Perhaps nothing more symbolized our promised atomic-age future in the mid-20th century than the humble push button. The future was going to be automatic, and everything could be accomplished with no more effort than pressing a button! It is easy to see the appeal of this – a small child can press a button, and it is hard to imagine an activity that requires less physical effort. Even today, phrases like “press the easy button” and “just a keystroke away” are still part of the popular lexicon.
So it was only natural for automakers to latch on to this trope to demonstrate both how easy their products are to operate and how futuristic they are.
1929 Whippet Ad
As usual, we will start with the earliest example of this trope I could find, which in this case is this ad for the 1929 Willys-Overland Whippet. They made a lot of noise in their ads about having a single button to simplify the operation of their car. I’m not so sure how simple this arrangement actually is. In modern usability terms, this single button is “overloaded” with a lot of “non-discoverable” functionality. Pull up to start? Different functions based on turning the button in different increments? And there appear to be no markings anywhere to explain any of this. There is a reason most cars have standardized on separate controls for different functions.
1954 Ford Ad
Most of the rest of my examples are from the 1950s and 1960s, not surprisingly, as this was the golden age of push buttons. Here we see granny demonstrating exactly how to use the power windows in her 1954 Ford. Power windows are one of those features that should require no explanation, but in 1954 they were still relatively new.
1956 Plymouth Ad
1956 was the first year for Chrysler’s famous push-button PowerFlite automatic transmission, and this is when we see the trope in its fully developed form: A finger, literally pressing a button. As easy as pressing a light switch!
1956 DeSoto Ad
Or as easy as ringing a doorbell! Note that the fingers doing the button pressing in this trope are almost always female, and are usually gloved (as per the style of the day). While I’m sure men appreciated automatic transmissions as much as women, the implications are that if it is easy enough for a woman to use, then certainly a man can use it.
1956 Dodge Ad
Rounding out the 1956 Mopars, we have this 1956 Dodge ad, which has two hallmarks of 1950s design in the same shot – the tailfin, of course, but also the “New Look” dress that the woman is wearing. Christian Dior’s “New Look” (debuting in 1947) would come to define woman’s fashion for the next 15 years, and all its hallmarks are on display here: The long, below-the-knee A-line dress, cinched waist, and abundant draping and pleating. I’ll have more to say about Dior’s New Look in a future post – there are some interesting automotive tie-ins.
Second, look closer at that button-pressing finger. No glove! This is actually a big deal.
Got it? There will be a quiz later.
For people not alive at the time, this requires some explaining. For centuries, women of high station always wore gloves in social settings. The gloves were usually gleaming white, to better indicate that those hands were definitely not made for working (although sometimes they were color coordinated, as is the case with the woman in the yellow ensemble in the DeSoto ad above). Women’s gloves were everywhere, until the mid-60s, when they went out of fashion almost overnight.
Back to the Dodge ad. While the woman appears to be wearing gloves in the upper photo (black ones, which is actually quite daring), the gloves are off when she is driving the car. While this can be viewed as somewhat empowering for the driver (dispensing with some glove etiquette), it also (alas, in a sexist way) says that there is no risk to your delicately manicured hands when operating these controls. You can drive bare-handed! The past is certainly a foreign company.
1958 Mercury Ad
This 1958 Mercury ad also features an ungloved female hand, but in the context presented (going to the beach), it makes sense.
1959 Chrysler Ad
As if sensing my criticism, here is a 1959 Chrysler ad showing that a man can push buttons just as easily as a woman.
1963 Renault Ad
By the 1960s, social norms were changing, and the gloves were coming off, especially among the younger buyers that Renault was courting.
1966 Ford Thunderbird Ad
This 1966 Thunderbird ad is a push-button twofer. With the Chrysler pushbutton transmission gone at this point, steering wheel-mounted cruise control switches became this latest object of pushbutton fascination, with the obligatory gloved female hand, as shown in the lower right above.
The pretend airplane cockpit of the 1964-66 “Flair Bird” Thunderbirds has rightly received lots of mockery over the years, and here we see a male hand wearing what is supposed to be a commercial pilot’s uniform (with four stripes indicating the rank of Captain) pressing a button on the overhead console. Unfortunately, the button he is reaching for is the emergency 4-way flasher (the only actual button on the overhead console – the other “buttons” are just indicator lights), so our pilot is probably not having a good day.
