2carb40

Phun W/Nailheads

Recommended Posts

Greetings

  Does anyone have experience bolting a 1957 dynaflow bellhousing and torque converter on the front of a 1956 dynaflow? Seems like a simple way to install a 364 or 59-61 401" in an older Buick if the 56 & 57 trans parts would bolt together. Make front mounts and go? No need to go thru work to do open driveshaft. With the extra stator in the convertor, seems like accel would be pretty good as well. Hope I've planted an evil seed for thought anyway! I hope someone can answer this question! Maybe that stuff below could be switched to another post /thread? No offense, that's all interesting stuff, but not the question asked here. Again, has anyone mixed up these dynaflow parts successfully? Thank!

Edited by 2carb40 (see edit history)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Greg, you've given me many ideas. I have a spare 56 Dynaflow but no 57 bellhousing... would be interesting to see if something comes from it. The 50s Dynaflows were said to have unlimited torque characteristics due to the fluid coupling. Maybe put it to the test? :P

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I wish I didnt already have too many parts commitments to remove and ship, as I just picked up a 57 Century engine trans, yes, another one DEAR! I think when they beefed the trans for 250-300 hp engine, the tailshaft might be larger diameter, eliminating the swapping of tailshafts? That would really be nice, if its possible, cuz in 57 they increased to six from 5 clutch plates in the drum. Clamp them horses!

Edited by 2carb40 (see edit history)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

("Unlimited torque characteristics"???)  Unlimited torque multiplication possibilities, within a range.  Kind of like a "cvt in a circle"?

 

The switch-pitch torque converter goes from about 2.6 down to 1.0, whereas most other torque converters of the time were 2.2 or 2.0 down to 1.0

 

As your buddy has a J-2 Olds in his "fleet" (or access to it), why not see what the difference in the rear frames are between it and your Buick?  IF the olds rear leaf springs will or can attach to the Buick frame, for example?  IF that's easily possible, then changing to an open driveshaft AND a modern automatic (with MORE gears) would be easier to do.  Y'all start hoarding those THM400s from the '65 Wildcats!

 

NTX5467

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Beemon said:

But Willis, if you remove the rear coils, you loose that famous Buick ride!

 

 I agree! Almost as bad as a chevy engine.

  IF I were doing an open drivre shaft, I would use some kind of torque bars and keep the coils in the same mount. Probably STILL lose some of the ride/handling.

 

  Ben

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In earlier threads about GM frames and how each carline's frames were different or very similar, especially in the rear section, plus the similarities of Olds frames to Buick frames, in those later-'50s times, the possibility of changing Buick torque tube to an Olds open driveshaft/leaf springs came to my mind.  A possible different way to get an open driveshaft rather than an expensive aftermarket (race-inspired) set-up that costs much more money.  The other alternative would be to adapt the torque bar from a Gen III Camaro (also with the THM200-4R transmission, and its related rear housing architecture to accept the torque rod), or design a new rear housing for the DynaFlow to accept such things.

 

With such a leaf spring set-up, it would provide a possibly less-expensive architecture upon which to fit an aftermarket rear axle, rather than a pure custom-built housing per se.  End result might be that the rear axle companies "build to specs" anyway, whatever the specs might be.

 

I'm aware of the frictional issues of coil springs vs leaf springs, of which the coil springs have none.  But I also submit that much of "the ride" is more about spring rates AND shock absorber valving actions.  Perhaps y'all might be more comfortable with using something as a mid-'60s Buick rear suspension (depending upon the rear track width and frame width/configuration in that rear section?  Beemon the fabricator and salvage yard scout?

 

Enjoyy!

NTX5467

Edited by NTX5467 (see edit history)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

www.yariscustoms.com/1956-cadillac  for the rear air bag installation on a '56 Cadillac.  Note the "lateral bar" in the rear suspension picture.  The engineering of that whole deal appears to be "simplistic", to me.  Looks good, but how does it do "on the road", with bumps an dips and CORNERS?

