(first posted 6/15/2013. At least two owners of these have left comments ) I’m not trying to beat this semi-automatick schtick into the ground, but in the recent Chevy Torque Drive post, Mad Hungarian left a comment near the end referring to a similar semi-automatic offered on the 1970 Ford Maverick. That triggered a vague memory, which just had to be followed up in order to satisfy my own curiosity. Well, there’s remarkably little out there about it, but here’s what I dug up:
The only brochure reference is buried in the fine print. It was available only on the 1970 MY Maverick (which was built starting in April of 1969), and only on the smallest 170 CID six. And at $121, was a fair bit pricier the the Torque Drive ($69). Perhaps that’s justified by it having three gears instead of two? Of course, for eighty bucks more, one could get the self-shifting C4 automatic. Which undoubtedly helps explain why these were undoubtedly rare in 1970, and dropped for 1971. Torque Drive, with its four-year run, makes this look like a real flop in comparison.
Speaking of, that raises the question as to how one properly operated this gearbox. Start off in first or second? Depending the competition at the red light drag strip? Someone out there have a 1970 Maverick Owner’s Manual. roger628?
I tried to find if there was still one out there anywhere. fordmaverick.com has a registry of 939 Mavericks, and one 1970 was listed as having the semi-automatic transmission. It’s in Colombia, no less, having been imported by the US Embassy in Bogota. But like almost every old six cylinder Maverick, it’s been “restored” with upgrades, in this case the engine (250 six) and transmission from a Granada donor. I wouldn’t be surprised if there’s absolutely none left anywhere in the world. How sad is that?
Meanwhile Chrysler was confident enough that people either wanted the Torqueflite or an honest manual trans.
These “clutchless” manuals are a strange footnote in automotive history.
I think they came about from the complaints of PowerGlide owners (and other two-speeders, FAIK) of how shifts happen at inopportune times. Popular Science testers complained loudly about that when they did a 10,000 mile test of the Vega with PowerGlide. They remarked that it was easier and smoother to drive in town with the gear lever in Low.
Somebody, over at GM or FoMoCo (who knows which?) may have taken that the wrong way and thought the nation was lusting for a non-shifting slushbox.
They were wrong, of course.
Sounds about as desirable as a VW with the “automatic stick shift”. Interesting, I never knew that transmission existed.
Lots of them running around in Portland, OR back in the day, a friends mom bought one new when they first came out. The ’64 and ’68 VW’s owned by a couple of other friends could outrun it from a standing start.
Make that Colombia and Bogota….
Good idea; done.
The listed gear ratios are interesting. With the 170 you got steeper gears with the manual and the 200 got the more common steeper gears with the AT unless equipped with AC.
I had never heard of this trans until the Torque Drive discussion, definitely looks like it was a response to GM’s Torque Drive. I’m guessing it was just a C4 with a manual valve body.
This is so intriguing. I had no idea that American cars offered semi-automatics at all. I just thought it was a foreign thing.
My travels take me to Colombia every couple of years–always for legitimate reasons, I swear! Next time I’m in Bogotá I’ll see if I can find that semi-automatic Maverick. Car-wise, Colombia has gone mostly Korean and SUV, but you do find the occasional gem. Last August I was in Medellín and there was a beautiful 1960 ‘Vette staying at our hotel. Didn’t have the chance to speak with the owner, but one thing is sure: if you have a classic car in Medellín, one of the world’s most vertical cities, makes sure you keep the brakes in top shape.
An excellent CC topic would be the cars of Pablo Escobar. Sadly, almost all of them were burned up when his apartment building in Medellín (the Monaco) was bombed by his enemies of the Cali cartel. When I visited the Monaco in 2010 the charred remains were still there.
As I said in the post, that one has had its original drive train replaced by one from a Granada, so no more semi-automatic in that one.
Oops, I should have read more carefully about the tranny, but I was excited by Paul’s Colombia reference. Truly a beautiful (and unfairly maligned) country, with some of the nicest people in the world. Well worth a visit.
I’d like to, having been long intrigued by Colombia.
Not while it is on the State Departments recommended do not visit list. I value my life. Dangerous enough on PDX’s Max line.
I don’t remember ANY discussions on the Chevy or Ford semi-automatics back in the day – only talk on the VW box. Probably because they were a bad solution to an almost non-existent problem. I remember the VW semi-auto as having a curious feature of shifting into neutral even if you just put your hand on the shifter.
