d2_willys
-
Posts
246 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Forums
Gallery
Events
Posts posted by d2_willys
-
-
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: gearhead</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I have one out of a 57 Buick that is yours for the taking. I'm located just west of St Louis.
</div></div>
Sounds great, can you PM me with your information, including number where you can be reached. I would like to pick up the transmission in early November, would that work, let me know via PM.
Thanks
-
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Gene Brink</div><div class="ubbcode-body">'54 & '55 are different. Century/Special output shaft and housing are shorter than Roadmaster/Super. Don't remember the difference but when replacing (yet another) transmission for the '54 Super if I could not find a Super/Roadmaster I'd snag what I could and change out the back half. Not much work -- just a nusiance. Don't know about '57-'60 but would not be surprised if they were not the same. </div></div>
So what you are saying is that Dynaflows had more than one tailshaft/housing length? Do you know roughly what the difference in lengths are? My guess is that the tail/housing has different lengths for at least 57 and 58, since they had two, possibly three wheelbases (limited might be longer than Roadmaster and Super in 58). Will have to check on 59,60 wheelbases.
Any more info u can add would be greatly appreciated. Thanks
I will now go and look at my 58 manual and see if there is any info and part #'s on the backs of the transmissions.
-
Looking to buy a worn out (needs rebuilding) Dynaflow from 57-60 Buick. Does not need torque converter included. Would like to be within driving distance of NE Kansas.
Also if someone out there has a spare Dynaflow U-joint (at back of trans) for a reasonable price, please PM me.
Thanks
-
57-60 dynaflows is what I am interested in, and whether the small wheelbase cars are different from the bigger ones.
-
Actually the ST400 transmission was a BOP pattern for the 300" Wildcat 310 engines for the LeSabres. And they used the trans in 64 up Lesabres. As far as the ST300 used in 401 Skylark GS, that was another Buick blunder. Anyone with some sense would want a 3 speed auto, not a two speed "glide" wanna be.
Buick & auto transmissions = ODD COUPLE
-
Any of you Buick Dynaflow experts happen to know the measurements of the transmission, from the bell housing engine mating surface to the extension housing/case surface, to the torque ball retainer, and lastly to the yoke opening on the torque ball u-joint? Your help is greatly appreciated, thanks!
-
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Stuart1</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Close but the ST 400 came out in 1964 and was a single range transmission.
The "S" portion comes from it's ability to chnage the angle of the stator in the convertor which added an extra bit of oomph. </div></div>
HMMM, I thought the ST meant SUPER TURBINE and that the switch pitch 400's were called SP400.
The switch pitch transmissions were used from 65-67 on Olds, Cadillac, and Buicks. Both the ST300 (two speed) and SP400 were switch pitch in those years. Pontiac and Chevy was a standard non-switch converter.
The 64 400's were single range and don't recall them having switch pitch converters.
Switch pitch converters are interesting devices.
-
Look up the OEM# in Hollander's interchange manual. I would believe it is the same as the other GM cars.
-
I can attest that the 6V Optima is the "way" to go. Had mine for over 12 years and still kicking butt on 6V starters. Cranks my Hudson 202 so fast that it almost sounds like it has no compression (but it has for sure).
You won't be disappointed.
Another problem with 6V systems is that the ignition suffers during winters and when the engine is trying to restart after running for some time. I believe Pertronix makes a solid state ignition system that should be able to give a very good spark even if the engine is stubborn. Just a thought. (I am in the process of doing something in that area on my 6V vehicles.)
-
Considering the modifications made to the powertrain, I would think 2k is about what it is worth. Now if was original it might be worth 4K. And yes it definitely is a 54 model.
55 models had a drastic change in tailights. 54 added the bottom pieces to the old tailights. They also had the hooded headlight trim.
And as I recall the 54 and 55 models were manufactured by the Kaiser Willys corporation. Kaiser had already bought Willys Overland in 53.
I also believe that they dropped the "AERO" prefix for the models and just went with ACE, Custom, Bermuda, etc.
One other thing. There was an optional 226 flathead six that was used in Kaisers (some had Mach superchargers). GM hydramatic was also offered in late 53, 54, 55 models too.
I have a 53 Aero Eagle with a f head 161 six and 3 speed and overdrive. Really a durable and dependable car.
Too bad the one in question is so "butchered up"!
-
Can anyone tell me if a 300 v8 flexplate would bolt to a 225 V6?
-
I have a 65 Buick 225 V6 and need a flexplate for it. Will a Buick 300" V8 flexplate fit up to the V6 crank flange?
-
Will a 300 V8 flexplate fit a 225 V6 crankshaft? I would think it should since alot of the parts where interchangable, but I thought I might check it out.
dynaflow measurements
in Buick - General
Posted
Going to pickup a 57 dynaflow from a guy, don't know what car model it is from. But I can probably get a good idea, since I have a 58 Flightpitch dynaflow out of a Roadmaster.
If the twin turbine dynaflow is from the Special or Century I should be able to get the dimensional differences, I would think.
There is a yard across the street from my work, where I am probably going to spend my lunch hour soon. Maybe they have some flows over there. Thanks for your replies.