Part II - 1953 Chrysler. Fluid Drive versus Fluid Torque Drive, explained.

[@richardd9955]

My 1948 Dodge has the Fluid Drive which works quite well and as intended! As a longtime viewer of this work of love and labor to include the cold, verry cold b thankful we have a down to earth tutorials

[@johnandrews6872]

As a mechanic from that era, (I am 75) I hated this drive system. It had a clutch. and a fluid coupling and was a pain to remove from the engine. this description is correct the fluid coupling was not a toque converter , no mechanical advantage.

[@volgaboatman7225]

I understand during a clutch change unless you had the correct alignment tool to align the clutch for installation. It was difficult because of the length of the input shift. Couldn't align it by eye.

[@Jimmy242r4]

Yes there would be a mechanical advantage. Why do you rev engine up pulling out headed up hill?

[@Pooooooops]

@@Jimmy242r4 if I take two steps up an icy hill to cover one step of distance, where’s the force multiplication

[@michaelzang9739]

Good video, I like having the extra knowledge now. I had a 1950 dodge coronet with the Gyro Matic transmission which I enjoyed driving cause it was so different. I thought of it as automotive history. Thank you.

[@richardd9955]

Interesting! For some of us in America and other places these cars were sent, had a chance to pick a part and go to your destination by hand's on!

[@clubmike2910]

This guy could be a teacher, I sure as heck learned a lot today. Thanks awesome car.

[@keithsgarage5831]

Thanks! I like helping others look after their old Mopar cars.

[@volgaboatman7225]

The difference between fluid drive and fluid torque drive is fluid torque drive has a stator or multiple. The stator re directs fluid in a helping direction toward the turbine. A torque converter with impeller, stator and turbine is described as a three element torque converter. The example in the video is four element torque converter because it has two stator.
As the car accelerates from a stop the impeller
Directs fluid to the turbine.The turbine starts to spin and re directs fluid to the stator that re directs fluid back to the turbine. This is torque multiplication. During this process, the stator is held in place during acceleration. As turbine speed approaches pump speed the impeller and turbine turn at a 1-1 ratio and since torque multiplication is no longer needed the stator starts to free wheel along with the impeller and turbine. All three elements are interacting as one unit and act as a fluid compling since acceleration is no longer needed. The name torus is used to describe a fluid coulping/ torque converter assembly since their construction reflects a toroidal configuration. I've only seen that used in old school descriptions.

[@mrcedar1000]

That is indeed a rare car! In the late sixties and early seventies i had a 1950 Chrysler Windor sedan. I had what is known as a Gyro-matic transmission. You depressed the clutch put it in gear let the clutch out and you where on your way you could leave it in gear and drive. Wish i could have that car back! Truely a fun car to drive and very comortable. Hope you keep this car forever and preserve her. Cheers!

[@keithsgarage5831]

Yes, my 53 Chrysler has this same Gyro-Matic transmission. It is easy and fun to drive.

[@wolfmanhawk]

I love how you used the technical manual! Very cool! Thanks a lot!

[@keithsgarage5831]

Glad you like it!

[@richardfeibel3154]

THE TRANSMISSION DESCRIBED IN THIS VIDEOS WAS REPLACED FOR OBVIOUS REASON IN 1953 LATE WITH THE POWERFLITE TWO SPEED TRANSMISSION,BUT THAT WAS REPLACED IN MID 56 WITH THE NOW FAMOUS TORQUEFLITE 3 SPEED TRANS MISSION.

[@milesge56]

That's a beautiful automobile. As the owner, you would know what kind of transmission is in your car. I would ignore the "know it all" commenators.

[@emjayay]

They continued a version of the two-stator torque converter with the real automatic Powerflite, the first Chrysler automatic in 1954. It was just a two speed transmission like a Chevy Powerglide, but with more multiplication because of two not one stator. After the three speed Torqueflite came out they continued the Powerflite on some cheaper models until 1961.

[@steves4639]

super interesting. never knew that there were 2 types of couplers back then...just assumed that all were fluid drives with a coupler and not a convertor. thx for clearing this up. must have been a good upgrade from the standard auto

[@keithsgarage5831]

The stand fluid drive would have probably been fairly lethargic I suspect. It offers no torque multiplication. My Chrysler here performed pretty satisfactory in my opinion. Here you can see a 0-60 test. th-cam.com/video/ODGGCTSgtpM/w-d-xo.html

[@gojoe2833]

Thank you for correcting my misunderstanding of Chrysler's semi-automatic Torque Drive. The technical details of the transmission are very interesting!!

