I put an AOD in my Fairlane and I like it. It originally had a Fordomatic as well. When I build the next car/truck, I'll probably do a manual just to have one of each and be able to experience both, depending on what I want to drive that day. I really don't think one is more or less "hot rod" than the other. It's great to have a preference, but it always amazes me when people starting talking about what a "REAL" car should have. Kinda silly if you ask me. Unless you're personally funding my little project, then what's "real" on my car is whatever the hell I decide to put in it.
Depends on the type or theme of the car. In my case the roadster just screamed for a 4 speed, even though it was a major pain making the bellcrank setup and finding space for the exhaust and master cylinder. You can build killer autos that will be faster than a stick, but it sure is fun banging through the gears. On the other hand my 37 is the family cruiser and needed the auto/overdrive. Thats the beauty of building a car, you can make it what your vision is.
From wikipedia Oldsmobile's 1940 models featured Hydra-Matic drive, the first m***-production fully automatic transmissions. Initially an Olds exclusive, Hydra-Matic had a fluid coupling(not a torque converter) and three planetary ge****ts providing four speeds plus reverse. Hydra-Matic was subsequently adopted by Cadillac and Pontiac and was sold to various other automakers, including Bentley, Hudson, Kaiser, Nash, and Rolls-Royce. From 1950 to 1954 Lincoln cars were also available with GM Hydra-Matic. Mercedes-Benz subsequently devised a four-speed fluid coupling transmission that was similar in principle to Hydra-Matic, but did not share the same design. The first torque converter automatic, Buick's Dynaflow, was introduced for the 1948 model year. It was followed by Packard's Ultramatic in mid-1949 and Chevrolet's Powerglide for the 1950 model year. Each of these transmissions had only two forward speeds, relying on the torque converter for additional gear reduction. In the early 1950s Borg-Warner developed a series of three-speed torque converter automatics for American Motors Corporation, Ford Motor Company, Studebaker, and several other manufacturers in the US and other countries. Chrysler was late in developing its own true automatic, introducing the two-speed torque converter PowerFlite in 1953 and the three-speed TorqueFlite in 1956. By the late 1960s most of the fluid-coupling four-speeds and two-speed transmissions had disappeared in favor of three-speed units with torque converters" Now, for me, I like a manual trans. I've got a 3 speed in my '46 Ford, 4 speed in my Nomad, and a 5 speed in my '06 Silverado. A manual trans comes in handy on old cars when the brakes go out!
I know what you mean about changes over time. I remember when it had to be a 4 speed and then in the late 70s it seemed like manuals dried up in anything other than a rice burner. If I am chasing parts or driving to work I like my old Nissan 4 cylinder automatic. It goes like a cat on fier and gets somewhere in the neighborhood of 28 mpg. If I am driving for fun I like a standard which is why I just sprung the bucks for a freshly rebuilt '39 Ford transmission to put behind the flathead going into my '27 T coupe. I don't remember anyone asking should I do this or build that into their cars 40 years ago. We built what we wanted when we had the money and what we had to when we were broke. Give me three pedals for fun any day!
yep, nothin beats bangin gears, even with my f'd up knees. When I can't lift my left leg far enough to push a clutch maybe then I'll go auto or come up with a hand clutch
no problem, they worked out great for me and I would highly recommend them - good work, nice to communicate with, no at***ude **** and do what they say they were going to do.
My hot rod (g***er really) has a stick, my custom and my stock 60 ford wagon have autos.... it really comes down to what the vehicle is doing.... hot rods shouldnt ever have automatics....
My 34 has an automatic in it. The way it is setup now, there ain't no room for another pedal, at least not with my big feet. Like rustrustler said " At 61 I find my knees appreciate an automatic much more than rowng thru the gears". However, if in a few years I finally get around to building a 31 or 32 roadster, it will have a manual and the extra pedal. Nearly all my daily drivers for the past 45 years have all had manuals, and I can't say that I don't miss them in my street rod, but I don't plan to butcher this one just because I prefer a third pedal. <!-- / message -->
Three pedals in all of my stuff. Ive spent a lot of time making manuals fit and adapt in a lot of different cars, but its more than worth it for me. Hell I even like driving a stick in traffic.
Hot Rod = Manual Custom /cruiser = auto Just my .02. I don't think a 4 speed swap would suit the Riv too much... Todd
Manuals => bump start. Automagics confuse me. I haven't shifted a 3-on-the-tree for too many years now. Same for floating the gears and flipping the rear gears in a diesel truck. Where's overdrive on a 3-on-the-tree? Thanks, Kurt
I just find it ironic that 40 years ago a manual was cheaper to run and now they're more $$$ and harder to find, unless you restrict motor selection to say 1955 and earlier. I'd love to run a manual with a big V8, but just try and find the parts to do it and not spend a fortune.
The Jalopy Journal
