1 2 3 4 5
Strike_Zero
Strike_Zero Dork
12/13/11 11:14 a.m.

SUPER ZOMBIE THREAD RESURRECTION . . .

Well I found out today that the world class T-5 I purchased for this build is in fact a non-world class transmission on the inside

"FUUUUUUU . . . . . berkeley"

Tom Heath
Tom Heath Web Manager
12/13/11 11:19 a.m.

Zombies? Only one way to fix Zombies. I suspect a breaker bar or torque wrench would do it.

Really I'm just posting to fix the 404 that results from a canoe delete, but I'm sorry to hear that you got screwed, Perry.

Strike_Zero
Strike_Zero Dork
12/13/11 11:49 a.m.

Hehe . . .no problem, Tom!! The thought of zombie bashing did make me giggle.

I'm looking at like this, it came with a B&M ripper (I sold for $80) and some other gear I can use . . .so it's not a total loss.

I'm beginning to get gun shy about used stuff now lol!!

That NEW Summit Racing T5z is looking better and better . . .

Moving_Target
Moving_Target
12/13/11 6:53 p.m.

I am currently stalled on my e36 5.0L swap as well. I'm waiting until after the christmas madness to pass before ordering more parts to continue.

The finished (maybe that should be running?) project should be a helluva fun car.

oldtin
oldtin Dork
12/13/11 7:06 p.m.

Hey strike zero, seems like theres some upgrade kits that can bring up a non wc t5 to handle a good bit of torque. Upgraded input shaft support/bearing, syncros... I think they run about 150-175.

Strike_Zero
Strike_Zero Dork
12/13/11 7:28 p.m.

In reply to Moving_Target:

I HAD two parts left to purchase. The flaming river steering joint and the driveshaft . . .Now I have three lol!!

In reply to oldtin:

Really now . . . I must research. I didn't know you can upgrade a non wcT-5 to a pseudo wcT-5.

wearymicrobe
wearymicrobe HalfDork
12/13/11 9:29 p.m.
Strike_Zero wrote: In reply to Moving_Target: I HAD two parts left to purchase. The flaming river steering joint and the driveshaft . . .Now I have three lol!! In reply to oldtin: Really now . . . I must research. I didn't know you can upgrade a non wcT-5 to a pseudo wcT-5.

Given the weight do you actually need the wcT-5 setup. Also you are going to keep the flair to a minimum can you even get enough tire to break it.

oldtin
oldtin Dork
12/13/11 11:03 p.m.

my bad - G-force has parts/can upgrade a non wc t-5 - but it gets spendy - in the $500 range in parts where it would be more like 200-250 for wc. the wc's can get away with cheaper upgrades like billet keys and upgraded bearing retainers. A cheap non wc would probably be ok to get it going though. It's a reasonably light car and if you take it easy it could survive a while.

Strike_Zero
Strike_Zero Dork
12/14/11 1:18 a.m.

Taking it easy isn't an option

From my research today, the nwc I have is rated at 265lbs. (think 83-84 Fox-body).

