Camery 5 speed box oil ?
atec77
John_H
>looks like atf but is that correct ?
Shell guide (nearest to hand) says Dexron.
--
John H
atec77
> atec77 wrote:
>
>> looks like atf but is that correct ?
>
> Shell guide (nearest to hand) says Dexron.
>
TT
"atec77" <atec77...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:g6u1sc$8h1$1...@aioe.org...
Dexron II (supersedes to III) is what is specified for all
Camries. *IF* it works hard or is used in a hot climate I
would recommend a semi-synthetic 75/90 such as Shell XGO.
Synchros will be a little stiffer in the mornings but he
gears and bearings will love it in the long run.
BTW I take it you asking about a manual as the new 5speed
Auto use special fluid.
Cheers TT
atec77
( after market TO3) in a custom race car and yes it's a manual
Ta
TT
Use the Shell XGO 75/90 then.
Cheers TT
Jason James
> looks like atf but is that correct ?
I use what the Gregories says: B80 grade IIRC.
cant find book,...Jason
the_dawggie
> looks like atf but is that correct ?
Auto store should have an application guide for oil products?
John McKenzie
>
> atec77 wrote:
>
> >looks like atf but is that correct ?
>
> Shell guide (nearest to hand) says Dexron.
IF you happen to have a hardcopy - out of interest, all the literature
I've got (mostly val workshop manuals) recommends dexron for the bw35
autos. A friend of mine said that he could have sworn they specified
type f/tqf for them in fords. I don't suppose you'd have any insight.
What I was thinking (rightly or wrongly) that perhaps he's getting
confused with the fmx which afaik is based or just plain _is_ the borg
warner fx mx auto (but for the record, I have nfi what they take, so the
speculation that they might spec type f and that that is the source of
the discrepancy is wild.)
--
John McKenzie
tos...@aol.com ab...@yahoo.com ab...@hotmail.com ab...@earthlink.com
ab...@aol.com vice.pr...@whitehouse.gov pres...@whitehouse.gov
swee...@accc.gov.au u...@ftc.gov admin@loopback ab...@iprimus.com.au
$LOGIN@localhost world's #1 sardine whisperer ro...@mailloop.com
$USER@$HOST $LOGNAME@localhost -h1024@localhost ab...@msn.com
ab...@federalpolice.gov.au frau...@psinet.com ab...@asio.gov.au
$USER@localhost ab...@sprint.com ab...@fbi.gov ab...@cia.gov
atec77
> John_H wrote:
>> atec77 wrote:
>>
>>> looks like atf but is that correct ?
>> Shell guide (nearest to hand) says Dexron.
>
> IF you happen to have a hardcopy - out of interest, all the literature
> I've got (mostly val workshop manuals) recommends dexron for the bw35
> autos. A friend of mine said that he could have sworn they specified
> type f/tqf for them in fords. I don't suppose you'd have any insight.
> What I was thinking (rightly or wrongly) that perhaps he's getting
> confused with the fmx which afaik is based or just plain _is_ the borg
> warner fx mx auto (but for the record, I have nfi what they take, so the
> speculation that they might spec type f and that that is the source of
> the discrepancy is wild.)
>
without the bang under full go on lower shifts , old bloke I spoke to a
while back suggested it and I had to take him at his word , after all he
trained with RR in the uk in the 50's and had quite a successful racing
career as a spanner spinner.
John_H
>John_H wrote:
>> atec77 wrote:
>>
>> >looks like atf but is that correct ?
>>
>> Shell guide (nearest to hand) says Dexron.
>
>IF you happen to have a hardcopy - out of interest, all the literature
>I've got (mostly val workshop manuals) recommends dexron for the bw35
>autos. A friend of mine said that he could have sworn they specified
>type f/tqf for them in fords. I don't suppose you'd have any insight.
>What I was thinking (rightly or wrongly) that perhaps he's getting
>confused with the fmx which afaik is based or just plain _is_ the borg
>warner fx mx auto (but for the record, I have nfi what they take, so the
>speculation that they might spec type f and that that is the source of
>the discrepancy is wild.)
Shell chart says Dexron III for the Falcon BW 35.
Never take the oil company recommendations as gospel though as they're
sometimes wrong. OTOH you should be able to trust the factory
workshop manual.
--
John H
Kev
the Type F was used for the FMX boxes
and for the first of the 4 speed boxes(TQF)
BW35/55 boxes just used nomal Dexron fluid
Kev
John McKenzie
>
>
> Shell chart says Dexron III for the Falcon BW 35.
>
> Never take the oil company recommendations as gospel though as they're
> sometimes wrong. OTOH you should be able to trust the factory
> workshop manual.
I've been using dexron since Adam, twas just curious where the mate had
had that info from :). fwiw, I agree, the factory workshop manuals (well
at least for the few cars I play with lots) are pretty decent indeed.
TT
"Kev" <kev...@optunet.com.au> wrote in message
news:4894147b$0$2273$afc3...@news.optusnet.com.au...
Was recommended but most use DII or DIII in them.
> and for the first of the 4 speed boxes(TQF)
Bzzzzzztttt! Wrong! None of the LE85> 4 speed boxes ever used Type F or
Dexron fluid and is most unadvisable to do so.
> BW35/55 boxes just used nomal Dexron fluid
>
Yes agree but no Falcon ever had a BW55 fitted to it. Also for the record I
can't think of a single Ford model that had one in it either.
Cheers TT
Kev
> "Kev" <kev...@optunet.com.au> wrote in message
> news:4894147b$0$2273$afc3...@news.optusnet.com.au...
>> John_H wrote:
>>> John McKenzie wrote:
>>>> John_H wrote:
>>>>> atec77 wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> looks like atf but is that correct ?
>>>>> Shell guide (nearest to hand) says Dexron.
>>>> IF you happen to have a hardcopy - out of interest, all the literature
>>>> I've got (mostly val workshop manuals) recommends dexron for the bw35
>>>> autos. A friend of mine said that he could have sworn they specified
>>>> type f/tqf for them in fords. I don't suppose you'd have any insight.
>>>> What I was thinking (rightly or wrongly) that perhaps he's getting
>>>> confused with the fmx which afaik is based or just plain _is_ the borg
>>>> warner fx mx auto (but for the record, I have nfi what they take, so the
>>>> speculation that they might spec type f and that that is the source of
>>>> the discrepancy is wild.)
>>> Shell chart says Dexron III for the Falcon BW 35.
>>>
>>> Never take the oil company recommendations as gospel though as they're
>>> sometimes wrong. OTOH you should be able to trust the factory
>>> workshop manual.
>>>
>>
>> the Type F was used for the FMX boxes
>
> Was recommended but most use DII or DIII in them.
correct
it was recommended for smoother shifting or some such thing
>> and for the first of the 4 speed boxes(TQF)
>
> Bzzzzzztttt! Wrong! None of the LE85> 4 speed boxes ever used Type F or
> Dexron fluid and is most unadvisable to do so.
I know we used to sell a shit load of TQF fluid to a workshop that dealt
with the EB transmissions(warranty claims) as that was what they used in
them
>> BW35/55 boxes just used nomal Dexron fluid
>>
> Yes agree but no Falcon ever had a BW55 fitted to it. Also for the record I
> can't think of a single Ford model that had one in it either.
84 XE and XF Falcons had BW55 boxes
had mine replaced and my Brother had his ZL Fairlane box replaced, both
exchange jobs from different Transmission workshops and both quoted BW55
boxes for EFI engines
Kev
TT
Recheck and you will find it was Castrol TQ95 (or TQ85 first
production designation) or Shell XTR who did the orriginal
formulation for Borg Warner Australia before they went bust
and sold it to BTR.
>
>>> BW35/55 boxes just used nomal Dexron fluid
>>>
>> Yes agree but no Falcon ever had a BW55 fitted to it.
>> Also for the record I can't think of a single Ford model
>> that had one in it either.
>
> 84 XE and XF Falcons had BW55 boxes
NO THEY DID NOT! Late XE and XF Falcons had a BW40 fitted.
Then the late commercials and early EA had a BTR 51 fitted
before going to BTR LE85 4 speed. No Falcon ever had a BW55
fitted as standard.
> had mine replaced and my Brother had his ZL Fairlane box
> replaced, both exchange jobs from different Transmission
> workshops and both quoted BW55 boxes for EFI engines
NO! BW40 unless you were ripped off and fitted a BW35.
I hope this helps.
Cheers TT
Kev
Hmm ok
was about 17 years ago so you are probably right
I do know it was a TQ something
sold to them in 60L drums
>>>> BW35/55 boxes just used nomal Dexron fluid
>>>>
>>> Yes agree but no Falcon ever had a BW55 fitted to it.
>>> Also for the record I can't think of a single Ford model
>>> that had one in it either.
>> 84 XE and XF Falcons had BW55 boxes
>
> NO THEY DID NOT! Late XE and XF Falcons had a BW40 fitted.
> Then the late commercials and early EA had a BTR 51 fitted
> before going to BTR LE85 4 speed. No Falcon ever had a BW55
> fitted as standard.
>
>> had mine replaced and my Brother had his ZL Fairlane box
>> replaced, both exchange jobs from different Transmission
>> workshops and both quoted BW55 boxes for EFI engines
>
> NO! BW40 unless you were ripped off and fitted a BW35.
>
> I hope this helps.
>
> Cheers TT
>
>
Hmm
told they were BW55s
oh well they worked fine
and weren't 35s
had one of those in my XD but swapped in a C4 as the BW35s kept dying
from the hard time I was giving the car
Kev
TT
> and weren't 35s
> had one of those in my XD but swapped in a C4 as the BW35s
> kept dying from the hard time I was giving the car
>
Cheers TT
Noddy
> I know we used to sell a shit load of TQF fluid to a workshop that dealt
> with the EB transmissions(warranty claims) as that was what they used in
> them
I wonder if they were actively seeking to gaurantee return work, as anything
but TQ95 in the things will cause them to flare their heads off and go into
limp home mode (stuck in third gear) in pretty short order.
> 84 XE and XF Falcons had BW55 boxes
Not exactly.
XE & F Falcons had BW40's fitted to everything in the sedan and wagon range,
while utes and vans got the M51 auto, which is sometimes known as the BW55.
> had mine replaced and my Brother had his ZL Fairlane box replaced, both
> exchange jobs from different Transmission workshops and both quoted BW55
> boxes for EFI engines
The "55" was the standard "heavy duty" after market replacement for the
regular BW40, although the difference between them was fuck nothing.
--
Regards,
Noddy.
Noddy
"TT" <TTence...@westnet.com.au> wrote in message
news:Ie2dnV2Gn_3FyQvV...@westnet.com.au...
> NO THEY DID NOT! Late XE and XF Falcons had a BW40 fitted. Then the late
> commercials and early EA had a BTR 51 fitted before going to BTR LE85 4
> speed. No Falcon ever had a BW55 fitted as standard.
XF Falcon commercials had an M51 auto fitted as standard.
--
Regards,
Noddy.
TT
"Noddy" <m...@home.com> wrote in message
news:4896e61a$0$87086$c30e...@lon-reader.news.telstra.net...
>
> "Kev" <kev...@optunet.com.au> wrote in message
> news:4896387f$0$1023$afc3...@news.optusnet.com.au...
>
>> I know we used to sell a shit load of TQF fluid to a workshop that dealt
>> with the EB transmissions(warranty claims) as that was what they used in
>> them
>
> I wonder if they were actively seeking to gaurantee return work, as
> anything but TQ95 in the things will cause them to flare their heads off
No! They thump on gear changes - the exact opposite. TQ95 is a very
heavily friction modified oil - i.e it is very slippery mainly developed to
overcome clutch squawk in the LE85.
and go into
> limp home mode (stuck in third gear) in pretty short order.
No it won't. See above. For this series box to go into failsafe (limp home
mode) the ECU must detect an electrical fault. Although running them very
low on oil will throw speed sensor codes. The wrong oil *WIL NOT* do it.
>
>
>> 84 XE and XF Falcons had BW55 boxes
>
> Not exactly.
>
> XE & F Falcons had BW40's fitted to everything in the sedan and wagon
> range, while utes and vans got the M51 auto, which is sometimes known as
> the BW55.
>
No! The BTR 51 was developed for the EA because the LE85 4 speed was not
ready. It had larger gear sets inside and was from late 1987 on when the
model 40 was discontinued.
>> had mine replaced and my Brother had his ZL Fairlane box replaced, both
>> exchange jobs from different Transmission workshops and both quoted BW55
>> boxes for EFI engines
>
> The "55" was the standard "heavy duty" after market replacement for the
> regular BW40,
No it wasn't! BW55 is a 3 speed all clutch box made in England and used in
Volvos. Then made under licence in Japan as a Aisin Warner AW40.
>although the difference between them was fuck nothing.
Again NO! Two totally different boxes with absolutely nothing
interchangeable between them.
Cheers TT
TT
Cheers TT
Noddy
> No! They thump on gear changes - the exact opposite. TQ95 is a very
> heavily friction modified oil - i.e it is very slippery mainly developed
> to overcome clutch squawk in the LE85.
Flaring is actually quite common, and especially on trying to change into
third gear.
> No it won't. See above. For this series box to go into failsafe (limp
> home mode) the ECU must detect an electrical fault. Although running them
> very low on oil will throw speed sensor codes. The wrong oil *WIL NOT* do
> it.
Absolutely it will, and I've seen them do it many times.
The *instant* the ecu detects a couple of repeated incorrect changes it'll
failsafe into limp home mode almost immediately to prevent damage. They're
specifically programmed to do so, and it's not just electrical faults that
will cause it. Low fluid level or overheated fluid will do the same thing.
> No! The BTR 51 was developed for the EA because the LE85 4 speed was not
> ready. It had larger gear sets inside and was from late 1987 on when the
> model 40 was discontinued.
I wasn't talking about the BTR 51, but the *M51* which was Ford's model
number prefix. It was fitted to all XF commercials from the day the model
was first released, as opposed to the BW40 fitted to the non commercial
range, and the BW model code for it was 0551-***** if I recall. It is often
erroniously called a "BW55" because of the "0551" model prefix stamped on
the tag on the side of the box.
The "BTR" tag didn't exist when the XF was first released, and as far as I'm
aware the M51 continued in the XF Commercial range until the model was
replaced by the XG in the early '90's.
> No it wasn't! BW55 is a 3 speed all clutch box made in England and used
> in Volvos. Then made under licence in Japan as a Aisin Warner AW40.
Amongst others.
> Again NO! Two totally different boxes with absolutely nothing
> interchangeable between them.
Indeed, but I was talking about the differences between the M51 as fitted to
the XF commercials and the BW40 as fitted to the sedans and wagons.
--
Regards,
Noddy.
TT
>
> "TT" <TTence...@westnet.com.au> wrote in message
> news:Bv2dnYEgz57oZAvV...@westnet.com.au...
>
>> No! They thump on gear changes - the exact opposite. TQ95 is a very
>> heavily friction modified oil - i.e it is very slippery mainly developed
>> to overcome clutch squawk in the LE85.
>
> Flaring is actually quite common, and especially on trying to change into
> third gear.
Really?!
>
>> No it won't. See above. For this series box to go into failsafe (limp
>> home mode) the ECU must detect an electrical fault. Although running
>> them very low on oil will throw speed sensor codes. The wrong oil *WIL
>> NOT* do it.
>
> Absolutely it will, and I've seen them do it many times.
Please explain? Who do know that has filled (many times) perfectly good
working autos with the wrong oil?
>
> The *instant* the ecu detects a couple of repeated incorrect changes it'll
> failsafe into limp home mode almost immediately to prevent damage.
Not with wrong oil! A complete impossibility! But carry on this is getting
interesting for me.
> They're specifically programmed to do so, and it's not just electrical
> faults that will cause it. Low fluid level
I said that in my previous post.
>or overheated fluid will do the same thing.
No it wont! *IF* the transmission goes into overheat mode it will inhibit
4th gear and apply the lock up torque converter to allow more cooler flow
and less transmission slip so it can cool down. Inhibiting 4th is totally
different from locking in 3rd and stuck in failsafe!
