Are there any other 6 speed trannys for Chevy's? since im looking into getting a new T 56, i wanted to make sure that its still the best descision,is the vette tranny any different/ stronger?
is the M6 people refer to, jsut a "manual 6" but still refering to the t 56, or is it a different tranny? any recomendations for other 6 spd's, or which is strongest if buying a new one.
thanks

 

You know, the reason the T56 is mentioned here so much is that it's the cheapest option. But I'll humour you.

ZF from an 89-96 vette? Not stronger, way pricier and more complex to work on than the T56.

97-up Vette used a T56 / Transaxle in the back of the car. Not even gonna fit a thirdgen.

Richmond 6? Shifter way in the wrong place. As strong as, if not stronger than the T56. Uses T10 parts, so it's reasonable priced, service wise. Buying one however, is not cheap. Not sure if they make one for the 83-92 bellhousings w/ canted pattern. With the 1982 bell, or either of the Lakewood bellhousings for a third gen, it uses a cheap and more common T5 clutch.

Instead of asking questions, do a search on the above 2 trannies. Take notes. Then come back with detailed questions.

 

Hmmm, always thought the ZF Six speed was a bit more beefy than the T-56? *shrug*

I had the privelage to go look at a C5 on a lift with a T-56, Weirdest drivetrain i've ever seen, like JMD said the tranny was by the axle and had this giant tube coming from the trans tunnel to the transmission in the back. How the hell does that thing work and is that better over the traditional setup as far as parasitic drivetrain loss?

 

The earlier C4 vette "noisy" ZF was rated 450lb-ft. The later "quiet" one was rated a bit less, don't remember the exact rating. So, comparing the 2.6x first gear / .50 sixth gear T56 to the same ratio ZF, they are either the same or weaker rated. Trannies can be under-rated or over-rated on strength though.
So I'll just go with the factory ratings.


clutch is still up front. Driveshaft is driven by something up front and hooks into the front of the trans. Shouldn't be much different on drivetrain loss since you still have a clutch, a driveshaft with 2 u-joints, and a T56.

 

Drivetrian loss is much higher. I think (too late for my brian to think) it is upwards of 18 to 20 percent where as the T56 is 15 to 18. A stock LS1 camaro shoud dyno higher than a stock LS1 vette. However, the point of that type of rear is for handeling and near 50/50 weight distrabution. Those two factors alone make it far superior to any rear suspension set-up on 3rd gens.

 

That was the cookiest thing I have ever seen on a car, I had thought that thing was the driveshaft at first, I was like *** damn, what does the vette need with a 3/4' driveshaft, then I realized it was a housing for something. Yea, I bet its great for handling, damn t-56 weighs about 125 lbs, must be nice to put it in the rear. Im curious to how the shifter linkage works, sorry didn't make that clear.

 

I've never serviced a C5, but the shift rail rod comes from the front of the trans., instead of in the tailhousing. Similar to a 928 Porsche. I dunno how it's all hooked together though. Gotta be interesting.