I've read so many threads in this forum about various transmissions that my eyes have begun to hurt. So then I went to bed and repeated the next day. And again. And again. The one problem is there doesn't seem to be any clear answers.

I'm putting something bigger than a 350 into a car. Won't be super built, but the intention is to have a good amount of power. Car will be meant for weekend street use only, so no high-end power is really needed, just low-mid. I also require the transmission to be a stick.

So, my options, from what I've seen:

T-56 - Pricey. Quite possibly well out of my price range.
Muncie - So many differing opinions on the clutch linkage and bellhousing, etc.
Super T10 - A variation of the Muncie? (or the other way around?)
T5 - Will this even hold up to a 400sbc or better?

Do I have other options? Are any of these really decent options for my purpose? I'd like to spend no more than a grand or so on the transmission; this includes a rebuild if its needing it.

The Muncie is the one I'm most interested in... mostly for the "being different" factor, but it seems every other post is "it can be done" "it can't be done" "why would you want to", etc. Can someone give me some good, solid information on what a Muncie in an f-body would entail?

 

well there are the tremec TKO transmission, though they are also pricey.

a WCT5 can work, provided you dont beat on it a lot and use the clutch when shifting gears, no powershifting.

Its the cheapest option, and will bolt in with no extra modifications or special parts which is a plus

 

First off:

The Muncie 4-speed was produced by GM, at their plant in {surprise!} Muncie, Indiana; starting in about 1964. Its last year of production was 74 IIRC. It was never made with a torque arm mount; so there are NONE WHATSOEVER that will fit into these cars without modification. Furthermore, there are no shifters made for it, with the correct mounting, handle, etc. etc. to fit one of these cars. No doubt it's possible to hack a huge enough hole in the floor and cobble something together that would "work", if some arangement could be found that would keep it from interfering with the torque arm; or, if the car was back-halved; or, if an aftermarket torque arm of appropriate design was used. Not real easy or cheap in any case. FAR from a bolt-in, and FAR from the best option.

Second:

The T-10 was a product of Borg-Warner, before they sold off that entire business. It orignally came out in about 1959. The Muncie is very similar to it, in fact if you look at the 2 side by side you'd be tempted to think GM copied the Warner Gear design. It WAS available in these cars, in 82 ONLY; so therefore it IS available with the torque arm mount, and there IS a shifter available for it, from Hurst. It requires a unique 82-only bell housing. However, only a tiny fraction of 82 4-speed production came with the T-10; the vast majority came with a Saginaw ( :barf: ) 4-speed. There are VERY VERY VERY few of the 82 T-10s floating around in the world; but if you JUST GOTTA have a 4-speed, that's the one to look for. It's a considerably better transmission than the Muncie.

Third:

The other 82 part, the Saginaw ( :barf: ), is far more common than the T-10. It is the dung. It was built by GM's Saginaw Gear division in a town named {surprise!} Saginaw, in Michigan. It was widely used in 60s and 70s cars behind 6-cyl and other motor with no power. It was NEVER built as a "performance" piece. It has terrible gear ratios, it is weak, it shifts terrible, and is just altogether unsuitable for "performance" use. I cannot begin to imagine what possessed some goob at GM to put that POS in these cars, maybe it was somebody that hated stick-shift cars and wanted to make sure that they got a bad reputation so that people would ABSOLUTELY not buy them. Anyway, avoid it like the plague.

Fourth:

The T-5 is small, light, and weak. You can break it with a 6-cylinder. I broke the one that came in my car about 5 or 6 times with the 305 it came behind; and then probably at least a dozen more times with the 400 I put in it in about 87. I have a MASSIVE pile of trashed T-5s and parts. However, after decades of driving 4-speed cars before I bought this 83, I FINALLY re-learned how to drive a stick shift; I realized that I had to take my foot off the gas while shifting!!! What a revelation. Anyway, after I finally gave up on driving it like it was a 4-speed and started treating it gently, the last one survived for several years behind the 400. So it CAN be done, it's all in how you drive it. If you always keep in the back of your mind that there's this fragile thing, like an egg, in your drive train, and drive likt that, it can last a LONG time. A few high-RPM clutch dumps, or speed-shifting, especially with some sticky tires, will DESTROY a T-5 quickly however. The case will stretch, allowing the gears to misalign; and then it will either strip the teeth off 3rd gear, or off the clutch gear / countergear interface. Once the case is stretched, the trans is GARBAGE.