>
>> No! The BTR 51 was developed for the EA because the LE85 4 speed was not
>> ready. It had larger gear sets inside and was from late 1987 on when the
>> model 40 was discontinued.
>
> I wasn't talking about the BTR 51, but the *M51* which was Ford's model
> number prefix.
So what did Ford call the model 35 and 40 then?
> It was fitted to all XF commercials from the day the model was first
> released, as opposed to the BW40 fitted to the non commercial range, and
> the BW model code for it was 0551-***** if I recall. It is often
> erroniously called a "BW55" because of the "0551" model prefix stamped on
> the tag on the side of the box.
So why wasn't the 0535-**** called a 53 or a 0540-**** called a 54 then?
Considering all these gearboxes quite clearly had an embossed aluminium
identification tag on them telling everyone what they actually were ;-)
>
> The "BTR" tag didn't exist when the XF was first released,
First correct thing you have actually said ;-)
> and as far as I'm aware the M51 continued in the XF Commercial range until
> the model was replaced by the XG in the early '90's.
2 out of 2 ;-)
>
>> No it wasn't! BW55 is a 3 speed all clutch box made in England and used
>> in Volvos. Then made under licence in Japan as a Aisin Warner AW40.
>
> Amongst others.
>
>> Again NO! Two totally different boxes with absolutely nothing
>> interchangeable between them.
>
> Indeed, but I was talking about the differences between the M51 as fitted
> to the XF commercials and the BW40 as fitted to the sedans and wagons.
No! There was no differentiation between sedans/wagons and comercials only
build dates. In the XF range until late 1987 they all used the same BW40
except the EFI engines which had different valvebodies and rear servos
fitted. They then went to the Model 51 for all comercials and EA
sedan/wagon.
I also note that you don't talk about the EA in any of this and them having
the Model 51 (or BTR 51) in them as well.
Cheers TT
Noddy
> Please explain? Who do know that has filled (many times) perfectly good
> working autos with the wrong oil?
Plenty. Especially those who do their own "home servicing" and don't bother
to read the manual :)
Magna's used to be another common one.
> No it wont! *IF* the transmission goes into overheat mode it will inhibit
> 4th gear and apply the lock up torque converter to allow more cooler flow
> and less transmission slip so it can cool down. Inhibiting 4th is totally
> different from locking in 3rd and stuck in failsafe!
Read the manual.
> So what did Ford call the model 35 and 40 then?
They used the "BW35" & "BW40" designation, in conjunction with the Borg
Warner model number depending on what it was. For example, with the XF range
there were 6 different types of BW40, depending on whether the car was a
carb or efi, 4.1 or 3.3, and pre or post ADR 37.
> So why wasn't the 0535-**** called a 53 or a 0540-**** called a 54 then?
You got me. Why do some dickheads call a ute a "pickup"?
> Considering all these gearboxes quite clearly had an embossed aluminium
> identification tag on them telling everyone what they actually were ;-)
They did indeed.
> First correct thing you have actually said ;-)
According to you :)
> No! There was no differentiation between sedans/wagons and comercials
> only build dates.
Bzzzt... Nice try, but no cigar buddy.
> In the XF range until late 1987 they all used the same BW40 except the EFI
> engines which had different valvebodies and rear servos fitted. They then
> went to the Model 51 for all comercials and EA sedan/wagon.
Ahem.....
You might want to jot all this information down and send it off to Ford, as
they must have fucked up when printing the workshop manual for the XF Falcon
ute and van :)
> I also note that you don't talk about the EA in any of this and them
> having the Model 51 (or BTR 51) in them as well.
That's because I wasn't the slightest bit interested in the EA.
--
Regards,
Noddy.
TT
>
> "TT" <TTence...@westnet.com.au> wrote in message
> news:PqCdncDas67DjArV...@westnet.com.au...
>
>> Please explain? Who do know that has filled (many times)
>> perfectly good working autos with the wrong oil?
>
> Plenty. Especially those who do their own "home servicing"
> and don't bother to read the manual :)
>
> Magna's used to be another common one.
No they didn't. The original fill was DII and then later
changed to a friction modified oil during production.
>
>> No it wont! *IF* the transmission goes into overheat
>> mode it will inhibit 4th gear and apply the lock up
>> torque converter to allow more cooler flow and less
>> transmission slip so it can cool down. Inhibiting 4th is
>> totally different from locking in 3rd and stuck in
>> failsafe!
>
> Read the manual.
Obviously I must be very thick. Please supply a reference
to the section that says this to back up your claim.
I do see where your confusion is - build dates. Yes XF
sedans and wagons did not have BTR Model 51 fitted because
Ford brought out the EA. The commercials continued and used
the 51 up until the XG when they went straight to a LE91.
You said "all XF commercials from the day the model was
first released, as opposed to the BW40" The model 51 did
not exist in 1985 when the XF was first released. They
*ALL* had BW/BTR model 40 fitted. The 40 was introduced
half way through the XE model run and finished when the EA
was released then all vehicles had Model 51 fitted. Also
many, many 51 and 40 were interchanged in the commercials by
dealers and transmission shops.
>
>> I also note that you don't talk about the EA in any of
>> this and them having the Model 51 (or BTR 51) in them as
>> well.
>
> That's because I wasn't the slightest bit interested in
> the EA.
Yeah, who was/is :-)) Biggest dog Ford ever produced!
>
Cheers TT
F Murtz
> John_H wrote:
>>
>> Shell chart says Dexron III for the Falcon BW 35.
>>
>> Never take the oil company recommendations as gospel though as they're
>> sometimes wrong. OTOH you should be able to trust the factory
>> workshop manual.
>
> I've been using dexron since Adam, twas just curious where the mate had
> had that info from :). fwiw, I agree, the factory workshop manuals (well
> at least for the few cars I play with lots) are pretty decent indeed.
>
>
modifiers and are not the same
TT
"F Murtz" <hag...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:4897cac3$1...@dnews.tpgi.com.au...
No they don't! Please stop saying ridiculous things with no
factual evidence. DII supersedes to DIII. *ALL* DIII is
backwards compatible to DII.
See the BP oil guide below.
http://www.bp.com/sectiongenericarticle.do?categoryId=9012455&contentId=7025024
Autran DX III is the latest performance specification of the
Dexron range and has been formulated to meet the General
Motors specification for a Dexron III fluid.
"This results in increased wear protection and longer
automatic transmission life. Autran DX III is completely
compatible with Autran DX II and can be used as a top-up or
replacement fluid for transmissions originally filled with
Dexron II fluids."
Regards TT.
atec77
75/90 bmw oil 'cuse I had lots of it , nice and quite too.
TT
>>
> Ha , well it has a gut full of the same stuff as goes in
> my k100 diff
> 75/90 bmw oil 'cuse I had lots of it , nice and quite
> too.
Any synchro problems? e.g. a little stiffer in the
mornings?
The reason I ask is that diff oil is an EP (extreme
pressure) type oil even though it is still 75/90 grade. The
Shell XGO 75/90 I refer to is a specialised manual gear oil
and is unsuitable for hypoid diffs. Luckily the Camry only
has a helical diff set up ;-)
If no synchro probs and you have heaps then you have got a
good combination.
Cheers TT
atec77
> "atec77" <atec77...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:g78o9n$rib$1...@aioe.org...
>> Ha , well it has a gut full of the same stuff as goes in
>> my k100 diff
>> 75/90 bmw oil 'cuse I had lots of it , nice and quite
>> too.
>
> Any synchro problems? e.g. a little stiffer in the
> mornings?
oil is EP
>
> The reason I ask is that diff oil is an EP (extreme
> pressure) type oil even though it is still 75/90 grade. The
> Shell XGO 75/90 I refer to is a specialised manual gear oil
> and is unsuitable for hypoid diffs. Luckily the Camry only
> has a helical diff set up ;-)
>
> If no synchro probs and you have heaps then you have got a
> good combination.
to the end of the street in 1st shift 2nd BRAKE :)
>
> Cheers TT
>
>
TT
> TT wrote:
>> "atec77" <atec77...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:g78o9n$rib$1...@aioe.org...
>>> Ha , well it has a gut full of the same stuff as goes in my k100 diff
>>> 75/90 bmw oil 'cuse I had lots of it , nice and quite too.
>>
>> Any synchro problems? e.g. a little stiffer in the mornings?
> The drive line is in a rwd race car so mornings don't count and the oil
> is EP
No problemo then :-) You are using the right stuff.
Cheers TT
F Murtz
Not sure about orig dextron manufacturers but I rung valvoline tech
section about their dx2 and dx3 difference and that was what i was told
[different friction modifiers].They did not recommend using dx3 in place
of dx2 in old cars designed for dextron11 [why would they still make dx2
if dx3 will do the same job]
TT
Let Google be your friend ;-)
> but I rung valvoline tech
It's all downhill from here ;-)
> section about their dx2 and dx3 difference and that was what i was told
> [different friction modifiers].
DII and DIII are not friction modified oils.
>They did not recommend using dx3 in place of dx2 in old cars designed for
>dextron11
Because DIII costs more and there is more proffit margin.
> [why would they still make dx2 if dx3 will do the same job]
Purely cost. DII is out of patent and so anyone can make it without paying
royalties to GM.
BTW We are now up to DVI (Dexron6) which is also backwards compatible with
2&3.
Have a read here.
http://www.hollonoil.com/DEXRON-VI-Service_Fill_Release.pdf
Cheers TT
F Murtz
Can see no other reason why their technical people would say what they did
TT
>>
>> BTW We are now up to DVI (Dexron6) which is also backwards compatible
>> with 2&3.
>>
>> Have a read here.
>>
>> http://www.hollonoil.com/DEXRON-VI-Service_Fill_Release.pdf
>>
>> Cheers TT
>>
>>
> Mabee valvoline dx2 and dx3 are not the same specs as dextron dx11 and
> dx111
Please look up the definition of specification now? To be labelled Dexron#
# it must meet the GM specs otherwise they can't use the name.
> Can see no other reason why their technical people would say what they
> did
I can. They are idiots!
Regards TT
F Murtz
specifying dextron and some others [mabee that is why dx2 dx3 rather
than dxII and dxIII]
TT
OK you win. GM has no idea what oil goes in their vehicles and Valvoline
does. Valvoline mixes friction modified oil suitable for a Dexron standard
that GM has specified. Fine by me.
TT
John McKenzie
compatible. Would it be fair to say that it's just a better fluid, a
higher standard/criteria, or are there actual tangible differences (as
opposed to improvements) between the dexron fluid range?
Reason I ask - although it seems all backward _compatible_ I'm wondering
what would actually be _best_ in terms of longevity for a bw35. I don't
get a hell of a long life out of them, but I do tow more than the
average tug boat, and generally thrash the shit out of them. I am going
to a 904 which has been ready to go for years now (waiting on enough
readies to finish the next engine), which means the 35 I'm building now
(using the ford box as the starting point, since I got one for free from
noddy, and the shaft diameters are bigger, though it's a little bit of
juggling.). I save a fair whack of dough building the transmissions
myself (and get the same longevity as any commercially reco'd ones (and
I didn't used to go downmarket either to get a cheaper, shittier deal)
and I don't mind spending extra folding on fluid if there is a distinct
advantage. If there isn't I'll stick with dx2 or 3 depending on what is
available that actually meets the standard officially.
Any insights? Also - did you reco transmissions for a living by any
chance?
--
John McKenzie
tos...@aol.com ab...@yahoo.com ab...@hotmail.com ab...@earthlink.com
ab...@aol.com vice.pr...@whitehouse.gov pres...@whitehouse.gov
swee...@accc.gov.au u...@ftc.gov admin@loopback ab...@iprimus.com.au
$LOGIN@localhost world's #1 sardine whisperer ro...@mailloop.com
$USER@$HOST $LOGNAME@localhost -h1024@localhost ab...@msn.com
ab...@federalpolice.gov.au frau...@psinet.com ab...@asio.gov.au
$USER@localhost ab...@sprint.com ab...@fbi.gov ab...@cia.gov
TT
"John McKenzie" <jmac_me...@bigpond.com> wrote in
message news:48990D...@bigpond.com...
> I've been reading the info provided
At least someone bothered ;-)
> - all dexron vi is backward
> compatible. Would it be fair to say that it's just a
> better fluid, a
> higher standard/criteria,
Yes.
or are there actual tangible
> differences (as
> opposed to improvements) between the dexron fluid range?
>
Yes. It's more temperature stable and doesn't break down as
quickly and so provides better gear wear.
> Reason I ask - although it seems all backward _compatible_
> I'm wondering
> what would actually be _best_ in terms of longevity for a
> bw35. I don't
> get a hell of a long life out of them, but I do tow more
> than the
> average tug boat,
Wrong gearbox to be using for towing and fit a large oil
cooler.
> and generally thrash the shit out of
> them.
See above ;-)
> I am going
> to a 904 which has been ready to go for years now
> (waiting on enough
> readies to finish the next engine),
So a Torquflite 904? So you have a Valiant/Chrysler what?
If so the blocks have a different bolt pattern from TF904
to BW35.
> which means the 35 I'm
> building now
> (using the ford box as the starting point, since I got one
> for free from
> noddy, and the shaft diameters are bigger, though it's a
> little bit of
> juggling.).
*IF* the shafts are bigger then it is not a BW 35. It is
either a BW40 or BTR51
> I save a fair whack of dough building the
> transmissions
> myself (and get the same longevity as any commercially
> reco'd ones (and
> I didn't used to go downmarket either to get a cheaper,
> shittier deal)
See above about oil coolers.
> and I don't mind spending extra folding on fluid if there
> is a distinct
> advantage. If there isn't I'll stick with dx2 or 3
> depending on what is
> available that actually meets the standard officially.
>
I can't see an advantage to by going to DexronVI. Try a
bottle of this stuff instead with DII or III.
http://www.lubegard.com/automotive/trans_atf.html
> Any insights? Also - did you reco transmissions for a
> living by any
> chance?
Yep ;-)
Cheers TT
John McKenzie
>
> "John McKenzie" <jmac_me...@bigpond.com> wrote in
> message news:48990D...@bigpond.com...
> > I've been reading the info provided
>
> At least someone bothered ;-)
>
> > - all dexron vi is backward
> > compatible. Would it be fair to say that it's just a
> > better fluid, a
> > higher standard/criteria,
>
> Yes.
>
> or are there actual tangible
> > differences (as
> > opposed to improvements) between the dexron fluid range?
> >
> Yes. It's more temperature stable and doesn't break down as
> quickly and so provides better gear wear.
ok.
>
> Wrong gearbox to be using for towing and fit a large oil
> cooler.
I know that, it's been a question of time/cash mostly. I'll get there
eventually with the new motor and 904 behind it. Once that is actually
in there, I'll be happy.
>
> > and generally thrash the shit out of
> > them.
>
> See above ;-)
I know, I know :)
>
> > I am going
> > to a 904 which has been ready to go for years now
> > (waiting on enough
> > readies to finish the next engine),
>
> So a Torquflite 904? So you have a Valiant/Chrysler what?
> If so the blocks have a different bolt pattern from TF904
> to BW35.
vj charger
you did notice the bit about finishing the engine?
I've got a few torqueflite blocks, thankfully.
The only other thing I do have to do (for convenience sake) is to cut n
shut a section of the 904 bellhousing, so I can mount the starter in
it's original position for a bw35/inline 6.
>
> *IF* the shafts are bigger then it is not a BW 35. It is
> either a BW40 or BTR51
I get that, but what else am I going to call it if it ends up being a
hybrid that uses a mix of bits to get it to fit behind a hemi and in
front of the chrysler tailshaft.
>
> See above about oil coolers.
It's already running a f'n big external cooler, have done since I got
it.
> > and I don't mind spending extra folding on fluid if there
> > is a distinct
> > advantage. If there isn't I'll stick with dx2 or 3
> > depending on what is
> > available that actually meets the standard officially.
> >
> I can't see an advantage to by going to DexronVI. Try a
> bottle of this stuff instead with DII or III.
> http://www.lubegard.com/automotive/trans_atf.html
>
> > Any insights? Also - did you reco transmissions for a
> > living by any
> > chance?
