trannsmison help

The place to talk Slicks. All we ask is that discussion has something to do with slicks...

Moderators: Casey 65, Kid

Post Reply
User avatar
BMorrison
Posts: 4
Joined: September 13, 2008, 11:30 pm
Location: Eugene, Oregon
Contact:

trannsmison help

Post by BMorrison »

Ok heres how it goes I put an (SROD)mustang trans in my 65 f100 300I6 I kept the factory bell and fly wheel upgraded to a new diaphram clutch kit every thing went in perfect . My crapy old starter seemed to give up when i was finished i thought . I pulled it back out after only 35miles because the throughout bearing seemed to short couldn't get the clutch to release enough that is with it adjusted perfectly . The pilot bushing was chewed up and so was the splines on the trans and bearing retainer pushes against the clutch hub . It is to deep in the bell . what could be the problem and yes the block spacer is in . the t5 will fit and haven't read any issues with that . Any one that has Ideas would help .
BackyardRest

Re: trannsmison help

Post by BackyardRest »

BMorrison wrote:Ok heres how it goes I put an (SROD)mustang trans in my 65 f100 300I6 I kept the factory bell and fly wheel upgraded to a new diaphram clutch kit every thing went in perfect . My crapy old starter seemed to give up when i was finished i thought . I pulled it back out after only 35miles because the throughout bearing seemed to short couldn't get the clutch to release enough that is with it adjusted perfectly . The pilot bushing was chewed up and so was the splines on the trans and bearing retainer pushes against the clutch hub . It is to deep in the bell . what could be the problem and yes the block spacer is in . the t5 will fit and haven't read any issues with that . Any one that has Ideas would help .
sounds like the trans input is too long for application. Did you use a pilot bushing or a brg.

time to get out the tape measure to check length of input vs how far out your pilot bushing/crank is. was the trans tight against the block and did it seem to bind?
fmartin_gila
Posts: 1021
Joined: April 21, 2007, 9:58 am
Location: Mandurriao, Iloilo City, Philippines

Post by fmartin_gila »

I don't remember the specifics, but there was some difference in the depth of the bellhousings between car use and truck use. amounted to 1/2 or 5/8 difference. Maybe someone else will chime in with better info. Better check the tranny input shaft bearing for damage too. Also if you ran it that way for a bit, it would have put an excessive load on the thrust bearing for the crankshaft. Better do some serious checking for damage.

Fred
User avatar
Jonas
Posts: 322
Joined: August 8, 2006, 11:59 am
Location: Monroe NC
United States of America

Post by Jonas »

http://www.davidkeetoploaders.com/bellh ... dchart.htm

From David Kee's website

"Bellhousings that will be used with a Toploader must measure 6 1/4" deep. If it measures 6 3/4" deep it is a truck bellhousing and should not be used."

I ran into this issue when I put a toploader in my 66. I had to find a car bellhousing.
1966 F100 SWB 390/Toploader/Ford traction Loc

1997 F250HD 460 4X4

2004 RoadKing

1984 FLHS

1978FXE
User avatar
Hawkrod
Posts: 1359
Joined: July 21, 2006, 10:57 pm
Location: Apple Valley CA
United States of America

Post by Hawkrod »

The bellhousing depth difference was for FE engines and does not apply to 6 cylinder or small block applications. The truck FE used a longer bellhousing and so used the same trans for a 6 cylinder, smallblock, or FE while cars used different trans for all three (usually). In this case the front bearing support is rubbing so I would wonder if it were not a 4 cylinder or V6 trans instead of a V8 as they were slightly longer. The 302 trans should work fine behind the truck 6 but maybe there was a change I am not aware of. Hawkrod
Post Reply