Printable View
I am restoring a old drag car(65 Biscayne) & drove it for the first time a few days ago.
I am pleased with the car (350/muncie/lowered 4"/59 dash/T-bird buckets/Z-28 steering box) with the exception of the Muncie M-20.
I would like to reduce the highway RPM's, but do not want a auto trans. I also have out lived my retirement savings so money is critical.
I must admit I have not kept up with 5 speed trans.....what are my options.
Hi to all my old friends.
Don
Nice looking car Don.Like the two poster lift too. The T5's are a weak tranny.So is the NW series.Actually they are worst than the T5's. The stock based tranny(not aftermarket) to get would be a T56 which is a 6 speed.
http://www.chevyhiperformance.com/te...smission_swap/
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Borg-Wa...6_transmission
This a copy of a Ebay add of a company that does work on T56's and it seems they need alot of work to get them to work correctly. Here is the ad:
Transmissions are completely disassembled, de-greased, all parts carefully inspected. Rebuilt using performance upgraded parts, with severe use in mind!
Performance parts list:
Upgraded 1-6 carbon fiber/kevlar blocker / synchronizer rings
Reverse synchronizer ring
Bronze fork pads for the 1-2 & 3-4
Billet keys for the 3-4 with upgraded springs
Billet keys for the 1-2 with upgraded springs
Bronze shifter bushing / isolator cup
Snap ring kit
3-4 steel shift fork
Stock 5-6 & reverse fork pads
Stock 5-6 & reverse keys & springs
front & rear seals
·Carbon fiber/kevlar blocker / synchronizer rings
Carbon fiber/kevlar blocker / synchronizer rings provide much better shifting than stock paper lined parts.
·Bronze fork pads 1-2 and 3-4
Bronze fork pads are a necessary upgrade for all T56 high performance and racing applications! These will not fail or wear like the stock Teflon pads.
·Billet Synchronizer Keys 1-2 and 3-4
Billet keys are a necessary upgrade for high performance and race applications. Replace the weak stamped steel keys with a superior billet material.
·Steel 3-4 shift fork.
This is the upgraded T56 3-4 steel shift fork used in the Vipers and will fits all T56 transmissions. It replaces the weaker aluminum shift fork with a much stronger steel fork.
And then from a end user:
Do you have a Gen I or Gen III/IV engine?
If Gen I, you can use a stock LT1 T56, flywheel, and hydraulics with no issue as long as you have a 1 pc RMS engine. The 2 pc RMS engines require a $400ish conversion flywheel. The 93 T56's had slightly shorter gears all around and were rated for less torque. Generally the concensus is to avoid them.
If Gen III/IV, the LS1 F-body T56 is the ticket. All 94-02 F-body T56's had the same gear ratios as far as I am aware.
You can convert a 98-02 F-body T56 to work with a Gen I engine but it requires an adapter plate at least, maybe other issues too. A 94-97 T56 costs around $600-$1000 for parts to convert it for use with a Gen III/IV engine down the road. That may affect your decision.
The LT1 T56 uses a strange clutch with a reverse-pointed slave cylinder. They're fairly unique and there arent many clutch options out there. There are enough, but aside from maybe the high end Mcleods, they all use the exact same Valeo pressure plates. They increase grip by changing the clutch disc material, not by increasing clamping force. Normally this isnt a big deal, but its a transmission they only made for 5 years, you're just not gonna have a TON of options on it. But there is enough available that it isnt a huge concern. the clutches do cost a little more though it seems. $250 is about the starting point.
The LS1 T56's seemed to have crappy hydraulics from the factory. I think i read that GM didnt allow full pressure to the slave cylinder, so you never got complete clutch disengagement... something weird like that? Hence things like the "drill mod". LS1 T56's seem to go through synchros a lot faster, but that could be because of crappy hydraulics or because LS1's make oodles and caboodles of power. Nothing a fancy aftermarket $300 Tick master cylinder cant fix. The LT1 T56's despite being older and more worn out seem to last just as long, but they are getting very old now.
CTS-V and GTO T56's can work, but they require a lot of conversions to get them into other vehicles. The F-body ones are a direct drop in. If this is for a non F-body, then it may not matter so much. Corvette T56's are integrated into the rear axle and IRS, so they pretty much only work in corvettes.
