Leary Posted July 3, 2016 Report Share Posted July 3, 2016 Hi all, I am planning on installing a T5 behind a 230 L6 in my '47 business coupe. One thing that concerns me is the added load from the weight of the engine being transferred through the gearbox to the mount. The crossmember position is a lot further aft than what is used on the fluid drive, but the gearbox is lighter. Does anyone have any thoughts or experienced any issues? I have attached an old image i found from member @chop with his conversion using a 904. Thanks, Leary 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Plymouthy Adams Posted July 3, 2016 Report Share Posted July 3, 2016 if all you are changing is the transmission the rear mounting is not disturbed Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Don Coatney Posted July 3, 2016 Report Share Posted July 3, 2016 What Tim said is correct. No change to the rear mount. Do you have a fluid drive car and if so do you plan on installing the T-5 connected to the fluid coupling? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Leary Posted July 3, 2016 Author Report Share Posted July 3, 2016 yep, it has a fluid drive fitted now. I wasn't planning on using the fluidrive or original bellhousing with the T5. I have seen the mod using the plymouth bellhousing, but parts like that are thin on the ground in Australia. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Plymouthy Adams Posted July 3, 2016 Report Share Posted July 3, 2016 thanks for the added details on your proposed build.. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jhm1mc13 Posted July 3, 2016 Report Share Posted July 3, 2016 The picture looks like an automatic? If so I can understand the concern about no center support. Jim M Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Leary Posted July 3, 2016 Author Report Share Posted July 3, 2016 The picture looks like an automatic? If so I can understand the concern about no center support. Jim M Your right its a 904, i have just used that image as an example. The T5 conversion seems quite common. I figured that if there was a problem someone has experienced it, Or those that are using an adaptor plate have manufactured additional mounts to account for the load. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rb1949 Posted July 3, 2016 Report Share Posted July 3, 2016 Doesn't that bring up clutch linkage fabrications? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Leary Posted July 3, 2016 Author Report Share Posted July 3, 2016 Doesn't that bring up clutch linkage fabrications? It does, but not nearly as much as keeping it column shift. I plan on using 2 push-pull cables rather than linkages. Leary Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Plymouthy Adams Posted July 3, 2016 Report Share Posted July 3, 2016 why don't you take a minute and explain what it is you are doing to go about this modification instead of throwing back a fresh tidbit of information on every comment.suggestion......that way folks here can get the general gist of your method of attack and then be able to assist you with minute details that you seem to be seeking.. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Leary Posted July 3, 2016 Author Report Share Posted July 3, 2016 At the moment, I'm running a 230L6 with a fluid drive 3 speed. AFAIK, it is in a stock configuration. The diff has already been changed to BW unit from a 97 EF Falcon, so park brakes have been taken care of. The plan is to fit a T5 gearbox from a EA Falcon. It is essentially the same configuration as your mustang boxes. The previous owner has already had an adapter plate manufactured to faciltate mounting of the box to the engine. Clutch linkages will either be modified Dodge OEM, or a custom cable arrangement. (I am effectively taking over from where the previous owner left off) As for the cable shift, the car has the OEM bench seat and a I have a family of 3. Ergonomically, it is not practical to use a floorshift. In the conversion I plan to use the original column and, rather than linkages, 2 push-pull cables. The cables will directly connect to the stub of the gear selector using heim joints or similar. My question in the original post was due to the engine mount being at the very front, and the mounting for the T5 trans at the very rear with no other support. I was concerned about the load from the motor placing stress on the gearbox in a manner for which it was not designed. Concerns ranged from cracks, through to 'flex' in the gear box case causing greater strain/wear on internal components. I note that in later model vehicles with L6's fitted with powerglides, that no additional engine mounts have been use. I suspect though that a powerglide is a much more structurally sound box and could withstand the load. If anyone has experienced any issues or has pictures of a similar setup (not using a standard bellhousing) I'd very much appreciate learning about it. Thanks, Leary Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
greg g Posted July 3, 2016 Report Share Posted July 3, 2016 If the trans has a provision for mounting the tailshaft, why not fab up a rear cross member and utilize it. I would think that there is actually less stress on the trans bell housing interface with the bell supported than in the modern design where the engine and trans weight are supported at the far ends of the combined load. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Young Ed Posted July 3, 2016 Report Share Posted July 3, 2016 If the trans has a provision for mounting the tailshaft, why not fab up a rear cross member and utilize it. I would think that there is actually less stress on the trans bell housing interface with the bell supported than in the modern design where the engine and trans weight are supported at the far ends of the combined load. I think that's his problem. He's talking about eliminating the original rear mount and going to just the rear trans mount. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DJ194950 Posted July 3, 2016 Report Share Posted July 3, 2016 http://www.qualityengineeredcomponents.com/?page_id=224 You may get some information you can use from this company page. DJ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
