[Ragtop Man]

I should know this, but don't,at least not yet:

Which hydro came in the Catalina/Ventura for 1960?

[Poncho60]

There's only one auto trans for 1960.....Super Hydro also known as Jetaway.....4 speed automatic......

NOT THE ROTO ROOTER!

[stevep]

The Roto started it's short lived life in 1961 and ended in the 1964 model year.

BTW, it was Oldsmobile's design.

A 1960 Pontiac trans is 1960 only.

[Ter409]

Hello I am new to this board and this thread hits home for me. I am working on a 1960 Bonneville and thought it had a "Slim jim" Trans! This thread suggests it may be a Super hydro or JetAway. The early Pontiacs are very confussing to me. How good or bad is this 1960 trans. Thank-you Ter409

[stevep]

Welcome to PY! If you are looking for Pontiac info, you have come to the right place.

The Dual Coupling/Super Hydramatic/Jetway transmissions are good strong transmissions.
If you have a problem, you just have to find someone who knows how to fix it.

GM (and others) used that transmission from 1956 to 1964 with great success. They did have a problem in 1956, but by 1959, they had them working well.

I also have a 1960 Bonneville.

[60man]

Originally Posted by stevep

The Roto started it's short lived life in 1961 and ended in the 1964 model year.

BTW, it was Oldsmobile's design.

A 1960 Pontiac trans is 1960 only.

I assume you are talking about the internals..?? It will fit other applications thanks to the bolt on bell housing...I think they are a neat trans...especially for the street and light drag racing..the granny gear gets things moving in a hurry ..

[stevep]

I was really talking externals as the case size and the linkage are different from 59-60. You can make a 60 trans work in a 59, but I'm not sure if the bigger case from the 59 will fit into the 60 tunnel without mods. There are more differences between 60-61/64. Most of the internals are pretty much interchangeable between 58-64.

You can change the bellhousing but the 61-64 output shaft and tail housing are different.

That 3.97 1st gear really moves that car off the line, even with a 2.69 rear.

[60man]

OK...it's been a while for me having contact with the old 4 speed hydros..

Did realize there was a case diff...

[stevep]

Yes, the case has the same dimensions from 56-59. The made the case smaller in 1960 so they could make the trans tunnel smaller.

[Brent Flynn]

I put one out of a '58 in my '60 with no trouble... i think i had to change out the tailstock... the '58 had no provision for a crossmember mount , if i recall... it was in 1988...been a couple days! It worked great! Miss that car, '60 2dr post with 389/215 2bbl...i got 16.30's/85mph out of it by opening the crossover dump, short 205 tires on rear(2.69 gear), chrome Holley fuel pump and poli-locs.... Dad had a couple sets 5/16'' poli-locks from when he ran '60 Pontiacs in Stock Elim in the '60s ... my '60 ran like a dream... it was White all over with that tan and brown interior...all factory with 33,000 miles on it...

I broke the original trans when i shifted into high gear in the burnout box(with a slightly hotter engine that went 14's) ... young and dumb...hehe

[stevep]

Originally Posted by Brent Flynn

I put one out of a '58 in my '60 with no trouble... i think i had to change out the tailstock... the '58 had no provision for a crossmember mount , if i recall... it was in 1988...been a couple days! It worked great! Miss that car, '60 2dr post with 389/215 2bbl...i got 16.30's/85mph out of it by opening the crossover dump, short 205 tires on rear(2.69 gear), chrome Holley fuel pump and poli-locs.... Dad had a couple sets 5/16'' poli-locks from when he ran '60 Pontiacs in Stock Elim in the '60s ... my '60 ran like a dream... it was White all over with that tan and brown interior...all factory with 33,000 miles on it...

I broke the original trans when i shifted into high gear in the burnout box(with a slightly hotter engine that went 14's) ... young and dumb...hehe

That's good to know. Thanks!

[U47]

Confusing to many by it's many names; Hydra-Matic division which built the trans calls it P 315 controlled coupling Hydra-Matic, Cadillac calls it 315 Hydra-Matic, Olds Calls it Jetaway HydraMatic ( and also calls the 1964 and beyond ST300 in the F-85 & Cutlass Jetaway ) , Pontiac calls it first StratoFlight HydraMatic-Later, Super HydraMatic.