While using pushbuttons as a selling feature went out of style, it is a convenient visual shorthand that still shows up from time to time, like the 1990’s OnStar ad from above. It is still female, of course, but at least they are not allowed to be shown without gloves or nail polish, so that is progress, I guess.
OK. The Mercury shifter selection panel… I don’t get it.
Using the internet I found one (below) sample Mercury panel that is less less confusing, but even that one still begs the question: how to set the brake that the “Brake Release” button releases.
And it looks like it does not have a “Cruising/Performance” option as shown in this post, whatever that was in 1958.
I’m guessing “Cruising/Performance” is really D.
Chrysler’s panel was intuitively cleaner and clearer: R N D 1 2. Forget the 1 and 2, it’s just R, N, and D.
No user manual needed for R, N, and D.
When I had to travel for work in the ’80s and ’90s, arriving at night, in the rain, in a strange city, and armed with a tiny paper map from Avis, my concerns were always raised by how the various rental car’s controls varied from each other.
Looking at some current road test videos, it seems like some of these control variations have gotten worse, not better. Especially the shifter!
The first rule of usability – if you have to explain it, you’ve already lost (this applies even more to the Whippet control at the start of the post).
Well, that’s one way to foil car thieves- if they can’t figure out how to start it, they can’t steal it, right?
Park is a lever – not a button. Chrysler products had the push button transmission options, which were mechanical, not digital or electric – they were mechanical push button levers. The parking brake was a sliding lever, or a standard floor parking brake, also obviously mechanical. The Mercury’s parking lever is pushed in, similar to sliding the Chrysler’s parking lever down – and you pull it up to disengage, similar to sliding the Chrysler’s parking lever up.
Really is intuitive actually when you are in the car.
One final thing – when going from reverse to drive, or from drive to reverse – STOP THE CAR COMPLETELY WITH THE BRAKE. I know of more than a few people assume that you can just pop the buttons, but it can break the reverse band in the transmissions! That was the reason my first car – a 1964 Valiant – was only $200. It didn’t have the reverse band because someone finally broke it popping the buttons from reverse to drive.
So as I understand it the “parking brake lever” on the Valiant is not a mechanical Emergency Brake tied to the actual brakes? Guess it sets a parking pawl in the transmission only? If this is so I never thought this was a safe way to secure an automobile from possibly rolling.
I accidentally put a Holden powerglide into reverse at 50mph and all that happened was the engine stalled
The ’58 Mercury shifter was actually pretty intuitive – or so I thought. Unlike the Chrysler, they had a lever actuated Park position. There were 2 varieties. The single large Drive bar version was standard. The split bar version was the same transmission, but the 2nd bar (Cruising) offered the option of 2nd gear starts. The Hill Control range was a renamed Low range. The Brake Release button was exactly that – it released the foot operated parking brake. The Neutral Start range was interesting in that it performed 3 functions. It put the car in Neutral. It engaged the starter. On cars so equipped, it also activated the automatic chassis lubrication system. Another motorist chore converted to push button convenience!
Family’s 61 Dodge Phoenix did not have PARK .But second car, 62 Plymouth Belvedere (ugliest car ever produced) had push buttons mounted vertically with a lever next to buttons, which when pushed down put the car into PARK. Think other Chrysler brands may have followed 🤔
Yes – the Phoenix used the standard floor parking brake.
” Family’s 61 Dodge Phoenix did not have PARK… “
Indeed. Early TorqueFlite transmissions, like the one in our 1957 Windsor, had no Park option. It took a few (or more) years before the TorqueFlite was revised, and a Parking Pawl slider was included in that revision.
Without doing any actual research:
The Chrysler Powerflite (2 speed, but with a double stator in the torque converter) and later Torqueflite (3 speed) automatic transmissions did not have a Park pawl but the parking brake was on the driveshaft, not a cable operating the rear brakes. In 1962 a new smaller 60 pound lighter aluminum Torqueflite with the Park pawl was introduced and the parking brake used the rear brakes like on other cars. Flipping the Park lever down (or across on ones with horizontally arrayed buttons) also pushed the Neutral button in. All Chrysler pushbutton automatics moved a cable mechanically so I think most people actually used their thumb to push them. I would have to try one again to be sure.
