Official Transmission Conversion Thread

[55 Fargo]

Hey All,

Just thought I would create a thread dedicated to T5 conversions, pitfalls, methods and what is needed to make it work whether you have a car or truck.

How many of the T5 conversions have been done by members say in the last year(s), and what are your results, what are the pros and what are the cons.

There are 2 different gears ratios, one with lower gears, and one with higher gears.

Now who is using which transmission, and with what differential gear ratios?

So here is the opportunity to discuss this topic on T5 conversion for better or worse.

As of late have been asked by a few folks who do not do "internet", about a T 5 conversion, what's involved, which NWC trans gear ratio is best, what differential gear ratio is best, and who is pleased with there results, not only in Overdrive, but in all 5 gears, for off the line performance, as well as the gear spreads etc.

I have suggested there are other trans options, and a trans conversion is not limited to just a T 5 transmission.

This thread is not intended as a "brand" debate, but for learning and informative communications to be kept to the topic where possible.

As of late been offered 2 of the T5 transmissions for nothing, but not my choice, so have offered them to other flathead owners, who as I mentioned would like the low down on the transmissions, differences and best application......

 

 

 

Edited March 16, 2017 by Rockwood

[55 Fargo]

Okay so you T5 guys, what gear set model did you use, and with which diff gearing?

Now someone I know who is interested is not sure what he has, it's in a stock 52 Fargo, so most likely 4.11, the other guy has a 54 Dodge truck with some type of later Mopar 8 1/4 diff, but he thinks its 3.55 gears, but needs to verify?

I again mentioned they have other options, but both already have these transmissions and are keen on them.

So after 70 views, any info out there or can you share your personal experience on your T5 conversion, gearing, usage, efficiency etc.......

 

[Young Ed]

 

[wayfarer]

You might change the title to indicate 't-5' since there are many trans conversions available...

[55 Fargo]

Well, it is still open to all transmissions, I do not want this thread to be a combative preference on trans types and manufacturers.

If I was to say for example do the A833 conversion, would do a blog on the whole process.

 

[55 Fargo]

Just a thought on the topic of trans gearing, diff gearing, and optimal engine RPM.

I think a lot of us are accustomed to modern vehicles with automatic overdrives, and super low RPMs at highway speeds.

For example my Hemi Ram 6 spd, 1500 @60, and running on ECO 4, designed to run like this, and for best fuel economy.

Now take a Chrysler flathead 6, it sure would not be the best RPM range @ 1500, do not care what speeds its running at.

max torque is on the lower RPM scale, this varies from engine to engine, depending on bore and stroke.

I am in the school of thought, where 2200 to 2500 is a optimal range for these engines.

I think if you are running below 2200 any wind or grade might be a problem, over 2500 RPM fuel economy may of course start to drop.

Now there are those who run their's @ 3000 all day long, but is it really that good, and is the fuel economy suffering, I am in not saying it's bad, but is it best.

My engine seems to like 2200-2500,  is quiet enough, and is not working too terribly hard.

Now share your thoughts and experiences on this Gents?

PS won't be long and we can kick around " Vapor Lock" as we do yearly.....LOL

I really think I am wiring in an electric fuel pump this year...

 

[jeffsunzeri]

16 minutes ago, Rockwood said:

Now take a Chrysler flathead 6, it sure would not be the best RPM range @ 1500

I think that statement may be in error. For example, per Allpar: "The largest flathead six Chrysler used in its automobiles was 265.5 cubic inches that produced 218 ft/lbs of torque at 1600 RPM"

Edited March 23, 2017 by jeffsunzeri
more data

[55 Fargo]

Just now, jeffsunzeri said:

I think that statement may be in error.

Really 1500 RPM on the highway @55-65 mph would be a good powerband range?

Can you explain? I would think any resistance would cause , "bog" and poor fuel economy, but what do I know...

If this low of RPM is  good range, then I should look into an overdrive with my 3.23 diff gearing.

Thanx

 

[jeffsunzeri]

4 hours ago, Rockwood said:

Really 1500 RPM on the highway @55-65 mph would be a good powerband range?

Can you explain? I would think any resistance would cause , "bog" and poor fuel economy, but what do I know...

If this low of RPM is  good range, then I should look into an overdrive with my 3.23 diff gearing.

Thanx

 

Yes, that would be a good range for the Chrysler flathead six or eight motor.

Generally, the inline flatheads make power (max torque and HP) at about 1,000 RPM lower than V-8, OHV engines.