Next:

The T-56 is an EXCELLENT transmission. It bolts right up to a 400. All you need is the right flywheel, and the 93-97 (LT1) version of it just goes right in like it does behind a 305 or 350. It has about the same ratios as the Muncie or T-10 4-speeds, except it has 2 overdives on top of that. It is stout and will give little trouble even behind a fair amount of power.


I'd suggest forgetting the old stuff and the T-5; and get yourself a T-56. You might "think" it costs more, but after tearing up a few T-5s, or going through the Lord only knows what to hack a 4-speed into your car after you discover how tough it is to find tha tstuff and how much it'll cost and how bad you'll have to hack up your car to work around whatever parts you can't find, it might start looking pretty cost-effective.

 

sofakingdom, that was an amazingly informative post. Thank you very much!

I learned to drive standard from my dad, who's a professional driver, so I've already got the "driving it right" down pat.

T5: That was my main fear with a T5, is that anything over a 350 would break it in a heartbeat.

Muncie: My dad originally suggested the Muncie, since they were mated to the big blocks in the C3 Corvettes, and figured it would work quite well. I love the idea of a four speed and the uniqueness of it's shift pattern; I'll do some more in depth research on it for a cost analysis of doing it.

T-56: Why only the 93-'97 model? What's different about the '98-'02 models?

Given your suggestions, I'll probably end up going for the T56 anyways.

 

The T-56 shift pattern is the same, except that it has 2 extra gears off to the right, and reverse is over there too.

The 98-up T-56 is just different. It is said that there are certain swap parts that can be used to make it work, but I don't know exactly what they are. The LT1 version bolts right up, all you need is the "special" 400/T-56 swap flywheel (Centerforce 700173), a different crossmember, and some solution for the speedo. That's what I have in my 83: about a 96 or 97 one. Avoid 93, it has MUCH wider ratios; the 94-97 units have a 2.66 1st gear, almost identical to the Muncie and 609s & 70s T-10s. Works GREAT with 3.73 or 4.10 gears. The ODs are .7something and .50; meaning, with 4.10 gears, your final drive ratio in 6th gear is like having a 4-speed with 2.05 gears. You get the best of both worlds: launches like a jackrabbit, but cruises just barely off idle. Plus it's stronger than a Muncie, and it FITS. (a major consideration IMO, not to be overlooked)

 

Yes, it fitting is definitely a major concern. The next concern is simply cost... I could swap a T5 in for $600, including all parts, but a T56 would cost about double that. People get insane with what they want for a T56, from what I've been seeing. Now given, after blowing the first T5, a T56 swap would instantly look a lot cheaper in hindsight.

 

T-10s are made in the aftermarket ready to bolt into our cars. Get used to the mechanical clutch linkage (another piece you'd have to find), or get a hydraulic TO bearing and set that up. The only PITA about the T-10 i've found is it has no OD. Fine for tearing up asphalt in town, but get on the highway? Don't bother trying to pass that semi, you'll redline once you get by him.

The T56 is a solid choice, you just have to swallow the cost upfront. Then the custom cross-member, custom speedo setup and custom flywheel. Remember anything "custom" costs big pesos. Price it out first, phone up and get the price of EVERY part you'll need, then decide.

 

I just wanted to throw out there the TKO tremecs again. They fit basically where the T10 would, with some modifications necessary to fit up a torque arm. The best bet is a decoupled torque arm, that bolts to the trans mount, rather than the trans.

For the cost of what poeple want for a used, KNOWN GOOD T56, you can usually get a new TKO.

This just needs a basic bellhousing. If you so desire(and I highly recommend) a lakewood for a 3rd gen chassis, so you can use the normal throwout and hydraulic master/slave that the 3rd gen's use. That bellhousing has patterns for both straight up and 15 degree canted transmissions (T5).

the only gotcha you will have to deal with is a flywheel for a 400. depending on which bellhousing you get, you would need a common 168 counterweighted one, or a more expensive harder to find aftermarket 153 tooth counterweighted. There might also be an option for a bolt on counterweight, I dunno for sure.

in any case, upgrading to something that will substantially live behind anything with power isn't necessarily cheap. It's well worth it, but you have to be realistic with the costs involved.