>
> Yep ;-)
>
> Cheers TT
--
TT
> TT wrote:
>>
>> So a Torquflite 904? So you have a Valiant/Chrysler what?
>> If so the blocks have a different bolt pattern from TF904
>> to BW35.
>
> vj charger
>
Ahhhhh....Nice.... that brings back memories :-) I would love a 340ci
TF727 one. E40 from memory??? I had mates that had E38 and E49 and were
always trying to balance those mongrel Webers :-))
> you did notice the bit about finishing the engine?
>
Yes I did but no harm in just making sure. We run into the same problems
with Chev/Holden bolt patterns all the time as well.
> I've got a few torqueflite blocks, thankfully.
>
I personally couldn't go for the six I would have to put a 340 or 360 in
:-)) Do you remember the Charger from the Alvin Purple films by any chance?
> The only other thing I do have to do (for convenience sake) is to cut n
> shut a section of the 904 bellhousing, so I can mount the starter in
> it's original position for a bw35/inline 6.
>
Why do you want to do this? The factory never saw the need to. If it was
like a holden/chev and bolted to the engine block then not a problem but
it's not. The bell housing is very weak where you want to do this so my
advice is "don't".
>
>
>>
>> *IF* the shafts are bigger then it is not a BW 35. It is
>> either a BW40 or BTR51
>
> I get that, but what else am I going to call it if it ends up being a
> hybrid that uses a mix of bits to get it to fit behind a hemi and in
> front of the chrysler tailshaft.
>
It's called a Leyland P76. They were Valiant gearboxes with large
geartrains (for the V8) and a rover bell housing on the front. As you see
it has all been done before :-)) BTW when Leyland went bust and sold off
all their old stock a lot of these gearboxes ended up in Valiants anyway.
>
>>
>> See above about oil coolers.
>
> It's already running a f'n big external cooler, have done since I got
> it.
>
Good :-)
BTW the 265s used to chew up 35s like there was no tomorrow. We used to
build them basically up to a Ford EA standard. The 3.9l multi-point
injected Falcons went quite good in their day as well.
Cheers TT
John McKenzie
>
> > vj charger
> >
> Ahhhhh....Nice.... that brings back memories :-) I would love a 340ci
> TF727 one. E40 from memory??? I had mates that had E38 and E49 and were
> always trying to balance those mongrel Webers :-))
they're now going for a pretty penny. The one I've got is due for some
paint and panel work, to be sure, but every time I drive it, I get
people offering to buy it, and for decent money (compared to what it
cost, money wise at least). Which is a nice contrast to being pulled
over by the boys in blue when I was a p plater :)
> > you did notice the bit about finishing the engine?
> >
> Yes I did but no harm in just making sure. We run into the same problems
> with Chev/Holden bolt patterns all the time as well.
>
> > I've got a few torqueflite blocks, thankfully.
> >
> I personally couldn't go for the six I would have to put a 340 or 360 in
> :-)) Do you remember the Charger from the Alvin Purple films by any chance?
Honestly - I haven't seen the films. I think I saw one called 'melvin
son of alvin' but I could be mixed up. I could name most aus movies they
feature in - including 'the man from hong kong' 'fighting back' 'mad max
2' and (if I recall) 'running on empty' (though it was somewhere way in
the background, if at all)
>
> > The only other thing I do have to do (for convenience sake) is to cut n
> > shut a section of the 904 bellhousing, so I can mount the starter in
> > it's original position for a bw35/inline 6.
> >
> Why do you want to do this?
exhaust and other (drag link, and then when the motor goes in, so will
the steering rack/k frame conversion) clearance mostly, plus I've seen a
couple done and they are still together behind high boost hemis, so the
amount of torque they are dealing with is likely 500+ ft lbs. The
current engine is NA (and getting tired) and has a 6-3-1 exhaust, it's
still 3 pipes as it passes the bellhousing/block parting face, so near
impossible to reach around a lower mounted starter. The 'new' motor (and
I've got the turbo and other gear ready, just waiting on the motor, of
which I have most of the bits) will be boosted, but not ridiculously so
- probably around 400-420ft lbs, but not a shitload of power (I don't
want to spin it higher than around 4500 except by rare exception)
>The factory never saw the need to.
Yeah, but even if they saw merit in it, there's no way they could have
done it, they were always barely a step away from financially crippled
for most of the 70s
If it was
> like a holden/chev and bolted to the engine block then not a problem but
> it's not. The bell housing is very weak where you want to do this so my
> advice is "don't".
The other option is to run a custom made bellhousing, which is thicker
(some guys are, for example) welding a solid plate to the bw35 bell and
then machining it and cutting the 904 bell and bolting the 35 bell to a
904 via the front pump (as ultrabell options also utilise) - this is
done to adapt to a bw pattern block.
> >
> >
> >>
> >> *IF* the shafts are bigger then it is not a BW 35. It is
> >> either a BW40 or BTR51
> >
> > I get that, but what else am I going to call it if it ends up being a
> > hybrid that uses a mix of bits to get it to fit behind a hemi and in
> > front of the chrysler tailshaft.
> >
> It's called a Leyland P76. They were Valiant gearboxes with large
> geartrains (for the V8) and a rover bell housing on the front. As you see
> it has all been done before :-)) BTW when Leyland went bust and sold off
> all their old stock a lot of these gearboxes ended up in Valiants anyway.
Interesting you should say that, as at least 2 of the boxes I've had
apart over the years (and I also tend to crack them along the centre
brace, where the servo for the rear band is, if I don't break the band
first)
> >
> >>
> >> See above about oil coolers.
> >
> > It's already running a f'n big external cooler, have done since I got
> > it.
> >
> Good :-)
>
> BTW the 265s used to chew up 35s like there was no tomorrow. We used to
> build them basically up to a Ford EA standard. The 3.9l multi-point
> injected Falcons went quite good in their day as well.
I'm running the ea taxi spec friction plates (more 'meat' less grooves)
and new bands, I've been told conflicting things about kevlar lined
bands so haven't tried them. In either event, I can't run new ones, as I
usually break the low/rev band before the rest wears out. I've deep
sixed the reverse detent thing that pushes the throttle valve a little
and raises line pressure (since I'm always reversing out of the
driveway, it's in reverse soon after starting) at idle whilst in rev, to
soften the 'hit' and I've got the idle rpm as low as I can.
this should be the last time around though!
I've only been in a couple of 3.9 ford eas with the 3 speed, so am not
sure how to judge them. They seemed way down on torque compared to the
manual version a mate had. I'm wondering if they had softened the tune a
little to get them to last? I also recall noddy mentioning that when EAs
were being used as taxis, and the new 4 speed let go, more than a couple
of taxi places put bw 3 speeds in them, as it was cheaper, and lasted
enough time in that guise that they were off the road for good by the
time next reco came around. I have no idea how common that might have
been though.
My general take on the bw35 is fairly pragmatic - for their era, and
original criteria, they are a decent reliable auto, they were just never
meant to be put behind a torquey six, period.
TT
>> Why do you want to do this?
>
> exhaust and other (drag link, and then when the motor goes in, so will
> the steering rack/k frame conversion) clearance mostly, plus I've seen a
> couple done and they are still together behind high boost hemis, so the
> amount of torque they are dealing with is likely 500+ ft lbs. The
> current engine is NA (and getting tired) and has a 6-3-1 exhaust, it's
> still 3 pipes as it passes the bellhousing/block parting face, so near
> impossible to reach around a lower mounted starter. The 'new' motor (and
> I've got the turbo and other gear ready, just waiting on the motor, of
> which I have most of the bits) will be boosted, but not ridiculously so
> - probably around 400-420ft lbs, but not a shitload of power (I don't
> want to spin it higher than around 4500 except by rare exception)
>
>
> The other option is to run a custom made bellhousing, which is thicker
> (some guys are, for example) welding a solid plate to the bw35 bell and
> then machining it and cutting the 904 bell and bolting the 35 bell to a
> 904 via the front pump (as ultrabell options also utilise) - this is
> done to adapt to a bw pattern block.
>
Another option is to use the BW35 Bell Housing and make the adaptor at the
back of it. Cut the 904 housing complete off (with a jigsaw) and use the
the pump bolts to mount the new housing and adapter on. That's the way we
used to do it in the olden days to fit TF727s up Chevs and Fords.
>
>> >
>> >
> Interesting you should say that, as at least 2 of the boxes I've had
> apart over the years (and I also tend to crack them along the centre
> brace, where the servo for the rear band is, if I don't break the band
> first)
>
Common fault. The later BW40s and BTR 51 in anything fuel injected had a 3
bolt servo. The extra being on the outer end to stabilise the servo from
twisting the support out.
>> >
> I'm running the ea taxi spec friction plates (more 'meat' less grooves)
> and new bands, I've been told conflicting things about kevlar lined
> bands so haven't tried them. In either event, I can't run new ones, as I
> usually break the low/rev band before the rest wears out.
I hope you are using the HD rear bands out of the late BTR51. Black Kevlar
ling and extra thick arround the strut mounts.
> I've deep
> sixed the reverse detent thing that pushes the throttle valve a little
> and raises line pressure (since I'm always reversing out of the
> driveway, it's in reverse soon after starting) at idle whilst in rev, to
> soften the 'hit' and I've got the idle rpm as low as I can.
These are referred to as "Band Breakers" ;-) I think you know why now.
>
> this should be the last time around though!
>
> I've only been in a couple of 3.9 ford eas with the 3 speed, so am not
> sure how to judge them. They seemed way down on torque compared to the
> manual version a mate had. I'm wondering if they had softened the tune a
> little to get them to last? I also recall noddy mentioning that when EAs
> were being used as taxis, and the new 4 speed let go, more than a couple
> of taxi places put bw 3 speeds in them, as it was cheaper, and lasted
> enough time in that guise that they were off the road for good by the
> time next reco came around. I have no idea how common that might have
> been though.
It happened a lot in Sydney and Melbourne.
>
> My general take on the bw35 is fairly pragmatic - for their era, and
> original criteria, they are a decent reliable auto, they were just never
> meant to be put behind a torquey six, period.
Absolutely correct. It started life circa 1961 as 4cyl auto for Ford
Cortinas, Vauxhall Vivas etc then they started putting them in small 6s like
Woolsey, Jags etc. Then Rover (and Daimler) stuck them behind V8s Then
stupid bloody Australians stuck them in Ford XR 289 V8s and blew then to
pieces faster than they could roll them off the production line!
Ahhhhh..... them were the days. People often say "they don't build 'em like
they used to." Well there's a very good reason for that - most of it was
rubbish ;-)
Cheers TT
John McKenzie
>
I don't
> > want to spin it higher than around 4500 except by rare exception)
> >
> Anyone for a slant montor instead???? :-)
I do happen to like em to be honest, but in the end it boils down to the
fact they have 40 less cubic inches, and a head that has trouble flowing
enough to support a 198, let alone the long stroke 225. I'm not sure how
'into' vals you might be, but did you know there were actually a few vh
valiants (they went to the hemi at the time of the vg) that left the
factory with slants, on some weird special order (perhaps akin to what
holden did to get rid of their last post 1974 coupes)? the other issue
with the slant is it's weight - not actually lighter than the hemi
believe it or not.
>
> >
> > The other option is to run a custom made bellhousing, which is thicker
> > (some guys are, for example) welding a solid plate to the bw35 bell and
> > then machining it and cutting the 904 bell and bolting the 35 bell to a
> > 904 via the front pump (as ultrabell options also utilise) - this is
> > done to adapt to a bw pattern block.
> >
> Another option is to use the BW35 Bell Housing and make the adaptor at the
> back of it. Cut the 904 housing complete off (with a jigsaw) and use the
> the pump bolts to mount the new housing and adapter on. That's the way we
> used to do it in the olden days to fit TF727s up Chevs and Fords.
that's precisely what I'm talking about, sorry for my vague description.
I've also had an adapter kit to mount a th700 to a hemi, but ended up
getting a decent offer for the adapter kit and the th700 I had (only
needed a convertor). I wasn't as crash hot about the adapter - as it
used a manual flywheel drilled to mount the convertor from teh th700 to
it. It would have worked, and the weight as such of the flywheel
wouldn't have mattered as much (since the convertor full of oil isn't
exactly light) but ultimately it was the machined down (to around half
factory thickness) flywheel that made me reluctant. the person I sold it
to later reported that i would have had to cut n shut the chassis -
around where the front suspension torsion bars attach to the
body/chassis, just to clear the tail end. SO he ended up selling the
auto, and running a powerglide with the adapter of all things (and then
ended up buying a 3000rpm glide/trimatic convertor I had!) and is
actually happy with it.
In any case, I have the 904 ready to go, and since I plan to go turbo
(vs an NA higher rpm setup with the 4 speed auto, and lower diff gears)
with the new hemi, I don't have much trouble with high diff gears, and
one less ratio, and a tighter convertor, I'll have all the torque I'll
need, just off idle, to take care of that.
I'm at a new job just recently, so it should all pan out a little more
expeditiously, as the funds will exceed the day to day stuff by enough
to get it sorted.
> >
> >> >
> >> >
> > Interesting you should say that, as at least 2 of the boxes I've had
> > apart over the years (and I also tend to crack them along the centre
> > brace, where the servo for the rear band is, if I don't break the band
> > first)
> >
> Common fault. The later BW40s and BTR 51 in anything fuel injected had a 3
> bolt servo. The extra being on the outer end to stabilise the servo from
> twisting the support out.
If I've read it all correctly, the btr 51 as you refer to it, is the 3
speed bw factory fitted to the ea's? If so, if I (hypothetically, since
this should be the last go around with a bw at all) got an auto from an
ea, and changed the output shaft and extension housing to suit, would it
otherwise fit a hemi convertor and bellhousing from an earlier bw35? I
can't imagine ever going there, but it would be good to know.
I've done a few writeups of the various trials and tribulations,
including details for the '1 cent' shift kit - shimming the primary
regulator with a 1c piece. I've since gone cold on it, as whilst it does
make the shifts a little crisper, I'm breaking shit before I wear out
the friction linings.
Other than that, some of the trivial stuff I've done is run the 'pickup'
conduit from underneath the main filter from a later ford, which has it
picking up the oil from a little toward the middle/rear, rather than the
front, so it will not suck any air whilst accelerating from a
standstill, or whilst towing on a steep enough incline at high throttle
openings. I've also made small gaskets from thin copper sheet with
appropriate holes and or corners cut to hold them in place, to help seal
the valve body to the case. On more than a few (and I should get off my
arse and machine the case flat I guess) that centre brace is slightly
warped, and some fluid can bleed off, mostly that from governer area,
and it did improve the consistency and predictability of the shifts.
About the only thing left, I've made a brace/strap that secures to one
bolt from the front filter, and one that goes where the rear pickup
remains, but is inoperative, i.e. for those with rear pumps (hillman
hunter maybe?) which supports the main pipes into and out of the
valvebody, and prevents them blowing out
> >> >
> > I'm running the ea taxi spec friction plates (more 'meat' less grooves)
> > and new bands, I've been told conflicting things about kevlar lined
> > bands so haven't tried them. In either event, I can't run new ones, as I
> > usually break the low/rev band before the rest wears out.
>
> I hope you are using the HD rear bands out of the late BTR51. Black Kevlar
> ling and extra thick arround the strut mounts.
I couldn't tell you a lot about them, save for the fact that afaik they
aren't kevlar lined (I seem to recall green, but don't quote me, they
aren't in front of me right now. When I got them (from a wholesaler in
'gale st brunswick - who are decent guys in my experience) they were the
best quality/version they had available. I note your description around
the strut mounts, that's precisely where they tend to let go 9 times out
of 10. the other time I broke the pivot pin/surrounding alum cast body
of the servo on the servo arm, and of course the previously mentioned
cracking of the case braces . I also cracked an entire case once around
the bolt holes that the bolts which secure the 1st gear sprag go
through. the other thing I've done a couple of times is break the cages
that locate the planetary gears, they broke horizontally, and moved up
and ground into the sun gear(s) to the point they were all stuffed
inside a week (I knew when it first happened, then they'd 'jamm' off the
mark from a set of lights, even at light throttle, and then they let go
altogether.)