I have a T56 from a 94 TA that was bracket raced and power shifted hard. I learned how to drive a stick with it in my car, and the thing makes noises, but it's held up great over the years Ive had it. They're very tough transmissions, and I think everything from 94+ had at least a 450 ft lb rating.
As it always is,there is a substantial investment to have something that will last.
Don,
You might consider a GearVendors Overdrive unit behind that Muncie as an alternative - here's a link to the one they push for your application Gear Vendors under/overdrive auxiliary transmissions Hot Rods, GM 4, 5 and 6-Speed Manual Muscle Car/Street Rod/Sport Truck.
I was totally unfamiliar with them until Dave Severson posted his thoughts about using one in his '57 Chevy project, but after doing some reading they seem to be a very viable alternative - not cheap, but a good option. Good luck on your search.
I forgot to mention that my engine is a 1972 350....Don
The Gearvendors came to light on a RV web site. What the general concision was it would take a long time to get back the investment in gas mileage given the costs of the unit. I wanted to add that a engine's power(the ones on the lower end of it) might eat more gas trying to power the o/d. I would guess your car isn't too light wt.
Well Gary, you once again reinforced why I pulled back from posting here, and why I'll pull back even farther now. Seems that no matter what I post you re-post trying to discredit what I've said. GearVendors has different products for different applications, from big trucks to RV's to hot rods, with each dialed in for the intended use. I'm pretty sure that Dave pointed out the losses that the units impose in his thread, and they were minuscule because of their design. As far as the general "consensus" in an RV magazine?? :rolleyes::rolleyes::LOL::LOL::LOL::LOL::LOL:
Don, best of luck with your modifications. I'm glad to see you back, and I really think if you read about the GearVendor unit it might be a good fit for you if the cost is not too much to handle, especially if you could find a used unit out there somewhere - maybe one of those RV guys that thinks they aren't any good has one cheap!! ;)
Bye guys & gals. You may see me lurking once in a while, but it'll be a while before you see my avatar again.
Roger don't let that know it all clown run you off nobody pays attention to him just ignore him I for one enjoy your posts and I don't think I am the only one .....ted
Don
Maybe I missed something , but what rear end gear ratio are you running now ?
I'm looking at a Gear Vendors OD for my sons car. I'm sold on them. For me, the gas savings would be a moot point for the addition. I don't know how much money you guys have in your engines, but I know what it will cost to replace my sons stroker. I fear the engine killer.......high RPMs. Sure we could drop in a modified tranny, or different gears. But my ex wife always said I was a complicated individual. :rolleyes:
David
I am running a 3.23 rear....I might also mention that my disappointment with the Muncie is also the way it shifts.
I am used to a silky smooth Z06.
What trans did the 5 spd 90's(?) camaro use with a 305?
Would that not work?
Don
Don
Don. It's great to see you back. Like you I haven't really kept up to much with the manual overdrives. I do look up some specs on them from time to time.
From what I've seen though, you really have to watch the T5s and 6 speed T56s as far as the application they came from. The torque rating varies a lot between the different applications. There are several several listings that come up when you google Troque rating T5 or T56 that should help.
The gear vendor is also a decent option, but doesn't address the shifting of the Muncie.
Thanks Mike, I have had serious health problems & they are still continuing. I am scheduled for
a cath Fri & possibly a valve replacement.
Thanks Don
Good luck to you Don. Ain't it a shame they can't rebuild us like we do with our cars.
.
Don,
Keep your chin up. I'm still moving around with three stents.
The T5's where in use behind the 305's. History has proven they are a very weak trans. We had a guy on a Astro/Safari site do a world class update to one to use behind a swapped in 383. Major money and still at times didn't shift as it should.
They are only a "weak link" when you exceed their intended use. AKA Torque rating! They are not a Top Loader or Super T-10, but if you can work within the confines of the ratings. They are ok.
Yepper.Your right. The T5's in the Astro's which was the same one behind the 305's was rated at only 170 foot pounds.
Here is a thread about the T5's and beefing them up.
AstroSafariVans.com • View topic - Ultimate Astro 5 speed manual transmission build
So like the millions of 305 chevy's and millions of 302/5.0 ford's, the T5 is a fine transmission. If your going to be doing burnouts and drag racing, you'll shorten it's life. Otherwise, it'll go tens of thousands of miles with no issue!
