Was the 401 nailhead available with 3 on the tree in 1959?

but all other things being equal, doesnt a standard transmission get better mileage and more overall economy to own and operate than an automatic? All other things being equal?

 

I think it highly depends on the driver and the circumstances more so than the coupling.
As mentioned, the early automatics sucked.
I suppose it's possible and in some cases likely, but I wouldn't call it a rule.

The major advantage to whom, the OEM's or the customer? (mileage or overall economy)
Gas was relatively cheap and automatics were a new and evolving thing.
I would challenge anyone to prove that they historically did get better mileage with the standard.
Who really tracks their mileage for every tankful under controlled and repeatable circumstances for tens or hundreds of thousands of miles, esp. when the shift points, cruise rpms and time under load and respective throttle settings would be tough to replicate?
My posts are from having done just that, and from the process of learning that most of the traditionally held beliefs are simply untrue.
I realize how some of this stuff sounds...

Time under load or acceleration has much more influence to overall mileage when the trips are short, nullifying the mechanical coupling.
Equality wouldn't exist under acceleration when an automatic's converter multiplies torque and can have substantial weight to it...like a flywheel.
It will push the car more briskly with lesser throttle angle and have potential for stronger shift recovery. (not the first ones though...)
My experience showed that very heavy throttle to reduce acceleration time from 0-50 mph was a major improvement over a long, light acceleration.
I've seen that running a vehicle longer in it's sweet spot will overcome major differences in mechanical efficiency, and that "normal driving" probably doesn't operate in any given vehicle's "sweet spot" until we get much closer to modern cars.

I think "overall economy" was a sales phrase used to find the positive aspects required to sell or make people feel better about stick equipped cars when the push for automatics was clear.
It would have been up to the owner to find the methods to best obtain mileage.

(I should have simply written, "all else is never equal", Lol.)

 

In 2007 I bought my first 59. It was a LeSabre 2 dr sedan with the 3 on the tree. It is true that the Lesabre was the ONLY model that came with a manual trans in 59. Usually when I see others with manuals they are bare bone cars like mine. (poverty caps, am radio if lucky, etc). You can convert any 59 to a manual trans. The problem is finding the parts. Its a accepted fact that less then 1% of 59s came with manuals. To convert a Invicta or Electra into a manual shift, you need a 3 pedal set up from a 59 or 60, shift linkage, transmission, AND the instrument panel. Here are pictures of my stick 59. Note where the shift indicator is hasn't been cut out of the instrument panel. I believe any 57-60 3 speed manual transmission will work from a Buick.

https://www.flickr.com/photos/59151113@N03/sets/72157634308703133

In regards to drivability I have driven 59s with the dynaflow and manual. The manual is much MUCH better for those who like to FEEL the Buicks torque. For cruising the dynaflow would be better. I did a lead foot test on both. The manual accelerated quite a bit faster, and ran lower RPM at a given speed. It also was better in stop and go city traffic. The dynaflow sucked up alot of the power, and got about 2 mpg less. In fact it was almost impossible to spin tires on DIRT while the manual I was able to burn rubber through a concrete intersection with new rubber and custom exhaust! Both were lesabres with 364s with a complete tune up. The dynaflows best feature aside from 'no shift feeling' was the RPMs it ran in first gear. I hooked up a tach to it and no matter how far I put my foot down the RPMs didn't go over 2400 until about 35-40 mph then they started to rise with no notice to shifting. Aside from that novelty the manual all day every day. Rule of thumb if you find one get it. They are highly sought after and I wish I still had mine.

 

Yeah, I seem to recall that my Invicta never once spun the tires, but just grabbed and went. At lower speeds, like off the line, yes it was a bit slow. But when it came into it's power-band, look out. The Dynaflow would only work with Buick torque, which is why the "dual path" or the precursor to the Turbo 300 was introduced in the small V8 and V6 motors, they just couldn't pull over a dynaflow.

I'll never understand why the style in the 50s was to use a column shift on a standard transmission. "Rowing" is a good way of describing city traffic in one of those, a floor shift was so much easier to use.

 

could be they wanted to accomodate 6 people and shifting a stick between someones legs would be rather uh .. erm.. unseemly. Especially if it was another dude. just sayin.

 

LOL, but the funniest things are those that are true. I think that's exactly why they took the shifter off the floor. Some cars had pretty good three on the tree linkage - most didn't. I hate to say it, but I think the Mopar column shift linkage was the best in the industry in the 40's and up to the mid '50's when they went to a concealed shift tube inside the column. Most GM three-speed column linkage was awful - including Buick's. Ford was somewhere in-between.

 

In a modern automatic transmission, there are two very different situations - when the torque converter "locks up", as you say, the rpms going in to the transmission are the same as the rpms coming out of the engine. When accelerating and the torque converter has not locked up, a very different series of events occur. Without getting too wordy, the original 1939 Oldsmobile Hydramatic had a fluid coupling that acted like a clutch. The engine drove an impeller that directed oil to a turbine attached to the input shaft of the transmission. Think two fans facing each other; one is plugged in and blowing air at the other fan. The second fan will turn due to the air being blown at it. A torque converter is a fluid coupling with one added member - the stator (think Buick Dynaflow). The stator is carefully positioned between the impeller and the turbine so that it will catch any oil that is deflected off the turbine and redirects it back into the turbine. Essentially the turbine gets an extra push from the stator. This multiplies torque. The turbine gets two or more pushes from the oil that the impeller is pumping. It's not exactly free energy - the process absorbs horsepower, but multiplies torque, which is what you want when you are attempting to accelerate something that weighs two tons.

 

OK V8 Buick People: I have that 60 Wagon with the factory 3 on the tree. It was crunched out when I got it and have since purchased another used transmission to install.

I later found out that the 364 in my wagon had been replaced with a 401 from a 59 Invicta. This could be a reason the transmission went South. I'll never know for sure. The factory mated stick units for 59 and 60 to a special de-tuned 364 and the pressure on the trans may very well have been why.

Now....if there were someone who is an expert and can come to my place and help me get this thing together for a fee....I'm interested! Mitch

 

I would be very careful shifting that tranny. They don't grow on trees.

 

Chiming in~
I've owned a '59 Invicta since '89, so I've read any '59 literature or article I've ever encountered, in addition to having been in the BCA for about 20 years. I have never seen either a car or claim that a LeSabre got a factory-installed 401 or that a 401 car got a factory-installed 3-spd. I am convinced it never happened.

While theoretically correct that 'back in the day' one could get non-original set-ups if you had the money/knew someone- this practice was much more prevalent at Pontiac than Buick.
Officially, as stated earlier, Buick was pretty rigid about the power trains in '59 : LeSabre 364 only, 2bbl or 4bbl, 3-spd standard & Twin Turbine optional. Invicta, Electra & Electra 225 were all 401s, with the standard TT or optional Triple Turbine.

'59 LeSabre production was 164,904 (not including stripped chassis's). Manual trans installation rate was 1.2%, or approximately 1,979 cars built with a 3-spd.

 

along about 64-65,,, I was coming thru Ochita parish Louisiana and a Buick sheriffs patrol car pulled out getting on I-10 and it had a 3 speed manual trans... and lots of power.... :Brow: Power bou coups