I've got pictures of most of the carnage. You've probably see 1000 times
as much over the years of course. If it's any interest, I'll upload them
somewhere if it's of any trivial interest.
>
> > I've deep
> > sixed the reverse detent thing that pushes the throttle valve a little
> > and raises line pressure (since I'm always reversing out of the
> > driveway, it's in reverse soon after starting) at idle whilst in rev, to
> > soften the 'hit' and I've got the idle rpm as low as I can.
>
> These are referred to as "Band Breakers" ;-) I think you know why now.
I have to ask WTF they were thinking when that was added in there. Who
really needs higher line pressure, just to 'engage' reverse, surely if
it was under any load, the kickdown cable would be actuating the
throttle valve enough to increase the line pressure as needed. It seems
to me to have nothing but the downside? Any insights?
This might spin you out - there's a bloke on a mopar forum who is
running a turbo 6 (and last I heard into the 12s) with a bw auto. He
told me on the quiet (since he claims it's a bw, and he isn't lying)
that it's actually a 51 internally, which his old man helped out with
(seeing as he is a trans rebuilder) both with the general build, but
also a full manual valve body. It was still running last I heard. I
dunno how the heck he manages to keep it together! (I was told in
confidence, but it's inconceivable that anyone else from the forum reads
in aus.cars, and i've not mentioned enough details to identify him) but
that's far beyond what I thought they might handle.
> Ahhhhh..... them were the days. People often say "they don't build 'em like
> they used to." Well there's a very good reason for that - most of it was
> rubbish ;-)
indeed. Though I do wonder whether or not having a 6 speed auto in a
relatively high torque/flexible engine is of any real benefit over, say,
a 4 sp auto, or at absolute tops, a 5 speed. I wonder if their
complexity, and cost to overhaul won't sooner or later get them to a
point that they just aren't worth rebuilding, and the car they were
finds its way into a wrecker yard earlier than it otherwise should.
TT
"John McKenzie" <jmac_me...@bigpond.com> wrote in message
news:489CCF...@bigpond.com...
> TT wrote:
>>
>>
> I've also had an adapter kit to mount a th700 to a hemi, but ended up
> getting a decent offer for the adapter kit and the th700 I had (only
> needed a convertor). I wasn't as crash hot about the adapter - as it
> used a manual flywheel drilled to mount the convertor from teh th700 to
> it. It would have worked, and the weight as such of the flywheel
> wouldn't have mattered as much (since the convertor full of oil isn't
> exactly light) but ultimately it was the machined down (to around half
> factory thickness) flywheel that made me reluctant. the person I sold it
No! No! No! Wrong way to make an adapter. Any competent converter shop
would have made a hybrid converter - back half Chrysler base to accept
starter and original drive plate and front half all TH700 to go into the
gearbox. We often have this done. Also you would have been better off
using a late Holden VT 4L60E with detachable bell housing. I have these
boxes handling Supercharged GenIIIs with 525HP at the rear wheels. BTW in
utes ;-) They wouldn't hang together if they ever got traction :-))
> to later reported that i would have had to cut n shut the chassis -
> around where the front suspension torsion bars attach to the
> body/chassis, just to clear the tail end. SO he ended up selling the
> auto, and running a powerglide with the adapter of all things (and then
> ended up buying a 3000rpm glide/trimatic convertor I had!) and is
> actually happy with it.
IMHO Silly! The TF904 or better still the TF727 that were fitted factory to
CL Chryslers would have be better and cheaper to make hang together. The
904 is a brilliant mid horsepower box and there is nothing better than a 727
for high HP vs. $$$$$
>
> In any case, I have the 904 ready to go, and since I plan to go turbo
> (vs an NA higher rpm setup with the 4 speed auto, and lower diff gears)
> with the new hemi, I don't have much trouble with high diff gears, and
> one less ratio, and a tighter convertor, I'll have all the torque I'll
> need, just off idle, to take care of that.
What we used to do was raise diff ratio to 2.92:1 and then use the gear sets
out of a Scorpion 904 as they had a lower 1st gear ratio. The car would
launch just as hard but still had some sort of reasonable top end.
Below is where it's gunna get hard ;-)
>> > Interesting you should say that, as at least 2 of the boxes I've had
>> > apart over the years (and I also tend to crack them along the centre
>> > brace, where the servo for the rear band is, if I don't break the band
>> > first)
Yep!
>> >
>> Common fault. The later BW40s and BTR 51 in anything fuel injected had a
>> 3
>> bolt servo. The extra being on the outer end to stabilise the servo from
>> twisting the support out.
>
> If I've read it all correctly, the btr 51 as you refer to it, is the 3
> speed bw factory fitted to the ea's?
Yes. And van ute XF from 1988 up as well.
> If so, if I (hypothetically, since
> this should be the last go around with a bw at all) got an auto from an
> ea, and changed the output shaft and extension housing to suit, would it
> otherwise fit a hemi convertor and bellhousing from an earlier bw35? I
> can't imagine ever going there, but it would be good to know.
>
Yes, you can bolt any BW35 bell housing onto the front of any of these boxes
from any other box. What changed in the olden days was input shaft size and
oil pump length. **ALL** late 26 spline converters and bell housings fit.
Valiant VF actually had a BW35 fitted that had a slant bell housing, TF904
converter and a oil pump to take the converter.
Now where the problem is the length of the gear train - it's longer so they
machined the back of the front pump to take a bearing and machine the rear
inside of the case. There is some juggling to be done but it can work. Now
the interesting thing is the gear pinions in the planetary are *Exactly* the
same as the BTRLE 85/91/95 4 speed ones. Now the LE95 is the 5.0l Windsor
V8 box. But these are not the issues - breaking the case in half is!
> I've done a few writeups of the various trials and tribulations,
> including details for the '1 cent' shift kit - shimming the primary
> regulator with a 1c piece. I've since gone cold on it, as whilst it does
> make the shifts a little crisper, I'm breaking shit before I wear out
> the friction linings.
>
Yep, see above.
> Other than that, some of the trivial stuff I've done is run the 'pickup'
> conduit from underneath the main filter from a later ford, which has it
> picking up the oil from a little toward the middle/rear, rather than the
> front, so it will not suck any air whilst accelerating from a
> standstill, or whilst towing on a steep enough incline at high throttle
> openings.
Very sensible.
> I've also made small gaskets from thin copper sheet with
> appropriate holes and or corners cut to hold them in place, to help seal
> the valve body to the case. On more than a few (and I should get off my
> arse and machine the case flat I guess) that centre brace is slightly
> warped, and some fluid can bleed off, mostly that from governer area,
> and it did improve the consistency and predictability of the shifts.
>
More importantly is this is also the forward clutch feed hole as well!
> About the only thing left, I've made a brace/strap that secures to one
> bolt from the front filter, and one that goes where the rear pickup
> remains, but is inoperative, i.e. for those with rear pumps (hillman
> hunter maybe?) which supports the main pipes into and out of the
> valvebody, and prevents them blowing out
>
All late Falcons from XD had these fitted.
>
>>
>> I hope you are using the HD rear bands out of the late BTR51. Black
>> Kevlar
>> ling and extra thick arround the strut mounts.
>
> I couldn't tell you a lot about them, save for the fact that afaik they
> aren't kevlar lined (I seem to recall green, but don't quote me, they
> aren't in front of me right now. When I got them (from a wholesaler in
> 'gale st brunswick - who are decent guys in my experience) they were the
> best quality/version they had available.
Mmmmmm.......... Yes they are Kevlar but are not new, they are relined.
Everyone uses them though ;-)
> I note your description around
> the strut mounts, that's precisely where they tend to let go 9 times out
> of 10. the other time I broke the pivot pin/surrounding alum cast body
> of the servo on the servo arm, and of course the previously mentioned
> cracking of the case braces . I also cracked an entire case once around
> the bolt holes that the bolts which secure the 1st gear sprag go
> through. the other thing I've done a couple of times is break the cages
> that locate the planetary gears, they broke horizontally, and moved up
> and ground into the sun gear(s) to the point they were all stuffed
> inside a week (I knew when it first happened, then they'd 'jamm' off the
> mark from a set of lights, even at light throttle, and then they let go
> altogether.)
You rally need to junk these things as soon as possible or fit an
accelerator stopper at about 3/4 throttle :-))
>
> I've got pictures of most of the carnage. You've probably see 1000 times
> as much over the years of course. If it's any interest, I'll upload them
> somewhere if it's of any trivial interest.
>
I know exactly what you are talking about ;-) I am usually looking at this
stuff while a kid is standing next to me saying "Hey mister, I juss went
'round a corner and it jus' went bang! All by itselve!!! Rooly and trooly I
not kiddin ya!" Yeah right pal! Why is there rubber sprayed all over the
rear guads and the back tyres are feathered then?
>>
>> > I've deep
>> > sixed the reverse detent thing that pushes the throttle valve a little
>> > and raises line pressure (since I'm always reversing out of the
>> > driveway, it's in reverse soon after starting) at idle whilst in rev,
>> > to
>> > soften the 'hit' and I've got the idle rpm as low as I can.
>>
>> These are referred to as "Band Breakers" ;-) I think you know why now.
>
> I have to ask WTF they were thinking when that was added in there. Who
> really needs higher line pressure, just to 'engage' reverse, surely if
> it was under any load, the kickdown cable would be actuating the
> throttle valve enough to increase the line pressure as needed. It seems
> to me to have nothing but the downside? Any insights?
Yep. The simple answer is Valiants made them do it! Because Chrysler was
the only Oz car maker that had an automatic choke fitted, when cold the
engine would rev at approx 1500rpm and not pull the KD cable and of course
everyone reverses out their driveway and if there was an incline it would
make the trans slip. Where as Ford, Toyota, Nissan etc still had manual
chokes that pulled the KD cable. Note: Ford XE on with the 2BBL Weber had
an automatic choke *but* it pulled the KD cable. Now when ford went EFI
they reintroduced these "Band Breakers" because the EFI system would raise
rpm when cold like an auto choke. Whew! Does that explain it clear enough?
>
> This might spin you out - there's a bloke on a mopar forum who is
> running a turbo 6 (and last I heard into the 12s) with a bw auto. He
> told me on the quiet (since he claims it's a bw, and he isn't lying)
> that it's actually a 51 internally, which his old man helped out with
> (seeing as he is a trans rebuilder) both with the general build, but
> also a full manual valve body. It was still running last I heard. I
> dunno how the heck he manages to keep it together! (I was told in
> confidence, but it's inconceivable that anyone else from the forum reads
> in aus.cars, and i've not mentioned enough details to identify him) but
> that's far beyond what I thought they might handle.
>
OK yes it can be done. The problem isn't so much going in a straight line
forward but reversing under power or selecting reverse under load. Roll
forwards (as opposed to roll backs) :-)) **IF** you always treated these
things in revers like trying not to pull the pin out of a grenade then you
would cut your rebuilds considerably.
>
>> Ahhhhh..... them were the days. People often say "they don't build 'em
>> like
>> they used to." Well there's a very good reason for that - most of it was
>> rubbish ;-)
>
> indeed. Though I do wonder whether or not having a 6 speed auto in a
> relatively high torque/flexible engine is of any real benefit over, say,
> a 4 sp auto, or at absolute tops, a 5 speed. I wonder if their
> complexity, and cost to overhaul won't sooner or later get them to a
> point that they just aren't worth rebuilding, and the car they were
> finds its way into a wrecker yard earlier than it otherwise should.
>
Mercedes has gone 7 speed and I believe Toyota is working on an 8 speed!
To answer the question - yes it is better. To start with we can have lower
1st gears to launch easier, there is less rpm drop between ratio changes so
less shock loading (which the customer likes) on internals, the motors can
be kept in their best power or economy rpm band.
Have a think on this. Your 3 speeds have about a 1st of 2.5:1 and a 2nd of
about 1.5:1 right. So at 5,000rpm in 1st to change to second gear the
second gear band must pull that engine down by 2,000 rpm! 4 speeds have
the same issue as 4th is OD so they have the same problems as a three speed.
It's not until you get to 5 and higher speeds where you start to split the
lower ratios.
I hope some of this helps ;-) I must admit you are making me scratch my
head just a little in trying to remember what all these Valiants had in them
when they were new :-( Also I grew up with all this stuff around as well as
worked on a lot of it when it was still brand new.
BTW before I forget use a late TF904 out of a 318ci as it has a double wrap
rear band and more clutches in the drums as well as the later larger fine
spline input shaft. If you are really lucky you'll get the 4 pinion steel
planetary gears as well.
Cheers TT
jonz
whats this dextron stuff??
jonz
thank you linesmen, thank you ballboys......game set and match to
TT.................................................................
>
> Cheers TT
>
>
TT
"jonz" <fj...@diesel.com> wrote in message news:489d...@dnews.tpgi.com.au...
>
>
>>>> I also note that you don't talk about the EA in any of this and them
>>>> having the Model 51 (or BTR 51) in them as well.
>>> That's because I wasn't the slightest bit interested in the EA.
>>
>> Yeah, who was/is :-)) Biggest dog Ford ever produced!
>
> thank you linesmen, thank you ballboys......game set and match to
> TT.................................................................
>
BTW the actual EA that takes the prize was the 30th anniversary edition.
Identifiable by the badge on both front guards just in front of the front
doors. *Every* 4 speed gearbox detonated and just about every motor had
head gasket, front and rear crank seal oil leaks. That was just for
starters! Viscous fan hubs, radiators and numerous electrical faults mainly
caused by bad earths and shit wiring. When anyone says "They don't make 'em
like they used to" just be very thankful :-))
Cheers TT
Cheers TT
jonz
terrific thread........thanks....
>
> Cheers TT
>
>
TT
I'm glad someone is getting something out of it ;-)
Cheers TT
John McKenzie
>
> This is gonna be a long post and I will snip as much as I can :-)
>
> "John McKenzie" <jmac_me...@bigpond.com> wrote in message
> news:489CCF...@bigpond.com...
> > TT wrote:
> >>
> >>
> > I've also had an adapter kit to mount a th700 to a hemi, but ended up
> > getting a decent offer for the adapter kit and the th700 I had (only
> > needed a convertor). I wasn't as crash hot about the adapter - as it
> > used a manual flywheel drilled to mount the convertor from teh th700 to
> > it. It would have worked, and the weight as such of the flywheel
> > wouldn't have mattered as much (since the convertor full of oil isn't
> > exactly light) but ultimately it was the machined down (to around half
> > factory thickness) flywheel that made me reluctant. the person I sold it
>
> No! No! No! Wrong way to make an adapter.
no kidding!
Any competent converter shop
> would have made a hybrid converter - back half Chrysler base to accept
> starter and original drive plate and front half all TH700 to go into the
> gearbox. We often have this done. Also you would have been better off
> using a late Holden VT 4L60E with detachable bell housing.]
Although in principle I'd not be against the idea of an E model, it's a
little more dough to get it to work (I think the guys that made
megasquirt budget efi also have a trans controller so it's nowhere near
as much as it used to be for a standalone), I scored (very affordably) a
freshly rebuilt and moderately upgraded th700. I got it because it was
built for a customer of a place I know who never showed up, let alone
paid for the work, so they were up for cutting their losses on it.
I have these
> boxes handling Supercharged GenIIIs with 525HP at the rear wheels. BTW in
> utes ;-) They wouldn't hang together if they ever got traction :-))
So I've heard. I believe the 4L80e is more like a true th400 with an
overdrive, and would be 'the go' if I ever looked for a 4speed.
>
> > to later reported that i would have had to cut n shut the chassis -
> > around where the front suspension torsion bars attach to the
> > body/chassis, just to clear the tail end. SO he ended up selling the
> > auto, and running a powerglide with the adapter of all things (and then
> > ended up buying a 3000rpm glide/trimatic convertor I had!) and is
> > actually happy with it.
>
> IMHO Silly! The TF904 or better still the TF727 that were fitted factory to
> CL Chryslers would have be better and cheaper to make hang together.
I agree. And in his case, with an NA 6, it's one of those scenarios
where an extra ratio (or a 4sp auto) over the glide is really warranted,
at least imo. But he had the adapter (and I didn't blow sunshine up his
arse, he knew it wasn't the best thing since sliced bread. He then came
across a glide, and went with it. He could have also tried a th350 or
400 - since the adapter/sandwich plate would suit all.
