4+3 trans swaps
#21
Drifting
mrc, I missed the part about the RAM conversion clutch. With that setup, you've got the weakest link taken care of, IMO (and are still under the cost of a bolt-in TKO or Richmond kit.)
I'm guessing had you swapped to the ZF this guy wouldn't be making any money on the deal. The 4-speed is very stout though, I'm not sure why so many people knock it for power handling. Of course it won't hold up being abused in overdrive, but which trans does?
I'm guessing had you swapped to the ZF this guy wouldn't be making any money on the deal. The 4-speed is very stout though, I'm not sure why so many people knock it for power handling. Of course it won't hold up being abused in overdrive, but which trans does?
5900 is wwwwwwwwaaaaaaaaaaaaaayyyyyyyyyyyyy out of the power believe me!! Only throwing the switch on real long straight away's. With us normal use is the track! That's about it.
#22
Team Owner
Member Since: May 2002
Location: San Diego , CA Double Yellow DirtBags 1985..Z51..6-speed
Posts: 24,337
Likes: 0
Received 17 Likes
on
16 Posts
The 84 and 85 were all "on demand" overdrives. It's a shame GM screwed with it beyond that, they have no one to blame but themselves for the 4+3's reputation.
#24
Racer
Member Since: Jan 2004
Location: Everfrost Second Life
Posts: 428
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes
on
2 Posts
The beam thing however is not that easy...but with good fab welding skills it can be done.
#25
Le Mans Master
Member Since: Jul 2001
Location: Silicon Valley Kalifornia
Posts: 6,252
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
You also have another option; you can replace the 4+3 with the Richmond 6 speed.
Here's the product description:
Just an FYI, a lot of people say the gears are noisy with this tranny. I personally don't know because I'm still running with the 4+3. I only threw this tranny on here to give you one more option to look at.
Here's the product description:
Just an FYI, a lot of people say the gears are noisy with this tranny. I personally don't know because I'm still running with the 4+3. I only threw this tranny on here to give you one more option to look at.
#26
Instructor
Member Since: Nov 2006
Location: Duluth Georgia
Posts: 207
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Just how noisy are these things? That's what I am planning to switch mine out to if the 4+3 ever goes out, which I don't think it will. Luckily for me, the previous owner completely rebuilt it about 5,000 miles back.
#28
Le Mans Master
Member Since: Jul 2001
Location: Silicon Valley Kalifornia
Posts: 6,252
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
Actually it has less than 100 miles on it. A trip to Santa Cruz from San Jose and a few times around the block!! 1st, 2nd, 3rd.... sound like a reverse gear...not as bad but enough to anoy me. Kit was from Eckler's:
Tranny, shifter, speedo sensor. Let me estimate a price. Will PM.
Tranny, shifter, speedo sensor. Let me estimate a price. Will PM.
#29
Safety Car
Once that's done, a 12-pack and a pizza for my buddy and he can write a CNC program for the part I make by hand.
Once that's done, all folks would have to do is bring the program on floppy to a CNC machine shop and pay for materials and a run on the machine.
That of course cures the cbeam issue. I'm still concerned about the shifter.
I can't do any of this now, it's spring but, once it gets cold again (november), I'll start playing. I have access to a T5 for mock up, just need the 4+3 bell housing, and I have a bunch of alum blocks and a small vertical mill in my shop. If nobody else does it between now and then, i'll start tinkering. Might happen sooner if my 700R4 blows up before then.. If so I really hope I can get *some* of my $500+ back on the torque converter..
-- Joe
#31
Safety Car
Only thing that concerns me about the T56 is the dimensions. Will it be too long, will it hit the exhaust, etc. The T5 should be more 'direct' as it bolts to the 4+3 bellhousing, is same length, etc.
Guess it's something to look into.
-- Joe
#33
Burning Brakes
There is atleast one guy on here with a T56 in his C4. The size is fine. The only real complicated part is making a custom shifter cover cause the shifter is too far to the right. Gotta use the LT1 Camaro (93-97) bellhousing, clutch slave, flywheel, etc. Forget his name, but do a search in the C4 tech forum for T56.
#34
Team Owner
Member Since: Aug 1999
Location: Florida
Posts: 23,841
Received 522 Likes
on
342 Posts
St. Jude Donor '10
I wonder what ever happened to this and why it didn't come to market?
http://forums.corvetteforum.com/show...hlight=Keisler
http://forums.corvetteforum.com/show...hlight=Keisler
#35
Drifting
Al
#36
Racer
Member Since: Jan 2004
Location: Everfrost Second Life
Posts: 428
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes
on
2 Posts
I was thinking rather than weld, mill a bolt on mount...... up so it's resting on the mechanical safety's, and use my screw jacks to hold the T5 and dana in the correct spot so the same pinion angle is achieved. Then it's just a matter of hand milling and taking the peice on and off and on and off and on and off until it's the right size and holes are in the correct spot.
There is a BIG problem with people using tailhousings not designed to carry the load of these beams by use of brackets and other rigs. If the tailhousing flexes the bushing will wipe out. A T5 typically runs less then .003 of bushing to yoke clearance. The Mustang tail for example has holes that were used to mount dampner weights for harmonics while the T5 Camaro tail is better gussetted because it was designed for a trailing arm attachment.
