I can't believe some of the seller buyer questions/answers on B4C auctions. I must admit from time to time I get pretty upset at the TGO boards, but these people take the cake.

For example:

THESE QUESTIONS

here is my favorite example:


Q: Could you please tell me about the transmission? Like what model it is and what condition is it in? Thank you , Dave


Answered on Jan-07-05


A: I have had some great questions today! It is a World Class T5 manual tranny. It is similar to the ones that came in Fox Bodied mustangs, but they weren't interchangeable. It is a stronger unit than the regular T5's that came behind civilian Camaro's. For those who want to argue that last point, I received that bit of information from the Fleet Sales Manager at Knapp Chevrolet in Houston. They were the destination and prep point for all Texas DPS vehicles. The info was also concurred by Jerry Newbury whom was the fleet manager for DPS in Austin, Texas. I have personally spoke with Mr. Newburry.


ooooh I seee, Mr. Newburry (whoever the **** that is) well that means it must be 100 percent correct, because I can guarantee you some fleet manager definitely knows way more than any other person with even an inch of common sense.

Besides nobody elses V8 T5 car was ever a WC T-5 from the factory, certainly not the same as a mustang WC T-5. I get so sick of hearing about mustang trannys being stronger!

To the uninformed, mustangs are lighter (for the most part) and produce about as much torque as a 5.7 TPI AFTER YOU PUT NITROUS ON THE 5.0! I have repaired broken 5.0 trannys with parts from broken GM T-5's!!! (sacrilidge I know)

Gee, let me look into my one of a kind 1992 GM produced fleet order manual for "special service package" camaros



hmm nothing there about special trannys, I wonder why? BECAUSE THEY ARE NOT! [/RANT]

 

Well said.

 

Thank you for indulging my rant

 

Yeah, he posted that car on this site before he put it on Ebay. I was trying to include a stop by on a trip I had already planned. He put on the auction block (within 2 days of asking about the car) before I had a chance to make it down there. Now I'm glad he did it because I can now see some discepencies and altercations he's made to the car that I wouldn't have known otherwise. If references are made to parts that were removed he just says he has them, doesn't say why they were removed and doesn't actually state that they come with the car. It appears that the original diff is spoken for either way.
It also appears from the limited info that I can gather that he blew the original and the current engine as well as the differential. I'm given the impression that he changed the heads after it blew after looking into it further. He also won't start it so you won't know if the drive train even works. I wonder what condition that tranny is in after all that?
I was excited at a good opportunity to get my hands on a cheap 1LE. As always, you get what you pay for and a long drive was saved.


--- By the way, were you making fun of my question as well?

 

That's incorrect.

All Cars, V8 or 6-cyl, got the "wo"........ "worl"........ {pppppuuuuuuuukkkkkkkkke} sorry, been on too many PIT teams and in too many "total quality" seminars and too many kaizens to be able to even utter that one-minute-manager mid-late 80s buzzword.... 2nd design T-5. I had one in my 83 for some time in fact, that came out of a 91 1LE car.

 

Well, you may have me there because now that you mention it a few T-5's put in V8 camaros before 1986 might be non-WC units, but that still doesnt change the fact of his statement.

The easiest way to tell what "class" your T-5 is is to look at the front of it while it is out of the car. Just poking out from under the input shaft retainer will be a bearing race cap, it looks kind of like a plug. If it says:

"Timken" it is WC

"torrington" it is not WC

as I said before, other than V6/4cyl cars, or older V8 (pre 86) cars your chances of having a non-WC is slim.

In 4th gens they actually started putting WC behind the V-6's because they made more power than some of the irocs.

For those they actually used the mustang front case half (like the one pictured. Meaning the front half of the case, instead of using the 4 big bell housing mounting ears that we have become accustomed to seeing on GM cars and our cars over the years became the odd shaped non-protruding ears like have been found on fors for ages.

This combined with a tailhousing made just for GM cars allowed TTC ( the company that bought borg-warner and was previously just "tremec") to save costs by using the T-5 front case that they were still producing in greater numbers for ford on the GM application and at the same time save GM some green for their pockets (because it sure didn't lower car prices).

