Wow!  As I was filling my gas tank this evening, a brown 1960 Dodge
Seneca 4 dr pulled in and filled up.  (Push Button Trans selector, torsion
bars and all!

44 responses total.

I used to have a 1964 Dodge something-or-other with a push-button trans-
mission.

I had one and my dad had 3.  I had a 57 DeSoto (Awesome), my dad had a 
57 Plymouth, a 58 Plymouth, and a 60 Dodge.

By the way, anyone out there know what other car had push-button transmissions
and where were the buttons?

 My mom had a 62 Lancer, w push buttons, and they were on the left side of
the dash.

Right, but do you know of a Non-Chrysler Corp car that had push-button 
tranny selector?  And if so, where were the buttons.  

 Edsel. and it was in the center of the steering wheel.

Astounding display of trivia knowledge, omni!

Do you know when the first fully automatic transmission was offered and 
when?  (I think I know the answer here, but am not on solid ground).

 Wasn't it the 49 Buick with the Dyna-Flow Transmission? I seem to
recall some LIFE ads screaming something about no shifting, but I caould
be wrong.

 BTW, thanks. I seem to know more and more about less and less, until
finally I'm going to know everything about nothing!

I think the first automatic was 1942 oldsmobile.  I know first hand that 
this car was available with an automatic.  (My dad had one).  The 42 had
a heavy shift lever which would fall and engage reverse if you hit a big
bump.  Costly design error!.

I agree about the more&more/less&less comment, too.

 Marc, I looked in my car book and it says that a semi automatic was 
introduced in 1937, and an full automatic was introduced in 1938 
(the option cost $57 extra; the semi was $80). Hope that does it 
for you.
 I also noticed that configuration on the 59 Impalae, from "Tin Men"
a movie that used that model car.

Great info - 1937.  You could have taken me for a barley pop on that one.

The "semi automatic" reminds me of the early 50's Chrysler automatics, 
some of which were referred to as "Clunk-o-Matic."  It had a clutch & 
brake, a column mounted shift in an upside "h" pattern.  (R,1,2).  
If you put it in 1st, you would wind out at humongous rpms at about 12 mph.
If you then put the clutch in and let it out, you would find yourself in
a 2nd gear, good for maybe 35-50 mph.  Then you would make a manual shift 
to the 2nd shift position (where 3rd is normally) and it would be in the 
1:1 drive position. 

Normal operation called for leaving it in 2nd (where 3rd is normally) and
you would have a 2-speed transmission (equal to 2nd & 3rd).  You would take
off, push the clutch in and out and be in 3rd.  No need to put the clutch in
at a stop, only to shift.

 Packard standardized the H pattern for all manuals in the late 20s.

 I believe they were also first to use a steering wheel and balloon tires.

But what has Packard done lately?  Nothing, as Studebaker took over the
company in 1954 and demoted the once-proud nameplate to a fancier model
Studebaker in the final two years (1957-58).

Yeah!  Remember the 1957 Packard Hawk?  

 Blasphemer! How dare you mention that car, or should I say devil's spawn!

  Packard died in 1954 with the arrival of James Nance. It is my theory
that if Packard would not have entered that unholy alliance, We'd be seeing
some right classy cars today, and not a Caddy in sight ;)

The first fully-automatic was very likely offered on a bus, not on an
automobile.  Certainly, it was with busses that a lot of the early work
was done.  The problem is that, with city start-stop driving, busses had
to make a lot of shifts, and, if the driver was at all careless or lazy,
it was pretty easy for them to wear the transmission and clutch out in
no time at all.  Another motive was passenger comfort - the jerks &
bumps as the driver got underway were not particularly nice.  An
automatic transmission meant drivers didn't need as much training, and
the busses were less prone to abuse, and more comfortable for
passengers.  The company that did much of this research was GM; and for
years afterwards, they had a commanding share of the city bus market.

A)  I detect a strong feeling against "packard" nameplates after '54!
    Remember the 3-color model that was a high-series and one of their
    last?  I think it was called the ....  Wait a minute, I just checked
    my "car spotters encyclopedia" and it is the Caribbean.  BTW, the 
    body style of the 54 Patrician and Clipper continued thru '56 as
    the Clipper Custom Constellation Hardtop Coupe, the Four Hundred,
    and the Caribbean.

    The ugliest Packard?  In my book it was the 1958 wagon (Studebaker clone).

B)  Interesting comments on Auto trans & the GM Bus.  Makes a lot of sense. 
    (digression:  I think the styles of the older busses was great, with
     the slope-back and split windows).

 It's obvious you havn't see the Packard Predictor, Ugly? God yes.
But it predated a lot of things found on other model I had a 
picture around here some where, but I can't put my hands on it.

