News:

Reminder to CLC members, please make sure that your CLC number is stored in the relevant field in your forum profile. This is important for the upcoming change to the Forums access, More information can be found at the top of the General Discussion forum. To view or edit your profile details, click on your username, at the top of any forum page. Your username only appears when you are signed in.

Main Menu

1963 Hydra-matic Transmission

Started by Gary Powers CLC #19760, August 23, 2006, 10:47:07 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Gary Powers CLC #19760

Hello everyone,

I have a question for Doug Houston and anyone that has had an experience with the early sixties Hydra-matic transmission.

A bit of back-ground:
Over the past few years Ive heard many opinions regarding the Cadillac Hydra-matic (Jet-away) and the later Turbo 400 trans...  and I hear the negatives tend to fall onto the Hydra-matic (Jetaway).   The Hydra in my 63 is doing fine at 73,000 miles,  but doesnt seem to be as refined in the shifting department as my 68 Cad. transmission is, other than that I
cant complain.

After being told and reading here and there that the Hydra (Jet-away)is mechanically trouble-some, very expensive to repair and rebuild and the worst part being that its very difficult to find a transmission repair shop that can work on them correctly, now Im not feeling very confident about the unit so I need some correct, factual info and a knowlegable opinion if anyone has time to offer....

I like my 63 Cad, I hope the trans isnt a sore spot on these
cars.

Gary

Joe R #20442

I would say the words you have heard about the Jetaway are true-if its working fine its a great tranny, but if you have a problem you will have tough luck finding someone who can fix it correctly.  I bought my car partially restored and it had a rebuilt tranny in it, and it never shifted correctly so I bought a used unit which works well but leaks.  I personally think that is why 64s tend to get a little higher price than 63s.

My Dad worked on these units in the GM garages in the early 60s, and was looking over my shop manual and was explaining how much more complicated the old type was compared with the new Hydramatic-big difference.

Rusty Shepherd CLC 6397

Something to remember if you want a Turbo-Hydramatic Cadillac: not all 1964 series cars used it. The de Ville and regular Fleetwood cars came with Turbo-Hydramatic while the Fleetwood 75s and the 62s used Hydra-Matic for one more year. Its easy to tell the difference as Hydra-Matic has R at the bottom of the indicator past L. Turbo-Hydramatic in 1964 only had just one Drive position, so the quadrant looks like Powerglide: PRNDL.