Technical Anyone know details on the FMX transmission?

Well, I had one behind a 351C 4V in a '70 Torino, that thing did not last long.

 

had a 71 mach1 with a 351c 2bbl the fmx went 240000 miles one engine rebuild and several trans services mother nature finally ended it

 

Occured to me that it was the C-6...

 

That sounds right

 

The C6 uses a simpson gearset like a Torqueflite, but that's where the similarity ends. The Torqueflite is very simple transmission. They use levers to multiple force, even in the clutches. A lot of thought was put into the engineering on the Torqueflite. I'm not saying the C6 isn't a good transmission, just that Ford did internal things a lot different than Chrysler.

 

From what I read there was a license deal involved, though the final product may have been considerably different.

 

I think my Rambler did too. I can’t remember if it needed a lift on the throttle to shift to 3rd. Been a decade since I owned it

 

Just to muddy the waters a little bit more, Simpson had 24 separate patients for a three speed planetary automatic transmission. Example is a C4 and a C6. The C4 derives first gear by using a band to hold the low/reverse planets and the C6 uses a clutch to hold the low/reverse planets. Because of that, each was a separate patent. Little differences like that made a different patent. The turbo 400 used no bands and only clutches to get its three speeds. In my opinion, it is the strongest and most dependable of all the Simpson designs.

 

The 350 and 400 use roller clutches to deal with the shifts, so they don't require band release timing to be perfect...which seems to me to be why they have better shift quality than the Ford and Mopar boxes that use the 2nd band for this function.

but I don't know nearly as much about them as I should....

 

i think that's the one that will swap into a flathead with the old air-cooled fordomatic. basically uses stock parts...

 

Just a quick history of those automatic transmissions (Studebaker, Borg-Warner, Ford), lightly edited from what I wrote on The AMC Forum back in 2012 (https://theamcforum.com/forum/finally-the-true-dg-bw-ford-connection-story_topic41566.html):

I have a 1953 or so article (could be as early as 1950... where is that thing?) about the "new automatic transmissions" from Borg-Warner and Ford. It wasn't very exact, just stating that BW and Studebaker co-developed an auto trans (the Detroit Gear 200 and 250), then Stude had to drop out, and Ford took up with BW as a co-developer. Nothing in detail though.

Well, I was doing some searching and found what seems to be a reliable document on the history of Borg-Warner Corporation (http://www.encyclopedia.com/doc/1G2-2840700154.html). The quoted source is "International Directory of Company Histories, 1991".

I won't go into the founding of BW, but will start in 1929:

"In August 1929 Davis (Chairman of the Board of the newly created Borg-Warner Corporation, mid 1928) purchased the Detroit Gear and Machine Company in order to gain needed factory space. "

So that's the connections between BW and DG. DG became a division of BW.

"In 1930 Ford contracted Borg-Warner to construct transmissions for its new standard lever gearshift."

That's the first column shift, at least for Ford. So here's the first Ford/BW connection.

"In 1948 Borg-Warner was contracted by Ford to produce half of its automatic transmissions."

AHA!! The first of these, according to my MOTOR'S manual were used in 1951 models. Ford apparently got licensing rights to build the other 50%. I'm doing some assuming here, but it's all reasonable. Ford wouldn't have BW build one trans while they built another. There was only one Ford-O-Matic in the early 50s, not several different models, the same as there was only one BW auto until 1961 (the cast iron M-8 from 57-64, M-35 introduced in 61).

"In 1958 Borg-Warner’s contract to manufacture Ford-O-Matic transmissions ended."

So... Ford "co-developed" the BW auto trans by financing, but indirectly -- they contracted for transmissions. By 1958 the contract ended, but Ford still had manufacturing rights and continued making the BW based "O-Matic" models, and further developed it into the FMX. The FMX resembles the M-8 and "O-Matics" internally more than the later M-11/12, but the FMX had the now standard shift pattern rather than a second gear start like the M-8 and "O-Matics" -- at least I'm not familiar with any of the "O-Matics" that started in first gear in what we normally consider the "D" position (right next to Neutral). But I'm not real familiar with late 50s/early 60s Ford autos. But the end of the contract explains why the later model Ford auto trannys don't have as many interchangeable parts as the earlier ones. It's pretty obvious that Ford was at least still building parts in the BW pattern even for the FMX -- probably due to their licensing agreement. Might have been buying some internal parts from BW too, but that's strictly conjecture.