The
> 904 is a brilliant mid horsepower box and there is nothing better than a 727
> for high HP vs. $$$$$
I have to be honest - I'm more of a fan of the glide in a really big
output engine. My reasoning is simple enough. With a slightly looser
convertor (than vs the same engine in front of a 3 speed) you'd have so
much torque at the rears (via the lower geared 1st gear ratio) that it'd
never be able to hook it up off the line or in the first 60 feet. A more
predictable and consistent launch with the glide (vs having to feather
the throttle far more typically) ends up being no disadvantage.
>
> >
> > In any case, I have the 904 ready to go, and since I plan to go turbo
> > (vs an NA higher rpm setup with the 4 speed auto, and lower diff gears)
> > with the new hemi, I don't have much trouble with high diff gears, and
> > one less ratio, and a tighter convertor, I'll have all the torque I'll
> > need, just off idle, to take care of that.
>
> What we used to do was raise diff ratio to 2.92:1 and then use the gear sets
> out of a Scorpion 904 as they had a lower 1st gear ratio. The car would
> launch just as hard but still had some sort of reasonable top end.
I'll be going for a 2.77 ratio, mostly since I've got a couple of 2.77
lsd carriers. With the right amt of boost and so forth, it's not going
to be short of torque, and will still pull very well off the mark. You
bring up something that does my head in. They used the baby 904 (if
that's a reasonable enough approximation) on the friggin 4 cylinder
mitsus (or at least some of them) but a bloody bw35 behind the 6s!
> > If so, if I (hypothetically, since
> > this should be the last go around with a bw at all) got an auto from an
> > ea, and changed the output shaft and extension housing to suit, would it
> > otherwise fit a hemi convertor and bellhousing from an earlier bw35? I
> > can't imagine ever going there, but it would be good to know.
> >
>
> Yes, you can bolt any BW35 bell housing onto the front of any of these boxes
> from any other box. What changed in the olden days was input shaft size and
> oil pump length. **ALL** late 26 spline converters and bell housings fit.
> Valiant VF actually had a BW35 fitted that had a slant bell housing, TF904
> converter and a oil pump to take the converter.
One of the things done to the 904 I have, is the front pump is
machined/realigned (apparently they can be up to 3-5thou off centre,
which ain't great), but it and the convertor now utilise a much thicker
snout to drive the oil pump. Afaik, this is somewhat based on the vf
setup you mentioned, or at least a prior valiant hybrid (I'll upload a
pic if it's any help)
> > About the only thing left, I've made a brace/strap that secures to one
> > bolt from the front filter, and one that goes where the rear pickup
> > remains, but is inoperative, i.e. for those with rear pumps (hillman
> > hunter maybe?) which supports the main pipes into and out of the
> > valvebody, and prevents them blowing out
> >
> All late Falcons from XD had these fitted.
and here I am thinking it's an aftermarket/reco trick!
>
> > I note your description around
> > the strut mounts, that's precisely where they tend to let go 9 times out
> > of 10. the other time I broke the pivot pin/surrounding alum cast body
> > of the servo on the servo arm, and of course the previously mentioned
> > cracking of the case braces . I also cracked an entire case once around
> > the bolt holes that the bolts which secure the 1st gear sprag go
> > through. the other thing I've done a couple of times is break the cages
> > that locate the planetary gears, they broke horizontally, and moved up
> > and ground into the sun gear(s) to the point they were all stuffed
> > inside a week (I knew when it first happened, then they'd 'jamm' off the
> > mark from a set of lights, even at light throttle, and then they let go
> > altogether.)
>
> You rally need to junk these things as soon as possible or fit an
> accelerator stopper at about 3/4 throttle :-))
You know I actually also met a bloke who used to race a hillman hunter
with a ~300bhp hemi and a bw35 of his own making. full manual, 4000
stall (somewhere between 3 and 4 anyway) and regular low 12s. He also
put nitrous through it on occasion to make a certain bracket cut off
(pardon my murder of the andra terminology). He even did a few burnout
comps in it, all on the same trans. He did go through some unknown
number of them to get it 'right' (even using mates cars as lab rats)
> >
> >> Ahhhhh..... them were the days. People often say "they don't build 'em
> >> like
> >> they used to." Well there's a very good reason for that - most of it was
> >> rubbish ;-)
> >
> > indeed. Though I do wonder whether or not having a 6 speed auto in a
> > relatively high torque/flexible engine is of any real benefit over, say,
> > a 4 sp auto, or at absolute tops, a 5 speed. I wonder if their
> > complexity, and cost to overhaul won't sooner or later get them to a
> > point that they just aren't worth rebuilding, and the car they were
> > finds its way into a wrecker yard earlier than it otherwise should.
> >
> Mercedes has gone 7 speed and I believe Toyota is working on an 8 speed!
>
> To answer the question - yes it is better. To start with we can have lower
> 1st gears to launch easier, there is less rpm drop between ratio changes so
> less shock loading (which the customer likes) on internals, the motors can
> be kept in their best power or economy rpm band.
Truly, I get that, but surely 8 is getting ridiculous. If we had
somewhere where we needed flexibility from 0-200km/h, I'd maybe see the
merit in 4 or 5. I can't imagine any modern engine lacking in
flexibility to really make a difference when comparing 4 and 6 speed
autos. Heck even motorbikes don't need that many, and they tend to have
peakier engines that have to be kept busy. I do recall that somewhere
around the time I was born, or just prior, grand prix 2 stroke
motorbikes had very narrow powerbands and actually ran >10 (possibly
more than 14) gears to keep them in the sweet spot.
> Have a think on this. Your 3 speeds have about a 1st of 2.5:1 and a 2nd of
> about 1.5:1 right. So at 5,000rpm in 1st to change to second gear the
> second gear band must pull that engine down by 2,000 rpm!
Which is well within the scope of a powerband of any engine I can think
of, esp factory production jobbies.
4 speeds have
> the same issue as 4th is OD so they have the same problems as a three speed.
> It's not until you get to 5 and higher speeds where you start to split the
> lower ratios.
I get that, but I still think it's overkill. And whlst it might (let's
say hypothetically) save $500 in fuel costs (probably an exaggeration,
and unfortunately, it's difficult to get any apples to apples, because
new autos rarely are debuted behind an otherwise identical car/engine)
per year - it still doesn't necesarily cover the difference in price in
reco-ing the auto itself. Which is what I'm getting at. Sure they might
last a couple of hundred thousand kms, but when they let go, its almost
to the point of the car being of questionable resale, or merit in
rebuilding.
>
> BTW before I forget use a late TF904 out of a 318ci as it has a double wrap
> rear band and more clutches in the drums as well as the later larger fine
> spline input shaft.
That's the one I have - identifiable by the input shaft as you indicate
(I did early source a 904, but it had the smaller course splined input.
I then managed to get a 318 version in suitable condition to reco.
If you are really lucky you'll get the 4 pinion steel
> planetary gears as well.
To the best of my knowledge that is the case. I didn't build it myself.
At the time I didn't have access to a lathe or mill, and am not as
familiar with the 904 as I am with a bw35. The convertor is modded
(previously mentioned snout) but also strengthened/furnace
brazed/upgraded) internally, to keep the stall down around 2000rpm, and
to help it cope with the low rpm torque the new motor will have.
TT
> TT wrote:
> Any competent converter shop
>> would have made a hybrid converter - back half Chrysler base to accept
>> starter and original drive plate and front half all TH700 to go into the
>> gearbox. We often have this done. Also you would have been better off
>> using a late Holden VT 4L60E with detachable bell housing.]
>
> Although in principle I'd not be against the idea of an E model, it's a
> little more dough to get it to work
There are full manual valvebodies available. No need for electronics (in a
race application).
(I think the guys that made
> megasquirt budget efi also have a trans controller so it's nowhere near
> as much as it used to be for a standalone), I scored (very affordably) a
> freshly rebuilt and moderately upgraded th700. I got it because it was
> built for a customer of a place I know who never showed up, let alone
> paid for the work, so they were up for cutting their losses on it.
>
The valving in TH700R4 (4L60) is what lets them down. A 4L60E is far more
refined and can be made to hang together a lot easier.
> I have these
>> boxes handling Supercharged GenIIIs with 525HP at the rear wheels. BTW
>> in
>> utes ;-) They wouldn't hang together if they ever got traction :-))
>
> So I've heard. I believe the 4L80e is more like a true th400 with an
> overdrive, and would be 'the go' if I ever looked for a 4speed.
>
Correct. Expense and size will be the killer.
>>
>> > to later reported that i would have had to cut n shut the chassis -
>> > around where the front suspension torsion bars attach to the
>> > body/chassis, just to clear the tail end. SO he ended up selling the
>> > auto, and running a powerglide with the adapter of all things (and then
>> > ended up buying a 3000rpm glide/trimatic convertor I had!) and is
>> > actually happy with it.
>>
Yes PGs are quite good for light vehicles around 1,000kg. Heavier cars tend
go better with a 3/4 speed.
>> IMHO Silly! The TF904 or better still the TF727 that were fitted factory
>> to
>> CL Chryslers would have be better and cheaper to make hang together.
>
> I agree. And in his case, with an NA 6, it's one of those scenarios
> where an extra ratio (or a 4sp auto) over the glide is really warranted,
> at least imo. But he had the adapter (and I didn't blow sunshine up his
> arse, he knew it wasn't the best thing since sliced bread. He then came
> across a glide, and went with it. He could have also tried a th350 or
> 400 - since the adapter/sandwich plate would suit all.
>
TH350 are POS!
> The
>> 904 is a brilliant mid horsepower box and there is nothing better than a
>> 727
>> for high HP vs. $$$$$
>
> I have to be honest - I'm more of a fan of the glide in a really big
> output engine. My reasoning is simple enough. With a slightly looser
> convertor (than vs the same engine in front of a 3 speed) you'd have so
> much torque at the rears (via the lower geared 1st gear ratio) that it'd
> never be able to hook it up off the line or in the first 60 feet. A more
> predictable and consistent launch with the glide (vs having to feather
> the throttle far more typically) ends up being no disadvantage.
>
I look after some very serious drag cars. A couple of Holden VL turbos (2
have now gone PG) and the others doing low 9s with the Jatco 4N71B. The
trick is to use a Transbrake and then to launch just off boost so wheel spin
is mimimal. As it is launching it is building boost and making HP.
>
>>
>> >
>> > In any case, I have the 904 ready to go, and since I plan to go turbo
>> > (vs an NA higher rpm setup with the 4 speed auto, and lower diff gears)
>> > with the new hemi, I don't have much trouble with high diff gears, and
>> > one less ratio, and a tighter convertor, I'll have all the torque I'll
>> > need, just off idle, to take care of that.
>>
Sounds OK.
>> What we used to do was raise diff ratio to 2.92:1 and then use the gear
>> sets
>> out of a Scorpion 904 as they had a lower 1st gear ratio. The car would
>> launch just as hard but still had some sort of reasonable top end.
>
> I'll be going for a 2.77 ratio, mostly since I've got a couple of 2.77
> lsd carriers. With the right amt of boost and so forth, it's not going
> to be short of torque, and will still pull very well off the mark.
Where I am from unless you are running 13" wheels this is an unheard of
ratio at the strip. Would be fine for the street with reasonable economy at
cruise. Down side is at 60kph the comverter will be generating a lot of
heat so keep big coolers up to it. Also make sure the TF is modded to give
cooler flow in Park.
> You
> bring up something that does my head in. They used the baby 904 (if
> that's a reasonable enough approximation) on the friggin 4 cylinder
> mitsus (or at least some of them) but a bloody bw35 behind the 6s!
>
The Jap imports had the TF904 and the 4 cyl Centura! All Locally built
units had the BW35 and then later the BW40
I would imagin Assin Warner had the tie up with Borg Warner at the time and
were making stuff for Toyota mainly so Mitsubishi and their tie up with
Chrysler obviously madethe TF904 under license.
>> > If so, if I (hypothetically, since
>> > this should be the last go around with a bw at all) got an auto from an
>> > ea, and changed the output shaft and extension housing to suit, would
>> > it
>> > otherwise fit a hemi convertor and bellhousing from an earlier bw35? I
>> > can't imagine ever going there, but it would be good to know.
>> >
Insert broad Scottish accent here from "Scotty" chief engineer Starship
Enterprise "Captain you just canna change the laws of physics!" And he is
dead right :-) BW 35 shafts are *too* weak and snap like cheese sticks.
Overcome the shafts with 40/51 and the cases will twist in half, rear bands
break, sprags flip over, input shafts snap, front clutch hubs break...etc,
etc......... Sigh......
http://www.elsberg-tuning.dk/1968.html have a look here 14 gears, 200kph,
500rpm power band and 50cc. I believe the engine still holds the record for
the highest power output per litre for any NA internal combustion engine at
395bhp/l. Well according to the book I have Team Suzuki by Ray Bttersby.
>
>> Have a think on this. Your 3 speeds have about a 1st of 2.5:1 and a 2nd
>> of
>> about 1.5:1 right. So at 5,000rpm in 1st to change to second gear the
>> second gear band must pull that engine down by 2,000 rpm!
>
> Which is well within the scope of a powerband of any engine I can think
> of, esp factory production jobbies.
>
That's not the issue here. It's constructing a box that will hang together
doing it! More speeds, less jumps, smaller clutches and bands, less weight,
less drag more efficient less emissions and better fuel economy.
>
>
> 4 speeds have
>> the same issue as 4th is OD so they have the same problems as a three
>> speed.
>> It's not until you get to 5 and higher speeds where you start to split
>> the
>> lower ratios.
>
> I get that, but I still think it's overkill. And whlst it might (let's
> say hypothetically) save $500 in fuel costs (probably an exaggeration,
> and unfortunately, it's difficult to get any apples to apples, because
> new autos rarely are debuted behind an otherwise identical car/engine)
The current falcon has an option of the std 4 speed or 6 speed. Perhaps
have a check on the specs?
> per year - it still doesn't necesarily cover the difference in price in
> reco-ing the auto itself. Which is what I'm getting at. Sure they might
> last a couple of hundred thousand kms, but when they let go, its almost
> to the point of the car being of questionable resale, or merit in
> rebuilding.
>
Correct. But as I said higher up it is all about emissions and govt.
regulations.
>>
>> BTW before I forget use a late TF904 out of a 318ci as it has a double
>> wrap
>> rear band and more clutches in the drums as well as the later larger fine
>> spline input shaft.
>
> That's the one I have - identifiable by the input shaft as you indicate
> (I did early source a 904, but it had the smaller course splined input.
> I then managed to get a 318 version in suitable condition to reco.
>
You want regret it :-)
> If you are really lucky you'll get the 4 pinion steel
>> planetary gears as well.
>
> To the best of my knowledge that is the case. I didn't build it myself.
> At the time I didn't have access to a lathe or mill, and am not as
> familiar with the 904 as I am with a bw35. The convertor is modded
> (previously mentioned snout) but also strengthened/furnace
> brazed/upgraded)
Common myth! ALL TF converters were furnace brazed from the factory and
this is one of the reasons why they are so good. The BW35 (that weren't)
were always letting vanes fall out and lunching the entire box.
> internally, to keep the stall down around 2000rpm, and
> to help it cope with the low rpm torque the new motor will have.
>
Stall speed and turbos - what a great past time? >:-( Use a low stall
converter , as you suggested above and it will be a dog off boost. Use a
too high a stall and will be fine off boost bust add some boost an it will
just be a big soggy sponge. There is an art to making a good turbo
converter and don't claim to know how either :-) But the standard TF904
converter for a 318 will be fine straight off the shelf. Do yourself a
favour and don't mess with it until you have tried it.
>
>
>Cheers TT
John McKenzie
I'll take one over a trimatic any day though :)
> >> What we used to do was raise diff ratio to 2.92:1 and then use the gear
> >> sets
> >> out of a Scorpion 904 as they had a lower 1st gear ratio. The car would
> >> launch just as hard but still had some sort of reasonable top end.