#37
Safety Car
By welding I was referring to fabricating a bracket. Since you have the original 700 or 4+3 why not just simply take some measurements and fabricate a bracket. The milling thing seems exciting and trick but.... take a good look and those lower bolt holes. It is much easier to take a 3/8 thick STEEL plate and make some spacers so that is it fastened to those holes, then do a 90 degree plate by weld on the top and bottom. Add some steel tubes for the beam bolts in between them to prevent the upper and lower areas from crushing. Take that off and have your beer buddy make a solid piece out of billet for resale to the hundreds of people who will want to do this conversion.
There is a BIG problem with people using tailhousings not designed to carry the load of these beams by use of brackets and other rigs. If the tailhousing flexes the bushing will wipe out. A T5 typically runs less then .003 of bushing to yoke clearance. The Mustang tail for example has holes that were used to mount dampner weights for harmonics while the T5 Camaro tail is better gussetted because it was designed for a trailing arm attachment.
There is a BIG problem with people using tailhousings not designed to carry the load of these beams by use of brackets and other rigs. If the tailhousing flexes the bushing will wipe out. A T5 typically runs less then .003 of bushing to yoke clearance. The Mustang tail for example has holes that were used to mount dampner weights for harmonics while the T5 Camaro tail is better gussetted because it was designed for a trailing arm attachment.
I'm not impressed by my 700R4/transgo/raptor combo, so I'm pretty sure this fall I'll take the trans out, and start a stick conversion. I'm kinda kicking myself in the *** for selling my lightweight flywheel, clutch setup, T5, etc last year.. Oh well.
-- Joe
#38
Team Owner
Member Since: May 2002
Location: San Diego , CA Double Yellow DirtBags 1985..Z51..6-speed
Posts: 24,337
Likes: 0
Received 17 Likes
on
16 Posts
Thats why i was thinking of using an Fbody T5, because the fbody uses a torque arm to keep the rear end from twisting on launch and decel, so it should in theory be able to handle load. Infact, I think on a C4 application is would be under a little less load as the rear end doesn't rotate.
Does the Fbody torque arm bolt to the trans or the chassis? Have any pics?
#39
Safety Car
Actually the rears on these do rotate. Some guys running high HP and slicks are twisting the 3rd member up and the torque beam is snapping the snout off. I doubt this would ever harm the trans though. It probably seems more forces at the end of the trans when bottoming out or hauling over dips in the road, when the weight of the engine+trans is bouncing around, held up in back only by the torque arm bolts.
Does the Fbody torque arm bolt to the trans or the chassis? Have any pics?
Does the Fbody torque arm bolt to the trans or the chassis? Have any pics?
The fbody torque arm bolts to the tail shaft of the trans, the fbody tail shaft differs from the mustang in that it has 3 bolt holes for the torque arm mount. (this is why i'm so confident in retrofitting a T5).
The transmission ALSO has a crossmember mount on the tailshaft itself (not the tranny) that is used as a rear engine/tranny spoort. When the car is driven, the rear end wants to rotate up and down so the tailshaft keeps it from rotating. The torque arm is similar to the cbeam on a C4, except that the cbeam is fixed, and the tailshaft is designed to move around. It's really a crappy design, but thats another story.
The tailshaft on the T5 is very similar to the TKO, infact, a lot of fbody guys replace exploded T5's with TKO transmissions.
Here is a few pix of a firebird I built right before I bought the C4. It should give you an idea of how the T5 setup in a fcar works. (this car was parted when I bought the vette cuz they're work more in peices)
http://members.cisdi.com/~anesthes/f-car-t5/23.JPG
http://members.cisdi.com/~anesthes/f-car-t5/24.JPG
http://members.cisdi.com/~anesthes/f-car-t5/27.JPG
Generally speaking, T5's are dirt cheap, and can be built to handle 500hp/tq (http://www.fordmuscle.com/archives/2...ild/index.php), so they could be a good replacement for a 4+3 IF the cbeam + shifter can be adapted.
As far as adapting the shifter, rather than cutting out the console I've seen shifters cut and welded so the handle is offset 2" to the left. (used on some 4x4 applications, and one guy on a T56 C4).
-- Joe
#40
Team Owner
Member Since: May 2002
Location: San Diego , CA Double Yellow DirtBags 1985..Z51..6-speed
Posts: 24,337
Likes: 0
Received 17 Likes
on
16 Posts
I don't get it, if the trans is bolted up to the torque arm, then the whole trans would have to move with the suspension travel.
Are you sure that torque arm isn't simply a trailing arm, and that there's a joint up near the trans where it pivots? If this is the case, then there is no torque exerted on the tailhousing of the T5. I agree that the C4 setup is too heavy to work well as it's designed. The most telling part is when you compare it with the C5, the C5 with rear trans puts less bending from weight on their torque tube and attachment points, not to mention it's way beefier.
Viper used a nearly identical setup to the C4 layout, I'm not sure if they moved the motor mounts back more, or have some extra support on the trans though.
On a side note, why is the floorplan trashed? Is that from jackstands?
Are you sure that torque arm isn't simply a trailing arm, and that there's a joint up near the trans where it pivots? If this is the case, then there is no torque exerted on the tailhousing of the T5. I agree that the C4 setup is too heavy to work well as it's designed. The most telling part is when you compare it with the C5, the C5 with rear trans puts less bending from weight on their torque tube and attachment points, not to mention it's way beefier.
Viper used a nearly identical setup to the C4 layout, I'm not sure if they moved the motor mounts back more, or have some extra support on the trans though.
On a side note, why is the floorplan trashed? Is that from jackstands?