What to really expect from a 1953 Dynaflow - Honest reality check.

[Beemon]

On 2/4/2024 at 10:55 AM, Treozen said:

2) Good luck getting over 60MPH, and take a running start at hills. Hills in traffic will be a nightmare because you are stopping and starting - no momentum. You can shift into low and then into drive, but that will eventually blow out a seal, and if you want to see reverse work - don't move the car until its warm and idled down.  Also - it will eventually leak transmission fluid into your rear end, assuming all the fluid doesn't just leak out somewhere else.

Sounds more like a worn engine problem vs a transmission problem.

[61polara]

On 2/3/2024 at 1:34 AM, Treozen said:

- its sitting on an early nova subframe. 

Run and fast.  Too many good ones to fool with this one.

[Frank DuVal]

On 2/4/2024 at 1:55 PM, Treozen said:

2) Good luck getting over 60MPH, and take a running start at hills.

Utter nonsense! They could not have sold a Buick with such a limitation. Especially a Roadmaster or Skylark!

 

On 2/4/2024 at 9:49 PM, Treozen said:

Well, I would only want one with power steering and power brakes, disk preferably - so "stock" wouldn't work either. That's really why this car is such a quandary - it has much of what I'd want. I don't worry too much about the subframe - everything I've read on how these are done makes sense, and this one was subbed by a shop, not some guy with a welder and a hacksaw 😉 , and based on the videos of the work, it was done correctly.

Well, it was still a guy with a hacksaw and welder. He just probably kept the hacksaw in the tool box and used the plasma cutter. 

 

What is the fascination with disc brakes? First you get ideas from people that a Dynaflow won't get to 60 MPH, then you suddenly need to stop in 50 feet? Millions of miles were put on these cars with stock drum brakes. 

 

And I wonder what the shop was thinking when they put a subframe in a Buick? It seems to solve NO problem, yet makes more problems. Power brake and power steering options would have made a much nicer driving Buick. You know, king pins are not that hard to replace. 

 

I drove a '56 Special for years and never thought it was slow. If I needed more power, I simply pressed the go pedal to switch pitch the turbine. The switch pitch Dynaflows also had a very unique feature. They switch pitch in any gear set. Drive, Low and ........... REVERSE! What other transmissions have a passing gear in Reverse? ❓

 

The 53 is not switch pitch, so it is slower off the line. Makes up for it soon, though. 

Edited March 8 by Frank DuVal (see edit history)

[JohnD1956]

8 hours ago, Frank DuVal said:

What other transmissions have a passing gear in Reverse? ❓

😅😅😅

[Treozen]

Hello folks -

 

I see some remaining traffic on the topic so I just thought I'd pop in and provide the update.

 

I decided not to move forward with the '53 referenced in this thread.  I did look closely at a 1956 - and almost went that route - but there were some logistical challenges and ultimately the owner and I were unable to come to an agreement.  While I'd still entertain a '56 Buick, I happened upon a '56 Oldsmobile, and overall felt that car was a little closer to my comfort zone. That deal is not baked yet either, but I expect it will be.

 

This of course means I'll likely not darken your doorstep again, or at least not for a while. 

 

I would like to thank the Buick community though for the feedback, thoughts, histories and commentary.

 

Allan.

 

 

[60FlatTop]

When I was around 12 years old my Dad told me I didn't need to steer a car if it wasn't moving. I have had cars with both power and manual steering. That little tip from Dad has helped me avoid the problems many experience.

[Frank DuVal]

Allan, stick around. AACA likes Oldsmobiles. And several people post on Buick forums that own them, like Rockettrader and Joe Padavano. 

 

Trying to teach my daughter not to turn the steering wheel until the car was moving was difficult, as all we had at the time were cars with power steering or Corvairs to drive (or projects...🤣). Those can be steered lock to lock while sitting still.❗

[rocketraider]

If the Oldsmobile pans out, there's a lightly used Olds forum a little further down. Or you can come hang out with us on Classicoldsmobile.com. There are knowledgeable 50s guys there.

 

You're worried about a Dynaflow's performance? Wait till that four-speed HydraMatic snaps your head back when it shifts from 1st to 2nd!😃 Nothing wrong, it's what a HydraMatic does...

 

And is a big reason Buick wouldn't use it. HydraMatic and torque tubes wouldn't have gotten along at all...

[KNUT]

Hi from Norway. I just saw this thread. Hope you are still on. I have been doing these Dynaflows for decades over here. The 55 came with a totally revised torque converter versus the 53/54. Inter Alia, they introduced a sprag in the converter sun gear. However, the sprag tended to “flip over”, which resulted in that the sun gear did not lock in the anti clockwise direction. This was critical for accelerating from 0, making the car very sluggish up to about 20-30 miles, and from there it should act normal. The service bulletins proposed to install the 56 sprag and two spacers in order to replace the 55 sprag. 

[Treozen]

.

Edited March 18 by Treozen
I am an idiot and can't quote properly (see edit history)

[Treozen]

1 hour ago, KNUT said:

Hi from Norway. I just saw this thread. Hope you are still on. I have been doing these Dynaflows for decades over here. The 55 came with a totally revised torque converter versus the 53/54. Inter Alia, they introduced a sprag in the converter sun gear. However, the sprag tended to “flip over”, which resulted in that the sun gear did not lock in the anti clockwise direction. This was critical for accelerating from 0, making the car very sluggish up to about 20-30 miles, and from there it should act normal. The service bulletins proposed to install the 56 sprag and two spacers in order to replace the 55 sprag. 

 Perhaps that's what was wrong with mine then. My '55 Buick was great, provided it was parked, but it was terrible getting up to speed - Literally the worst car I've ever driven in that regard.....and I used o own an '84 Dodge Omni that ran on 3 our of 4 cylinders. 😉 

 

 

On 3/15/2024 at 2:30 PM, rocketraider said:

If the Oldsmobile pans out, there's a lightly used Olds forum a little further down. Or you can come hang out with us on Classicoldsmobile.com. There are knowledgeable 50s guys there.

Well - I don't know what's going on with me, but that particular Oldsmobile didn't pan out either. I've never had a car deal go down in flames so rapidly, and it had nothing to do with the car.  The sales manager I was working with seemed great, but their back-office person was...well....I really can't explain it in forum-approved language. It was bad enough that I told them to keep the "bleeping" car.   So that's a 53 Buick, 56 Buick, and a 56 Oldsmobile that all seemed like 95% done.....but nope. I don't know....am I losing my touch? lol. I've got my eye on a different 56 Oldsmobile, though this one is a base model 88, and also a '55 Oldsmobile - which in some ways I like better.  Actually - if I had the perfect Oldsmobile of that period, it would have a '55 grill, '56 side trim and interior, with '57 rear window.

 

On 3/13/2024 at 8:24 PM, Frank DuVal said:

Allan, stick around. AACA likes Oldsmobiles. And several people post on Buick forums that own them, like Rockettrader and Joe Padavano.

I may do that, I am sure a Buick will be in my future eventually.

Edited March 18 by Treozen (see edit history)