> >
> > I'll be going for a 2.77 ratio, mostly since I've got a couple of 2.77
> > lsd carriers. With the right amt of boost and so forth, it's not going
> > to be short of torque, and will still pull very well off the mark.
>
> Where I am from unless you are running 13" wheels this is an unheard of
> ratio at the strip. Would be fine for the street with reasonable economy at
> cruise. Down side is at 60kph the comverter will be generating a lot of
> heat so keep big coolers up to it. Also make sure the TF is modded to give
> cooler flow in Park.
This isn't a purpose built drag car, it's a tow car that I (eventually)
want to have more fun in. It'll have a very tight convertor, which
should help the heat issue, but where it differs from practically all
other turbo stuff *(well 6cyl stuff at least) is that it's not short on
cubes, so it doesn't need to pull big revs and big boost to get some
decent hp. I'm not telling you anything new that for NA cars, you need
to make the 'same' torque at higher and higher rpm to make more power
(once you've maxed out VE for all practical purposes) and then get the
acceleration back via gearing. On a turbo engine you double (for
example) the torque at the same rpm, for the same effect without gearing
changes. On some of the vls and supras, since they can support it ok,
and since they are going for broke, they go both ways, massive torque
and higher rpm.
I'm not into the loose convertor, slow spool stuff, it's good for a
decent timeslip, but it's considerably less so for actual head to head
(not that I do much of that) where you don't have time to spool it at
your leisure, or for instant overtaking power.
In a nutshell, I'll have a power curve that looks like a torquey
moderately low revving big block, out of a hemi 6. The last time I
played with a turbo hemi 6, we actually got it to have decent boost by
2000 and pull to 6000 cleanly, I'm not even looking for that much of a
wide powerband, though I will be using a similar sized turbo (a little
better matched to be honest)
>
> > You
> > bring up something that does my head in. They used the baby 904 (if
> > that's a reasonable enough approximation) on the friggin 4 cylinder
> > mitsus (or at least some of them) but a bloody bw35 behind the 6s!
> >
> The Jap imports had the TF904 and the 4 cyl Centura! All Locally built
> units had the BW35 and then later the BW40
>
> I would imagin Assin Warner had the tie up with Borg Warner at the time and
> were making stuff for Toyota mainly so Mitsubishi and their tie up with
> Chrysler obviously madethe TF904 under license.
it's odd, I'll tell you that much :)
fair enough. I'm only looking at 'my' side of it, not the govco machine!
> >>
> >> BTW before I forget use a late TF904 out of a 318ci as it has a double
> >> wrap
> >> rear band and more clutches in the drums as well as the later larger fine
> >> spline input shaft.
> >
> > That's the one I have - identifiable by the input shaft as you indicate
> > (I did early source a 904, but it had the smaller course splined input.
> > I then managed to get a 318 version in suitable condition to reco.
> >
> You want regret it :-)
>
> > If you are really lucky you'll get the 4 pinion steel
> >> planetary gears as well.
> >
> > To the best of my knowledge that is the case. I didn't build it myself.
> > At the time I didn't have access to a lathe or mill, and am not as
> > familiar with the 904 as I am with a bw35. The convertor is modded
> > (previously mentioned snout) but also strengthened/furnace
> > brazed/upgraded)
>
> Common myth! ALL TF converters were furnace brazed from the factory and
> this is one of the reasons why they are so good. The BW35 (that weren't)
> were always letting vanes fall out and lunching the entire box.
Yeah, but this is a one off. I've had it sitting here for a couple of
years now, but if I recall it also has a torrington bearing instead of a
thrust/bush/washer (if that makes sense) and the sprag itself is not
what they normally put in there. Last of all the stator is possibly
different, and the clearances tight as practical all to minimise
slippage and keep the stall as low as is practical.
>
> > internally, to keep the stall down around 2000rpm, and
> > to help it cope with the low rpm torque the new motor will have.
> >
> Stall speed and turbos - what a great past time? >:-( Use a low stall
> converter , as you suggested above and it will be a dog off boost.
not really - the whole motor will be made to operate efficiently just
off idle. and there's no reason it has to 'stay' off boost. It'll get
boost by the stall rpm, more than enough to keep it spritely.
Paradoxically the 2.77 diff will work to advantage here. Turbos take
some definitive amt of time (not just rpm) to spool up. With 3.7 gears
(for arguments sake) the motor will end up blipping to redline before
it's gotten maximum boost (unless the boost was fairly low at max
anyway, and the exhaust spec quite tight. With 2.77s it holds first a
lot longer, gets boost and can actually do something with that first
gear. I found this out a long time ago when I was playing with holden
6s, they actually went quicker overall (though I'd put in the additional
spanner in the works that I was mostly playing with manuals then) in
terms of 1/4 mile performance with what would otherwise be considered
'too high' gearing.
It's partly that, and it's also a little bit of a case of the overall
first gear ratio with 2.77 gears isn't all that far removed from that of
a glide in 1st with 3.7-3.9 gears (which probably would work out to a
good overall diff gearing on paper).
I'm well aware that the 'ideal' diff ratio is one that puts you at 5%
over peak hp rpms through the traps, but that theoretical optimum also
involves having some say over the individual gear ratios. Since I don't
(to any practical extent) and it will still go 'well' with 2.77s , off
idle boost, and a tight convertor, it's where I'm at. I'm not up for
running massively expensive rear tyres, and I'm no longer at an age
where I feel much of a need to do burnouts, something quick but
inconspicuous and quiet off the line will do me just fine :)
Use a
> too high a stall and will be fine off boost bust add some boost an it will
> just be a big soggy sponge. There is an art to making a good turbo
> converter and don't claim to know how either :-) But the standard TF904
> converter for a 318 will be fine straight off the shelf. Do yourself a
> favour and don't mess with it until you have tried it.
bit late for that - it's already built!
Noddy
> Yes PGs are quite good for light vehicles around 1,000kg. Heavier cars
> tend go better with a 3/4 speed.
It depends entirely on the output of the engine. If you're making shitloads
of power then 2 speeds are plenty.
>> The
>>> 904 is a brilliant mid horsepower box and there is nothing better than a
>>> 727
>>> for high HP vs. $$$$$
*Except* a powerglide of course. It's no surprise that it's the number one
drag racing trans in the world, and has been for decades.
--
Regards,
Noddy.
TT
>> TH350 are POS!
>
> I'll take one over a trimatic any day though :)
>
I wouldn't. A trimatic is 1/3 the cost to build and even though they can be
a little "bio-degradable" the bits are easy to come by. TH350s are just
plain cheap junk that have more in comon with hand grenades ;-) Low HP 5.0
V8 and smaller stick with Trimatics. Anything you want to last and put HP
into use a TH400. BTW TH400 is the second best box ever made. TF727 is
still #1 ;-)
>
> This isn't a purpose built drag car, it's a tow car that I (eventually)
> want to have more fun in.
Ahhh............. your choices make a lot more sense now. Sorry I was under
the impression it was a street/strip thing you were making. Nust have been
all the talk about PGs and 1/4 mile stuff.
>It'll have a very tight convertor, which
> should help the heat issue, but where it differs from practically all
> other turbo stuff *(well 6cyl stuff at least) is that it's not short on
> cubes, so it doesn't need to pull big revs and big boost to get some
> decent hp
And turbo lag will be reduced considerably :-) I look after a VL that has a
huge Garrett turbo fitted and it is a dog to drive on the road. Over two
seconds lag and then the power hits like a light switch! It is only the
second car to ever have scared me driving it. Trying a 50kmh 3rd gear
(manual VB) with 3.91 diff gears roll on it turned the car arround on my on
the street. Whats worse is when you get off the throttle it doesn't shut
down very quick either :-( Driving this car it feels like there is a hinge
in the middle of it. BTW with slicks I believe it did a 9.2s at the drags.
The only other car was the GenIII ute I mentioned with the supercharger
running stock 3.08 diff. 100kph on a straight, dual lane country road and
when it kicked back to second gear fom 4th it it lit up the back tyres and
went sideways!!!!! I am over this sort of stuff!!! I have no idea how these
guys expect to drive this stuff on the road?! I'm talking about dry roads,
no traffic and a competetant driver. What happens in the rain, traffic and
non-ideal drivers???? Oh and should nebtion to, both cars had standard
Holden brakes so three runs and no brakes left!
>
> I'm not into the loose convertor, slow spool stuff, it's good for a
> decent timeslip, but it's considerably less so for actual head to head
> (not that I do much of that) where you don't have time to spool it at
> your leisure, or for instant overtaking power.
>
Excellent :-)
> In a nutshell, I'll have a power curve that looks like a torquey
> moderately low revving big block, out of a hemi 6. The last time I
> played with a turbo hemi 6, we actually got it to have decent boost by
> 2000 and pull to 6000 cleanly, I'm not even looking for that much of a
> wide powerband, though I will be using a similar sized turbo (a little
> better matched to be honest)
>
A man after my own heart ;-)
>
>> Correct. But as I said higher up it is all about emissions and govt.
>> regulations.
>
> fair enough. I'm only looking at 'my' side of it, not the govco machine!
>
Of course but current cars and trends are dictated to!
>
Then that is the perfect converter to put in ;-)
>
John you are definitely on the right track and I wish you all the best with
your project.
Cheers TT
TT
>
> "TT" <TTence...@westnet.com.au> wrote in message
> news:foidnTNkBoqcDzzV...@westnet.com.au...
>
>> Yes PGs are quite good for light vehicles around 1,000kg. Heavier cars
>> tend go better with a 3/4 speed.
>
> It depends entirely on the output of the engine.
To be entirely correct it comes down to power to weight ratio.
> If you're making shitloads of power then 2 speeds are plenty.
And the world record holders use direct drive so your point is?????
>>> The
>>>> 904 is a brilliant mid horsepower box and there is nothing better than
>>>> a 727
>>>> for high HP vs. $$$$$
>
> *Except* a powerglide of course. It's no surprise that it's the number one
> drag racing trans in the world, and has been for decades.
>
Please reread what I wrote. You have to spend a huge amount of money on a
PG to get it take the HP. The TF727 is cheaper to build for the same HP and
genenerally less fragile.
> --
> Regards,
> Noddy.
Cheers TT
Noddy
> I wouldn't. A trimatic is 1/3 the cost to build and even though they can
> be a little "bio-degradable" the bits are easy to come by. TH350s are
> just plain cheap junk that have more in comon with hand grenades ;-) Low
> HP 5.0 V8 and smaller stick with Trimatics. Anything you want to last and
> put HP into use a TH400. BTW TH400 is the second best box ever made.
> TF727 is still #1 ;-)
Jeez, you're on your Pat Malone there buddy :)
I've known a few blokes who root around with Traumatics, and they've
persisted with them purely in the interests of "making them work". without
exception they are the most troublesome auto behind *any* reasonable
horsepower application, and for the life of me I can't imagine why *anyone*
would want to use one other than to be different.
The 350 might not be the ducks guts either, but it shits on a "Trauma" from
about 38 stories high :)
--
Regards,
Noddy.
Noddy
> To be entirely correct it comes down to power to weight ratio.
If you wish to get technical.
> And the world record holders use direct drive so your point is?????
My point is that three or more speeds aren't necessary if you're making
plenty of mumbo, and for the most part more than 4 aren't necessary for your
average "stock" street car unless it weighs 3 tonnes and has an engine that
makes as much torque as a blender.
6, 7 and 8 speed autos are these days more about marketing wankery than they
are anything else.
> Please reread what I wrote. You have to spend a huge amount of money on a
> PG to get it take the HP.
We're talking about a GM *Powerglide* here, right? I don't know about your
experience with them but most people generally regard them as one of the
toughest transmissions you can get out of the box, and there's absolutely
nothing fragile about them at all.
> The TF727 is cheaper to build for the same HP and genenerally less
> fragile.
If that really was the case I would have expected the drag racing community
to have embraced the Torqueflite years ago, but that's not the case. You'll
find 100 'glides in just about anything you'd care to mentiuon compared to
every 727 that hits the track and the majority of them with be in Chrysler
powered cars. Shit, even th400's will outnumber 727's 100 to 1, and they're
not a patch on a glide for severe duty applications.
The torqueflite is a fine auto, but to suggest it's tougher than a glide is
just plain ridiculous.
--
Regards,
Noddy.
Noddy
"Athol" <athol_S...@idl.net.au> wrote in message
news:g7ts56$g92$1...@aioe.org...
> IIRC, the 4L80E could theoretically be converted to a 6-speed by
> software...
> It's a turbo 400 with an overdrive tacked on the back. The main planeary
> set
> retains the original ratios. By engaging the overdrive in all 3 planetary
> ratios instead of only 1:1, you'd get a total of 6. :-)
Nice :)
> I believe that this is essentially how at least one european 7-speed
> became
> an 8-speed... Use an extra ratio combination that is not really worth the
> effort but allows you to claim an extra ratio...
Brand wankery at it's finest.
> I must admit that I do like the specs of the new 6L90E. It's the box in
> the new "fullsize" GMC/Chev trucks. The middle 4 gears are about the same
> as a 4L80E but it's got an extra low 1st gear and a 2nd extra-tall
> overdrive
> at the top. When the extra gears are about providing extra ratio spread
> like that, I can agree with more gears - it's equivalent to having a low
> diff ratio for low-speed torque plus a tall ratio for highway economy.
>
> A gearbox with 6+ gears without a wide ratio spread is a wank. No
> question.
Yep.
The six speeder in the Territory is kinda like that in that first gear is
super low, 2nd is a step between it and what first would be on the 4 speed,
and top is a poofteenth shorter than on the 4 speed. On paper at least it
should make a significant difference to the vehicle's performance but in
practice is does fuck nothing other than see the six speeder change three
gears before you've crossed the average intersection.
> You mean like the cast iron top gear clutch hub, which needs to be
> replaced
> with a billet one? The clutch packs that need to be machined to get extra
> clutches in? Changing to a kevlar band? Converting to a turbo hydro size
> input shaft and torque convertor?
That may be so, but the fact remains that the glide is a hell of a tough
trans. You can break one, sure. You can break *anything* if you want to, but
they'll take more abuse than most.
> I repeatedly broke a 'glide behind a mild 350. I do believe, however,
> that
> the guy I used to work for had no idea and convinced me that a 2200RPM
> stall
> convertor was going to be fine with a 2.47 diff ratio. Even though I ran
> the largest model of Derale cooler available, I'm pretty sure that the
> failures could all be ultimately traced back to overheating, even if they
> were things like dropping teeth off the planetary gears and embedding them
> into the annulus...
Nasty.
> In all cases, there are a few mandatory mods for serious use. I think
> that
> the reality is that the 'glide needs fewer and cheaper mods to do the job.
Generally. Combined with the fact it's popularity makes it very well
supported in the after-market industry.
> The 'glide also has a weight advantage, both in overall mass and in
> rotational inertia.
It does indeed.
--
Regards,
Noddy.
Daryl Walford
> Noddy <m...@home.com> wrote:
>
>> The six speeder in the Territory is kinda like that in that first gear is
>> super low, 2nd is a step between it and what first would be on the 4 speed,
>> and top is a poofteenth shorter than on the 4 speed. On paper at least it
>> should make a significant difference to the vehicle's performance but in
>> practice is does fuck nothing other than see the six speeder change three
>> gears before you've crossed the average intersection.
>
> diff ratio and get an extra tall top ratio if I wasn't planning on using
> it to tow heavy stuff. Then again, I don't live in VIC, so a lot of my
> country highway travel is a tad over 110km/h. :-)
>
Why so slow, I've been averaging 125+ (110 zone) on the Western Hwy for
decades (as do lots of others) and have never been booked:-)
Daryl
TT
>
> "TT" <TTence...@westnet.com.au> wrote in message
> news:hq2dnVSJEPR...@westnet.com.au...
>
>> To be entirely correct it comes down to power to weight ratio.
>
> If you wish to get technical.
>
>> And the world record holders use direct drive so your point is?????
>
> My point is that three or more speeds aren't necessary if you're making
> plenty of mumbo,
See my comment about direct drive rails!