[@adoreslaurel]

Try and find a torque converter with a drain plug these days, they gave up on those years ago, damn it.

[@joenicoud5967]

Beautiful automobile

[@keithsgarage5831]

We agree!

[@richardd9955]

Good reproof Mr. K !! Thanks again for all your autopsies especially the 37 or was it a 38 Chrysler. I have a 1937 and a 1948 both Dodge Coupe models. The Dodge Brothers were in charge of their creation from 1914-1938

[@biggusbestus551]

Cool ...everyone has a Ford or Chevy. Love the sound of that straight six...

[@volgaboatman7225]

Generally speaking, if its referred to as a fluid drive, it has a fluid coupling. If called a fluid torque drive, its a torque converter.
I knew someone who has a 1952 crown imperial it shifted and behaved like your car except on the gear selector handle there was a button. When in the hi range in 4th gear if you pushed the button and firewalled the gas it would drop back to third for acceleration. Im not sure if that be used in the lo range. I seen my friend use it a few times only in hi range. Has anyone else seen a Chrysler product with this forced downshift feature?

[@ronwerner7813]

Had that on my 47 chrysler windsor

[@user-re9gk1be1m]

The “semi-automatic” system is fascinating, today it is used in heavy transport: tanks. The first systems had the hydraulic coupling then, as the author says, the copy converter was inserted. a system that multiplies the torque much more performing. the evolution of the converter saw the Lock up clutch for exclusion.

[@georgechambless2719]

Very interesting. I may never understand why Chrysler didn't come out with a fully automatic sooner.
After all, GM came out with their Hydramatic in 1939.

[@keithsgarage5831]

Maybe because the Chrysler semi-auto was very reliable. (it still is 66 years later) By 1953 maybe other full auto transmissions were not perfected and Chrysler was waiting out perfection and reliability before releasing their own fully auto? The market dictated when Chrysler had to make a change. Public demand by 1954 for a full auto perhaps enticed Chrysler to release their full auto tranny in most car models by 1954.

[@That_AMC_Guy]

The first Generation GM HydraMatic was not the greatest device ever made. Firstly, it had service intervals of only 5,000 miles. Severe damage would occur if a service was skipped. Fluid back then would get dirty easily, and dirty fluid acts like sandpaper and would tear the transmissions up inside. Also, the bands for range application needed adjustment every 5,000 miles as well, or the unit would become slow to engage, slip or certain "gears" would just fail to apply altogether. Also, the original HydraMatic did not have a torque converter which, and correct me if I'm wrong, it wouldn't get a torque converter until 1954 or 1955! Even by that time, Chevrolet's original PowerGlide (1950-1954) was a single-speed unit. It started in top gear!! It would not downshift if the accelerator was floored. It would only apply "first gear" if manually selected. PowerGlide was updated mid-year 1954 for the upcoming V8 models and they wanted to showcase performance. Actually having the transmission start in first gear did just that!
In contrast, regular Fluid Drive provided by Dodge, Plymouth and Chrysler was infinitely more simple, required virtually no maintenance and eliminated 85% of shifting! It was also much, much cheaper to produce than Hydramatic and through the 40's, Fluid Drive was very popular. Women drivers loved it. As Fluid Drive progressed with updates, it only got better and better, but began to get more complex. That's when Chrysler engineers decided to start working on PowerFlite.
Compared to the HydraMatic, Powerflite had fewer parts than HydraMatic, actually featured a Torque Converter with power multiplication and had, under normal conditions, no service interval. (This fact was REALLY boasted about a few years later with the debut of the TorqueFlite!)

[@jamesbosworth4191]

They felt that with a fully automatic, the driver gave up too much. Eventually, the public said otherwise, and Chrysler developed PowerFlite.

[@jamesbosworth4191]

@@That_AMC_Guy Hydramatic NEVER received a true Torque Converter. Chevy's Powerglide became a true automatic for 53, not 54. The 50 - 52 models operated entirely in High, just like Buick's DynaFlow. In fact, it can be thought of a scaled-down lower cost version of the Dynaflow.