Some people tried & tried to do burnouts with ASS VWs by doing “Neutral Drops” by having transmission in gear, revving engine & letting go of stick. Clutch in those is small & difficult to access.
Interesting to ponder that VW, the leader in compacts, freaked the Big Two out so much they had to respond in this manner. Thinking about it too ( and not sure if this was stated on the previous post) the ad for Chevy’s Torque-Drive bears more than a passing resemblance to a DDB-style VeeDub ad… How much market share could they possibly have been worried about, though?
Well, by 1968 Beetle sales in the US were over 400k.
Like in today’s world, cars are judged by Honda/Toyota standards, in that time any small car was compared to the Beetle. It was the king of economy cars in the US for a very long time.
I noticed that too, the Chevrolet ad was styled to look like a DDB VW ad.
Not really sure the Torque-Drive or Maverick semi-auto were really intended to compete in a specific market for semi-auto cars. Rather, it was a way to offer clutchless cars at a lower price point at a pretty intensely competitive time for US automakers (Japanese cars were just starting to make inroads, these were peak sales years for the Beetle, and the US makers were competing with each other for the smaller car buyer). For VW, on the other hand, the Autostick was a low-buck way to use a lot of existing technology (some developed by Saxomat) to market Beetles to those who didn’t want manual boxes, without re-engineering the floorpan which would have been required to install the autobox VW used in Squarebacks.
My automotive nerd status was already pretty high but CC is propelling it to a ridiculous level. Haha.
What an amazing and obscure find. Seems like another government fleet special. Since these seem to be so rare (as in, none exist, anymore), where did the selector dial come from?
I suppose someone with a really warped sense of rarity could create their own by converting a 1970 Maverick 170/C4 with a manual valve body. But they’d still need the correct selector dial.
The ’70 Maverick owner’s manual is viewable/downloadable at http://archive.org/details/Ford_Maverick_Owners_Manual_1970_. Go to page 19. It recommends starting in first and shifting to second between 15 and 40 mph. Also says you can start in second but gas mileage and acceleration will be affected (no kidding!).
The ’70 Maverick was built to a price, so much so that the glovebox was replaced by an open shelf, to keep the base sticker under $2000, just barely. I suspect Ford marketing folks believed they could lure some additional number of customers from the imports (and from Novas and Valiants) if they could offer a clutch-free car at a slightly lower price point.
Ford specifically chose the $1995 price tag for Maverick because they wanted it to be identical to the price of the first base-model Falcon from 1960. The semi-automatic C4 was intended to be a more palatable option for buyers wanting an automatic without the heftier price tag of the ‘full’ automatic. Oddly enough, the semi-auto C4 wasn’t really that much less expensive to manufacture. The bean counters at Ford decided to withdraw the option, particularly in light of the fact that it just wasn’t selling.
I had one of those semi-auto things in the early 1980s. Mine, however, came bolted to a 200 engine (yes, the original for the car, confirmed with a VIN 5th digit ‘T’). The car’s original owner died, the car went up for sale by the original owner’s son, who thought the trans was shot (he didn’t understand that it wasn’t SUPPOSED to shift automatically), which is when I acquired it. I, too, thought the trans was going until I took it to a transmission shop for a repair estimate and the guy there enlightened me as to what I had. It was a fantastic little get-around car, and was great in snow and ice thanks to the time-honored practice of starting out in 2nd gear. It got pretty good gas mileage, too, though it definitely wasn’t the fastest thing around.
I enlisted in 1984, and rather than let the car sit in my parents’ driveway for the bulk of four years, I sold it. I wish I’d kept it, but that would have meant it would have been sitting unused for the bulk of four years.
I wonder how many are left truly?
A one year option that wasn’t popular and only available on one car.
At least Torque-Drive ran for a few years and it was available on a couple of cars, so you have a better chance of seeing one, though it slim at best even for the much more common Torque-Drive.
There is a discussion of the semi-auto on the Maverick/Comet Forum at http://mmb.maverick.to/showthread.php?t=26585&highlight=semi-automatic . Go down a bit in the thread and there is a quotation from the shop manual listing all the parts that are missing or different in the semi auto versus the regular C4.
There is another thread started by someone with an original semi auto car that had been converted to a self-shifting C4 at some point, but he had the original trans and was thinking of rebuilding it and making the car original again. The thread is at http://mmb.maverick.to/showthread.php?t=32075&highlight=semi-automatic . It dates from 2007; I wonder if he followed through.
