third gear unless the start was from full throttle.
All were air cooled except for HD and supercharged cars which were water cooled.
Posted on: 2015/1/10 10:38
|
|||
|
C:\Users\veron\Desktop\New folder\1956 Packard Caribbean\753.jpg
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: Ultramatic by Borg-Warner?
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Quote:
I believe you are correct. More likely, the lockup torque converter was a bandaid to offset the poor efficiency of the early automatics. The early Hydramatics used a fluid coupling and as many as 4 speeds, while the Dynaflow apparently used a torque converter with no lockup, making it the slushiest of all. As torque converter efficiency improved in the 50s, the perceived need for the lockup feature may have simply gone away, until resurrected due to pressure from CAFE standards. In the Langworth book about Studebaker, where the correspondence at Packard about Borg Warner was reported, Packard engineering's assessment was that the Ultramatic would be obsolete by 58. Adding some credit to the theory that more efficient 3 speed automatics were a better solution than the two speed/lockup layout.
Posted on: 2015/1/10 11:37
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Ultramatic by Borg-Warner?
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
An interesting aside - and irony - is that the early prototype Hydramatics had eight speeds. When GM introduced Hydramatic, they had whittled it down to four and were working toward eliminating one more gear set for a three speed transmission. The irony is that six, seven and even eight speed automatics are now commonplace.
Posted on: 2015/1/10 11:45
|
|||
|
||||