[@billvose7360]

We had a 1953 Custom Imperial with the Fluid Torque converter and Tip Toe shift. Ours was black, 4dr and also had the Kelsey-Hayes wire wheels. Beautiful car! The Powerflite 2 speed automatic was also available. Ours had the 331ci Hemi V8.

[@shwt121]

Keith, thank you for the VERY INFORMATIVE VIDEO ON SUCH A BEAUTIFUL AND UNIQUE EDITION OF THE 1953 CHRYSLER NEWPORT/ WINDSOR.... THIS WAS AWESOME..!!!!!👍👍😁😁

[@billdoster2483]

Excellent explanation and you are absolutely correct.
I had one of these cars in 1965.// Loved it !!

[@MrGlenferd]

Makes me sad. My uncle had 3 of these cars. 2 with hemeis. The new Yorker was in nice shape. He tried to give them to me for several years but my dad thought I shouldn't have such an old car. Now we're both sorry.

[@NoosaHeads]

Gorgeous looking car. They had far more style in those days. It'd be fun to Restomod one of these cars to modern-day safety standards and efficiencies (this might be both paradoxical and impossible, of course).

[@MichaelRHull-wy7wg]

That was a very good explanation of how it works and the comparison’s.

[@michaelcook768]

Mr. Keith. My Grandma didn't learn to drive till 1959, when Mom was carrying me. Grandpa replaced his 1952 Coronet, flat 6, and, what they always called semi automatic. Mom said you had to push the clutch to change gears, but high was as far down as the lever would go, that they didn't use low, and that it took off just fine in high, and that it would run 100 because she drove it that fast. It sounds like it had the torque converter, not the fluid drive...what do you think? Granny got a new 1966 Coronet...and even though I was only 6, I remember the day they sold the 52, and I remember Rudi,g in it with Granny.
By the way, Grandad bought a 57 Dodge Coronet, red/white, with the D500 package. I wish I had been old enough to have asked if he would keep it for me.

[@keithsgarage5831]

The transmission you describe is the Mopar M5 or M6 semi-auto. Same as the one in my car. You can easily just leave it in 3rd and shift to 4th. Hard to know if your Grandparents had the torque converter, or fluid drive. The 6 cyl engine in 1953 with the torque converter has the oil drain plug on the torque, and the engine oil is shared with the torque.

[@michaelcook768]

@@keithsgarage5831 I managed to find a picture of the fluid drive. Apparently, 1st and reverse were in the traditional place, neutral in the middle, and high on the bottom. We talked about the car many times. She drove it for several years after her and Dad married in 1957. Then, Granny drove it for 5 or 6 years. She never said you had to lift the shifter up for low gear, but did say you had to use the clutch to go from low to high, and it shifted on its own in the drive position. At this point, nobody alive can tell me, as Mom left us in 2009 from cancer. She also said it would go through snow like a plow. I'm 90% sure it was like the trans you have in your Chrysler. Grandad worked in DC, a 75 mile trip. He stayed there all week, with his brother...they were both Plasterers.. returning home Friday evening. Considering the driving involved, I expect he bought the better trans,,,he always bought posi rear axles to drive in the snow. Grandads 1963 Dodge 330 had the 8.75 posi, 318, and the 727 trans. Dad's sister lived about 30 miles from home on the route back from DC. Her husband said he saw Grandad pass him many times during a snowstorm...the car being so recognizable...and that Grandad was passing everything in site like it wasn't even snowing. He ran that road for 44 years, only missing it while he worked at a nylon plant for tires in WWII.

[@ritatyson6209]

I have a1947 Chrysler Windsor....she's a beauty...her name is Stella...drive her all the time...
everything is original....just had her engine reworked....I love it

[@jamesbosworth4191]

Dodges had a flathead inline 6. Flat 6s are used by Porsche, and the Corvair also used a flat 6.

[@jamesbosworth4191]

@@michaelcook768 There was no "1st" position with Fluid Drive on a Chrysler or DeSoto. Dodges with Fluid Drive did, but their's was a fluid coupling in front of a conventional 3 speed manual transmission. The trans on Chryslers and DeSotos was a hydraulically operated 4 speed transmission.

