You would have a hard time finding the law that outlawed Chrysler's pushbuttons as there was no such law. The American federal government did not have the right to pass any legislation regarding auto equipment or safety regulations until the enactment of the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act and the Highway Safety Act in 1966. Those laws enabled the American government to establish the Department of Transportation and proceed to pass a multitude of laws concerning auto and highway safety.. Chrysler dropped the pushbuttons for marketing reasons. Although Chrysler owners loved the buttons, GM and Ford owners were not so positive about them. And if Chrysler wanted a bigger share of the American market, they would have to entice GM and Ford owners to buy Chrysler. And thus the buttons died. There were no standards set for automatic transmission gear selection in the 1960's, contrary to what many believe. The P-R-N-D-L or P-R-N-D-2-1 quadrant was the accepted format for the Big Three - even Chrysler's pushbuttons were R-B-D-2-l - but Studebaker hung onto the P-N-D-L-R quadrant to the very end in 1966. And Corvair's standard gear selector for its Powerglide was a dash-mounted lever, just like Chrysler in 1955. And next time you get on a newer model transit bus - Gillig, Flyer, Orion, etc., ask the driver to shift his bus into neutral and then back into a forward gear. Watch him use pushbuttons to do it. Until the passing of the above two laws, the Automobile Manufacturers Association was the big power. It was the AMA that pushed for the adoption of sealed beam headlamps in 1939 and the quad headlamp system in 1956-57. Again, it was not the federal government that approved them as they had no power over such matters until 1966. Same as well for the adoption of such items as seat belts, padded dashboards, anti-glare paint on dashboards and windshield surrounds, day-night mirrors, driver's outside rearview mirrors, backup lights, dual braking systems - all these either appeared on cars or were approved for production prior to the enactment of the above acts due to the AMA. Even side marker lights/reflectors were not the result of any federal law, which is why Chrysler products had lights in 1968 and reflectors in 1969. If you want to know what the federal government does say about transmission shift lever sequence, below is a quote from their regulations, first announced December 2, 1971, and not sometime in 1963 or 1964: . >From the Department of Transportation, Title 49: Transportation, [36 FR 22902, Dec. 2, 1971, as amended at 54 FR 29045, July 11, 1989; 56 FR 12471, Mar. 26, 1991; 60 FR 13642, March 14, 1995] - "PART 571-FEDERAL MOTOR VEHICLE SAFETY STANDARDS "Subpart B-Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards "§ 571.102 Standard No. 102; Transmission shift lever sequence, starter interlock, and transmission braking effect. "S3.1.4 Identification of shift lever positions. "S3.1.4.1 Except as specified in S3.1.4.3, if the transmission shift lever sequence includes a park position, identification of shift lever positions, including the positions in relation to each other and the position selected, shall be displayed in view of the driver whenever any of the following conditions exist: "(a) The ignition is in a position where the transmission can be shifted. "(b) The transmission is not in park. "S3.1.4.2 Except as specified in S3.1.4.3, if the transmission shift lever sequence does not include a park position, identification of shift lever positions, including the positions in relation to each other and the position selected, shall be displayed in view of the driver whenever the ignition is in a position in which the engine is capable of operation. "S3.1.4.3 Such information need not be displayed when the ignition is in a position that is used only to start the vehicle. "S3.1.4.4 Effective September 23, 1991, all of the information required to be displayed by S3.1.4.1 or S3.1.4.2 shall be displayed in view of the driver in a single location. At the option of the manufacturer, redundant displays providing some or all of the information may be provided." As you can see, there is no concern as to the order the gears are displayed, only their visibility to the driver, with and without a park position Bill Vancouver, BC ----- Original Message ----- From: "Douglas Nieblas" <doug58imp@xxxxxxxxxxx> To: <mailing-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> Sent: Wednesday, October 12, 2005 4:43 PM Subject: RE: IML: Please Welcome Returning Member, Douglas Nieblas (1958) > The reason that they stopped making the push button automatics was not women > breaking their nails. It was the federal government that passed legistation > in 1965 to force all automakers to standardize the basic functions of the > cars. It was easier for Chrysler to shift back to levers in the now standard > pattern, than it would be to convince Ford and GM to swift to push buttons. > Don't you think? > Doug > 58 Crown coupe > > > >From: "david simons" <simonsbud8@xxxxxxxxxxx> > >Reply-To: mailing-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > >To: <mailing-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > >Subject: RE: IML: Please Welcome Returning Member, Douglas Nieblas (1958) > >Date: Wed, 12 Oct 2005 08:56:20 -0700 > > > >women complained the pushbutton transmissions broke their nails > > > > > >-----Original Message----- > >From: "mailing-list-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx" > ><mailing-list-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> on behalf of "ken brather" > ><oef_1947_isf@xxxxxxxxx> > >Sent: Wednesday, October 12, 2005 2:21 PM > >To: "mailing-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx" <mailing-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > >Subject: Re: IML: Please Welcome Returning Member, Douglas Nieblas > >(1958) > > > > > >k. here saw a new yorker yesterday an 89. looks pretty much like an imp > >of the period guess there r suttle differanses. easeier to tell the diff > >tween new yorkers & imps from the early '< 70's on back. mid ' 70's on > >up more difficult to tell. i saw an ad 4 a 56 chrysler & y'all r right. > >there is no park designation. it showed a close up of the push button > >shifter why did they stop making those? the edsel had them & when i was > >in college, i had a friend that had i think it was a valiant that had > >this . been thinking what i like as my 1st imp if i could ever afford 1. > >you folks seem to have a lot of trouble w/ them my folks had a ' 71 new > >yorker & had lot of trouble w/ back firing thru carberator. > > ----------------- http://www.imperialclub.com ----------------- This message was sent to you by the Imperial Mailing List. Please reply to mailing-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx and your response will be shared with everyone. Private messages (and attachments) for the Administrators should be sent to webmaster@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To UN-SUBSCRIBE, go to http://imperialclub.com/unsubscribe.htm