 

What about daptation of later model Buicks or GM cars' rear suspensions to the '56 chassis?  Keeping the coil springs in the process.  Where the basic designs and engineering were done OEM rather than otherwise.

 

NTX5467

Edited by NTX5467 (see edit history)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 hours ago, NTX5467 said:

("Unlimited torque characteristics"???)  Unlimited torque multiplication possibilities, within a range.  Kind of like a "cvt in a circle"?

 

The switch-pitch torque converter goes from about 2.6 down to 1.0, whereas most other torque converters of the time were 2.2 or 2.0 down to 1.0

 

As your buddy has a J-2 Olds in his "fleet" (or access to it), why not see what the difference in the rear frames are between it and your Buick?  IF the olds rear leaf springs will or can attach to the Buick frame, for example?  IF that's easily possible, then changing to an open driveshaft AND a modern automatic (with MORE gears) would be easier to do.  Y'all start hoarding those THM400s from the '65 Wildcats!

 

NTX5467

Already hoarding th400s with switch pitch and short tail! Nailhead versions and the BOP bell 400 from early 1967

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Correct on the website.  typo . . .

 

Now, that Caddy is ready for the continental kit on the back, with a hidden 3-blade mower deck for Texas-sized lawns . . . A '58 Buick Limited Riviera would work, too!

 

NTX5467 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 9/23/2017 at 6:58 PM, NTX5467 said:

Correct on the website.  typo . . .

 

Now, that Caddy is ready for the continental kit on the back, with a hidden 3-blade mower deck for Texas-sized lawns . . . A '58 Buick Limited Riviera would work, too!

 

NTX5467 

Please start a different thread. What does this have to do with the question asked? Has anyone mixed up dynaflow parts?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 6/22/2017 at 3:09 PM, old-tank said:

You should try it...:D

Yes I plan to try it, but I was hoping the discussion would go on about the question asked!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My apologies for continuing the swapping of DF parts as I did.  My orientations were more toward swapping "open driveshaft" items in the place of "closed driveshaft" items.  Might not be the end of the trans you were interested in, though. 

 

NTX5467

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Greg, did you ever find out if the 57 and 56 Dynaflow are the same size from bellhousing to tailshaft?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you convert to an open driveshaft you won't be able to put the car in low and raise it vertically 5 or 6" by power braking. NOW, where is the phun in not being able to intimidate some 1.8 liter whatever with that little trick?

 

"Dear, keep looking straight ahead. But that old man next to us in the Buick is doing something real strange with his car. It is going up!"

 

Bernie

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, 60FlatTop said:

If you convert to an open driveshaft you won't be able to put the car in low and raise it vertically 5 or 6" by power braking. NOW, where is the phun in not being able to intimidate some 1.8 liter whatever with that little trick?

 

"Dear, keep looking straight ahead. But that old man next to us in the Buick is doing something real strange with his car. It is going up!"

 

Bernie

Video demonstration  please!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Beemon said:

Greg, did you ever find out if the 57 and 56 Dynaflow are the same size from bellhousing to tailshaft?

My quest is to find out if a tailshaft housing from '56 dyna will bolt to the main body of '57 up  Dyna trans or if the bell housing from 57 will bolt to 56 dyna trans main body. The next "logic" (ya right), 20170909_093427.thumb.jpg.f89f834ea3082fcf06ed6946137f9cab.jpgjump would be 364" or early dyna 401" nearly bolt in, (with the front motor Mt adapters I bought from Russ Martin), nice power upgrade with the possibility of not having to cut things too dramatically or convert to open drive? Haven't had time to try it personally yet. Was hoping some other curious fool had already tried it, (we curious fools sometimes have crazy parallel mental distractions), he said, hoping! Thought I'd also post that all the parts for this headliner treatment to my 55 Cent 2dr ht have been purchased and confirmed to fit. The stainless side trim comes stock from a 55 Belair 2 Dr ht, the bows are chrome reproductions for same car. I love the look although not available in my car from factory in 55, but neither was the 6 way bolt in power seat frame I got from the 56 Olds 98 2 Dr ht. Who knew?

Edited by 2carb40 (see edit history)
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now