• Hello there guest and Welcome to The #1 Classic Mustang forum!
    To gain full access you must Register. Registration is free and it takes only a few moments to complete.
    Already a member? Login here then!

1952 F1: The Garage Roommate

Select from the following six options, derived from two basic designs w/ colors and options.

  • A

    Votes: 1 7.7%

  • B

    Votes: 7 53.8%

  • C

    Votes: 2 15.4%

  • D

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • E

    Votes: 3 23.1%

  • F

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Total voters
    13
  • Poll closed .
Stopping by to see a guy later today who has a 4RW70 to take a look. Want to get some measurements in comparison to the T5 in terms of size (bellhousing mainly). Fit will be paramount in this decision. I don't want to hack up an already finished firewall.

Bruno, in terms of resale and value/desire I think you have it backward. More of a market for an auto. Doesn't matter as I will be dead before it gets sold anyway!

Ken, what were thinking in terms of controller for the trans? I'm pretty set on US Shift at this point unless you know of other better options.
 
The body of the trans is quite a bit bigger than the T-5 unit. Fit may be an issue.

For the Bronco I am planning to use all of the Ford injection and controllers, I think. If I were to go to the aftermarket then the US Shift from Baumann would be the way I go. Since I have an entire Explorer to pull the engine, trans and wiring harnesses from I am leaning that way on this build. Simplification and dependability. For my next build...similar to the vein of your current one....it will be all custom.
 
Not the transmission body I'm worried about as much as the bellhousing portion. There is a giant opening in the floor now I could simply make the cover taller as needed. The current fit with the flathead set-up is really tight at the top. The initial drop off of the top of the bellhousing is pretty steep. If not, it would hit the bottom edge of the firewall. That's where I'm curious.

Spent way too much time this morning trying to find a trans. I need an early unit with a 2 bolt starter. Basically 5.0L Explorers or the like. Seems a V6 unit has the same bolt pattern too. Only internal difference I read somewhere was one less friction disc?! They can be built up like a V8 version. I've got a guy lined up to do the rebuild just need a suitable trans. I'm not even thinking of doing it myself. Enough on the plate.
 
Horseplay said:
Bruno, in terms of resale and value/desire I think you have it backward. More of a market for an auto. Doesn't matter as I will be dead before it gets sold anyway!.
Click to expand...

See above

Verstuurd vanaf mijn SM-A605FN met Tapatalk
 
Horseplay said:
Not the transmission body I'm worried about as much as the bellhousing portion. There is a giant opening in the floor now I could simply make the cover taller as needed. The current fit with the flathead set-up is really tight at the top. The initial drop off of the top of the bellhousing is pretty steep. If not, it would hit the bottom edge of the firewall. That's where I'm curious.

Spent way too much time this morning trying to find a trans. I need an early unit with a 2 bolt starter. Basically 5.0L Explorers or the like. Seems a V6 unit has the same bolt pattern too. Only internal difference I read somewhere was one less friction disc?! They can be built up like a V8 version. I've got a guy lined up to do the rebuild just need a suitable trans. I'm not even thinking of doing it myself. Enough on the plate.
Click to expand...
I can't speak to the bellhousing section, but no doubt you could pull pics from the internet. Also note there are three different tail housing/shaft set ups. There is a short tail shaft used in Mustangs and smaller cars, a longer tail shaft used in large cars such as the Crown Vic, and no tail shaft housing in the 4x4's, including all 5.0 Explorers. The latter uses an adapter housing to the transfer case and will not work for you. Internally they are all very similar, the latter years being better, year 2000 and later.
 
