This Whirlpool control panel style reminds me so much of the new panel design Sears began selling with their high end DD models October 1986 with the control knob on the right and the temp and water level selectors on the left side.
POD 03/20/2020
- Thread starter appnut
- Start date
Help Support :
I agree. I always preferred the control knob on the right, esp. if the lid raised from center. Speaking of control knobs, some brands had plastic and others had a more durable materials, back in the day. And some were just easier to read, not confusing. Always thought Maytag had simple, elegant knobs.
And don't forget some were push to start and others pull to start. I would think in case of emergency, without thinking, push to stop would be more natural reaction.
Barry
And don't forget some were push to start and others pull to start. I would think in case of emergency, without thinking, push to stop would be more natural reaction.
Barry
Ahem
Everyone knows that there's only one right way, and that's "pull to start/push to stop"!
lawrence
Everyone knows that there's only one right way, and that's "pull to start/push to stop"!
lawrence
arbilab
Well-known member
Everyone knows that there's only one right way
Reminds me when GM hung onto PNDLR for their automatics. [gameshow buzzer]
Reminds me when GM hung onto PNDLR for their automatics. [gameshow buzzer]
toploader55
Well-known member
"Reminds me when GM hung onto PNDLR for their automatics. [gameshow buzzer]"
OMG... Too funny
Lisa Douglas learning to drive... " The Pernurdle". Park, Reverse, Neutral Drive and Low. Back in the day before what you said.
I believe it was just before what you were describing.
Meaning I believe I remember our 1962 Starfire Olds had "Park, Neutral, Drive Super, Low, and Reverse."
I think " Park, Reverse, Neutral, Low" began around 1966. And I think I remember all Car Companys changed to that as well
Chrysler/ Mopar had Park, Reverse, Neutral , 2, then 1. I think that was the Pushbutton Drive and then on the Column.
Ooooops. Sorry off thread... Beautiful Machine. All Machines back then had constantly changing Control Panels, Design and Human input.
It gave a person a chance to think and imagine. What a concept.
OMG... Too funny
Lisa Douglas learning to drive... " The Pernurdle". Park, Reverse, Neutral Drive and Low. Back in the day before what you said.
I believe it was just before what you were describing.
Meaning I believe I remember our 1962 Starfire Olds had "Park, Neutral, Drive Super, Low, and Reverse."
I think " Park, Reverse, Neutral, Low" began around 1966. And I think I remember all Car Companys changed to that as well
Chrysler/ Mopar had Park, Reverse, Neutral , 2, then 1. I think that was the Pushbutton Drive and then on the Column.
Ooooops. Sorry off thread... Beautiful Machine. All Machines back then had constantly changing Control Panels, Design and Human input.
It gave a person a chance to think and imagine. What a concept.
arbilab
Well-known member
brief sidebar
Ford in 55 was PRNDL. But you coudn't necessarily trust it to stay in Park.
Buick in 57 was PNDLR. We had one of both.
Not absolutely certain about the 62 Pontiac, but I think by then it was PRND(2?)L.
Ford in 55 was PRNDL. But you coudn't necessarily trust it to stay in Park.
Buick in 57 was PNDLR. We had one of both.
Not absolutely certain about the 62 Pontiac, but I think by then it was PRND(2?)L.
Our 64 Catalina still had reverse at the very bottom of the sequence.
arbilab
Well-known member
GM was juggling transmissions at that time. What the net says about 62 Cat is not what we had, neither was the 63. The 62 bypassed torque converter in second, 63 was 'conventional' in every sense. Unknown what they did to StarChief and Bonneville, but buddy's 59 was 4-speed conventional Hydramatic like his 58 Olds, that's the book I learned autotrans from.
Cats were 3-speed.
Cats were 3-speed.
Automatic Transmission Shift patterns
GM was the main one that had the very dangerous design of having reverse next to low [ forward ], hundreds were killed and thousands of accidents were caused by this stupid design.
John L.
GM was the main one that had the very dangerous design of having reverse next to low [ forward ], hundreds were killed and thousands of accidents were caused by this stupid design.
John L.
Lisa Douglas...
<span style="font-family: 'courier new', courier;">Learning to drive. An all time favorite besides using the number totals to plug in and use appliances.</span>
<span style="font-family: 'courier new', courier;"> </span>
<span style="font-family: 'courier new', courier;">Learning to drive. An all time favorite besides using the number totals to plug in and use appliances.</span>
<span style="font-family: 'courier new', courier;"> </span>
arbilab
Well-known member
accidents were caused by this stupid design
A kid or dog jouncing in the front seat could slam the lever into R at fwd speed. A few trans had a reverse lockout
above set speed; minority, can't name them. Don't think hydramatic did, the one that needed it.
A kid or dog jouncing in the front seat could slam the lever into R at fwd speed. A few trans had a reverse lockout
above set speed; minority, can't name them. Don't think hydramatic did, the one that needed it.
neptunebob
Well-known member
I think this format for shifting is one of the things that Ralph Nader forced the automakers to not have any more.
<blockquote>A kid or dog jouncing in the front seat could slam the lever into R at fwd speed.</blockquote> One of the dalmatians, Abby or Casey, did that to RJ's first (circa 2000) Jaguar .. Park or Reverse, whichever.
One of my cousins put her car in reverse while driving forward one time. It didn't go backwards though - but it wouldn't go forwards again either. Seems like it then had to have a new part, something called a transmission! She is rough on cars