> and for the most part more than 4 aren't necessary for your average
> "stock" street car unless it weighs 3 tonnes and has an engine that makes
> as much torque as a blender.
>
Apparently manufactures disagree with you.
> 6, 7 and 8 speed autos are these days more about marketing wankery than
> they are anything else.
>
As I already stated the fact is to get emissions down and economy up.
>> Please reread what I wrote. You have to spend a huge amount of money on
>> a PG to get it take the HP.
>
> We're talking about a GM *Powerglide* here, right?
Correct.
> I don't know about your experience with them
Correct again. But suffice to say I have intermit knowledge with them over
30 years.
> but most people generally regard them
Most people regard smoking is not healthy, it's OK to drink and drive and
saying 3 Hail Mary's will not let you get pregnant either? :-))
> as one of the toughest transmissions you can get out of the box,
This is blatantly incorrect and demonstrates your lack of knowledge about
them.
> and there's absolutely nothing fragile about them at all.
>
See above comment.
>> The TF727 is cheaper to build for the same HP and genenerally less
>> fragile.
>
> If that really was the case I would have expected the drag racing
> community to have embraced the Torqueflite years ago,
A lot did.
> but that's not the case. You'll find 100 'glides in just about anything
> you'd care to mentiuon
Correct. And now there is a huge after market parts industry based on this
transmission. It is no a "no brainer" to get these things to handle HP.
State how much HP and then buy the parts to suit. Right up to and including
a Dedenbear gearbox case!
http://www.dedenbear.com/tranny_cat.htm Now ask yourself *why* these are
being made. I'll give you a hint - the standard ones break.
> compared to every 727 that hits the track and the majority of them with be
> in Chrysler powered cars.
Currently yes.
> Shit, even th400's will outnumber 727's
Currently yes.
100 to 1, and they're
> not a patch on a glide for severe duty applications.
Incorrect again.
> The torqueflite is a fine auto, but to suggest it's tougher than a glide
> is just plain ridiculous.
>
The TF727 stock geartrain will take nearly double the HP that a stock PG
gear train will. Read my comment again regarding the 727 is the best hp/$$
transmission.
Finally a PG which was struggling behind an old 350Chev at 300 HP would
break with monotonous regularity. Where as TF727s easily handled Hemi 454
triple carb engines at 600HP and were standard in 4x4s. The PG never came
out in a 4x4.
Please do your research a little better and then get back to me and we will
talk some more.
Regards TT
TT
>> "TT" <TTence...@westnet.com.au> wrote:
>
>> 6, 7 and 8 speed autos are these days more about marketing wankery than
>> they
>> are anything else.
>
> software...
I believe so.
> It's a turbo 400 with an overdrive tacked on the back.
Front actually ;-)
> The main planeary set
> retains the original ratios. By engaging the overdrive in all 3 planetary
> ratios instead of only 1:1, you'd get a total of 6. :-)
>
> I believe that this is essentially how at least one european 7-speed
> became
> an 8-speed... Use an extra ratio combination that is not really worth the
> effort but allows you to claim an extra ratio...
>
The best example in Oz is the Ford Exploder with it's 5R55E tranmission. It
is a conventiol 3 speed (based on a Ford C3) with and OD at the front. To
get from 4-5 gears they bring the OD on in 1st gear to split the ratio
between 1st and the original 2nd. So the shift is:
1st > 2nd 1stOD on > 3rd ODoff (old 2nd on) > 4th (direct 1:1 old 3rd) >
5th OD on in 4th (old 3rd)
> I must admit that I do like the specs of the new 6L90E. It's the box in
> the new "fullsize" GMC/Chev trucks. The middle 4 gears are about the same
> as a 4L80E but it's got an extra low 1st gear and a 2nd extra-tall
> overdrive
> at the top. When the extra gears are about providing extra ratio spread
> like that, I can agree with more gears - it's equivalent to having a low
> diff ratio for low-speed torque plus a tall ratio for highway economy.
>
These new boxes are replacing all RWD GM autos and will be made in 3
different sizes (small, medium and large). The medium is in the V8
Commodore now. It is based on the ZF 6HP26 that is in the Falcon now.
> A gearbox with 6+ gears without a wide ratio spread is a wank. No
> question.
>
>>> Please reread what I wrote. You have to spend a huge amount of money on
>>> a
>>> PG to get it take the HP.
>
>> We're talking about a GM *Powerglide* here, right? I don't know about
>> your
>> experience with them but most people generally regard them as one of the
>> toughest transmissions you can get out of the box, and there's absolutely
>> nothing fragile about them at all.
>
> You mean like the cast iron top gear clutch hub, which needs to be
> replaced
> with a billet one? The clutch packs that need to be machined to get extra
> clutches in? Changing to a kevlar band? Converting to a turbo hydro size
> input shaft and torque convertor?
>
You tell him :-)
> I repeatedly broke a 'glide behind a mild 350.
Funny I just told him that in my reply to him ;-)
> I do believe, however, that
> the guy I used to work for had no idea
There is a lot of that going around ;-)
> and convinced me that a 2200RPM stall
> convertor was going to be fine with a 2.47 diff ratio. Even though I ran
> the largest model of Derale cooler available, I'm pretty sure that the
> failures could all be ultimately traced back to overheating, even if they
> were things like dropping teeth off the planetary gears and embedding them
> into the annulus...
>
If it was heat related there would be "bluing" of the metal parts. Shiny
and still gleaming silver then it is mechanical failure.
>
> In all cases, there are a few mandatory mods for serious use. I think
> that
> the reality is that the 'glide needs fewer and cheaper mods to do the job.
>
> The 'glide also has a weight advantage, both in overall mass and in
> rotational inertia.
>
Correct. The weight saving is at the expense of strength though. As I also
say above these issues are all adressed now.
Cheers TT
Noddy
> Apparently manufactures disagree with you.
Of course they do.
They're in the business of selling cars to the ignorant sweaty masses. I'm
not.
> As I already stated the fact is to get emissions down and economy up.
So they claim, yet in reality they seem to make fuck all difference.
> Most people regard smoking is not healthy, it's OK to drink and drive and
> saying 3 Hail Mary's will not let you get pregnant either? :-))
If you say so.
> This is blatantly incorrect and demonstrates your lack of knowledge about
> them.
You're fucking kidding me, right? :)
I've been around drag racing circles for near on 30 years and you're the
*first* person I've ever heard say the Glide isn't a strong box.
> See above comment.
Yeah, you nailed it. I'm totally convinced. NOT.
> A lot did.
A lot?
What was the last car you ever saw with a torqueflite in it? I can't
remember anything of any particular note. On the other hand, there's more
than a few front engined top fuel dragsters running glides in the states.
> Correct. And now there is a huge after market parts industry based on
> this transmission. It is no a "no brainer" to get these things to handle
> HP. State how much HP and then buy the parts to suit. Right up to and
> including a Dedenbear gearbox case!
> http://www.dedenbear.com/tranny_cat.htm Now ask yourself *why* these are
> being made. I'll give you a hint - the standard ones break.
Of *course* they break. Run 1000hp through *any* standard auto and it'll
break.
> Currently yes.
So, we're likely to see that change sometime soon?
> The TF727 stock geartrain will take nearly double the HP that a stock PG
> gear train will. Read my comment again regarding the 727 is the best
> hp/$$ transmission.
Sure, then you go and read mine where I said if that were *really* the case
it would seem odd that the glide outnumbers the 727 on a massive scale.
> Finally a PG which was struggling behind an old 350Chev at 300 HP would
> break with monotonous regularity.
Bullshit :)
> Where as TF727s easily handled Hemi 454 triple carb engines at 600HP and
> were standard in 4x4s.
600hp?
The "big banger" factory 426 was a dual four barrel version and it was rated
at 425hp. Methinks you over state the case a tad :)
> The PG never came out in a 4x4.
Thankfully :)
> Please do your research a little better and then get back to me and we
> will talk some more.
Thanks. I'll take it on board, but you could do with some of that medicine
yourself.
--
Regards,
Noddy.
Noddy
> Funny I just told him that in my reply to him ;-)
You did indeed, and to be totally honest if I had a buck for every glide I
pulled out of a car that was busted I'd be a millionaire a second time over.
However, in every case it was being asked to do a job that was totally
beyond it's operating capacity and it failed only after a fair amount of
abuse.
You've actually reminded me of a guy I knew some years ago who owned a 340
powered Lancer coupe with a torqueflite, and he had nothing but trouble. He
eventually changed to a glide and picked up 3 tenths, and never had an auto
issue again.
> There is a lot of that going around ;-)
There sure as shit is.
--
Regards,
Noddy.
TT
>
>> Front actually ;-)
>
>
Would you expect anything less in a group like this :-)
>> The best example in Oz is the Ford Exploder with it's
>> 5R55E tranmission. It
>> is a conventiol 3 speed (based on a Ford C3) with and OD
>> at the front. To
>> get from 4-5 gears they bring the OD on in 1st gear to
>> split the ratio
>> between 1st and the original 2nd. So the shift is:
>
>> 1st > 2nd 1stOD on > 3rd ODoff (old 2nd on) > 4th (direct
>> 1:1 old 3rd) >
>> 5th OD on in 4th (old 3rd)
>
> They could split 2nd as well to make it a 6-speed. :-)
>
They don't work very well as a 5 speed :-(
> If they were to widen the ratio set in the main epicyclic
> set (there have
> been aftermarket sets for the turbo 400 in the past), they
> could have made
> this a meaningful 6-speed.
>
It was cheaper to copy ZF when their box ran out of patent
;-)
>> These new boxes are replacing all RWD GM autos and will
>> be made in 3
>> different sizes (small, medium and large). The medium is
>> in the V8
>> Commodore now. It is based on the ZF 6HP26 that is in
>> the Falcon now.
>
> Oh, okay. I hadn't really looked closely. If they
> compressed the ratio
> spread, I'm not interested.
The 6L80E has.
1st 4.07
2nd 2.364
3rd 1.52
4th 1.15
5th 0.852
6th 0.667
Rev 3.064
>
>>> I do believe, however, that the guy I used to work for
>>> had no idea
>
>> There is a lot of that going around ;-)
>
> Consider that I'm a signatory engineer as well as a
> mechanic, and that the
> guy I worked for was likewise, although his mechanic
> qualification was from
> passing the IAME entrance exam...
>
I never heard it said like that before.
>> If it was heat related there would be "bluing" of the
>> metal parts. Shiny
>> and still gleaming silver then it is mechanical failure.
>
> Yes, I know. Seriously, I don't remember. It was quite a
> few years ago
> now. The 'glide didn't get stripped down after its last
> failure and that
> would have been around 1999 to 2000. I think that the
> broken gearset is
> still sitting in a 6-cyl casing under my parents' house...
> I used the
> gearset from that one to get the box working again after
> it broke the
> previous time.
>
Cheers TT MIAME ;-)
John McKenzie
>
> "John McKenzie" <jmac_me...@bigpond.com> wrote in message
> news:48A210...@bigpond.com...
>
> >> TH350 are POS!
> >
> > I'll take one over a trimatic any day though :)
> >
> I wouldn't. A trimatic is 1/3 the cost to build and even though they can be
> a little "bio-degradable" the bits are easy to come by.
I've (indirectly) broken more trimatics than the rollings stones broke
hymens in their hey day, behind NA 308s that I've built for mates. The
autos came from a couple of the nations so called leading trimatic
beefer upperers. In all cases, a th350 (built by jim walton in one case,
plug plug) was the end of the dr. destructo nickname for the driver(s)
involved.
TH350s are just
> plain cheap junk that have more in comon with hand grenades ;-) Low HP 5.0
> V8 and smaller stick with Trimatics. Anything you want to last and put HP
> into use a TH400. BTW TH400 is the second best box ever made.
I'm certainly not against their use. One of the th350s in question was
built with a (rare for the trans industry esp given the job criteria of
'this will be caned relentlessly and mercilessly) 'if this doesn't hold
up then i'll do a 400 for no extra cost. it's been a few years now. In
contrast, the trimatics were lasting on average a week to a fortnight.
TF727 is
> still #1 ;-)
As much of a val fan as I am, I think the glide, albeit in somewhat
aftermarket form, is still the undisputed king esp for higher level drag
racing. You just get to a point where the extra ratios aren't needed as
the engine power curve is just nuts.
Of course stuff like pro-stock runs 5 speeds, but it's specialist stuff,
with tight restrictions, and NA, and it behooves them more than any
average bloke type effort to have the motor screaming within a very
small rpm spread.
I do like th 727, definitely. In no small part because they are strong.
Then again, the mopar a833 4 speed manual is in a similar boat - they
are so big that you can literally fit the entire gear out of a top
loader through the synchro cone of an a833.
>
> Ahhh............. your choices make a lot more sense now. Sorry I was under
> the impression it was a street/strip thing you were making. Nust have been
> all the talk about PGs and 1/4 mile stuff.
It went off on a tangent for sure. It's not like the place is any worse
for some extra on topic discussion :)
>
> And turbo lag will be reduced considerably :-)
yep. It sometimes worries me that a lot of kids read (and fuck me, I'm
now at an age where I say that not totally tongue in cheek) magazine
articles and think that 'hyooge' turbos are the be all end all of cars,
and by extension street driven ones.
I look after a VL that has a
> huge Garrett turbo fitted and it is a dog to drive on the road. Over two
> seconds lag and then the power hits like a light switch!
fuck that. That means in essence a car that is a good second slower over
the 1/4 would beat it in heads up racing, lest they risk redlighting, or
otherwise leaving too late (that's based on a 2 second spool).
Some of the vids posted over the years on fullboost.com.au have been ,
to be fair, impressive, but if you watch how long they actually sit at
teh start spooling, it's almost embarassing. I realise they are at the
end of the pyramid where the time and the mph are what sells their
product, not the 'well it's better for the street'
It is only the
> second car to ever have scared me driving it. Trying a 50kmh 3rd gear
> (manual VB) with 3.91 diff gears roll on it turned the car arround on my on
> the street. Whats worse is when you get off the throttle it doesn't shut
> down very quick either :-( Driving this car it feels like there is a hinge
> in the middle of it. BTW with slicks I believe it did a 9.2s at the drags.
> The only other car was the GenIII ute I mentioned with the supercharger
> running stock 3.08 diff. 100kph on a straight, dual lane country road and
> when it kicked back to second gear fom 4th it it lit up the back tyres and
> went sideways!!!!! I am over this sort of stuff!!!
I've done stuff like that, admittedly in much lighter early toranas. But
I could get wheelspin on the gearchanges well above the ton, and keep it
up if I wasn't on top of the situation quick enough. Luckily enough,
with drawthroughs, the instant you are off the power, the turbo can spin
all it likes (and it actually does) because it's in a near vacuum and
the power drops off straight away. It actually spools down less on gear
changes in a manual, as far as I can tell (at least without a bov, or
modified shift technique)
I have no idea how these
> guys expect to drive this stuff on the road?! I'm talking about dry roads,
> no traffic and a competetant driver.
I knew the odd person or 3 who used to run some sticky rubber on odd
occasions on the road, the most recent about 5-6 years back at an
industrial area near the tulla airport. Nobody around except those who
turned up for it, but of course it got shut down. I'm not condoning the
antics, but honestly, nobody else was at risk, and nobody lived near
enough to ever hear it. But nobody knows what is good for them, that's
the government's job!
What happens in the rain, traffic and
> non-ideal drivers????
That's an important issue imho. I've seen some retarded shit over the
years. Most of it comes through lack of skill, practice and education.
You can't be in the middle of an emergency and need to 'think' what to
do, it has to be programmed in ahead of time. Luckily for me, I got a
fair bit of experience on go karts, dirt tracks, dirt bikes (and cars on
dirt tracks) that I was doing ok by the time I was old enough to even
get a learners permit.
> John you are definitely on the right track and I wish you all the best with
> your project.
If everyone out there could just wish me more enthusiasm I'll get it
finished soon enough!