As for bogging or poor fuel economy, remember that all the Mopar flat sixes and for that matter the flat eights are relatively small engines that don't produce a lot of horsepower compared to the now-common V-8 engines. A large straight 8 of the modern period (after 1938 or so) never got much larger than 300 C.I., and you can compare that to the ubiquitous 318/360/383 V-8. So our little flatties are going to be running hard compared to more modern OHV motors, but well within themselves if not pushed too hard. Certainly they will be less stressed than many GM and Ford motors of the same time period.

You should definitely be good with an overdrive with a 3.23 diff. if you're running a healthy 218/230/251/265.

[55 Fargo]

4 hours ago, jeffsunzeri said:

Yes, that would be a good range for the Chrysler flathead six or eight motor.

Generally, the inline flatheads make power (max torque and HP) at about 1,000 RPM lower than V-8, OHV engines.

As for bogging or poor fuel economy, remember that all the Mopar flat sixes and for that matter the flat eights are relatively small engines that don't produce a lot of horsepower compared to the now-common V-8 engines. A large straight 8 of the modern period (after 1938 or so) never got much larger than 300 C.I., and you can compare that to the ubiquitous 318/360/383 V-8. So our little flatties are going to be running hard compared to more modern OHV motors, but well within themselves if not pushed too hard. Certainly they will be less stressed than many GM and Ford motors of the same time period.

You should definitely be good with an overdrive with a 3.23 diff. if you're running a healthy 218/230/251/265.

Okay great, yes running a 228 or 237, why you ask, its a long block 4 1/4inch stroke, but bore is not known yet, so either a 3 3/8= 228 ci or 3 7/16= 237. I know Canadian motors...

Actually peak torque is not the same on all of these engines, some are as low as 1200 rpm and others higher at 1650 rpm. 

Peak HP is developed a way after 1500 rpm, and is usually measured at 3600 RPM...

[55 Fargo]

Okay so here we go, yesterday a friend dropped off his 1983 S 10 NWC T5 trans, now I am going to help him put this in his truck, as he is very determined to do so.

But it needs a going over, and the shifter plate bolts 3 out of 4 were broken, so he wants me to fix this.....LOL

So I try heat, no way, then I weld on nuts, no way, not enough to get a good weld into, but man was the nut and bolt shaft red hot.

I then ground 2 down flat, and made my center punch ,ark, my smaller bits were dull yuk, but got reasonable starter holes, and got them drilled out, and threads cleaned up, the final hole the bolt is broken well inside, so drill it out, but not as well, had to tap up to 9M, no big deal I suppose.

Now this isa 4.03 1st gear trans, and .86 5th, and his rear gears are 3.55 we think.

The shifter has no stops, the trans is super light duty rated to 275 ft lbs of torque, sorry guys so far not sure what I think of these trannys, but will say a Chrysler A833 is far more robust.

This trans is missing the outer speedo gear assembly and hold down bracket, he doesn 't know where it is, and does not know where to find one...again ...LOL

The pics, I will help him with his, not sure yet if the clutch housing is being pulled or whether we will do it in truck, but that means the flywheel doesn't come out either.

So far he has had a bargain as I charged 30 bucks to do the broken bolt job...

 

[55 Fargo]

Okay had some time to investigate this T5 trans, its a 1983 NWC 033 series, so 4.03 1st gear, and .86 5th overdrive.

Now this is quite the low gearing for 1st and 2nd somewhat, this 1st gear with a 3.73 or lower diff, would be useless, and .86 reduction in 5th ain't nothing to "walk in high cotton" about either.

The later NWCs are 3.76 1st and .73 5th overdrive, might make a little more sense.

I told my pal, I hope his diff is 3.55 or higher, I explained what gear ratios this is, and not sure where this is going yet.

Any of you T5ers, running the older 4.03 geared trans, if so, tell us about them?

[55 Fargo]

Okay so about to embark on my Chrysler New process A 833 trans transplant.

This unit is from a truck, with a final drive ratio of .71 in 4th, and no ridiculous 4.03 or even a 3.76 for 1st like an S10 T5.

Being a .71 overdrive, highly likely well guaranteed it will not play nice with my present 3.23 , at 65 70 mph, it will be between 1800- 1950 rpm, probaly not so good in hills or any head wind.

Cruising below 2000 rpm, may or may not be that great for the engine, and it may lug and bog at times.

I am already fully aware that it makes peak torque at 1200 rpm, so am a little confused as to why it should not cruise on the hghway at 1800 to 2000 RPM.