I don’t know if this was true for the 1955 dashboard lever Powerflites or earlier steering column lever ones, but all pushbutton Chrysler transmissions would shift into Neutral if you pushed the R button when going over 5 or 10 mph. I had a (decades old) 1956 Plymouth and inadvertently tried that out once going for the L button when going downhill.
Chrysler also innovated (I think) push button heater/AC controls with vacuum operated blend doors so there were matching push buttons on each side of the steering wheel, even on Valiants, when most cars had manual heater controls.
Hello Michael Allen.
” … so I think most people actually used their thumb to push them… “
Absolutely correct!
On the ’57 Windsor and a friend’s ’57 FireFlite, we positioned our curved hand under the square selector pod and used the thumb to select a gear. This offered a sense of digital (meaning finger) positioning and allowed us to sense the location and shape of the buttons that was more secure than having an index finger hovering in the air and requiring a visual verification of which button was about to be pushed.
And yes, the cable operating buttons were not delicate; they required a relatively firm shove to engage the selected gear.
This was a job for a strong and stabilized thumb, not a free-floating and wiggly index finger, regardless of how Madison Avenue ad execs liked to picture it.
It also helped that early on, the TF buttons had two shapes on two rows. Later versions were less distinctively designed.
Don’t know about the Mercury nor the Plymouth Automatic. My Dad owned a new ’56 Plymouth Plaza, but it was a stripper with manual and flathead 6. He bought it before he met my Mother, who actually learned to drive on a ’51 Chrysler with semi-automatic but never has been comfortable with a manual (so the ’56 got traded in in 1961 for an automatic Rambler wagon).
Know what you mean about rental cars. I don’t travel much anymore on trips, but my last one in 2016 I had a Ford Explorer that had a pushbutton start. The only problem was I didn’t know where the “fob” to the car was…someone had thrown it under the seat, but I didn’t know that and didn’t want to leave the rental lot without first locating it, knowing I’d have to locate it before I was to leave the car once I reached my destination. I don’t have pushbutton start on my car, and after dealing with it on the rental, I almost think of it as a negative thing rather than a feature, at least for me. One more thing to keep track of, and at least a key plugs into the lock cylinder when the car is running so it has a place while driving, where the electronic fob doesn’t need to be anywhere in particular, so under the seat is OK in theory. Is there a fob locater that helps you find it inside the car? Else to me, I’d much rather have a key.
Interesting, didn’t know the Renault Dauphine had an automatic in 1963. My Dad bought a new ’68 Renault R10 with a manual, but it was a 2nd car, only driven by him…but come 1973 during the first gas crisis, he wanted my Mother to be able to drive the 2nd (smaller) car since the family car was a large wagon that got pretty bad fuel mileage. He traded the R10 in 1974 for a small car with an automatic for just this reason, that car got worse fuel mileage than the R10 but at least Mom could drive it. He didn’t know he should have bought the R10 with an automatic in 1968 rather than the 4 speed. I have made much that mistake myself, having bought my car in 2000 with a manual, no one else in my family can drive my car…as I get older, it has become an issue at times…such that my next car will be an automatic, partly because manuals are getting really hard to find, but also because of that popularity, I have to beg off buying a manual, even though I still prefer one.
Great post, and one day I’d like to sit down and create one featuring the “photo of the toe of a woman’s shoe barely touching the power brake pedal” that was so ubiquitous in car brochures of the 1950s and 60s.
Lincoln introduced pushbutton doorhandles, both inside and out, in 1940. They got it wrong at first. A button without a pullhandle is difficult and dangerous. The door has to pop open on its own, then you have to grab the edge of the door to finish opening. If the door is sticky or icy you’re out of luck.
The interior pushbutton isn’t dangerous, but it’s still tricky.
My ’50 Willys pickup had interior pushbuttons. You had to brace your fingers on the windowsill, then reach down and punch in the button with the thumb. Not a natural motion.
Great article as usual, Tom.
