Twilightoptics

Anyone done this setup before?

No one has really talked about scatter shields in my searches.

I've got a 2piece rear main engine. The Trans will be out of a '94-'97.

I emailed lakewood, and they told me they don't make a bellhousing for my application? I assume you could just use an LT1 bellhousing?

McLeod on the other had, has not gotten back to me yet.
Their SFR Modular Bellhousing:
8710-15 1, 2, 5, 7 T56 FROM LT1 CAMARO

Notes:
1. LT1 CAMARO COMES WITH EXTENDED PILOT BUSHING. BELLHOUSING HAS NO PLACE FOR STOCK SLAVE CYL. W/PULL CLUTCH. BUT BELLHOUSING CAN CONVERT YOUR PULL CLUTCH TO A PUSH WITH A HYD. T.O. BRG.

2. CONVERTING LT1 TO PUSH TYPE CLUTCH - USE OUR KIT NUMBER 74010-1A-07 WITH STEEL FLY, OR 73010-1A-07 WITH ALM. FLY.

5. SOME T56 TRANS MAY REQUIRE THE FRONT INTERMEDIATE PLATE, CHANGED TO ACCOMMODATE MECHANICAL LINKAGE.


So, according to this, I would just purchase their bellhousing that would fit the engine block and transmission, a standard flywheel (in which a 168 tooth would fit), a standard clutch set that would have a 1 1/8" Dia 26spline (Same as a T-5), and I'd be set?

Aside from throwout bearing and clutch fork, which I'd have to figure out part number. Not sure what their kit 74010-1a-07 entails, but if it has a clutch, I'm certainly not spending $1000+ on the clutch alone as I see most McLeod clutches are.

http://store.summitracing.com/partde...5&autoview=sku

Is that the piece for the "bearing retainer." I assume that would bolt onto the bellhousing, the trans would slip into it. Would the input shaft come far enough into the crank to properly engage?
The lower cost of all pieces (Clutch/flywheel) should cover the cost of the adapter.

What is the intermediate plate, and they are talking about it needing to be changed for just mechanical linkages? As in, a lever from the clutch pedal to the frame, over on a pivot ball for the clutch?

What about hydraulics? When they say PULL clutch, does that mean that the clutchfork under engagement, moves the opposite direction of a standard say 3rd gen hydraulic setup


I saw in the Chevy High Performance Mag, that they installed a T56 onto a standard GM Bellhousing with an Adapter plate from Rockland Gear (Cannot find a price on their site). Then fabricated a bracket to mount the slave cylinder. They also fit a 12" clutch with 168tooth flywheel underthere aswell.

If this is the case, and you CAN just retrofit, why doesn't anyone?

I'm not going to put the factory bellhousing up there with a Spec Clutch (as I will purchase), if it means putting a scatter shield up later will require a flywheel/clutch/fork etc change.



I REALLY hope someone has encountered this.

Thanks
-Paul

onebad82z

iTrader: (7)

I think I am encountering this right now!

That McCleod plate in Summit is for swapping in an LS1 series T56.It will not fit an LT1 T56.I am doing that swap (LS1 T56) right now into my '82 with a Lakewood scattershield #15015.

"Is that the piece for the "bearing retainer." I assume that would bolt onto the bellhousing, the trans would slip into it. Would the input shaft come far enough into the crank to properly engage?"

That part number gets you an adapter plate to bolt an LS1 T56 to a T10/T5 bell,stock or steel as far as I have found out.As well as adapting it to a standard bell it moves it back 1/2" to make up for the longer input shaft on the LS1 trans.It does bolt right up to my Lakewood no problems.You remove the LS1 bell altogether and this adapter bolts to the front of the trans.The adapter also comes with a throwout bearing retainer.The input shaft then will engage the pilot bearing just fine.I have talked to several members on nastyz28.com that have done this swap succesfully with mechanical linkage second gen cars.They have used all stock components from bell forward.That is what gave me the idea to do it in my mechanical linkage '82.I cannot say for sure if it will work in a hydraulic T5 car or not but I cannot see why it would not.

Rockland Standard does not sell that adapter mentioned seperately.I have asked them as I work about 10miles from their shop.You can only get it with a trans.

