> In fact, during the 60's when these transmissions were built, the
potential of
> a lockup converters was well known in the industry. However, everybody
> realized that the improvement that such a device would offer did not worth
its
> cost (because the converter slippage is very low most of the time). In
modern
> times, the engines lost torque and the requirements in performance
increased,
> so they started installing high stall converters. Also, overdrive
> transmissions became common. Overdrives tend to load the engine at low
speeds
> where slippage is high. Now, the potential benefits of the lockup are
higher,
> so they are used on virtually all modern cars.
Don't modern cars include some 'either/or' control logic? IOW, first OD is
engaged, and then lockup. Lockup is first to let go, then the unit
downshifts as needed.
>
> Now, why did the 440s in 78 had lockup transmissions? Oil crisis may be?
As
> said, I cannot verify any mileage advantage of my lockup equipped LeBaron.
>
That is encouraging news for anyone who is concerned about gas mileage who
is using an older trans.
John
Back to the Home of the Forward Look Network