I'm looking to purchase a T-5 setup for my car. I'm going to swap in a 3.4l next summer, most likely gonna turbo the car at some point. I have a winter car, the firebird will only be for summer driving...and maybe a lil sideways in the snow. Someone has offered to sell me a 92 T-5 from a 3.1l camero, or a 83 t-5. Which would be the best bet as far as reliability? From what I've heard from my father in law the old manual linkage trannies were much better because when you let the clutch out it's out, doesn't slowly go into gear. On the other hand I've heard that the world class trannies are better, which I beleive the 92 would be. Which would be better? Longer life, more reliable.....

 

IMO the linkage sucks. I've had LOTS of cars with that, over the years; I hated every one. I changed it out in the car I have now, to hydraulics. It's MUCH MUCH better.

I've heard that drivel about how linkage allows for "faster" clutch operation. Notice that it mostly comes from people who have never had one. I don't believe it. Especially since I've had both kinds, in the same car, one behind the other, with the same clutch. Apples to apples comparison.

Since it's your father-in-law, nod politely, agree while he's standing there, and then go do the right thing instead without telling him.

In any case, the transmission does not care what system the clutch uses. There is no difference in the transmission itself.

I'd strongly recommend the newer one.

 

That's what I figured. He was talking more about 60's vehicles so I dunno if that makes a difference or not.

 

Well, I normally agree with what I've heard sofakingdom recommend, but not this time. I've only had one issue with the old linkage style clutch (1 bad bushing) - but other than that, It's worked fine for me. But in saying this, I realize a hydralic clutch is a better design. And yeah, I've driven both, and 1 is no harder to operate than the other IMO.

And there is a difference in the transmissions between an '83 and '92...but as Sofa said - Go for the newer trans, it should be a WC trans. Any original '83 trans is gonna be a NWC, and the torque rating will be lower.

 

Are there differences in the way the speedometer cable works and what about any torque arm stuff?

My experience with the hydraulic clutches are mixed some have been slow to disengage and others worked fine. I prefer the mechanical design as long as everything works fine.

My 83 T/A broke a z-bar and cost me a transmission, driveshaft and rearend. I replaced everything and bought a new G.M. Z-bar and other parts for it. I lubed everything up good and I suspect that is why the other one broke because of no grease. I never drive in the rain or snow with it since I have owned it so it should last.

 

No diff in the torque arm mount that I'm aware of. As far as Speedo, well that did change from cable to electronic. But- My trans is from a '92 model, and my speedo drive from my '83 went in just like the original.

BTW....how in the world did you end up losing a trans, drive shaft and rear end due to a z bar breaking?? I'm not doubting you, I just find it hard to believe someone else has the same luck I have - all bad.