So much to connect to and think about here. First, I have to say (as I’m sure I have before) that I am fascinated with push-button transmissions for all of the “futuristic” reasons you discuss. That said, I have never actually understood how they offered any practical advantage (which at least ostensibly the automakers were trying to tout) over a regular column or console shift lever. I think that what these setups were actually keying into was simply the ease and comfort of an automatic transmission over a 3-pedal setup. Sure, “just pushing a button” could be seen as a tremendous advantage over learning how to shift…and with prevailing cultural ideas of the day (re. genders in particular), I could see how marketing these things as something that serve women would be a thing. Nevertheless, “these things” weren’t the pushbuttons so much as the fact that they controlled an automatic transmission. I’ve always been confused by that.
I’m also fascinated by the gloves thing…and how gloves it seems died out at about the same time as hats. All well-dressed people were wearing both in 1960, but by 1965 they were pretty much gone. That’s pretty remarkable for a fashion accessory that had been around in common currency for (arguably) hundreds of years. I’ve been hoping that the same would happen to mens’ ties sooner or later (me, having pretty much given them up at least 20 years ago), but so far, no such luck. Those damn things just keep hanging on.
Finally, the buttons themselves. I think many drivers – me included – would love a return to a few large buttons to handle key tasks if it meant a departure from multifunction controls (the modern version of the Whippet control) or screens.
As a young single owner of an old Plymouth with pushbutton Torqueflite controls on the left, I’ll call attention to one advantage I liked over versus a column lever or floor shifter.
If I managed to get my arm around my date while driving to a suitably romantic parking spot, I didn’t have to remove my arm from her shoulders to shift into reverse when finding a spot to park.
Granted, this probably seems such a trivial matter it hardly bears mentioning now. It ure seemed important “back in the day”.
I was a stickler about keeping both hands on the wheel whilst driving; after I’ve parked then we can put our arms around each other and make out. Or at least we could before huge center consoles made it difficult…
I’m with you on ties, Jeff. Folk still wear hats in rural Australia where you need the sun protection, though you don’t see it in the cities. Gloves do seem to have vanished except as a cold-weather thing, though my daughter loves them as symbolic of the grace of a bygone age.
But ties – grr! Pointess things.
Dad always used to say I ought to wear a tie to work at my first job – I tried to explain that a lab technician doesn’t wear a tie, that’s for the boss. When I was a pastor I deferred to people’s expectations in matters of dress, but my family knew my twisted sense of humour and got me some – unusual – ties. On one memorable occasion I wore a tie with sheep on it, only to find out the farmers in the congregation had been trying to make out what breed of sheep they were! It was agreed they were Corriedales (I hope no money changed hands there….)
I’ve been tie-free for twelve years now – and loving it!
The Edsel in 1958 had a set of buttons in the steering wheel hub. They were electric. That was different from the other types of push button transmissions at that time. Additionally, the Edsel “Teletouch Transmission” required the driver to use the neutral button between shifting from reverse to drive or from drive to reverse. This was necessary, but many drivers didn’t do that – they popped the buttons from reverse to drive and vice versa without using the neutral button. This caused problems with the Teletouch Transmission option in the Edsels, and it is also why you don’t see Push Button transmissions as electric button, but are instead mechanical shifting buttons instead.
” Additionally, the Edsel “Teletouch Transmission” required the driver to use the neutral button between shifting from reverse to drive or from drive to reverse.”
You didn’t have press N to go from D to R or R to D. If you DID select N before shifting to R, that would disable the safety device which prevents R from engaging when the car is moving forward. This practice was actually discouraged. Going directly from R to D or D to R is the correct way to use the transmission.
Ah yes. The Edsel Problematic.
Weren’t there some prototype 1958 Lincolns with Teletouch units? (Yeah, “Let’s make the world’s most complex car even more complex!”)
Yep, there was something futuristic about pushbutton controls that resulted in buttons being used where another type of control would have worked better. Automatic transmissions being a good example – a single lever on the shift column is probably easier to operate than a panel of buttons which require careful aim rather than just grabbing a big lever and moving it (I consider center console auto transmission levers a step backwards as they require moving your hand much further from the wheel). Buttons have made a bit of a comeback – used on recent Lincolns for example – as have other alternative controls. Nowadays of course the trendy thing is to put everything on a touchscreen. It’s futuristic! And also a huge step backward ergonomically.