kb3 said:
I can't speak to the bellhousing section, but no doubt you could pull pics from the internet. Also note there are three different tail housing/shaft set ups. There is a short tail shaft used in Mustangs and smaller cars, a longer tail shaft used in large cars such as the Crown Vic, and no tail shaft housing in the 4x4's, including all 5.0 Explorers. The latter uses an adapter housing to the transfer case and will not work for you. Internally they are all very similar, the latter years being better, year 2000 and later.
Click to expand...
All can work for me provided they feature the 5.0L (SBF) bellhousing bolt pattern. Easiest way to identify those is they have a 2 bolt starter mount. The mod motors use a three bolt. It's not easy at all to find the one I need used. I've found some 96/97 Explorer units that I'm thinking about. Just need to swap out the output shaft for a longer one and lose the transfer case adapter piece and bolt up the appropriate length tailshaft housing. Since I'll be rebuilding the thing anyway making this change is no big deal. As the whole trans has to come apart to swap that shaft if you're not rebuilding using a 4x4 trans is not an option.

I'm also awaiting quotes from a couple places to just outright buy what I need but that looks like it might run me $500 or more in excess of having a used one built to my liking. I can get an old one for about what others will charge for not sending in a core and the rebuild and parts will be a little over half what say Monster wants for the same trans. As long as the used trans doesn't have any junk hard parts in it that need replaced I'm much better off having this local guy rebuild it and stand behind it than some mass produced unit from an internet company. I think, anyway.

If all this comes together I can switch gears (yep, went there!) to an auto for about $3K. That's a fully rebuilt/improved trans, convertor and flexplate, electronic controller and harness along with the adaptor to mate it to the flathead. I will just stick the T5, flywheel, clutch, adaptor and the rest of the manual stuff back on the shelf to collect dust until the next project.
 
My 67 C10 will be auto. For a cruiser I prefer it. For a hot rod with tons of power that you want to get rowdy with a manual is the ways to go. That’s how I look at it.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
  • Like
Reactions: kb3
The cost of the switch to auto just went up another $600 or so. Forgot about the need for a shifter and associated bits. Just gonna tag it at 4 grand and let that number bounce around in my head a bit. I will make the chassis changes needed to accommodate either option and keep plugging along on other stuff for a while.

I plan on making and using a set of secondary motor mounts to support the engine as the stock arrangement has mounts on the front corners of the engine (they are actually part of the truck water pumps I am using). These new mounts will be at the rear of the engine connected by the transmission bellhousing bolts. Essentially acting like a typical mid-plate on a race set-up although these will sit on rubber pads resting on shelves coming off the frame. This will have the engine fully supported without a trans in place. As heavy as it is I'm much more comfortable going this way as opposed to having a trans mount serve as the other support point, given how the stock engine mount is all the way forward instead of the usual mid-engine point. Sure wish I had a plasma cutter...
 
If you do a lot of city driving definitely auto. Can always fit a stall convertor if needed. Much more comfortable drive.
 
I have got one but that doesn't help you..
On the motormounts. Don't tie the engine too much cause it has to work abit around. Otherwise the trans could brake of at its mounting flance. Typical its left and right of the engine and rear center of trans. As you probably know.
I personally wouldn't use/install motormounts at the front of the engine because the force/torque of the engine to the trans flance gets greater . IMHO.

Verstuurd vanaf mijn SM-A605FN met Tapatalk
 
msell66 said:
You have all these fancy tools and NO plasma cutter??? Come on man.


Mark
Click to expand...
I'm about to. On Amazon now trying to pick one. Chinese Cut 50 style. I can live with less than perfect cuts and having to clean them up a bit. My garage is constantly coated in grinding and cut-off wheel aftermath. Its ridiculous. Plus it can take forever to cut shapes out of thicker steel with wheels or even the bandsaw.

Any suggestions?
 
B67FSTB said:
I have got one but that doesn't help you..
On the motormounts. Don't tie the engine too much cause it has to work abit around. Otherwise the trans could brake of at its mounting flance. Typical its left and right of the engine and rear center of trans. As you probably know.
I personally wouldn't use/install motormounts at the front of the engine because the force/torque of the engine to the trans flance gets greater . IMHO.