On the forum there are some folks interested in potential racing applications of the semi-auto. I can see the reasoning behind that, but how many of these are around?
Yup, I’m the one who put the shop manual stuff on that thread over at the mav/comet sight.
I would have lost my shirt because I would have bet against anyone that told me that there was a Maverick Semi-automatic.
What’s next, you going to show a 3 cylinder Vega?
I suspect that back in the day there were quite a few Vegas running on three cylinders!
And one or two that left the factory in that state of tune, too.
I know for a fact it would run on two, too. (barely)
It would have been unfair for me to take the bet, as my first car was a ’70 Maverick — mine had the full fledged automatic, but I remember seeing that odd half-breed transmission in the owner’s manual.
My wife & i owned a ’68 VW Bug with the semi-automatic. In city driving, it was great keeping up with traffic. However, taking it up hills was an adventure.
Strange that priority was given to this over putting a 4-on-the-floor in the Maverick.
I am surprised it wasn’t more used but probably sold as an economy thing. Semi shift autos like Tiptronic etc are all the rage now.
These semi-autos were emblematic of the way Detroit thought about the Bug Invasion. Like the above poster said, the humble Bug was selling 400,000 units a year in 1968. The reason was not price; the Bug was cool. Even by ’68 it was horribly long in the tooth, not popular in Germany at all. It wasn’t even particularly cheap.
Detroit thought it was all about price so they came out with aberrations like this. They just never got small cars and they still don’t. At least now they are finally smart enough to bring in the small cars of their foreign subsidiaries, which sell pretty well, even though the are not all that cheap.
Late to the discussion, but I am another who had never, ever heard of this one. If I had to bet, I would guess that TorqueDrive was a “follow VW” move, and that the Ford unit was a reaction to both. An answer in search of a question, as it turns out.
What I find interesting is that either the PowerGlide or the Ford C4 allowed manual shifts (the Ford even started in second gear, if it worked like the CruiseOMatic in my 67 Galaxie).
Did the CruisOMatic really (start in second gear)? All of them? Are you sure? When did that change? Why did I not know that?
Yes the C4 and C6 can start in 2nd gear if that position was selected, one of the reasons I prefer my C6’s over my 727 which will still start in 1st when put in the “2” position.
They started in second gear if you selected “2.” No mistake on that; we had two 1968s; a 1973 and a 1974. And I had, for a brief time, a rotted-out 1972 Pinto with a mini-Cruise-O-Matic.
All of them would do that if you selected “2.” On the Pinto, it kept the car running until a fluid-change and Trans-Medic did its work…the transmission wouldn’t shift. In D it would stay in L; but with 2 I could run it all over town, to work, to wherever.
It surprised me when I found that some GM cars and all new cars run 1-2 in “2.” To me, one big advantage of “2” was it reduced wheel spin if you were lightly stuck. Denying a forced start in intermediate gear loses that real advantage.
Well of course, if you select “2”. I thought what jpc was saying they started in 2 when it was in D. What did you mean, Jim?
TF727, TH350 and TH400 start in 1st even if you select 2.
Seemed like GM thought you’d only be using ‘2’ to limit your speed on a downgrade, while Ford considered its use in low-traction starts as well.
I have always wondered if the Ford way of starting in second with “2” was more historical holdover. The Ford-O-Matic from the 1950s (not to be confused with the 2 speed Ford-O-Matic introduced in 1960) was a Borg Warner unit (and was essentially the same unit as the Studebaker Flight-O-Matic that replaced the more expensive DG for 1956) was a 3 speed that was set up to start in second and shift to third when in “drive”. Both could be made to start in first, but this had to be done manually. I have read that the reason was that an automatic 1-2 shift was deemed not smooth enough, so they just set the thing up to use first in a manual or semi-auto mode only. When the FX/MX (Cruise-O-Matic) replaced the Ford-O it in 1958, it started in first. However, Ford customers had been used to second gear starts for quite a few years, and the Cruise-O gave them the option. Just a theory.
The change came sometime after AOD became popular in the 1980s. With AOD, at least at first, the selection of OD of course gave you 1-2-3-4. Selection of D2 gave you 2-3. And of course, the perennial favorite, L.
I guess as transmissions got re-engineered for lighter, smaller FWD and other uses, the Ford people looked and didn’t see any real disadvantage in how THC was being used on the GM side. So…go with the flow.