I looked thru my encyclopedia and could not find a Predictor.  I'll keep
looking - this is one I missed.  What year was this work of art introduced?

 It was a concept car. I think only one was ever made. The photo I had
showed it parked at the plant on W.Grand Blvd. I wonder what ever happened
to it. 
  Do you remember the Request? I think it appeared in the mid 50s with
the classic Packard grille. It was made because so many former owners
were displeased with the elongated grill that was so common in the 50's.

I remember the Packard Request, and it did produce a "chicken or egg"
dilemma, as the front end resembled that of the first Edsel models.

Boy you guys have me hands down on these two models.  I do not remember 
the Request either.  Apparantly it was a production car, right?
(& here I thought I knew all the models in the 50's +/-)

No, mcpoz, the Packard Request was a prototype for what was to be the
all new 1957 Packard.  As you all know, the "all new 1957 Packard" 
ended up as a Studebaker look-alike and the final nail in the coffin
for the once-proud Packard name, and the 1958 Edsel ended up ripping
off the Packard Request front end styling.

Ok thanks for clearing that up.  The 1957 model was UGLY!  

Do you recall a car that was sold at Sears Roebuck & Co?

RE #24: Yes, I do.  It was called the Allstate, and was built by the Kaiser-
Fraser Motor Company (in Willow Run, Michigan, by the way).  The Allstate was
in reality a Henry J with a different nameplate and trim.  It only lasted a
couple of years, though.

 Looks like this item has become the "old Car trivia item" which is
just fine with me, as long as mention of Studebaker is kept to a 
minimum. I *HATE* those cars.
 
  I'll tell you why-
 1.They're Ugly.

 2. All designs were by Raymond Loewy and Associates.

 3. They killed Packard. (major sin in my book)!

Hm.  I've found Raymond Loewy's design ideals remarkably neat
once I've heard them explained.  He's the guy who came up with
the styling for the model 500 telephone hand-set; which has
got to be one of the classic "neat-o" industrial designs
of all time.

Trick question (& my last mention of Studebaker)  When was the first 
Studebaker built?

 1850 soemthing. Wasn't it a covered wagon or something?

  Saw THAT one coming, Marc.

Which handset was the model 500? And why was it "neat-o"?

Omni - Boy you are good!  The Studebaker Bros made wagons for the US Govt.
I thought it was 1851, but I would concede to 1850 (oops, I said I would
not type "Studebaker" again. )

 Oh, I'm not *that* good. remember, I do have a large collection of LIFE
magazines from the 30's and 40's and I just made the effort to read and
digest all that crud from back then. Quite Interesting, actually.

The "model 500" handset is the familiar desktop telephone.  It's the
rotary kind (nowadays one only sees the essentially similar 2500 which
differs only in having touch-tone).  Neato-things? The receiver has a
light weight design with a comfortable handle that harmonizes nicely
with the phone when on-hook.  (Designs before the 500 were *much*
heavier, bulkier, and not so nearly simple.)  The receiver can be easily
left off-hook by hooking forward of the cradle, and there's a convenient
handle under the cradle that can be used to carry the phone.  The phone
also has the bell integrated into the phone (I'm not sure how common
this was before the 500 for desktop designs), and there is a large dial
at a convenient angle for use on the front of the phone.

This is sort of drifting - phones aren't automobiles - but, from an
industrial design standpont, the 500 was an amazing design for its time.
It's really fascinating to hear the thought that Raymond Loewy put into
it, because they so sound so totally obvious once you hear them, but so
totally incomprehensible before that.

Ah ok. I wasn't questioning the fact that the standard Bell desktop phone
was a great design, I just didn't know *which* phone coresponded to the
designation "model 500".

Same here - I did not know which design!  The first phones I remember using
we[C were wall mounted oak units with an angled writing surface on it with a
horn- shaped receiver on a cord and a fixed horn shaped sender.  You had to
crank a magneto a certain number of rings according to who you wanted to pick
it up.  I think everyone on your party line heard the rings.

Pardon moi, but I think I'm hearing the Drifters doing a song.  Let's get back
to cars, and save telephone design for another conference.  OK? OK!

Hey Omni, in case you are interested, there must be a Studebaker show in
Dearborn this weekend.  There are Studebakers everywhere.  (Sorry, I promised
I would not say "Studebaker" again.

 Yeah, like I'd actually go there without a sledgehammer. Saw that on the news
right next to the Lincoln show which I'm sorry I missed. (I actually don't
have a car so this is kinda moot).

I work in Dearborn and I saw tons of old Lincolns - Most of them resembled

the Queen Mary but they were really unique.
The Stude's from the mid 50's had a lot of the really wild color combinations
such as pink and ivory.

- Backtalk version 1.3.30 - Copyright 1996-2006, Jan Wolter and Steve Weiss