Oh, someone mentioned not using the later model T56's. You can use them, you need to space the trans back away from the bellhousing face about 3/8", as well as put a spacer on the throwout assembly. I'll post again if I can find the picture of the company that makes this stuff, it makes it bolt in, with some slight changes to the trans mount. this is another option, and maybe cheaper, since the 98-up trans are more common (more yrs produced).

good luck!!!

 

Yep, found it....here ya go.....

 

Alright, here's something that I have absolutely no clue about. Why does the bellhousing change the needed flywheel? I see references to flywheels meant for one piece rear mains and another for two piece. Is that the 153/168 difference?

I have not bought an engine or transmission yet; I am planning everything out so that I can come up with a good, working combination, without too many headaches(of the "oh sh*t what now" variety, that is). A 400 is not set in stone; I'm looking at anything 327 and bigger, except 350(want to be different). So general information is what I need, more along the lines of "why it works/doesn't work", so I can apply that to my other choices.

I guess this is why people go with 350s--parts are plentiful and the homework has been done a thousand times.

 

our factory bellhousings will not clear the larger (168) tooth flywheel. A 400 requires a counter balance flywheel(externally ballanced) which is very uncomon in the smaller 153 tooth. - The aftermarket bellhousings will clear the larger flywheel, and I like having the ability to walk, so I use said "scatter shield" in all performance oriented vehicles.

Personally, I don't like the TKO trans. Too notchy. Won't allow straight shifting, thus an auto trans would be faster.

 

How can I determine what engines need to be internally or externally balanced? I assume with internally balanced engines, there's no need for a scatter shield which protects you from externally balanced flywheels shattering(why do they do that?)

 

yeah, true they are notchy. I'm just putting it out there as an option since it can save you money if you compare new to new TKO/T56. I could be off these days, I haven't priced the T56 in a bout a year, last I checked, new was about $2400, with the TKO in at $1700-1800 depending where you get it.
----------
anything factory 400 based will require a counterweighted assembly. These are the only factory small block engines that needed it, due to stroke length. Anything smaller is nuetral balanced.

If you go aftermarket rotating assembly ($$), you can get it nuetral balanced.

any time you use a manual trans with any kind of horsepower, a scattershield is HIGHLY recommended. For a few hundred dollars, you can spare yourself a legless or footless future should something go terribly wrong. It amazes me to this day that there are so few vendors that supply bellhousings for these insane LSx motor combinations these days, pushing more that 550-600HP as a low end entry.....

 

Okay, so I just read up on the need for scatter shields. Got that down now. Flywheel sizes are the thing I don't understand. The T56 will require a 153 tooth flywheel, so my options are to either find an engine that uses a 153 tooth flywheel or find an aftermarket 153 that will go on the engine. Is this correct? (we seem to have gotten more into drivetrain mechanical theory than practical application now)

 

153 tooth = 12.5", uses a 10.4" clutch. Typically referred to as the "305 size". Requires the correct bolt pattern (two in line at the back of the block) on the engine. This size flywheel fits in a typically BH.

168 tooth. 13.x", uses a 12.x" clutch I think. This is the 350/400cid flywheel. DOES NOT FIT in a stock BH. You can get a bigger BH, but will it fit in our 3rd gen tranny tunnel? Nope. The bigger clutch will hold more power, but if you can't fit it into our cars, what's the point in even thinking about it eh? There's probably a way, tweak the tunnel, special BH, whatever.

Older blocks are only drilled for the 168 tooth flywheel (such as my 1977 350 block). That means I had to drill the other hole to mount a 153 tooth flywheel myself. 400 blocks I imagine are not drilled for the 153 tooth flywheeel, get the shop to drill this for you while the block is bare. (Trust me, MUCH easier that way).

Lots of little odds and ends to think about it? Change one part then worry about the 6 that are bolted to it.

IMHO I wouldn't lose sleep over a scattershield. Theres so many other things that can go wrong in a high perf car, a clutch "exploding" and managing to cut through part of the car and slice through your legs? I'd be worried about getting hit by lightning... twice.... I lose sleep over loose lug nuts, brakes failing, suspension parts breaking and me careening off the road, bad drivers on the road (myself ) etc.

 

So if the 168 is called the "350 flywheel" and 168 tooth flywheels don't fit into any bellhousings that fit in the transmission tunnel... what do the stock 350s in our cars use? If it's 153, which is called the 305 tooth, that'd be a bit misleading.

