Switch Pitch

[Jim Davies]

On Thu, 28 Jan 1999, Gwyn Reedy wrote:

> There were comments about the similarity between the DynaFlow and
> Powerglide. I'm wondering if there weren't more similarities between DF and
> TurboGlide? The latter was a no-shift transmission.
>
Yes, the turboglide, dynaflow and the first 2 years of the powerglide were
similar, non-shifting, multi-element torque converter efforts from GM, who
did not wish to pay royalties for the Simpson planetary patent and also
didnt want to use Borg-Warners Ravigneaux-based transmissions.
 
> Thinking back about all these earlier transmissions: Was Detroit slow to see
> the need for better performance or was the market all attuned to smoothness
> (or so thought Detroit)?
> 
These 50s era horrible automatics were all GM. Ford was an early user of
the Ravigneaux, although the early ones were 2 speeds. GM really dropped
the ball [IMO] after the industry-first single coupling hydro went out of
production in 1956. It wasnt until the BW 400 came out in 1964 that they
had another first class automatic. Mopar, of course, introduced a Simpson
type 3 speed in 1955. Even Nash used 3 speed automatics in the 1950s.