It's odd that the Company History doesn't mention DG and Studebaker though. The DG 200 auto trans was first introduced in mid 1950 by Studebaker. Heck, whoever wrote the article probably never heard of Studebaker, or figured since they were long gone they weren't worth mentioning. You know, like AMC gets overlooked so much now...

The real interesting thing is that the Wikipedia Studebaker Automatic Drive article is really jacked up... assuming the BW History is true. I guess it depends on the agreement between DG (BW) and Studebaker and when that occurred. This is from the Wikipedia article (and repeated on other sites):

"Automatic Drive, which combined a three-speed planetary gearset and a lock-up torque converter, debuted in early 1950 as a $201 option on all Studebaker models. Ford, which was without an automatic transmission in 1950, approached Studebaker about buying Automatic Drive units, however Studebaker's management refused and therefore lost out on what could have been significant "plus" business."

There are no citations, and the article heading clearly states that citations are needed. I considered making some changes, but I don't know a thing about the actual Stude/BW (DG) relationship.

Borg-Warner sold transmissions to AMC and others that were manufactured by Borg-Warner and therefore have the BW tag on them, like the Checker. They are all the same internally. That Checker trans is a BW M-11 by the tag (AS2-11C), which would be the same as an AMC M-11. The "C" may indicate some minor changes, but I wouldn't think there would be anything major like gear ratio, as that would mean changing an expensive to manufacture part. I don't recall any of the AMC models having a letter after the number. The BW autos all had a removable bell so they would be easy to adapt to any engine.

 

So... Ford "co-developed" the BW auto trans by financing, but indirectly -- they contracted for transmissions. By 1958 the contract ended, but Ford still had manufacturing rights and continued making the BW based "O-Matic" models, and further developed it into the FMX. The FMX resembles the M-8 and "O-Matics" internally more than the later M-11/12, but the FMX had the now standard shift pattern rather than a second gear start like the M-8 and "O-Matics" -- at least I'm not familiar with any of the "O-Matics" that started in first gear in what we normally consider the "D" position (right next to Neutral). But I'm not real familiar with late 50s/early 60s Ford autos. But the end of the contract explains why the later model Ford auto trannys don't have as many interchangeable parts as the earlier ones. .[/QUOTE]

The first -0-Matic to start in low was the Cruise-0 introduced in 1958. By 61 it had a vacuum modulator for shifting and a carb lever arm for down shifting like passing gear. Like most transmissions of that era Art Carr (rip) was a wiz with modifications which included the converter which was the hardest in those years. 5 years ago he installed a medium case 62 Thunderbird one in my 56 behind a YBlock; since some parts are harder to find today he combined a lot of the parts. It made our 56 a pleasure to drive and I know I’ll never ever hurt it. You can see the “green dot” where you start our in normal low in our Ford.

 

I had one in a 69 mach1 351 w beat it to death and never missed a beat

 

MX trannys were a bigger version of the FMX as I understand. Studied them when building my Mysterion reproduction. Literature usually say it had FMX but my study discovered Ed used MX. I got one from a guy who sold me that, a rebuildable 390 and junk 390 all used on the Mysterion. It was pretty easy to rebuild, no super tricky tools needed.
When I tore into it I found this clutch spring broken. It is a common failure in these trannys. Found a replacement on ebaY and slammed it back together.


Here are a few photos I took in the rebuild.

 

A decade or so ago I got my hands on one and went down the research rabbit hole.

Nothing of note swaps between the FMX and any newer trans. It's not like the C6 E4OD and 4R100 that share a bunch of stuff.

The FMX is the final step in the development of Ford's FX and MX transmissions. Everything about it is conservative and tried and true or has been revised/tweaked based on experience. It's basically a re-do with hindsight. The AOD is derived from the FMX in the same way that an LS is derived from an SBC, it's more of an "inspired by" than a contiguous development into a new product.

It's a very good trans for what it is and I'd rather have one than a C6 in just about anything that's got a "period correct" power level.

If you don't have something to install it in about the only useful thing you can do with it is leave it complete and sell it to someone who's restoring a period car.

 

The Ford C3, C4, C5, C6 are all variations the the Simpson design. So are the Mopar 904 and 727, in GM the th125. 200. 325, 350, 375 400, and th425. Remember that Simpson made 24 separate patents on the 3 speed planetary transmission. Very simple, easy to work on, and as dependable as Lassie !