HydraMatic division also designed and built Roto HydraMatic. Roto is also a controlled coupling HydraMatic, and is the only automatic trans to have a fluid coupling and a fixed position stator, it is the only automatic that when in second gear(third range) is in complete mechanical connection from the engine to the drive shaft along with the invention of the lock up torque converter by Packard in the UltraMatic in 1949. Roto could have been one of the best automatic's for drag racing had it been for two things. 1. gear spacing between ratio's and 2. heavier duty components. HydraMatic Division calls it a four range three speed due to torque multiplication in first gear of 3.50 to 1- later through first gear at 2.93 to 1, 2nd at 1.56 and third 1 to 1. this is why it's called a three speed with four ranges. The trans has less parts than Super HydraMatic so it's complexity is less in that sense, but is more complex in it's operational duties in which the small fluid coupling like in Super HydraMatic takes the place of the conventional forward clutch, which Roto does also, it also takes on the duties of the large fluid coupling in the engine - transmission connection. Because Roto's small fluid coupling (same size as Supers front coupling) is so small (8")there is a need for a flywheel instead of a flexplate. One other minor drawback to Roto is because the coupling when filled ( 1st and 3rd) has very high pressures and is prone to leaks.
Both are great transmissions when treated with respect and understanding, and are a marvel of engineers ingenuity.

Don

[stevep]

The Roto is an engineering marvel....that looked GREAT on paper!

The Roto was an Oldsmobile design (according to John Sawruk) and helped to put AAMCO in business.

That is great info Don, thanks for posting!

[U47]

stevep, Information I get even back to original HydraMatic ("D" type) was that Oldsmobile worked with Detroit Transmission, but even so, original HydraMatic was also a Detroit Transmission design. Olds lent engineers and requirement perimeters to Detroit transmission, later to become HydraMatic Division, still later GM Powertrain Division.
This is also true of the Cadillac and Olds OHV V-8's ( 331 & 303 ) which came out of Kettering institute with Cadillac/Olds engineers assigned to Kettering Inst. and Kettering Engineers for development work up.

FYI, evidently Hydramatic Division thought Roto was good enough to use and Don Gay's 62 Catalina A/SA car proves it could be a contender. The trans (model 10) could never be used with a low torque V-8 such as Chevy SB...it could never get over the large ratio jump of the 1-2 shift.
One question I have is I know the fill up and drain of the Super-HydraMatic small ft coupling is four tenths of a second ( which we modified in our 59 Catalina to work in two tenths ), but do not know how fast Roto's fill & drain rate is. My assumption is that it is longer (than four tenths) for that lazy low to moderate throttle 1-2 shift.
I wonder if the ratio's of the smaller model 5 Roto that is used in 61-63 Olds F-85, Holden, Vauxall, is different??

D.

[stevep]

Don,

Look at this:

Roto Hydramatic (sometimes spelled Roto Hydra-Matic or Roto-Hydramatic) was an automatic transmission built by General Motors and used on some Oldsmobile and Pontiac models from 1961-1964. It was based on the earlier, four-speed Hydramatic, but was more compact, providing only three forward speeds plus a small 8" fluid coupling with a stator in place of the Hydramatic's fluid coupling. Oldsmobile, one of the users of this transmission, called the torque converter's stator the "Accel-A-Rotor." The lightweight, aluminum-cased transmission was sometimes nicknamed the "Slim Jim."

There were two models of the Roto Hydramatic: the lightweight Model 5, which weighed 145 lb (66 kg) and had ratios of 3.03, 1.58, and 1.00, and the larger Model 10, which weighed 154 lb (70 kg) and had ratios of 2.93, 1.56, and 1.00. The stator provided a maximum torque multiplication of 1.2:1.

In 1961-62, the "Model 5" was used on the Opel Kapitan, Vauxhall Velox/Cresta and EK Holden. The Roto Hydramatic was cheaper and smoother than the previous Hydramatic, but its slower, softer shifts sacrificed performance for refinement. Owners discovered that it was also less durable than Hydramatic, and was prone to various mechanical problems.