So if anyone got a "5.0 mustang WC T-5" it was the 93 and later V-6 4th gen cars LOL!

anyways, back to the subject, if you have an 87 and later factory V8 car that doesnt have a WC tranny then somebody ripped you. As an owner of a B4C, and owner of some very unique B4C GM produced documentation, and as a former tranny builder and drivetrain enthusiast, I still would never make the kind of rediculous claims made by that ebay seller's "glorified" car salesmean contact (the fleet manager). Basically to say, other than A/C there is nothing in a B4C that could not be had in other cars except maybe the suspension and brakes, and those could be had in 1LE's. We just happened to get it in one package and in an RS

 

Here is another tard:

A sale for a third gen twin turbo system that has two tiny turbos with exhaust housings that are large enough to be on a single turbo in most cars.

http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/ws/eB...tem=7946507201

first I email him:

it looks like you have the A/R's in the listing switched, you have the hot side listed as .96 (like a single turbo A/R) and the cold side as .6 (like a twin exhaust side should be). Am I wrong or were they mistakenly oredered backwards?

his first response:

THe exhaust side has a .96 a/r housing the compressor has a .60 a/r housing. These turbos are correct as a single turbo system or as a twin turbo system.



second I email him:

Im sorry with that large an A/R that you will either need a huge
engine or a lot of RPM. Using math or just common examples of actual vehicles running that can be seen even on line or at the track, for twins you wouldn't want over a .8 A/R on the turbine side even on a larger small block running a reasonable RPM.

The bad news is that a 5.7 liter engine buzzing to 6000 RPM running that setup would only make around 4 psi boost. Im sure the boost gauge would likely show a bit more peak boost but nothing too effective.

The good news is that it would make about 400 RWHP if that could be called good.

(calculations based on Ray Halls turbo calculator)

These turbos seem to remind me of the ones I have seen sold on ebay where a seller has taken left over hot and cold side parts from making nice home-made hybrid T3/T4 turbos and put them together hoping someone will buy them by including them in a kit.

his second response:

THanks for your opinion ,But I bought these turbos brand new,they were never torn down so I could try to rip somebody off,you also remind me of somebody that knows alot of information but not the whole story.Maybe you got ripped off or ripped somebody off at one time but I dont play those games.

what do you think I should say next? I am taking suggestions just for fun.

 

Too bad the Mustang WC T-5 has a different 1st gear ratio, making the countershaft, input shaft, and 1st gear totally different.

 

B-W came out with the 2nd design T-5 in about 86 or 87. Before that, all T-5s were 1st design; didn't matter what engine size or shape. No "features from the future".

Various mfrs started swapping over to it over the course of the next couple of years. I can't say about all GM models; but in these particular cars, 87 was the last year they used the 1st design, and they switched all of them over - of all engine configurations - to the 2nd design from 88 up, unless a few slipped out in early 88 using up old stock.

All this guy said, was it was the same type of transmission as the Mustangs had. No heinous sin in that, that I can detect.

We're not the ebay police here though; I doubt that complaining here about it, will do much good. Too bad people insist on trying to jack the price of their cars up by using buzzwords and such, and basically telling people what they think they want to hear, instead of the truth. Ebay is no different from yerbasic local we-tote-the-note corner vacant lot in that regard.

I can't be bothered with even looking at the "turbo" one, let alone arguing with some wannabe rĄcer trying to rĄce out a particularly unique domestic car. About 90% of the turbo stuff that goes on in street cars is pure monkey-spank anyway. Those Frankenstein projects hardly ever run at all, and if they do it's only for short bursts at a time, and they usually seem to stop running for some reason other than turning off the key. Something else usually happens first to make them stop. I'd bet this one is no different in that regard. Regardless of its theoretical merit and efficiency and predicted output, I bet it doesn't even come close, even for a few seconsds; let alone as anything approaching a daily driver. I'm sure as hell not going to get involved with somebody like that in a peeing contest over some technicalities of which turbos he "selected". That's just near about pointless and a waste of bandwidth.

"Caveat emptor"
— Some ancient Roman (Cicero? I forget now) after looking at, and deciding not to buy, a used donkey

 

Yes it is true ford went with the 3.35 first gear and but most years the other ratios (other than OD) in most were the same, meaning many other internal parts were able to be used from one tranny to the other, not all but some...