The AOD shift quadrant is OD, D, 1. Selecting D and it will start out in 1 just as in OD. Selecting 1 will give you 1st and 2nd though it will hold 1st until a forced upshift occurs and downshift to 1st at a higher speed. The AOD-E/4R70 has a D 2 1 quadrant with a OD off switch and it will start in and hold 2nd in 2 and 1st in 1, but won’t downshift to those gears if the resulting engine rpm would exceed the particular engine’s redline, while activating the OD off switch will give you 1-2-3 shifting.
Once the 5sp 5R55 came out with it’s D 3 2 1 quadrant and OD off button you can start in and hold 3rd, 2nd, and 1st.
You’re probably right on that.
I’m going on memory…memory as a passenger and from reading about that wonderful new Ford Automatic Overdrive. Never owned or drove one.
What I meant was that shifting into “2” got you second gear, whether at speed or from a start. The owners manual recommended 2 for starting out in low traction conditions. Maybe that was unique to the old FMX unit which predated the C4 and C6.
2 will start you out in 2nd in FMX, C3, C4, C6 AOD-E/4R70, 5R55 and E4OD/4R100. I think it does on the C5 and 4R44 too.
Our 2001 Honda Odyssey transmission operates in the same manner.
We had a C4, two C6s, and an AOD during the 1970s-90s, and did use manual ‘2’ for starting from a stop during the winter. The snow tires back then didn’t have very good traction on either dry pavement or ice.
I do know that the C4 in the early Mustangs (through the end of the 1966 model year) did both depending on what gear you selected. If you use the little dot position (where “drive” normally is) it always starts in 2nd and shifts to 3rd. The bigger green dot, (where the “2” position should be) is actually drive. In drive it starts in 1st, then shifts to 2nd and 3rd normally. Ford changed the C4 for 1967 to the more conventional D-2-1 arrangement.
I had never heard of any semi-automatic versions before though. Amazing…
I forgot about those early C4s and their strange shift quadrant markings and operation.
The timing for the 1970 Maverick’s C4 semi-auto is about right. Chevy’s Torque-Drive was introduced in 1968, which would fit in perfectly with the Maverick’s development timeline. It’s unlikely that Ford thought the Torque-Drive would be a success, but since development of a C4 version wouldn’t cost much, when they spotted it in the ’68 Chevy catalog, they went ahead and added a Ford version for the Maverick, too.
When it became apparent that Torque-Drive was a loser, I’m certain that it was too far along to pull it (marketing material, brochures, etc.), so Ford just quietly dropped it after 1970.
They only odd thing is that they didn’t see fit to carry it into 1971 on the Pinto. OTOH, maybe it was an easy enough mod that if the Torque-Drive Vega had become popular, it wouldn’t have been difficult to bring it back for the Pinto later.
I have the owners manual, the trans info in the preliminary Shop Manual, and I believe all the Maverick sales brochures. The semi-auto disappears in the 08/69 revised brochure. I probably feel most of the idiots of the day simply put it in 3rd and then went back to the dealer complaining about sluggish acceleration. One of these days when I have some spare cash I’m either going to call Kevin Marti or simply order a report on the car in Columbia (I believe the VIN is listed) because I really do want to know how many were sold. Back in the 80’s. there was a old man here that had one. In fact, his Maverick also had the base 13 inch wheels. Wish I had taken pics. I just did not know then.
One of these was found in late 2013 in Danielsville, GA, in good shape (hardly any rust), and it runs!
I have a 70 maverick with the original semi-auto trans and original 170…bought it a couple years ago and needs restoration…found it in Arkansas city Kansas, now in Oklahoma…
I owned a 69 1/2 Maverick (1970 MY) with a Semi-Auto in it. The trans IS a regular C4 unit with a manual valve body. I had the car in the 90s and it worked well. I took the trans pan down and put a regular valve body in it from another C4 to get it to shift Automatically. It was great in thew snow.
The Ford semi-auto in the 70 Maverick was actually named the “C4-S” .
It actually was a C4, with a manual valve body .
As I have a 70 Mav with owner’s manual, (mine has a full out automatic C4) I’ll explain how to drive one.
To start out, place the selector in 1st . Upshift from 1st to 2nd at 15 to 50 MPH (depending on throttle setting. Earlier shifts for less throttle, later shifts for more throttle)
Upshift to high at between 25 and 70 MPH (using the same rules for throttle setting)
Downshift to first when at a complete stop, or if acceleration demands. If acceleration demands a downshift and speeds are under 70 MPH, only downshift to the next lowest selection .