I would foresee downshifting back to 3rd a lot at times, no big deal I suppose.

I will be swapping my rear gear to 3.55 or better yet 3.73.

Once I begin this swap, it will be fully documented, it should be easier and smoother than a T5 swap, no bell housing to be pulled, no holes to drill and tap, just swap clutch disc, and bolt on adapter and trans, and the usual cut new hole, and do a driveshaft.

[55 Fargo]

On 3/23/2017 at 2:28 PM, jeffsunzeri said:

Yes, that would be a good range for the Chrysler flathead six or eight motor.

Generally, the inline flatheads make power (max torque and HP) at about 1,000 RPM lower than V-8, OHV engines.

As for bogging or poor fuel economy, remember that all the Mopar flat sixes and for that matter the flat eights are relatively small engines that don't produce a lot of horsepower compared to the now-common V-8 engines. A large straight 8 of the modern period (after 1938 or so) never got much larger than 300 C.I., and you can compare that to the ubiquitous 318/360/383 V-8. So our little flatties are going to be running hard compared to more modern OHV motors, but well within themselves if not pushed too hard. Certainly they will be less stressed than many GM and Ford motors of the same time period.

You should definitely be good with an overdrive with a 3.23 diff. if you're running a healthy 218/230/251/265.

Okay got a question for you Jeff?

With regard to your post, at what RPM range would the average Chrysler flathead 6 be comfortable in?

Where is the most efficient powerband? I always considered that running on the highway at 2200 to 2400 rpm, to be a good number, regardless of the actual speed.

You have illuded to running at much lower, being nearer to the peak torque number at say 1200 rpm.

Would highway cruising at 65-70 mph at 1600-1800 rpm gonna cut it?

 

[classiccarjack]

7 hours ago, Rockwood said:

Okay so about to embark on my Chrysler New process A 833 trans transplant.

This unit is from a truck, with a final drive ratio of .71 in 4th, and no ridiculous 4.03 or even a 3.76 for 1st like an S10 T5.

Being a .71 overdrive, highly likely well guaranteed it will not play nice with my present 3.23 , at 65 70 mph, it will be between 1800- 1950 rpm, probaly not so good in hills or any head wind.

Cruising below 2000 rpm, may or may not be that great for the engine, and it may lug and bog at times.

I am already fully aware that it makes peak torque at 1200 rpm, so am a little confused as to why it should not cruise on the hghway at 1800 to 2000 RPM.

I would foresee downshifting back to 3rd a lot at times, no big deal I suppose.

I will be swapping my rear gear to 3.55 or better yet 3.73.

Once I begin this swap, it will be fully documented, it should be easier and smoother than a T5 swap, no bell housing to be pulled, no holes to drill and tap, just swap clutch disc, and bolt on adapter and trans, and the usual cut new hole, and do a driveshaft.

Don't hate me for this....  3rd is OD on A833OD Transmission's. They flipped the lever on the side cover to allow for a conventional "H" shift pattern.  This makes 4th become third after the lever is flipped.  I build/have built A833's and A833OD Transmissions for about 20+ years now.  I love them!   

I just wanted to throw in some technical information.  Some folks call this transmission a three speed.  Others wouldn't know what it was if they saw one, especially the 1975 which had a cast iron case.  If you would like me to post some pics of these beautiful masterpieces designed from the early 1960's, and ran until the early 1980's,  I have a few that I can photograph and throw up for you to see.

I am trying to be helpful Rockwood.  There is absolutely no malice intended.  I hope that you take my interruption kindly.  I only thought if this because a lot of people are not very knowledgeable of A833's.  Unless it's a muscle car person.

[55 Fargo]

I know it's 3rd gear flipped.

But it's not the gear spread of the regular 4 spd either, which isa very tough trans like the Muncie rock crusher..

Thanks for your reply.

Feel free to add any info you like.

The fact the 3rd is the overdrive gear is it not a Chrysler engineering marvel.

I have  no problems having you join in.

My biggest issue will be this married to a 3.23 rear gear it ain't gonna fly.

So a 3.55 or a 3.73 will be part of the deal. 

I will say this, the S10 NWC T5s, with 4.03 1st gear, and 3.76  1st gear, you will be shifting before crossing a wide intersection, even 3.08 1st gear is a little low, but doable.

Edited April 9, 2017 by Rockwood

[classiccarjack]

30 minutes ago, Rockwood said:

I know it's sc3rd gear flipped.

But it's not the gear spread of the regular 4 spd either.