Verstuurd vanaf mijn SM-A605FN met Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Here is how a flathead is mounted using the truck pumps. The cars are a bit different but same idea. The whole engine just hinges off them. The heavy cast steel trans supports the other end not too far back of the engine. Now if you swap out and go to something more modern you are moving that second mounting point back at least an extra foot but closer to a foot and an half. That alone can get iffy but when you consider using something like a T5 you are asking that aluminum case to support way more weight and torque than it was ever designed to do. Adding a mid-point (rear of engine) support makes all the sense in the world to me. I'll design them to use the rubber pucks lust like the front. This design will give the motor more room to rock than a stock set-up with the basically, solid trans mount.
flatheadmount.jpg
 
Horseplay said:
The cost of the switch to auto just went up another $600 or so. Forgot about the need for a shifter and associated bits. Just gonna tag it at 4 grand and let that number bounce around in my head a bit. I will make the chassis changes needed to accommodate either option and keep plugging along on other stuff for a while.

I plan on making and using a set of secondary motor mounts to support the engine as the stock arrangement has mounts on the front corners of the engine (they are actually part of the truck water pumps I am using). These new mounts will be at the rear of the engine connected by the transmission bellhousing bolts. Essentially acting like a typical mid-plate on a race set-up although these will sit on rubber pads resting on shelves coming off the frame. This will have the engine fully supported without a trans in place. As heavy as it is I'm much more comfortable going this way as opposed to having a trans mount serve as the other support point, given how the stock engine mount is all the way forward instead of the usual mid-engine point. Sure wish I had a plasma cutter...
Click to expand...
What type of shifter setup are you looking at, column or floor mount? Lokar makes one to work with columns (probably floor mounts too) but it requires you to open up the transmission to switch out the shift lever. Just something to look into before the transmission is assembled.

If you lived closer I would have a plethora of tools for you to borrow!
 
Well , I am not an engineer or suchs but I think that the engine and the trans should move as a whole to whitstand the stress of the torque.?
I see it with all the high powered cars like AMGs from Mercedes-Benz.
And the strenght off the bellhousing is key . And in your case even more I guess. Just my 2cents.

Verstuurd vanaf mijn SM-T805 met Tapatalk
 
Or.....maybe your setup is better , cause I noticed by seeing that pic , that you can't use a big bellhousing behind a flathead. ???
It looks very small to me.


Verstuurd vanaf mijn SM-T805 met Tapatalk
 
kb3 said:
What type of shifter setup are you looking at, column or floor mount? Lokar makes one to work with columns (probably floor mounts too) but it requires you to open up the transmission to switch out the shift lever. Just something to look into before the transmission is assembled.

If you lived closer I would have a plethora of tools for you to borrow!
Click to expand...
Looking at a Lokar transmounted floor shifter. Pretty slick and effective. Then to that add the electronics (either theirs or Dakota's) to operate the gear selector indicator in the Dakota gauge. By the time you do a boot of some sort and a good shift ball/knob you're into it all for about $600!

Long way to go to bum a tool
 
B67FSTB said:
Or.....maybe your setup is better , cause I noticed by seeing that pic , that you can't use a big bellhousing behind a flathead. ???
It looks very small to me.


Verstuurd vanaf mijn SM-T805 met Tapatalk
Click to expand...
The connection between the engine and the transmission is a little complex. It is made up of three different parts before the actual transmission case connects to it all. First there is what is commonly called the starter ring. Next is the intermediate section (called a "hog's head" that covers the clutch and houses the stock mechanism to mechanically actuate the throw-out bearing (I'm removing that mech and going with a hydraulic bearing). And last is an adapter plate that allows the modern T5 to connect to the old bits. If I go auto, all three of those get discarded and a different adapter is used to connect directly between the engine and the trans.

Here's a pic of the manual conversion set-up in place

flatheadbellhousing.jpg
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top