When I was growing up we had this Waring blender in the kitchen, whose control panel always cracked me up. 14 buttons on it, each one labelled with a different function like “stir”, “grate”, “shred”, “chop”, “aerate”, or “puree”. As if it were some multifunction food processor with 14 different functions. All the different buttons did was spin the blades at a different speed, yet apparently a 8% increase in blade RPMs meant you were chopping rather than grating your food. A simple rheostat knob labelled Low-Med-High or 1-10 would have worked just as well if not better, but it wouldn’t have looked as cool as 14 buttons.
That is a bit different. Those are electric buttons and the buttons used in cars vary between electric windows – which have only one speed up or down, or mechanical as with the majority of push button transmissions.
A knob would require a resistor to tamper the electrical current, slowing the speed of the blades. The buttons don’t. Each button is set for a specific electric current. So it isn’t really a matter of taste, as it is in the ability to design a consumer product that permits varying speed without the cost and maintenance of a post-WWII resistor.
Automatic HVAC in automobiles work the same way. There is a resistor between the panel and the blower motor. The resistor controls the speed of the blower. Cars without automatic HVAC don’t have the resistor – instead they have the electric current controlled by each button. Also – if you have a fan with a dial – it is also using the resistor.
So – there are really a reason, not just styling behind the design of the Waring blender and other means of speed control.
You have it backwards on how the fan speed is controlled in cars. Blower motor resistors are how the speed is controlled in manual systems. Each setting on the switch has its own output and all of those outputs are connected to the blower motor resistor. Where the power is input into the blower motor resistor determines the speed. If power goes through all of the resistors you get lower speed. If it connects in the middle of the resistor chain you get one of the medium speeds and if the power is connected at the output end of the resistors you get high speed.
For auto HVAC with an infinite speed range, high speed is usually controlled by its own wire which energizes a relay. Any speed below that is controlled by a transistor in the blower motor controller that is fed a PWM signal, giving a varying duty cycle of 12v to the motor.
For example here is the blower motor resistor for a Crown Victoria w/o ATC
https://www.oreillyauto.com/detail/c/standard-ignition/air-conditioning—heating/blower-motor-resistor/899150df8ae0/standard-ignition-4-terminal-blower-motor-resistor/std0/ru403/v/a/5017/automotive-car-2003-ford-crown-victoria?pos=1#applications
And the blower motor controller for a Crown Victoria w/ATC
https://www.oreillyauto.com/detail/c/standard-ignition/air-conditioning—heating/blower-motor-resistor/899150df8ae0/standard-ignition-2-3-terminal-blower-motor-resistor/std0/ru572/v/a/5017/automotive-car-2003-ford-crown-victoria?pos=2
Can’t say I’ve torn down one of the old school push button blenders but looking at the 5 button replacement switch I found online suggests that it too uses a voltage divider to control the speed. Yes that voltage divider is going to be more reliable than a rheostat.
I mentioned a rheostat, but I’ve seen several appliances with knobs that have several discrete settings rather than a continuous rheostat, which like buttons would not require a resistor. My stove cooktop for example is a smoothtop electric unit with two halogen burners/hobs and two radiant burners. Each is controlled by a knob, with the halogen burners having 6 levels plus off; the knob clicks in place, much like a fan knob in a car.
Except the commercial versions of Waring’s blender have always featured either just a 2 speed motor (with a toggle that goes between High/Off/Low) or an actual rheostat knob.
I’m with la673 on the blender issue…the multitude of buttons were there to provide an illusion that more buttons provided more choices that you didn’t in fact need because most people actually use their blenders at either “low” or “full tilt as fast as it goes” speed and call it a day. So, marketing.
Many hours were spent with 10 year old Jeff trying to figure out the difference between “shred” and “chop” before I realized that the buttons meant nothing…other than having 14 little places to have to remove splatter from every time I used the thing.
Oster blenders for years too, and yes food gets in between the buttons. Modern versions may have flat electronic buttons.
I always thought those push button blenders were cool but even as a kid I thought is was silly that they had those different names for the speeds instead of giving them numbers with 5, 10 or 14 being the high speed 1 low and the others somewhere in between.