Thanks for your reply.

Feel free to add any info you like.

The fact the 3rd is the overdrive gear is anot engineering marvel.

I have  no problems having you join in.

My biggest issue will be this married to a 3.23 rear gear it ain't gonna fly.

So a 3.55 or a 3.73 will be part of the deal. 

With the .72 to 1 OD, my personal best results are using the 3.73 ratio with this transmission.  I have a factory built 1975 Duster with this OD.  And I put this transmission in a earlier car(my hot rod) and came up with these results:

3.55 was OK, but seemed to lug at speeds lower than 55 MPH.

3.91 was OK, but seemed to rev higher than I liked at 75 MPH.

I will be installing this transmission in my 1938 Plymouth someday.  Once I do this, I will see if the 3.73 is the "sweet spot" gear with this pick up truck.  If not, I will find this topic and comment.  

I have to disengage, filing 2016 taxes!  I would much rather surf this forum than do what I should do....   I will try to get back with you soon.  If I get the time, I can share some photos from my barn for educational purposes later.  My wife is currently busting my balls regarding filing my taxes!  LOL

Thank you Rockwood.

Edited April 9, 2017 by classiccarjack

[55 Fargo]

8 minutes ago, classiccarjack said:

With the .72 to 1 OD, my personal best results are using the 3.73 ratio with this transmission.  I have a factory built 1975 Duster with this OD.  And I put this transmission in a earlier car(my hot rod) and came up with these results:

3.55 was OK, but seemed to lug at speeds lower than 55 MPH.

3.91 was OK, but seemed to rev higher than I liked at 75 MPH.

I will be installing this transmission in my 1938 Plymouth someday.  Once I do this, I will see if the 3.73 is the "sweet spot" gear with this pick up truck.  If not, I will find this topic and comment.  

I have to disengage, filing 2016 taxes!  I would much rather surf this forum than do what I should do....   I will try to get back with you soon.  If I get the time, I can share some photos from my barn for educational purposes later.  My wife is currently busting my balls regarding filing my taxes!  LOL

Thank you Rockwood.

Thanx CCJ, in the case of trucks with stock suspensions, I beam front ends, 65 is a nice top speed range, had mine up to 75 mph early today, not so much fun after 70.

I know there will be those who say they are driving 75-80 mph, good for those, my truck is comfortable at 60-65 mph. Maybe this is not busy freeway friendly but works for me, and is a far cry better than 50 mph with 4.11 rear gears...

[classiccarjack]

4 hours ago, Rockwood said:

Thanx CCJ, in the case of trucks with stock suspensions, I beam front ends, 65 is a nice top speed range, had mine up to 75 mph early today, not so much fun after 70.

I know there will be those who say they are driving 75-80 mph, good for those, my truck is comfortable at 60-65 mph. Maybe this is not busy freeway friendly but works for me, and is a far cry better than 50 mph with 4.11 rear gears...

Hey Rockwood, can you post a picture of your truck?  I would love to see it. And 65 MPH is just enough to keep you from getting killed on California freeways.

 The 1949 Power Wagon I restored did 55 MPH.  SCARY ON FREEWAYS!  I was glaring into the rear view mirrors and utterly terrified of getting whiplash! These pricks would swerve, almost hit me, then blast their horns at me.  I never drove that truck again.  This bad rude behavior ruined it for me.

But...  Other than being a giant brick that sucked any plausible possibility of achieving any sort of decent gas mileage, my 1959 was in it's happy place between 80-90 MPH.  However, It was V8 powered by a 1972 360. My gears were 3.55 Ratio.  The engine loved 4000 RPM's with the camshaft I had in it.  I did have new king pins in it, and really expensive high speed rated Radial Tires on it.

My 1950 would go over 60 MPH only if I were to drive it off of a cliff to allow gravity to pull it to terminal velocity.  At 55, with bias ply tires, I was terrified and had all my nerves jumping to drive it that fast.  I was a teenager then, and not experienced.  Because of my fear, I took a lot of dirt roads!  LOL. It felt the best at 45-50 MPH.  

Every vehicle has it's comfort zone.  And I really pray that my 1938 will feel safe at 65-70 MPH.  If it does, I really would like to make it my daily driver due to the small fortune that I am investing into it.  If I can get 4-5 years out of it before major repairs are needed, then my dream will have come true.  Then I can pass it along to one of my kids to repair/restore/drive....  Well maybe...  And yes, I plan on using a A833OD in it with a 230.  The original drivetrain is going to be rebuilt, installed, broken in, driven a few thousand miles, then removed and crated.  This way I can always put it back to an all original numbers matching truck when I retire, that is if one of the kids doesn't inherit it first.....