Some say: World Class & Non-World Class There are two basic kinds of T-5's, Non World Class (NWC) and World Class (WC). The first T-5 was non-world class. In 1983 and 84 Ford used the Non-World Class T-5 to improve the Mustangs performance and gas mileage. All the V8 NWC boxes had 2.95 first gear set with .68 overdrive. All the main output shaft gears and 1st, 2nd, 3rd, gears riding on a solid output shaft with deep oil grooves to provide lubrication. The lower counter gears spin on straight cylindrical bearings with a thrust washer in front to provide support when under load. All the synchronizer rings are made of solid bronze which are of different size than those found in a would-class T-5. It is because there is no bearing under each gear and the bronze synchro rings that the NWC use the heavy 70w gear oil. Torque rating for the NWC was 265ft/lbs. 1985, Ford introduced the World Class T-5 installed with 3.35 first gear set with a .68od behind the 5.OL. T-5 was also used behind both the standard 2.3L with a 3.97 first gearset and the SVO Mustang. SVO received a one year only 3.50 first gear ratio as the 3.97 gear ratio was too low for the added power of the turbo charged 2.3L. No longer were 1st, 2nd, and 3rd gears spinning on a solid output shaft as needle bearings were installed under each gear to reduce drag. The lower counter gears saw tapered bearings to replace the bronze thrust washer. All main shaft synchro's were fiber lined steel rings to improve rings friction surface while 5th remains bronze. By improving the surface friction the synchro slows the gear faster making for smoother shifts. The design remained the same until 1989. Torque rating remained the same at 265ft/lbs. 1990 to 1993 the stock Ford production V-8 WC T-5 was upgraded with stronger 3.35 gear set by increasing the nickel content to produce a harder, stronger gear. 2nd and 3rd gear ratios were decreased slightly tp provide more torque to the rear wheels. Synchro linings on 3rd, 4th were improved by changing from fiber linings to carbon fiber to further improve the friction surface resulting in better high rpm shifts. A longer throw shifter was installed to "make shifting easier". The speedo drive gear was changed from 7 tooth to 8 tooth. The 8 tooth was a step backwards when installing lower rear axle ratio greater than 3.55 as the driven gear is limited to 21tooth count. Yes, 23 tooth gears are available but do not last long as the teeth are thin and do not mesh correctly. Torque rating jumped to 300ft/lbs. When the 93 Cobra was introduced, so was the "Cobra Spec" T-5. It was the first T-5 with a front tapered output bearing and steel front bearing retainer. The Cobra boxes also received a reverse gear brake and synchro assembly where there was none before. Just about everything else remained the same. Torque rating was increased to 310ft/lbs. 1994 and 95 were the last two years Ford used the T-5 behind a V-8. With the introduction of the SN95 Mustangs, the bell housings in both 3.8L and 5.0L were made deeper to place the T-5 shifter in the correct location to the body. This in turn made the input shaft longer. The neutral safety switch was eliminated, as it was no longer needed. The GT 5.0L Mustangs received the standard input shaft bearing and aluminum bearing retainer, where the Cobras continued with the tapered or "cupped bearing" input shaft and steel front bearing retainer. Torque ratings for both remained the same as the 93 T-5 models. 4 cylinder T-5s were no longer needed when the 3.8L V6 motor came along and was replaced with 3.35 first gear ratio and a .68od. The only difference between the 3.8L and standard 5.0L T-5 was the input shaft length. Changing input shaft of the 3.8L T-5 with 93 input shaft, will result in a 93 and early spec T-5. Everything else remained the same. Today's V-6 Mustangs sports the last of the T-5s. The T-5 behind the 3.8L is a 3.35 first gear set with a .68 over drive. What makes these different from the rest is the electronic speedometer trigger. No longer is there a mechanical driven cable system. It has the longer input shaft equipped with a steel front bearing retainer and reverse synchro brake assembly. Torque rating is 300ft/lbs. Ford also used the T-5 in 2.3L cars through the years. While the 4 cylinder T-5 may appear to be the same, they are not. Most 4 cylinder T-5s received a 3.97 gear set with a .79 overdrive and small input pilot bearing shaft. Four cylinder T-5's should not be used behind a V-8, even when the pilot bearing id is decreased to match. Simply put, they will not hold up. Torque rating ~240ft/lbs. Besides first gear is much too low to be usable behind a high horse power car.

So if this is correct, my nwcT-5 doesn't have all the neato easier shifting guts as a 85-89 fox wcT-5, but has the same torque rating.

I think you guys are right. With the lower weight of the car and the lack of super sticky tires (275 streets), this may not be that bad after all . . .

corytate
corytate HalfDork
12/14/11 8:26 a.m.
M2Pilot wrote: I've never had a sunroof on an older car that did leak. By older, I mean a '76 bmw 2002 M2 & a '98 bmw M3. The snrf on my son's '88 M5 doesn't leak either. Having said that, I don't like sunroofs.

your son has an old M5?! will you adopt me, cool dad?

camaroz1985
camaroz1985 Reader
12/14/11 8:42 a.m.

We put a 302 in our E30 Lemons car. After a few teething issues it is running flawlessly. Ran the last 8 hours of the race without missing a beat, though some oil management is in order, as we did see oil pressure drop drastically in sustained corners. Not sure what you have done to yours, but might need to look into that.

Taiden
Taiden Dork
12/14/11 8:44 a.m.
camaroz1985 wrote: We put a 302 in our E30 Lemons car. After a few teething issues it is running flawlessly. Ran the last 8 hours of the race without missing a beat, though some oil management is in order, as we did see oil pressure drop drastically in sustained corners. Not sure what you have done to yours, but might need to look into that.