greg g Posted July 3, 2016 Report Share Posted July 3, 2016 I think that's his problem. He's talking about eliminating the original rear mount and going to just the rear trans mount. I was thinking go with both. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andydodge Posted July 4, 2016 Report Share Posted July 4, 2016 Leary, I was going to use a T5 from a USA sourced S10 pickup as it has the forward mounted shifter.....I imported the box and whilst the 41 Plymouth Coupe had just the normal 3 speed gearbox the question you are asking is still pertinent......I intended to use the original Plymouth bellhousing with an adaptor to join the Plymouth bellhousing to the S10 gearbox which would mean I still had the original front engine mount and both rear mounts on either side of the bellhousing but NO rear S10 gearbox mount.......the S10 alloy gearbox would have been a similar weight to that of the original Plymouth cast iron gearbox and handbrake assembly and I didn't think that it would have had any undue effect.........I ended up selling the car and new engine/S10 gearbox prior to installation so I cannot be absolutely certain there wasn't any problem but as mentioned I didn't expect one............lol......I also was going to use a Falcon diff having used an EA/EB wagon rear axle in my 1940 Dodge Sedan which was a bolt in fit and would also have been into the 41 Plymouth Coupe..............so from your post I gather you intend to mount the complete Falcon bellhousing and gearbox to the original engine.............my concern would not be the cracking etc but the fact that the original engine mount being high in the front and the T5 gearbox mount being low in the back would allow the engine to "wobble" sideways..........the use of original rear bellhousing mounts would negate this...........anyway I am in Grafton NSW and talk better than I type if you want to call I am available anytime on 02 6642 5963............regards, Andy Douglas Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Leary Posted July 4, 2016 Author Report Share Posted July 4, 2016 my concern would not be the cracking etc but the fact that the original engine mount being high in the front and the T5 gearbox mount being low in the back would allow the engine to "wobble" sideways A valid point and something i did not consider. There would likely be some stresses on the mounts from torque as the would be very little lateral support. The previous owner has already had the adaptor plate manufactured, but i will likely look to modifying it to allow for another set of mounts. I'm OS with work at the moment, but when i get back I'll take some pics and give you a call. Leary Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Leary Posted July 9, 2017 Author Report Share Posted July 9, 2017 Just as an update, I've since returned from deployment and moved interstate. Things are moving along albeit a bit slowly. I've recently sent a couple of my spare blocks for machine work and pulled the current engine and fluid drive trans. Currently restoring the engine bay, rewiring, Jeep sway bar swap, chassis rust removal and preparing for the trans swap. If your interested, I've attached a couple of pics of 3D printed prototype parts to allow the cable shifting of the T5. Thanks, Leary 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andydodge Posted July 9, 2017 Report Share Posted July 9, 2017 Leary........what do you intend to do regarding having the original mopar high front mount and the T5 low mount and not having the side mounts of the original style bellhousing to stop the engine/gearbox assembly rocking sideways?................the use of the S10 gearbox with its forward mounted shifter allows the gearbox to fit into cars with a bench seat which it appears is what you want........Mal Wood Automotive in Qld are now importing all parts to convert the Oz T5 into the S10 style if that helps.................am still available on the phone if you want.............regards, Andy Douglas Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Leary Posted July 9, 2017 Author Report Share Posted July 9, 2017 Hi Andy, Yes, I'll keep the original High front engine mount, but after much thought i'll be adding extra mounts from the adapter plate to the chassis. So, the engine and trans will be supported in 3 places. I'll try and mock up some photos of what i mean later today. Leary Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SSD Posted July 10, 2017 Report Share Posted July 10, 2017 (edited) 14 hours ago, Leary said: Just as an update, I've since returned from deployment and moved interstate. Things are moving along albeit a bit slowly. I've recently sent a couple of my spare blocks for machine work and pulled the current engine and fluid drive trans. Currently restoring the engine bay, rewiring, Jeep sway bar swap, chassis rust removal and preparing for the trans swap. If your interested, I've attached a couple of pics of 3D printed prototype parts to allow the cable shifting of the T5. Thanks, Leary Thats genius Edited July 10, 2017 by SSD wrong words Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frank Elder Posted July 10, 2017 Report Share Posted July 10, 2017 Sooo........ with the cables you are going to have 5 on the tree? That would be so awesome! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Leary Posted July 10, 2017 Author Report Share Posted July 10, 2017 That's the plan. All the benefits of a 'modern trans' with the ergonomics of column shift. If it works, which I'm confident it will, I'll consider making a few more parts for a kit. Can't imagine too many people would be interested though. Leary 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frank Elder Posted July 10, 2017 Report Share Posted July 10, 2017 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wayfarer Posted July 10, 2017 Report Share Posted July 10, 2017 14 hours ago, Leary said: Hi Andy, Yes, I'll keep the original High front engine mount, but after much thought i'll be adding extra mounts from the adapter plate to the chassis. So, the engine and trans will be supported in 3 places. I'll try and mock up some photos of what i mean later today. Leary IMHO, I think that you will have issues trying to keep three mounts aligned without one in a bind. There have been multiple millions of cars produced using a 3-point mount. There must be a reason. I would strongly suggest that you follow Don's example and make two new mounts at the bellhousing. Depending on how thick your new block plate is (and whether it is steel or alum), it may be a useful attachment point or, use the 4 bolts that attach to the block. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.