The Roto Hydramatic was phased out after the 1964 model year in favor of the two-speed Super Turbine 300 and three-speed Turbo-Hydramatic. As with previous Hydramatic transmissions, auto safety experts criticized GM for the Hydramatic design which had a shift quadrant sequence of Park-Neutral-Drive-Second-Low-Reverse (P-N-D-S-L-R) due to the placement of reverse adjacent to a forward gear as opposed to the more common P-R-N-D-S-L sequence found in most other automatic transmissions at the time that placed "reverse" between "park" and "neutral", which was also incorporated in the new Turbo Hydramatic design introduced on Buicks and Cadillacs in 1964, and then other GM divisions in 1965.


BTW, did you ever read the 1961 Hot Rod article where they installed washers in the pressure regulator valve to raise the line pressure and quicken the shifts? They did shave a bit off their ET, but I would love to have seen that coupling bowl after a few runs!!

One thing that we have seen over the years was that the Roto seemed to work better in an Olds than a Pontiac. A rebuilder who was around in the 50's-90's figured that because the Olds a bit more HP and torque, it worked better. We did far more Pontiac Roto's than Olds Roto's.

[U47]

Originally Posted by stevep

Don,
__________________________________________________ ______________________


Look at this: Yes Steve, I have seen that, because I wrote some of the information that is in there. Where did you pull the text from??

__________________________________________________ _______________________

Roto Hydramatic (sometimes spelled Roto Hydra-Matic or Roto-Hydramatic) was an automatic transmission built by General Motors and used on some Oldsmobile and Pontiac
One thing that we have seen over the years was that the Roto seemed to work better in an Olds than a Pontiac. A rebuilder who was around in the 50's-90's figured that because the Olds a bit more HP and torque, it worked better. We did far more Pontiac Roto's than Olds Roto's.

__________________________________________________ ________________________

Steve, That statement about HP and torque are not true. The highest HP from a Olds 394 from 1961-64 was 345HP. The highest HP from a Pontiac in 1961-62 was 348HP with a large valve head option of 363HP. The 421 H-O 1963-64 engine was rated at 370 HP. tp my knowledge O-P are identical.

[Ragtop Man]

Show me an Olds that would go 13's with supertuning, Slicks and a Roto. Pontiac under-rated, Olds over-rated.

[stevep]

Originally Posted by U47

__________________________________________________ ________________________

Steve, That statement about HP and torque are not true. The highest HP from a Olds 394 from 1961-64 was 345HP. The highest HP from a Pontiac in 1961-62 was 348HP with a large valve head option of 363HP. The 421 H-O 1963-64 engine was rated at 370 HP. tp my knowledge O-P are identical.

Don,

I got it from Wikipedia, so it may not be accurate.

The HP and torque statement are just an opinion from a very knowledgeable transmission rebuilder who was "there".

He was referring to stock 389 2 or 4 bbl vs a stock 394 2 or 4 bbl cars. Just basic Catalina vs basic Dynamic 88 or 98.

[Bill Hanlon]

Originally Posted by U47

it is the only automatic that when in second gear(third range) is in complete mechanical connection from the engine to the drive shaft

Dual-Range Hydra-Matic (last used in '56 Pontiacs, '62 GMC trucks and '66 Rolls Royce) was "locked up" in 3rd and 4th gear.

[U47]

Originally Posted by Ragtop Man

Show me an Olds that would go 13's with supertuning, Slicks and a Roto. Pontiac under-rated, Olds over-rated.

__________________________________________________ ________________________
No doubt about that, but very close with old school ( gen 1 ) Dynamic 88 stripped with a 345 hp 394 incher. It is possible, but not with a stone stocker.
But in the gas classes of the mid to late 50's to early 60's- Pontiac, Buick, Olds (gen 1) and a few Cadillac's were the rage. Of those mentioned Olds was the most plentiful. One of my buddies ran top fuel from 58- 60 with a 480 inch Gen 1 394.
Who could ever forget Eddie Hill's twin engine Pontiac's side by side. Whew!

D.

Now back to Super Hydra-Matic and it's cousin