Driving the 1951 buick special straight 8 dynaflow

I am getting a video of driving the 1951 buick special with the dynaflow and straight 8 engine. It sure is a soft ride.

[@paradiseroad6405]

...Dynaflow doesn't shift in drive...torque converter does all the work...

[@ivanwashington3186]

i could picture an earlier incarnation of myself driving this thing most days.

[@stedydoch9911]

nice video! glad to see her running and driving. the dynaflow is actually a gearless transmission. its has something like 2 stators and a torque converter.

[@thenewmies7114]

Good to know, thank you

[@MichaelFlatman]

dynaflow has one main gear (drive) which is 1:1, it also has a low gear which you can select (1.8:1)

[@michaeldunn3088]

You do know the right way to drive a dyna flow transmission ?. You can drive around town in D but going up hills and accelerating involves shifting into L up to 60 MPH. Look it up if you don't believe me it helps I own a 63 buick lesabre with a dyna flow.

[@IkarusFlight]

Thanks for uploading. The straight 8 sounds nice. Doesn't sound too loud to me. There is less sound dampening than in a new car of cause.

[@thenewmies7114]

Thank you.

[@djplonghead5403]

Made of real metal.

[@trs-80fanclub12]

just purchased one, looking forward to the adventure

[@burnedoutfred9066]

You can remove that excessive steering play in 5 minutes. Smooth shift into 2nd? That's because there was no shift into 2nd. There was no 2nd.

[@dondesnoo1771]

0-60 one minute three to stop .word sonomatic sound familiar.had stick 47conv.the 42s had twin carbs .flathead Packard beat pants off them .dad had one .the 57century 0-60 6.8sec . stock.we raced one.😀

[@djplonghead5403]

I love packards.

[@jamesfrench7299]

Basically a crude CVT.

[@dbona4445]

It does Not shift!

[@kroakie4]

What are the benefits of the dynaflow transmission?

[@Jerkwad152]

None.

[@jigrodrigues]

It is a primitive automatic transmission, but it is well engineered, highly reliable and smooth. Gas mileage is awful though.

[@anonymousfuck9320]

*ONE SMOOTH LONG GEAR*

[@hooptierescue2540]

@@jigrodrigues they had pretty much perfected it by 1959 and then, with proper gearing they could get pretty amazing mileage. Also they had tremendous traction on slippery surfaces. It was a shame they phased them out in favor of the turbo 400 in 1964. GM wanted to start merging their car divisions together so started using some of the same components. By the 1990's the only difference between Buicks, Pontiacs, Olds, Chevys, etc... were pretty much cosmetic. I think one thing that did the dynaflow in was that without a hard shift, they didn't really feel like they were accelerating very fast, but in fact they were. I've had many of them and they were great for passing and not too shabby off the line

[@wildman510]

Smoothness and that's basically it apart from reliability/simplicity (these are almost just giant torque converters)