I am attempting this swap as even with the price of the adapter plate,it is cheaper for me as I already have a Lakewood scattershield,Hays Billet steel flywheel and CF DF clutch that works and holds perfect for me,all with no more than 7k miles on them.Why sell all this and go with an LT1 trans,with all used components!

"If this is the case, and you CAN just retrofit, why doesn't anyone?"

Probably because most people do searches here and see old posts saying you CANNOT run an LS1 trans with an older block.I searched elsewhere and found out this could not be any further from the truth!

If you have not picked up the trans yet you may want to look into the LS1 T56 swap instead.

onebad82z

iTrader: (7)

Just in case anyone ever finds this in a search..

Talked to McLeod tech today and he says that if you are using the #8-207 plate and swapping an 98-02 LS1 T56 to an older block,you NEED the extended pilot bushing #8617.

This is due to the fact that the plate is really made to adapt the aftermarket T56 to older bells.The difference is in the total input shaft length,trans would have to be pulled apart to measure this.The aftermarket trans input shaft is 11.125" long and the factory T56 length is 10.625".This bushing gives you roughly .400" more input shaft support than a standard pilot bearing/bushing.He said .500" would be ideal but give or take 1/8" will not hurt it.

Just an FYI.

Twilightoptics

The LS1 T56 seems to go for a little more $$. That's why I'm going for the LT1.

How does the LS1 type throw out bearing work? A guy in my local camaro crew used one from Tilton. He said the bearing itself acts as the slave, and you can use all clutch parts from a thirdgen (Flywheel, clutch, pressureplate). He also said he found a bearing retainer that bolts to the front two bolt holes on the LS1 trans that might bolt to an LT1? Never mind, the bearing is $350 and I'll run a stock bellhousing before I did that!

Looks like that lakewood is cheaper than the mcleod, so maybe that would offset the cost of getting the LS1 trans.

Just to clarify... you get a T5 bellhousing, bolt the adapter from summit(has bearing retainer) to the bellhousing, then bolt the trans to it? And you need the longer pilot bushing.

What about using this ?Lakewood T5 Hydraulic Slave

Then I could just use the thirdgen hydraulics? Why are there adapter plates with bearing retainer for the LS1 but not LT1? ARGH!


What about shifter placement? Using the LS1 trans, and being pushed back, what will that do to the shifter coming up through the console? Or is it neglegible and wont be noticed?

Are the LS1 trans built any better, or just different input shaft/bellhousing?

onebad82z

iTrader: (7)

Just to clarify... you get a T5 bellhousing, bolt the adapter from summit(has bearing retainer) to the bellhousing, then bolt the trans to it? And you need the longer pilot bushing.

What about using this ?Lakewood T5 Hydraulic Slave

Then I could just use the thirdgen hydraulics? Why are there adapter plates with bearing retainer for the LS1 but not LT1? ARGH!

I would have to say it would work with the T5 stuff,again I am doing this on a mechanical T10 car so I do not know for sure.

Because the LS1 trans has the same front plate as the aftermarket T56 which is what the adapter plate #8-207 was really designed for use with.

What about shifter placement?Using the LS1 trans, and being pushed back, what will that do to the shifter coming up through the console? Or is it neglegible and wont be noticed?

Should be about 2.5" back.Will post back with real results once I get there.

Are the LS1 trans built any better, or just different input shaft/bellhousing?

Just different bell/input shaft/front plate.People argue that the older LT1 T56's were stronger as they were built by Borg Warner.I am told by Rockland Standard they are all the same inside from 94-02.I myself would think the later 98-02 T56 break a little more due to the fact they came behind a more powerful motor in factory form.Just my opinion.Many high horse LS1 cars running stock or lightly modded T56's.Driver has alot to do with it as well.


I posted this to give you another possible source for a 6 speed.I cannot say for sure if it will work or not.You may have to be the first to attempt it,much like I seem to be with the T10 to LS1 T56.

Twilightoptics

Sounds like if it runs with the T5 bellhousing, I should be set.

I'll call lakewood and see what they say about it.

