Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Transmission

Collapse
This topic is closed.
X
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Transmission

    I have a 1955 President with a DG trans. When you downshift from 40 to 60 mph going downhill it shifts all the way to low. Is this normal for this trans. Thanks Len

  • #2
    I had a 1967 Rambler with the Borg Warner transmission, it went all the way down on a down shift. I just got a 1955 president. It is an automatic ,V8, what can I expect on gas mileage? How do you know which traney a Studie has? As you see I have a lot to learn.

    Comment


    • #3
      I never tried downshifting in that range, and don't understand why one would. Studebaker used a Detroit Gear ( division of Borg-Warner ) from 1951 thru 1955, and these were torgue lockup converters, and 3rd gear was direct drive as it were. With a 3.31 axle there provided good braking normally, and 1st gear is quite a pull back if you manually pull it down there. The DG-250 is a 1st gear start, and I believe only used in 1955, but not sure on that, and only used behind the V8 motors as I recall.

      quote:Originally posted by lenandpeg

      I have a 1955 President with a DG trans. When you downshift from 40 to 60 mph going downhill it shifts all the way to low. Is this normal for this trans. Thanks Len
      Sam Roberts

      Comment


      • #4
        Yeah Sam, only 1955 and only behind the 259cu.in. V8s. Further, the DGs debuted in the 1950 model lineup. The tranny was built by Borg-Warner's Detroit Gear division but had been developed in concert with Studebaker for use in their cars. It was abandoned by Stude after the 55 cars for the fact that it was so costly to make when they could get a revalved version of the Ford-o-matic (also built by Barg-Warner) for less. This might not have happened if Studebaker hadn't been looking to find ways to stop their slide in sales. Of course, the "King-of-the-Hill" battle between Ford and GM was what was hammering Stude's sales numbers. And it was those very numbers and the numerous sales of Ford=o-matic trannies that forced the unit cost to be so much lower than the DG series.[V]

        Miscreant at large.
        No deceptive flags to prove I'm patriotic - no biblical BS to impress - just ME and Studebakers - as it should be.

        Comment


        • #5
          The only 1950 Studebaker I ever saw with automatic in it had a different shift quadrant than what I associate with the DGs. I was told the few 1950 automatics were actually B-Ws and then in 1951 were supplied by DG rather than B-W itself. The reason I was given for no more B-Ws in 1951-55 was due to Ford telling B-W it wanted to be sure B-W would supply them before anyone else could get them, but again, that is hearsay, maybe even a little heresy.

          quote:Originally posted by Mr.Biggs

          Yeah Sam, only 1955 and only behind the 259cu.in. V8s. Further, the DGs debuted in the 1950 model lineup. The tranny was built by Borg-Warner's Detroit Gear division but had been developed in concert with Studebaker for use in their cars. It was abandoned by Stude after the 55 cars for the fact that it was so costly to make when they could get a revalved version of the Ford-o-matic (also built by Barg-Warner) for less. This might not have happened if Studebaker hadn't been looking to find ways to stop their slide in sales. Of course, the "King-of-the-Hill" battle between Ford and GM was what was hammering Stude's sales numbers. And it was those very numbers and the numerous sales of Ford=o-matic trannies that forced the unit cost to be so much lower than the DG series.[V]

          Miscreant at large.
          Sam Roberts

          Comment


          • #6
            More info on previous post. The car is a speedster with a dg 250 auto.The nameplate is on the left side of the case with serial no. I only get around 16 mpg but I live in the mountains and have a tendency to step on it. When I go downhill It would be nice to be able to downshift to second but it goes to first which really reves the motor but gives great braking. What I would like to know is this normal. Len

            Comment


            • #7
              About your milage, you get better in the mountains than I get with my Lark sedan.[V] Certainly better than you would get with a Ford or Chevy. And you can even have a little fun at that! Count your blessings.

              Lotsa Larks!
              Studeclunker
              A.K.A: out2lunch
              Home of the famous Mr. Ed!
              K.I.S.S. Keep It Simple Studebaker!
              Ron Smith
              Where the heck is Fawn Lodge, CA?

              Comment


              • #8
                I would not downshift that automatic to first, or even second, for the purpose of slowing the car down, on hills or otherwise. Brakes are a lot cheaper than DG250 automatics. If you don't have enough braking to keep you happy, upgrade your brakes, do not destroy your DG250. The DG250 has a lock up torque converter. It will provide some, more than most older cars, engine retardation even when in high/direct drive.
                Gary L.
                Wappinger, NY

                SDC member since 1968
                Studebaker enthusiast much longer

                Comment

                Working...
                X