[@brettster3331]

Hi Keith, I am so glad you explained this so well.

[@keithsgarage5831]

Glad it was helpful!

[@kfl611]

Good explanation, thanks for posting. Keep cruising.

[@jusportel]

A pity they didn’t use this system on the old 10-10 Lawrence logging winch. They had the IND-251 engine with a fluid drive, and a little band brake that released when you pushed the throttle. The regular fluid drive was said to be almost useless, every time you needed a little extra “oomph” it would just slip. I would imagine the cars with that system would have been much the same. I bet that fluid torque drive is fun to use. Always wanted to try one.

[@johnmaki3046]

My dad owned both! The "fluid drive" (slow, NOT trendy) WORKED FOREVER! The "Powerflite" was a "CLUTCHLESS, FINIKY, POWERLESS" JOKE!

[@billywilliamson1221]

Very good explanation.

[@keithsgarage5831]

Glad you liked it

[@charleshuguley9323]

A handsome car. Aside from the overall shape, I particularly like the styling of the chrome.

[@bertcushman7427]

this is the best explanation of the simplamtic transmission ever!
and yes, later models did have a torque converter. I think that imperial had the new torque flite automatic in 1954..
cheers 🍾🍾🍾🏳️‍🌈

[@keithsgarage5831]

Glad you liked it!

[@emjayay]

Powerflite, actually. Two speeds with a similar two stator torque converter. The three speed (but one stator) Torqueflite came out in 1956 on Chryslers and Imperials. Powerflite continued to also be used up to 1961.

[@jamesbosworth4191]

Mid 53 for Imperials and New Yorkers.

[@roycepruett5862]

Keith's Garage - You may not see this post as I am like 2 years late seeing both videos, I just wanted to say thanks for helping me remember a 1941 Chrysler I had back in 1954 that had the jump seats and Fluid Drive, it also had electric windows, what I thought was remarkable was the speedometer needle that changed colors the faster you drove, anyway, THANKS AGAIN.

[@keithsgarage5831]

I read all viewer comments. I try and and reply where I can.

[@FloridaClay]

Beautiful example!

[@markjurkovich7814]

Thank you for sharing Keith. That is one beautiful Chrysler!

[@jefftube58]

Absolutely beautiful car.

[@terrycrissman7392]

Looking good Keith

[@dougabbott8261]

12 to 13 liters of oil ! Wow!! You mentioned that in low range in second it would be about 24 mph , what is top speed in fourth gear? about. Great looking car by the way.

[@keithsgarage5831]

I’ve had the car up to 70 mph. And at that time it had 1 dead cylinder. I’m not sure what top speed is. I generally drive at 55-60 on the hi-way.

[@Mcbunaen]

When I watched part 1, I was all ready to go into "Besserwisser Mode" and make a comment to "correct" you. Fortunately, I read your reply to some comments similar to the one I was going to make, and realized you know what you are talking about, and your car does indeed have a torque converter, and not a fluid clutch. Thank goodness I refrained from making a fool out of myself! Your reference to the shop manual pictures showing, not one, but two (!) stators clinched your argument in a full-nelson submission-hold of irrefutable logic!

[@keithsgarage5831]

Lol. Glad to hear you refrained, and watched part II. I needed further proof as you can imagine, I get challenged a fair amount. 9 millions Mopar cars had fluid couplings. Seems that by comparison only a handful had toque converters.

[@emjayay]

Me too! I didn't know they ever put torque converters in some of the late model Chrysler semi-automatics.

[@erwinpatio8160]

Very gorgeous car. Reminds me of the art deco days.

[@mrfixzit1019]

Very interesting I have a 1952 Chrysler imperial.... However mine has the 331 hemi V8 with a fluid torque drive. That was very interesting about the shared engine oil from the engine into the torque converter I never heard of such a thing. I guess I need to check and make sure I don't have something like that with my hemi.

[@noahbianchi1920]

Beautiful vehicle

[@WyomingGuy876]

Have you tried using synthetic oil in that?
Those transmissions were notorious for not being fuel efficient, I'd be interested in your mpg with regular oil vs synthetic.

[@keithsgarage5831]

Sorry no. I have not. I sold this car about 2 weeks ago.