What did you use for an oil pan and brake master setup?

Strike_Zero
Strike_Zero Dork
12/14/11 9:09 a.m.

In reply to camaroz1985:

Canton Road race pan + oil cooler.

oldtin
oldtin Dork
12/14/11 9:20 a.m.

Think of it as a real-world longevity test of the t-5. As much as they get the reputation for being fragile, every t-5 in mustangs before 1985 haven't (all) spontaneously exploded.

Taiden
Taiden Dork
12/14/11 10:39 a.m.

Also the t5 comes in all flavors. a t5 that was bolted to the i4 is likely to not be as beefy as a t5 bolted to a v8.

camaroz1985
camaroz1985 Reader
12/15/11 9:21 a.m.
Taiden wrote:
camaroz1985 wrote: We put a 302 in our E30 Lemons car. After a few teething issues it is running flawlessly. Ran the last 8 hours of the race without missing a beat, though some oil management is in order, as we did see oil pressure drop drastically in sustained corners. Not sure what you have done to yours, but might need to look into that.
What did you use for an oil pan and brake master setup?

We used a modified front sump pan, I think from an Explorer. We got it off a scrap pile at a local shop, so we have no idea what it actually came from. For the brakes we got rid of the power booster, and used a wilwood master.

Strike_Zero
Strike_Zero Dork
12/15/11 10:10 a.m.

Just got off the phone with the builder. . . Good news, it is a from 84 Mustang GT, YAY! Bad news, 2nd and 3rd gears are pitted pretty bad, damnit . . .To get this transmission in decent condition would cost $$$$. No thanks, I'll pass . . .

I'm glad I spent the $$$ to get it opened up and looked at. I would have been PISSED to blow it up at the first race.

Taiden
Taiden Dork
12/15/11 10:38 a.m.

What size bore did you go for with the willwood? And also, is the pedal too stiff for daily driving?

Strike_Zero
Strike_Zero Dork
12/15/11 2:16 p.m.

Found me a T-5 going to get it tomorrow. Comes with a warranty and for less than it would have cost to repair T-5 I have . . . I can deal with that!!

dj06482
dj06482 HalfDork
12/15/11 2:58 p.m.

You made the right call, it's easy to find WC T-5s, and they're cheap...

Strike_Zero
Strike_Zero Dork
12/16/11 8:30 p.m.

Another wc T-5 with a warranty is in my possession. Time to get busy ...

Strike_Zero
Strike_Zero Dork
12/19/11 1:38 a.m.

So now that I have a suitable transmission, I have to order some parts.

  • SN95 5.0 bellhousing
  • Hydraulic throwout bearing

On the list this week ... Wash and prep the engine bay!

Ranger50
Ranger50 Dork
12/19/11 6:33 a.m.
Strike_Zero wrote: So now that I have a suitable transmission, I have to order some parts. - SN95 5.0 bellhousing - Hydraulic throwout bearing On the list this week ... Wash and prep the engine bay!

Could you just use a 280z cheap slave with a fancy homemade bracket?

Strike_Zero
Strike_Zero Dork
12/19/11 7:25 a.m.

Since I'm using a SN95 T-5 (cable operated throwout bearing), it has the arm at a 45* angle down on the driver side. I don't remember seeing any bosses I could use to attach some flat stock to mount an external slave. I'll have to go back out and look.

miatame
miatame HalfDork
12/19/11 1:00 p.m.

Well you have the WC tranny so no real issue now but if you aren't a donkey you shouldn't be able to blow'd up a transmission just driving fast. It is all about the clutch engagement. If you are dumping a lot and banging gears you can blow up anything. Years ago my buddy spent every last penny he had on some super strong transmission behind his close to stock 5.0 because he busted a few T-5s. Would you know it, a few weeks later after he installed the new tranny he decides to show off to us...and feels that a reverse burn out is the move to make...

That was the last night I saw that foxbody move under its own power.

1 2 3 4 5
Our Preferred Partners
smbZqHughQaB5ctNzFvjdb25oTHDFrchPQH4cRWMLLW2aZk6AQPCqGHFgSuwlRau