Give me the old-fashioned rotary dial knobs! At least in cars to adjust volume and stations on the radio.
Now I have to admit I like TV remotes with the little buttons better than getting up and manually adjusting the stations with the rotary knob.
That’s why I like what Ford has done. Their radio controls are on the steering wheel like most cars, but they have a traditional knob that you just push to turn the audio on and use as a dial for the volume in addition to the steering wheel controls. Twenty years ago, we do see that with the Taurus/Sable, Ford didn’t go full-on Pontiac with all their buttons, and instead used a stove-top headlight switch and designed controls that worked on feel. There is a lot of control switches in Ford products that are designed for feel.
Knobs make so much more sense for range values than buttons (like volume control).
Audi and VW (and probably other brands) have actual knobs for volume control on the steering wheel instead of just up/down buttons. The first time I experienced this was like a revelation. It seems so obvious – why doesn’t everyone do this?
Cadillac touted “standard push-button air-conditioning” for the Cimarron.
Here’s the drawback on push button – no feedback. Buttons must be labeled. When we look at the Pontiac Bonneville’s buttons, popular back in the day – There is a point where push button goes flipping crazy. No feedback on any of those push buttons.
I had one of these Pontiac systems. I found it pretty intuitive. Most commonly used functions (tune up/down and volume up/down) were the largest buttons, on the top corners, and were rocker switches. Mute button on center, nice because the radio didn’t contain an actual mute button. Other functions on rocker switches too, like seek and preset. And there wasn’t so many functions to get you confused. And the radio either changed station or Iit up a bargraph for levels, so in the corner of your eye was the feedback.
I also had one of the earlier systems with the rectangular pod. This had all buttons, no rockers. It was still ok with the arrangement of things, but the later version was more refined.
Both systems lit up with the dash lights so you weren’t lost in the dark. But I almost never looked at the controls.
I couldn’t find a print ad for it, but Packard had TV adverts showing off their 1956 electronic pushbutton Ultramatic. Was this the only one that was mounted to the right of the steering wheel? Operated by a gloved female hand, but it’s rare in 1950s car ads to see a woman driving and her male partner in the passenger seat, unless she’s obviously dropping him off or picking him up from the office.
1:20
This discussion is not complete without these two great cartoons:
1. Daffy Duck/Porky Pig, “The Push-Button Home”
2. Maw and Paw (and Milford the Pig), “The All-New Road Hog Super Automobile”
https://www.facebook.com/GugusseRoller/videos/maw-and-paw-cartoon-1953/782705078832463/
The Medallions “Pushbutton Automobile” from 1956 was the first thing I thought of as I was reading this. Here’s the soundtrack to this post:
Excellent —
As good as Jackie Brentsen’ (sp?) Rocket 88!
Here’s something with plenty of buttons, knobs and switches.
In reading this, I began thinking of a button accordion.
But your picture wins!
Indeed! If I recall correctly, you (David) restore these?
I will say that I was fascinated by the stops and switches on an organ console even before I got fascinated by the much simpler Chrysler transmission controls.
The 1952-7 E-series Vauxhall Wyvern/Velox/Cresta range had pushbuttons to open the doors from inside, instead of the usual handles.
I prefer the rotary knobs on the HVAC & sound system of my 20 year old Ford ~ no need to look away from driving when I want to make any change .
Don’t forget Nash and Buick’s starterators .
-Nate
Since no one has picked up on your lede picture of good old George Jetson, I have to say that the whole trope (from the opening credits and a frequent gag in the show) about George getting flustered by push button controls never made much sense to me.
I mean, I get it, push buttons = future…but all of the stuff – like the Foodarackacycle – that had the frustrating buttons…how ELSE was one to operate that stuff? Was there some kind of pre-push button past version of the foodarackacycle that George had as a child? Maybe something with a rheostat or a giant leaver?
It always seemed like a kind of throw-away joke that once you thought about it made little sense.
On the other hand, the cars on the Flintstones didn’t make much sense either 😉
Indeed. I never thought anything of it as a kid, but now with everything needing buttoned remote controls to operate, I begin to understand George’s problem. Maybe his childhood Foodarackacycle had a rotary dial?
And for the Flintstones, what holds the rear axle of Fred’s car in place? 🙂