Twilightoptics

I called McLeod:


To run an LS1 T56:

8617 Pilot Bushing
8-207 Adapter plate


The rest is standard T5 stuff (Clutch/bellhousing/TO bearing/Fork etc)


So those with a T5 currently... need spend $230 for the adapter, and some change on the pilot bushing. And get an LS1 Trans.


Which I'm not sure about, because I see places online selling a T56 as '930'02 without a bellhousing.

Does that mean one COULD use the LT1 trans? Guess I forgot to ask him that.

onebad82z

iTrader: (7)

There are some measurements I would suggest you record before doing anything.After measuring my setup I found that I would come up with only 1/4" of input shaft suppot with the recommended #8617 bushing.After measuring I went with the #8-1094-4 bushing which gives me a little more support at 5/8".I included a pic I made so I could record all of my measurements.I advise you get these recorded to see which bushing you will really need.

onebad82z

iTrader: (7)

try again...

seems to not wanna upload...sent you the pic via email!

Ricktpi

I tried the T5 stuff & the manual fork & bearing setup, 5/8" of travel at the end of the fork was not enough. It only gave 3/8" travel at the bearing end. I went with the McLeod #1364 Hydraulic TO bearing in the picture on my TKO trans.

Twilightoptics

The T5 stuff should work just fine for engaging and disengaging the clutch because the bellhousing/fork/ and clutch pack stay the same.

I'm trying to do this on somewhat of a budget but without cutting corners. A $2-300 throwout bearing is not what I had in mind.


Z: How are you measuring the input support? Do you think you put the pilot bearing in too far?

This bearing McCleod said works with both recesses of the Crank so it should stick pretty far out from the normal pilot bearing recess.

onebad82z

iTrader: (7)

Yeah the pilot bearing currently in there is flush with the back of the crank,same as any other manual setup I have run.

Upon measuring...

Face of McLeod adapter plate (bell side) to tip of input shaft = 6"

Face of Lakewood bell (trans side) to trailing edge (end of crank) of pilot bearing hole in crank = 6"

No Support!

The McLeod bushing #8-1094-4 sticks out of the back of the crank giving me 5/8" of support on the input shaft.I also did the math and figured out that is still leaves me 9/16" of clearance between the extended pilot bushing and end of the input shaft splines.

Did you get that pic?it helps explain all that I measured.

Twilightoptics

Picture never showed up.

I thought I'd just get the designated bushing. Bolt the trans to the adapter to the bellhousing to the block. Without the flywheel and clutch on, I should be able to see the input shaft engagement.

Twilightoptics

Well I got stuff installed and did your same measurements and I get that the input would only have the 1/8" taper enter the standard pilot bushing.

Called McLeod to verify and ask about both part numbers. He said the 8617 pilot bearing uses the OUTER race. The large one that's twice the size of the standard pilot bearing, and is then .400 longer towards the trans.

Looks like Lakewood makes something similar too. LAK-15975 but I am not 100% sure whether it would work or not.

Twilightoptics

Waiting for the clutch to show up. Pick up the starter. And bolt everything in. Everything else has been test fitted and wired in. Ready to go.

fb305svs

Hey - just so i understand this correctly, am i correct in the following:

Use a STOCK t-5 bell housing, clutch
Use the MCL-8-207 trans adaptor
Use a 98-02 LS1 t56

If above is correct, would it be safe to assume that you could use whatever throwout bearing the t-5 uses? or do i need to use a different one as mentioned above?

Twilightoptics

The throwout bearing would be all T-5 stuff. the PILOT bearing is all mentioned above.

anesthes

iTrader: (12)

Hrmm..

Twilightoptics

Yep. TObearing works great. Clutch engages and disengages as properly measured. Just need to get a steel driveline and have it shortened an inch.

DOH

ws6transam

Hey everyone, the Mcleod 8617 isnt just for the LS1 retrofit, it's also needed for the LT1 retrofit even if you use the factory bellhousing. In my case, without the 8617 extended pilot bushing there was only 3/8 inch of engagement on the input shaft, and because of this I had premature failure of the pilot bushing. I've since pressed in the 8617 and have a full 3/4 inch of pilot bushing engagement with the remaining 3.8 of my (now damaged) input shaft running free and clear of the bearing surface.