[55 Fargo]

So Cal freeways no thanx, and this is not a slam either.

How can that be any enjoyment, especially in an old heap.

60-65-70 is 1 thing, but 80-90 mph, don't even think about it.

I don't even like those speeds in my 2015 hemi powered Ram.

Even at 60 mph plus, in mulitlane busy traffic you better have the brakes and steering to back it up in a new york second.

Here is my truck, pic taken early Sunday morning not far from home..

[classiccarjack]

7 hours ago, Rockwood said:

So Cal freeways no thanx, and this is not a slam either.

How can that be any enjoyment, especially in an old heap.

60-65-70 is 1 thing, but 80-90 mph, don't even think about it.

I don't even like those speeds in my 2015 hemi powered Ram.

Even at 60 mph plus, in mulitlane busy traffic you better have the brakes and steering to back it up in a new york second.

Here is my truck, pic taken early Sunday morning not far from home..

Your truck looks FANTASTIC!   Was it originally an orange truck?  And I really like the multiple Carburetor arrangement.  I often have desired a Fargo Tailgate for my Canadian built 1937 Dodge Truck.  Just to make the Fuuurd and Chebbie guys scratch their heads and wonder what it is.  LOL

[classiccarjack]

Rockwood, I am not insulted.  SoCal has to be one of the worst places to live if you weren't born as a complete jackass.  Alot of people here are very rude, inconsiderate, and suffer from Narcism.  My kindness has been taken advantage of more than once here.  And I can keep rambling on, but I will put a cork in it....  Don't get me wrong, there are some good folks that I found out here, and they feel the same way I do.

My friends, acquaintances, and other people that I have met north of the Grapevine have all been solid people.  This is why I drove from next to the Mexican Border, where I reside, up to Tim's BBQ close to Lodi. I am originally a farm kid from Kansas, that grew up and wanted to seek adventure.  I served this wonderful country, and really learned alot when I traveled the globe.  I chose to live here due to health reasons.  And that is why I will stay here....  

Enough BS...  Let's talk Transmissions!

[55 Fargo]

Thanx for the anecdotes on the crude and rude drivers in your locale, near Escondido by chance?

Okay so out for a drive, surprise, surprise, my truck runs well enough, handles okay it is what it is, 1950s truck.

I am like most not overly satisfied with my 0-60 time, and this needs to improve.

I may put the trans transplant on hold temporarily, and swap ina new set of rear gears, trying to find 3.55 or better yet 3.73s, I think this aerodynamic fridge needs some lower gear boost.

Anyway shot this video for yall....

 

 

[jeffsunzeri]

23 hours ago, Rockwood said:

Okay got a question for you Jeff?

With regard to your post, at what RPM range would the average Chrysler flathead 6 be comfortable in?

Where is the most efficient powerband? I always considered that running on the highway at 2200 to 2400 rpm, to be a good number, regardless of the actual speed.

You have illuded to running at much lower, being nearer to the peak torque number at say 1200 rpm.

Would highway cruising at 65-70 mph at 1600-1800 rpm gonna cut it?

 

I feel that best cruising speed would be in between best torque and best HP for just about any gasoline powered automobile. I feel comfortable with my flathead sixes doing 2,000 or so RPM all day long.

Also, I feel the A833 is a far better choice than a GM trans.

Edited April 10, 2017 by jeffsunzeri
Added info.

[55 Fargo]

4 hours ago, jeffsunzeri said:

I feel that best cruising speed would be in between best torque and best HP for just about any gasoline powered automobile. I feel comfortable with my flathead sixes doing 2,000 or so RPM all day long.

Also, I feel the A833 is a far better choice than a GM trans.

Yes I agree, at 2000 rpm or so, they seem happy and not overly taxed.

I believe combines and swatters powered by these engines ran in the 2200 rpm range, lower rpm and cammed for more torque at the lower end.

Those will state they run 3000 rpm all day long, and who am I to say different. I do not want my engine running at 3000 rpm all day I can tell you that.

I am going ahead with an A833 trans=plant, and most likely a rear gear swap, as the 3.23 will have me at only 1700 rpm at 60 mph.

I could see not using this so much until this rear gear is changed.

Running a flathead on a level highway with not too much wind, not sure if it could handle a sustained speed of 60-65 mph at 1700-1800 rpm....