M39 vs MK6
#1
M39 vs MK6
Other than the 5th gear ratio being different, what are the differences between these two transmissions? Stiffer case, different input/output shafts, beefier internals, gear angles?
Is this similar to the M21 vs M22 comparison or is there more to it?
Anyone out there with intimate knowledge I would appreciate your input here.
Thanks
Is this similar to the M21 vs M22 comparison or is there more to it?
Anyone out there with intimate knowledge I would appreciate your input here.
Thanks
#2
Supreme Member
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 26,040
Received 1,667 Likes
on
1,265 Posts
Car: Yes
Engine: Usually
Transmission: Sometimes
Axle/Gears: Behind me somewhere
Re: M39 vs MK6
The TBI and LG4 (grocery cart) cars got a .63:1 5th.
The L69 & LB9 (performance) cars got a .73:1 5th.
There is no other difference whatsoever between them. Same intermediate gear ratios, same weeeeek case, same tiny gears, same same same.
As far as the various 6-cyls, I haven't the vaguest clue what they got.
The L69 & LB9 (performance) cars got a .73:1 5th.
There is no other difference whatsoever between them. Same intermediate gear ratios, same weeeeek case, same tiny gears, same same same.
As far as the various 6-cyls, I haven't the vaguest clue what they got.
#4
Supreme Member
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 26,040
Received 1,667 Likes
on
1,265 Posts
Car: Yes
Engine: Usually
Transmission: Sometimes
Axle/Gears: Behind me somewhere
Re: M39 vs MK6
No.
The setups for a cable speedo and for a VSS are COMPLETELY interchangeable. The transmission is the same. In fact in some years Camaro still used a cable with the VSS in the instrument cluster but the Birds used a trans-mounted VSS, in otherwise identical transmissions differentiated by application as described above.
Can't comment on 6-cyls. Those transmissions don't fit anything I would ever have and I would never use one for anything so I couldn't care less.
The setups for a cable speedo and for a VSS are COMPLETELY interchangeable. The transmission is the same. In fact in some years Camaro still used a cable with the VSS in the instrument cluster but the Birds used a trans-mounted VSS, in otherwise identical transmissions differentiated by application as described above.
Can't comment on 6-cyls. Those transmissions don't fit anything I would ever have and I would never use one for anything so I couldn't care less.
#5
Supreme Member
iTrader: (4)
Re: M39 vs MK6
The TBI and LG4 (grocery cart) cars got a .63:1 5th.
The L69 & LB9 (performance) cars got a .73:1 5th.
There is no other difference whatsoever between them. Same intermediate gear ratios, same weeeeek case, same tiny gears, same same same.
As far as the various 6-cyls, I haven't the vaguest clue what they got.
The L69 & LB9 (performance) cars got a .73:1 5th.
There is no other difference whatsoever between them. Same intermediate gear ratios, same weeeeek case, same tiny gears, same same same.
As far as the various 6-cyls, I haven't the vaguest clue what they got.
The 0.63 was not limited to LB9 / LG4; my first NWC T5 was 0.63 and from an '84 L69 Trans Am. The 0.63 makes perfect sense with 3.73 rear gears, which were offered with the L69 and LG4, but never the LB9, nor TBI.
And yes, 5th is the only difference between the two.
#6
Supreme Member
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 26,040
Received 1,667 Likes
on
1,265 Posts
Car: Yes
Engine: Usually
Transmission: Sometimes
Axle/Gears: Behind me somewhere
Re: M39 vs MK6
Every L69 one I ever got, had a .73:1 in it. (my original and 2 others)
The only one I ever got that I knew for sure came from LB9 (actually came out of a 91 1LE car) had .73:1.
Every other one I ever got (quite a few, therefore likely to be from the more common cars) had .63:1.
I screwed up and put a .63 in my car once. (just the stock gears, 3.73) It SUCKED. It made the car feel like it needed another gear in between 4th and 5th; kinda like the 700-R4 feels almost like it needs a 1½th gear.
I threw a handful of .63 gears away once. Got tired of em sitting around. I think I've pared my T-5 junk down to the point that I don't have any more of em.
AFAIK all the V8 T-5s in these cars came with about a 2.95:1 1st gear.
The only one I ever got that I knew for sure came from LB9 (actually came out of a 91 1LE car) had .73:1.
Every other one I ever got (quite a few, therefore likely to be from the more common cars) had .63:1.
I screwed up and put a .63 in my car once. (just the stock gears, 3.73) It SUCKED. It made the car feel like it needed another gear in between 4th and 5th; kinda like the 700-R4 feels almost like it needs a 1½th gear.
I threw a handful of .63 gears away once. Got tired of em sitting around. I think I've pared my T-5 junk down to the point that I don't have any more of em.
AFAIK all the V8 T-5s in these cars came with about a 2.95:1 1st gear.
#7
Supreme Member
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: North Salt Lake
Posts: 1,353
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
Car: '86 Camaro, '94 Camaro, 3 others
Engine: LG4 ->L29, L32->LR4, L36, LG4, L31
Transmission: 700R-4, T5WC, 4L80E, SM465, 4L60E
Axle/Gears: 3.42, 3.23, WTB/WTT 2.93
Re: M39 vs MK6
According to the GM heritage center, there were L69 / 0.63 combos, but in '85, not '84.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
zman1969
Engine/Drivetrain/Suspension Parts for Sale
1
11-08-2015 01:27 PM