It's a "must have" for all two-piece rear main seal T56 retrofits.

I got mine from Steve Spohn, at www.spohn.net who sold it to me for a buck or two cheaper than Summit. It was a good deal because I needed to buy some stuff from him anyway so shipping essentially free!

Twilightoptics

I'm like the other guy on here with only about .400 input engagement. McLeod said that'd be fine.

So I'll run it.

anesthes

iTrader: (12)

So let me back this train up a bit.

1) You use T56 out of an LS1. (about $900-$1000)
2) You use Mcleod MCL-8-207 Adapter plate ($229)
3) You use the larger bushing MCL-8617 ($35)

The driveshaft needs to be 1" shorter? So why not use an LS1 driveshaft? (they are 1" shorter. At least mine is for sure)..

The only problem I have is you're still bound to the crappy 10.4" clutch..

-- Joe

Twilightoptics

An LS1 driveline is 1/2" shorter than a thirdgen stock steel driveline. I know this because I have both sitting on my workbench. The LS1 driveline is too short. I need one that is 41.75" from the start of the slip yolk (not the tip that first slides into the trans, but where the trans would but against) to the center of the rear U joint.

That gives me 1" of slip yolk spacing between the trans and the body of the yolk.

Yes I'm using those parts you mentioned above.

I also had to build a crossmember. The LT1 crossmember will NOT work. It's designed to mount the trans mount at an angle.

What's wrong with the "crappy" 10.5" clutch?

Seem to work fine, if you get a decent clutch.

I know two guys in the 300+ Range, one 380HP range running a Centerforce dual friction with no problems.

I'm going to run a Spec 3 clutch. All the LS1 boards love the Spec 3 clutch.

If you're really going to whine about a 10.5" clutch you can put a whopping 11" clutch on if you really want. Just use the lakewood scatter sheild, put on a 168tooth flywheel, change your starter.

fb305svs

Well with any luck, hopefully my new driveshaft will work... :-/


Also, 460hp 350 here - burned up a dual friction at the track on a burn out with just 315 dr's... i'll be trying a spec stage 2 this time...

anesthes

iTrader: (12)

Well thats the problem.. 300hp range is about 200hp shy of the average yearly motor I build.. I'm running a centerforce dual friction right now and it's a POS. The clutch I did have luck with was a RAM fully ceramic, the p600 (6 padal design). But it chatters a lot on the street.

Got a picture of the bellhousing adapter?

Seems like a nice swap either way. Maybe I'll give it a try in a few months once you report back some driving testing... Or maybe I'll give up on thirdgens like I've been saying I would for 5 years now, and buy a c4.. haha..

Good luck and good job!!

-- Joe

Twilightoptics

And how are you getting 500HP out of a 350 on the ground? 500 Flywheel I'll buy. Which is where the 380HP engine I'm talking about sits. I'm around 420 flywheel if not a bit more. It's not all HP is the torque that slips the clutch and unless you are non-n/a.... you wont see 650 torque at the flywheel.

The spec 3 claims good to 650 torque. Stage 2 550. There are also the Stage + kits that go for more.

The spec 3 clutch looks like this:


Picture of the adapter:

anesthes

iTrader: (12)

358 cid, Vortech s-trim, singleplane efi, etc, etc..

I just sold the s-trim, and am considering a T-trim for an upgrade..

With the s-trim on the 355 I use to run 119-120mph in the 1/4. With a t-trim on the new 358, i'm expecting 125-130mph at least.

That looks exactly like the RAM clutch I used to use on the 355. It grabbed great but chattered like nothing else. I just ordered a lightweight flywheel tonight and a new pressure plate. I'm gonna try that out with a centerforce disk. I wonder if I can pull the ring + weights off and put it on a new pressure plate..


-- Joe

Twilightoptics

Was the ram clutch a sprung clutch? The spec is.

anesthes

iTrader: (12)

Yep. I think P600 or P6000 is the part #.

I'm not 100% sure if SPEC actually makes their own clutches, I remember researching it way back then. I know VALEO makes pressure plates for ram, centerforce, and spec. I forget if spec makes their own discs or if they sub them out..

-- Joe