There you have it
I have a 1969-1970 maverick with the 2 spoke/ horn ring steering wheel, ignition switch in the dash and the 170 CID six with the infamous 3 speed semi-automatic, the car is 100% original with 92K original miles, would love to put it in the hands of a collector. I stumbled on to it saving it from the crusher. I am located in Athens, GA
I had a used ’69 Nova 230 6 with the manual 2 speed. Second gear starts worked GR8 on snowy and icy Wisconsin Winter roads!!! Only Nova (of 4) I had with the 230……ran better than any of the new Nova 250s I owned!! 🙂 DFO
Fascinating, no semi manuals other than the VW effort were offered here and the VW one is very rare anyone springing the extra cash for an automatic option expected the real thing, the only 2nd gear start autos I remember were in Jags with their D1 D2 quadrant and the Austin/Wolseley 6/110 sedans which had the DG auto box,
SAAB had Saxomat optional for a while. Goggomobil had prreselector transmission. Renault had Ferlic Clutch option, followed by self-shifting, almost automatic, electric-controlled transmission. BMC had Manumatic. Rootes had Easidrive, electric-controlled containers of steel powder as clutches. FIAT had idroconvert. Mercedes had the HYDRAK, sounds sinister. Subaru 360 had semi-automatic, like VW. Lots of attempts by lots of makers to remove that left pedal.
The Ford “Green Dot” automatic transmission would indeed start in second gear (“2”) and then automatically shift to direct drive (third gear) if so selected on the steering wheel column selector. (Small dot on the quadrant.)
Or it would do the usual automatic transmission’s shifting pattern of first-second-third gear, if so selected. (The larger green dot selected.)
My Aunt had this “Green Dot” automatic transmission in her ’66 Ford Ranch Wagon. She swore that it was the best snow & ice car she ever owned.
With the 289 V8’s curb idle raised up slightly for the winter and the second gear start option selected, this wagon would ooze it’s way out of any snow drift, with no gas pedal input given and slowly chug it’s way down the street. She explained that “finesse”, not raw horsepower, was the key to Oklahoma foul weather driving.
Even the Japanese tried it for a while. The Hondamatic found in 1st gen Civics. Accords and several motorcyles was manually shifted.
My mom had what we were told was the first Accord in Victoria, BC that had that Hondamatic transmission. It was my mom’s car, and she loved it as she had to “shift” her own gears. Both my younger sister and I got our drivers licenses on that Honda. Better than the Cricket my dad had “surprised” my mom with a few years earlier.
Never knew about this Ford transmission, I learn something new here everyday, thanks.
My 6th grade teacher had a ’62 Rambler with an E-stick semi-automatic. He was pleased with it. It was basically an automated single plate clutch, I am told. Yes, E-stick not Twin-stick.
I seem to remember once driving a 53 Chrysler Town and Country wagon with a 331 Hemi and a 2-3 automatic shift with a 1-2 shift using the clutch. Do I remember this correctly and if so how does that compare to this.
John, your Chrysler was probably equipped with the Fluid Torque tranmission, a combination of Chrysler’s classic Fluid Drive updated as a torque converter and mated to the semi-automatic transmission. It was discussed when I wrote up a 53 Chrysler Imperial, and got some detailed explanation in the comments. https://www.curbsideclassic.com/curbside-classics-american/curbside-classic-1953-chrysler-imperial-easing-back-into-the-luxury-game/
Like many others who’ve posted, I never knew of this 3-speed semi-automatic transmission available for the ’70 Maverick coupled only with a 170 CID engine. I hope those few extant are taken care of. Museum pieces! → Maybe someone who has a ’76 Buick LeSabre with the ‘231’ will find a way to procure this oddball rarity of a Maverick for their collector auto stash. 😀
The 4L60E GM automatic, at least in the Caprice Police car and 1500 series trucks, would start and stay in 2nd with the shifter in “2”. Ford’s E4OD did the same. GM’s 4L80E, in my K2500, starts in first with the selector in “2”.
This re Ford’s 1964 cars in Popular Mechanics, 1963—relevant?
I had one in my 1970 Maverick. I hated that transmission. The car had a 170ci that had no power then that tranny started off in third gear unless you manually shifted it. What a joke.
And it looks like you put it out of its misery. Hope you were OK.
Sure never knew bout these!