Double posting.
When I was looking into a T5 for my project the one thing I did do aside from the links I have provided was to talk to Toni the owner of A & M Automotive.It's a tranny shop that he has operated for well over 40 yrs. In order to prove his point he took me in the back of the shop and showed me a 55 gallon drum filled with parts he took out of T5's because they are a poor design.I have known Toni for gezz it got to be 20 yrs and I asked him about if I just drove it normally,he told me most of those parts in the drum where from drivers who he didn't think where out beating on their cars.Added that those trannies just don't hold up. It's the T5's that are a bolt in on pre 1990 Astro's with the correct shifter location given the power train offset to the passenger side.So because I am a stick shift guy I am kind of stuck not having a T5 work for me without spending a boat load of money and still not be sure it would last even if I built a World Class T5 as the link I left about the T5 upgrade.
So still not persuaded I did more research. I am a member of a major Camaro forum.There guys talk about the failure rate of the T5's with 305's and how it isn't under consideration when doing any 350 swap. The low torque rating being the major factor of only 175lbs(I corrected myself when I posted it being 170 lbs) That anyone doing any kind of 350 has to upgrade to a T56. And even those need parts upgrades as I posted which makes them very expensive.
So as it stands now I have concluded Don I have no cheap answer for a O/D stick shift. Kind of gave up throwing my hands up in the air.
With your current trans,maybe it is just you going back and readjusting the shifter and throw-out bearing. You didn't say if your trans was the one used while the car was being drag raced.Maybe it needs to be rebuilt which seems to me would be cheaper than a conversion to a O/D. With a O/D and those rear end gears you would have to change them too. The cruise RPM's I would think would be way too low.
What would you guess is the HP/TQ ratings of your 350??.
Thanks for all the info......my 350 is around 300 hp & I will be getting into it from time to time thus, it
looks like I shoild not consider the T5.
I will continue looking but might have to learn to love my M-20.
Don
Don there is another overdrive option although it is a 4 speed not a 5 speed and as such the gear splits are not optimal.
That is the Chevrolet version of the New Process A833 overdrive transmission (based on the NP A833 that Chrysler used for years behind all their big and Small block engines).
I have the Chrysler version in my 57 Plymouth with the 354 Hemi and 4.10 gears (the OD ratio makes the final ratio equivalent to a 3.00 ratio). I’m running 235/70/15 tires. The car probably weighs about the same or maybe just a bit more than your 65.
FWIW here are my impressions of the transmission.
It’s has given me a very good service life so far and yeah, I “shown off” a bit with the car (with a HEMI, Tri Power and 4 Speed who can really resist).
The transmission comes with a 3.09 low gear and with the 4.10s low is really about useless when you jump on it. That being said, I have a pretty healthy cam in the car and for normal driving around town it really make the car well street mannered leaving stop signs and such. If I were to do it again I would probably step down to something in the 3.75 ratio area in the rear end. There is a pretty good jump in ratios between 2nd and 3rd (which is the 1:1 Ratio), but with the rear end gears and torque the Hemi makes it’s not all that noticeable. The OD ratio on the transmission is .73. Overall with the gear ratios I do enjoy driving it on the street but if I were to ever get serious about drag racing the Plymouth I would go to a conventional non OD transmission for the better ratio splits.
I’m using the Inland (Chrysler factory) shifter on mine and it shifts really nice. It has defiantly got a old school feel to it with the long throws but you’re going to run into that anytime you have the long shifter handles necessary with the 50-60s cars. The throws could be shortened by re-drilling shift arms, but it’s something I haven’t bothered with.
I got lucky with my overall combination, at 75 MPH the car is running at 2600 RPM, and the engine is in a happy place and gets 20 MPG (with the AC on).
These transmissions were used in some 70s-80 Chevrolet trucks and are not very well know or sought after so it usually take a bit of looking to find one. The plus side is they usually don’t command a high price.
Here’s a link to one that was put in a 65 Impala.
The New Process A-833 an Alternative to a Muncie Borg Warner
.
HMmmm.. and my buddy's 91 5.0 mustang with over 100K miles must be a freak... If I could locate a World Class T-5 to put behind a small block, I wouldn't hesitate for a second!