[@jamesbosworth4191]

Better oil would not improve gas mileage, it would extend component life.

[@Modeltnick]

They had an oddball transmission similar in the Plymouth called HyDrive. It shared the engine oil also.

[@jamesbosworth4191]

That Plymouth trans was a 3 speed manual with a torque converter instead of a fluid coupling. Powerflite came out in mid 53 for Chryslers and Imperials, 54 for DeSotos and Dodges, and mid 54 for Plymouths.

[@richardd9955]

My favorite channel, except for the Italian mama mia making homemade foods!

[@UberLummox]

Again, thanks. Never learned bout these.
Were the trans & clutch dependable enough to last 80k or 100.000 miles if driven and serviced reasonably?

[@keithsgarage5831]

They are known to be very reliable. Mine is still going strong. I have no idea how many miles are on it.

[@chuckschafer942]

THEY WERE "BULLETPROOF"

[@auteurfiddler8706]

Is the torque converter version noticeably better performing?
Have you driven both?
So, there is freewheeling in the low gear of each? Does that impair engine braking on a steep slow downhill?
When you park a true manual, you put it in a gear to help hold it as well as setting the parking brake. Is there any advantage to doing so in your car?

[@keithsgarage5831]

Auteur Fiddler I have only driven my torque converter model. I am confident it performs better than a basic fluid drive. How much better? I can’t honestly say. This model multiplies torque due to its internal stators. The fluid drive lacks stators. My car has a 1-way ramp style clutch on the countershaft collar gear that engages in 2nd and 4th. Offering hold back in those 2 gears only. It’s not a perfect design but it works, and you at least have an option. There is no park. Leaving the tranny in gear and walking away is not good. When the car stops it always down shifts to 1st or 3rd, meaning free wheel mode. So you have no hold back. It can easily roll away. The handbrake must be applied. I also use a wheel chock for added safety. I’ve had no issues or dangerous occurrences.

[@chuckschafer6728]

NO USEING THE PARKING BRAKE WAS PARAMOUNT

[@chuckschafer942]

NO USE THE PARKING BRAKE

[@petemoore5104]

I used to own a Lancher Ten, it too had a fluid drive..
Although its top speed was supposed to be 60mph,
I managed to get 72mph out of mine with thicker,
more viscose oil in clutch.

[@jamesbosworth4191]

I though all 53s had Fluid Torque Drive, and that 52 was the last year for the "plain" Fluid Drive.

[@leonardomaddoni9870]

Awsome..

[@DRIFTSALINAS]

Hey Keith, is there a way to bypass the carburetor wires that go to the fluid drive? I don’t have original carburetor. 1949 desoto s13 custom

[@user-er8fd5bc4q]

Newbie again, I have so many questions. My Windsor doesn't down shift when you come to a full stop, I usually put in N and back to drive. What can I do to fix this problem. It also seems to be a gas hog. I like all your video's. Thanks for all the info about these cars.

[@keithsgarage5831]

Try lowering your engine idle speed. It won’t down shift if its too high.

[@karlpiepenburg3157]

Wasn’t 53 the last year for the semi-automatics?

[@jamesbosworth4191]

They made a few in 54, and maybe even a small handful for 55.

[@paulijorader2057]

I got a green one jistas nice in my for sale 3800$ new interior hemi fluiddrive

[@michaelbenardo5695]

I always thought that by 53, the Fluid Torque Drive was more popular than plain Fluid Drive.

[@jamesbosworth4191]

I thought the plain Fluid Drive was discontinued for 53.

[@MoGumboFukUTubeForChngngMyName]

Is that a 265? Does it have the Carter B&B with dash pots? Which carb is it, thank you.

[@keithsgarage5831]

Indeed it is a265. I sold the car over a year ago. Sorry I can't confirm the exact carb model. However it was a Carter B&B with a anti-stall dashpot (6V solenoid). It also had the kick-down switch on the throttle linkage.

[@jameshathaway5117]

I would imagine it wouldn't take off very well in 3rd without the torque converter.

[@jamesbosworth4191]

It was decent, as Chrysler-built engines had good torque.

[@alanstrong55]

Either one made for a good tranny. That car is a winner. Love that deep green color. Chrysler rides again!

[@davidspeakman3175]

My dad’s car