Now if I could ask you one last head scratcher -- in a bw35, properly
adjusted kickdown, in good working order etc. If I was to move from D to
2 on the selector, around 100km/h - it would of course downshift fairly
quickly. My question is - this manual selection of 2nd does override the
valvebody/2-3 shiftvalve - but I am wondering - with zero throttle -
i.e. engine braking, will the line pressure directed to the kickdown
servo be higher or the same as if it were in D, and did a low speed low
throttle upshift from 1st to 2nd? I'm basically wondering, not that I do
this much, if ever, if engine braking using 2nd is actually exposing
that band to potential slippage whatsoever?
John McKenzie
>
>
> The 350 might not be the ducks guts either, but it shits on a "Trauma" from
> about 38 stories high :)
Can only go on personal, or close to personal experiences on this - I
don't know how the fuck anyone gets a trimatic to hold together. EVen
the big named trimatics didn't last in mates cars. th350s did.
John McKenzie
> You have to spend a huge amount of money on a
> PG to get it take the HP. The TF727 is cheaper to build for the same HP and
> genenerally less fragile.
What about first gear? almost all racers with a 727 are told in no
uncertain terms to start the burnout in the water in 2nd. It's a toss up
between first gear band or sprag, one holds stronger of course, but is
slower to release, and can cause an issue on the 1-2 shift.
I'm not an expert on these mind you, not even close, but I am aware of
that.
John McKenzie
>
>
> The 6L80E has.
>
> 1st 4.07
> 2nd 2.364
> 3rd 1.52
> 4th 1.15
> 5th 0.852
> 6th 0.667
> Rev 3.064
So there's no 1:1 in there at all? I know it's not quite as important
with planetaries, but sheesh, I kinda like the idea of a direct drive
for less wear and tear on the box.
Noddy
> Can only go on personal, or close to personal experiences on this - I
> don't know how the fuck anyone gets a trimatic to hold together. EVen
> the big named trimatics didn't last in mates cars. th350s did.
My experience as well.
I think the only people who like fucking around with traumatics are those
types who delight in doing complicated things.
Over and over :)
--
Regards,
Noddy.
Noddy
> So there's no 1:1 in there at all? I know it's not quite as important
> with planetaries, but sheesh, I kinda like the idea of a direct drive
> for less wear and tear on the box.
Yeah, you gotta wonder about that.
Those ratio's are almost the exact same as the 6 speed ZF in the Territory.
First gear is so ridiculously low it says in it for all of .75 of a second.
--
Regards,
Noddy.
TT
> TT wrote:
>>
>> "John McKenzie" <jmac_me...@bigpond.com> wrote in
>> message
>> news:48A210...@bigpond.com...
>>
>> >> TH350 are POS!
>> >
>> > I'll take one over a trimatic any day though :)
>> >
>> I wouldn't. A trimatic is 1/3 the cost to build and even
>> though they can be
>> a little "bio-degradable" the bits are easy to come by.
>
> I've (indirectly) broken more trimatics than the rollings
> stones broke
> hymens in their hey day, behind NA 308s that I've built
> for mates. The
> autos came from a couple of the nations so called leading
> trimatic
> beefer upperers. In all cases, a th350 (built by jim
> walton in one case,
> plug plug) was the end of the dr. destructo nickname for
> the driver(s)
> involved.
>
courses :-) smally V8s in light cars Utes, Toranas etc the
trimatic is OK now. There are full manual VBs that have
addressed the longevity issues. Obviously they still break
because they are basically pressed up bits of Coke can ;-)
>
> TH350s are just
>> plain cheap junk that have more in comon with hand
>> grenades ;-) Low HP 5.0
>> V8 and smaller stick with Trimatics. Anything you want
>> to last and put HP
>> into use a TH400. BTW TH400 is the second best box ever
>> made.
>
> I'm certainly not against their use. One of the th350s in
> question was
> built with a (rare for the trans industry esp given the
> job criteria of
> 'this will be caned relentlessly and mercilessly) 'if this
> doesn't hold
> up then i'll do a 400 for no extra cost. it's been a few
> years now. In
> contrast, the trimatics were lasting on average a week to
> a fortnight.
>
regularity. Or the very small bearings let go or the very
small gears fall to bits :-( the TH350 is to the US tranny
rebuilders what the Trimatic was to Oz.
> TF727 is
>> still #1 ;-)
>
> As much of a val fan as I am, I think the glide, albeit in
> somewhat
> aftermarket form, is still the undisputed king esp for
> higher level drag
> racing. You just get to a point where the extra ratios
> aren't needed as
> the engine power curve is just nuts.
>
Yes, agreed. I am even fitting PGs to Turbo VLs now. Light
weight, low HP drain and reliable (with the right bits) ;-)
> Of course stuff like pro-stock runs 5 speeds, but it's
> specialist stuff,
> with tight restrictions, and NA, and it behooves them more
> than any
> average bloke type effort to have the motor screaming
> within a very
> small rpm spread.
>
> I do like th 727, definitely. In no small part because
> they are strong.
> Then again, the mopar a833 4 speed manual is in a similar
> boat - they
> are so big that you can literally fit the entire gear out
> of a top
> loader through the synchro cone of an a833.
>>
>> Ahhh............. your choices make a lot more sense now.
>> Sorry I was under
>> the impression it was a street/strip thing you were
>> making. Nust have been
>> all the talk about PGs and 1/4 mile stuff.
>
> It went off on a tangent for sure. It's not like the place
> is any worse
> for some extra on topic discussion :)
>
What?! You want a car group to discuss cars? What next?
get people to stop swearing :-)) Haha
>
>>
>> And turbo lag will be reduced considerably :-)
>
> yep. It sometimes worries me that a lot of kids read (and
> fuck me, I'm
> now at an age where I say that not totally tongue in
> cheek) magazine
> articles and think that 'hyooge' turbos are the be all end
> all of cars,
> and by extension street driven ones.
>
> I look after a VL that has a
>> huge Garrett turbo fitted and it is a dog to drive on the
>> road. Over two
>> seconds lag and then the power hits like a light switch!
>
> fuck that. That means in essence a car that is a good
> second slower over
> the 1/4 would beat it in heads up racing, lest they risk
> redlighting, or
> otherwise leaving too late (that's based on a 2 second
> spool).
>
No. It has a transbrake fitted so it can be held on the
line just off boost. The trick is 9so I am told) Is to have
the Transbrake button also connected to the engine
management system and have it rev limited to say 3,800 rpm
or zero boost then when you launch at full throttle it
instantly spools up to boost. This also eliminates all the
wasted tyre smoke on launch. From memory his 60' times
were1.4sec and ended at 9.2. He has since been told to take
it away and don't bring it back with out a roll cage etc ;-)
> What happens in the rain, traffic and
>> non-ideal drivers????
>
> That's an important issue imho. I've seen some retarded
> shit over the
> years. Most of it comes through lack of skill, practice
> and education.
> You can't be in the middle of an emergency and need to
> 'think' what to
> do, it has to be programmed in ahead of time. Luckily for
> me, I got a
> fair bit of experience on go karts, dirt tracks, dirt
> bikes (and cars on
> dirt tracks) that I was doing ok by the time I was old
> enough to even
> get a learners permit.
>
I am an ex A grade Superbike rider and I have sort of had
all this burned out of me. That and I have a boat that does
over 90mph :-)
>
>> John you are definitely on the right track and I wish you
>> all the best with
>> your project.
>
> If everyone out there could just wish me more enthusiasm
> I'll get it
> finished soon enough!
>
I also suggest a large bucket of "round-to-its" :-))
>
> Now if I could ask you one last head scratcher -- in a
> bw35, properly
> adjusted kickdown, in good working order etc. If I was to
> move from D to
> 2 on the selector, around 100km/h - it would of course
> downshift fairly
> quickly.
It will downshift at any speed.
> My question is - this manual selection of 2nd does
> override the
> valvebody/2-3 shiftvalve
Yes.
> - but I am wondering - with zero throttle -
> i.e. engine braking, will the line pressure directed to
> the kickdown
> servo be higher or the same as if it were in D,
The same as at idle.
> and did a low speed low
> throttle upshift from 1st to 2nd? I'm basically wondering,
> not that I do
> this much, if ever, if engine braking using 2nd is
> actually exposing
> that band to potential slippage whatsoever?
>
The main issue is driving like this regularly you causing
excess stress and wear on the transmission by reversing all
the thrust in side. I say this to a lot of people "What is
cheaper a $1,000 gearbox or a $79 set of brake pads?"
The other point is it is not the 2nd band that is the worry
but the forward clutch ;-) That's the weak point.
Cheers TT
TT
;-) Also, apparently, it is good for 18 speeds with two
reverses all achievable by software.
Cheers TT
TT
> TT wrote:
>> You have to spend a huge amount of money on a
>> PG to get it take the HP. The TF727 is cheaper to build
>> for the same HP and
>> genenerally less fragile.
>
> What about first gear? almost all racers with a 727 are
> told in no
> uncertain terms to start the burnout in the water in 2nd.
> It's a toss up
> between first gear band or sprag, one holds stronger of
> course, but is
> slower to release, and can cause an issue on the 1-2
> shift.
>
> I'm not an expert on these mind you, not even close, but I
> am aware of
> that.
Have a think about what you just said? The sprag will blow
up in a *water* burn out with cold tyres but it won't let go
on a full race launch with sticky tyres (from the burn
out). Do you see what I am saying?
The reason for the 2nd gear water burn out is the water lets
the tyres slip easy and second is high enough to get the
tyres to turn at a good speed to get them hot and
consequently sticky so it can launch hard in first gear
with traction.
Cheers TT
Daryl Walford
>
> The Falcon's economy drops off noticably at about 140km/h. I suspect that
> an extra overdrive gear or an extra low ratio plus a taller diff would
> resolve that issue. :-) I wouldn't want to change the diff ratio with the
> current 1st gear as it would be too slow off the line for my liking...
>
> I guess I'll have to try to get some sort of guide as to where it is safe
> to do reasonable speeds and where you have to slow down before my trip
> down there in October...
>
Most cops won't bother you on a hwy or freeway unless you are doing more
than 10 over, I know my Hilux speedo reads 5 under so 115 in 100 is
reasonably "safe" from being booked by a cop but mobile and fixed speed
cameras are another matter.
Be suspicious of any late model vehicle parked on the side of a hwy,
vehicle includes light commercials and Holden Rodeos are popular camera
vehicles, they have a small box mounted either on a nudge bar or the
front bumper and also have a short antenna usually mounted on the driver
side just ahead of the windscreen.
Unless you know where the fixed cameras are on the inner city fwys and
the Ring Rd its best to stick to the limit, some GPS navigators have the
fixed cameras locations in their memory and give you a warning beep as
you approach them, the one I tested seemed to be accurate although it
did tell me there was a camera on the outbound side of the Westgate near
Grieve Pde but in fact the camera is only on the inbound side.
Daryl
Noddy
> I did say it was a copy ;-) But GM would never admit to it ;-) Also,
> apparently, it is good for 18 speeds with two reverses all achievable by
> software.
Nice enough, but considering the 6 it has stock is *more* that enough for
something like the Barra 190 engine one would have to wonder why you'd
*want* to do that :)
--
Regards,
Noddy.
Noddy
> The TH 350 explode the 2nd gear sprag race with monotonous regularity. Or
> the very small bearings let go or the very small gears fall to bits :-(
> the TH350 is to the US tranny rebuilders what the Trimatic was to Oz.
That might be the case, but it's like comparing the plastic and the small
block Chev. Both are cheap mass produced engines but one is shitloads better
than the other.
--
Regards,
Noddy.
Noddy
> After repeated failures of a modified 'glide (it has a Romac top gear
> clutch hub, kevlar band, extra plates in the clutches, adjustable
> modulator, yada, yada, yada still in it, as it came out of the ute the
> last time), I upgraded to a turbo 350 that had the clutch packs done,
> an adjustable modulator and nothing else IIRC. It's been fine behind
> the same engine, with the same 2.47:1 9" detroit and the same tyre
> size for more years than all the powerglide builds put together...
Maybe the guy building your auto's didn't know his arse from his elbow.
--
Regards,
Noddy.
Noddy
> The diff ratio needs to be taller, then. :-)
It does.
It's something like 3.45 for the 6 speed and 3.75 for the 4 speed.
--
Regards,
Noddy.
Noddy
> I remember some talk of point-to-point cameras on the Hume Hwy. Did that
> ever happen?
I don't know, but they're in place on the Western Ring Road.
> I assume that there are web sites that list the locations of all of the
> hidden cameras and perhaps the approved locations for mobile cameras?
> Or do they use the mobile cameras wherever they think they can make a
> profit?
Bingo.
Mobile cameras in Victoria are in unmarked cars, and unlike other states
there is no warning that they're in operation. What might look to be a
regular Camry or some such parked along with a few other cars is often a
Camera unit, and be 5km/h or more over the limit and you'll get pinged.
If you want the happy snap, you have to pay extra :)
> What about on back roads like between Bacchus Marsh and Little River?
Great places for unmarked camera cars.
--
Regards,
Noddy.
John McKenzie
>
> >> After repeated failures of a modified 'glide (it has a Romac top gear
> >> clutch hub, kevlar band, extra plates in the clutches, adjustable
> >> modulator, yada, yada, yada still in it, as it came out of the ute the
> >> last time), I upgraded to a turbo 350 that had the clutch packs done,
> >> an adjustable modulator and nothing else IIRC. It's been fine behind
> >> the same engine, with the same 2.47:1 9" detroit and the same tyre
> >> size for more years than all the powerglide builds put together...
>
> > Maybe the guy building your auto's didn't know his arse from his elbow.
>
> certainly considered that possibility...
One of the so called local legends has the unofficial title of 'so and
so automatics and ordinance' . Most people in the general area would
have to grab a thesaurus to realise it's a subtle reference to the
grenades he produces.
Neil Fisher
<athol_S...@idl.net.au>, after considering some belly-button
fluf, wrote:
>Noddy <m...@home.com> wrote:
>> "TT" <TTence...@westnet.com.au> wrote:
>
>> 6, 7 and 8 speed autos are these days more about marketing wankery than they
>> are anything else.
>
>IIRC, the 4L80E could theoretically be converted to a 6-speed by software...
>It's a turbo 400 with an overdrive tacked on the back. The main planeary set
>retains the original ratios. By engaging the overdrive in all 3 planetary
>ratios instead of only 1:1, you'd get a total of 6. :-)
Then they must be significantly different, internally, to the 4L60's!
In a 4L60, there are still only 2 planetary gearsets, just like a
TH400 - they're just "hooked up" differently.
Neil
---
Neil Fisher / Bob Young
Thundercords
personal opinion unless otherwise noted.
Looking for spark plug leads?
Check out http://www.magnecor.com.au
Noddy
> I'm guessing that that's the road I've gotta use to get from the Hume
> around to the road heading west to Bacchus Marsh?
Yep.
> Oh, and they've obviously driven the vehicle along each road one way,
> so sometimes you get the rear view from the wrong side of the road,
> including going around roundabouts the wrong way. :-)
Lol :)
A mate of mine is worried that his car shows up parked in the driveway of
his girlfriend's house on street view. The reason why he's worried is that
he hopes his wife or her husband never looks at it :)
--
Regards,
Noddy.
Bernd Felsche
>Noddy <m...@home.com> wrote:
>> "Athol" <athol_S...@idl.net.au> wrote:
>>> I remember some talk of point-to-point cameras on the Hume Hwy. Did that
>>> ever happen?
>> I don't know, but they're in place on the Western Ring Road.
>I'm guessing that that's the road I've gotta use to get from the Hume
>around to the road heading west to Bacchus Marsh?
>> Mobile cameras in Victoria are in unmarked cars, and unlike other states
>> there is no warning that they're in operation. What might look to be a
>> regular Camry or some such parked along with a few other cars is often a
>> Camera unit, and be 5km/h or more over the limit and you'll get pinged.
>Hmm. Might have to stick with plan A - aim for 10km/h below the limit
>at all times in VIC.
Install a tachograph (or certified equivalent). Drive AT the limit.
Or a tad faster as per your wallet. Stick a few fake aerials onto
the roof.
--
/"\ Bernd Felsche - Innovative Reckoning, Perth, Western Australia
\ / ASCII ribbon campaign | Science is the belief in
X against HTML mail | the ignorance of the experts.
/ \ and postings | -- Richard Feynman