 

No such thing as a stock 350 with a manual tranny for our cars That's why.

no no, a 153 isn't technically called a 305 flywheel, and a 168 isn't called a 350 flywheel. However, stock 305s came with 153 tooth flywheels, and 350/400's came with 168 tooth flywheels factory. I'm talking trucks, camaros, etc.
So if you're in an autoparts store, or talking to an old mechanic, that's what they'd refer to it as sometimes, based on what it came with from the factory.

 

So what tooth flywheel do the automatics use on the 350s,then? 153? Or is it different since its an automatic?

 

all v-8's in the 3rd gen chassis use a 153 tooth flywheel. These were necesary becuase the firewall is a little tight, and I suppose the design engineers decided that the 10.4" clutch would be more than enough so they could save money by reducing the size of the flywheel. A 168 bellhousing will fit in a thirdgen chassis but the tunnel will probably need to be clearanced with a BFH in a few spots.

if you use an earlier than '82 v-8, chances are, the engine used a 168 tooth flywheel. I don't specifically remember what year they changed to the smaller flywheel. This includes 350's 400's, anything else.....thats why if you use a 400, you need an aftermarket flywheel, the factory never made them.

 

My 1982 TA used the smaller bellhousing (even on the oldschool T10 tranny), with a 153 tooth flywheel. Still on there now, behind my 350.
Auto trannys use flexplates, not flywheels. They still have 153 teeth though.

 

Ahh, that would be it then. All my family shade-tree mechanics(all old school kind of guys) called it a flywheel(mine was warped and caused a massive vibration in the car).

 

The chance of blowing a clutch (you don't really blow a flywheel unless you're tunring it higher than the material can handle, it may, however, come apart if the clutch blows)is no different be it internally or externally balanced.
the aftermarket bellhousings will clear the larger flywheel and the firewall, no problems. Personally I also like an 11" clutch.

Sonix, I've seen several clutches explode. My lakewood in my 69 big-block camaro got trashed when the ram "cleaning lady" decided to give up life. I have dents in my mcleod shield from the first disk I ran with my 355 and hays pressure plate in my bird. I threw another lakewood in the trash that was cut from the fork hole up through the floor board and into the bottom of my old man's shoe from where his 5 puck had a puck break loose, flip around and cut through it. If either occassion had a factory cast-aluminum bellhousing, it wouldn't have absorbed much of that energy before shattering. Diaphram(spell check?) clutches are designed to tighten up as rpm increases and caused by the vaccum effect of the diaphram. This vaccum effect can cause it to not re-engauge during a high rpm gear change, thus causing the driver to quickly lift off the throttle which usually sends the pressure plate and clutch disk out of the car. - So as I was saying, I've seen it a few times, done it twice. True, it's not overly comon, but it only takes once to change your life. It's too cheap of an investment to take that kind of chance. - There is a reason that all sanctioning bodies require one at certain engine speeds and/or /vehicle speeds.

I too am suprised there aren't more options for the LS crowd, but there are a few out there, thus unless you could design and manufacture it cheaper than what is out there, would you try?

 

In all honesty, worrying about a 10.5" clutch versus an 11" clutch is irrelevant really. Even in the 60's and 70's, the vast majority of 350 powered cars got the 10.5" clutch. The 400's, big block cars, and a select few of the vettes and camaros got the 11". I upgraded to the the larger clutch/bellhousing/flywheel in my 69 Camaro some years ago, but I ran the smaller 10.5" for a long time before that with no problems. Of course switching to the larger stuff was a direct fit in a 69 Camaro, so it was an easy decision to make. If you spend the money on a good 10.5" clutch, such as a Ram Powergrip, or one of the Spec clutches, it won't be an issue at all. As the others stated, getting a 153 tooth flywheel for an externally balanced 400 will be the biggest hurdle, but they are available from the aftermarket for a price. If you want to keep the price down on your clutch/flywheel assembly, while running a stout tranny, you really are better off going with a Tremec TKO, since it uses the same setup as the stock T5's. The factory T56 clutch is pathetically weak, and the performance ones start at about $500. An externally balanced T56 flywheel for a 2 pc. rear main crank is definitely a "special" application, and those flywheels run about $250-$300. You could set up a nice, strong T5/TKO clutch and flywheel assembly for about $300-$400.

 

i've been reading this thread and also going to be in the same situation when i find a 400 block and a t56 one of these days. I found a flywheel that is claimed to work with internally balanced engines (305,350) and externally balanced engines (400).

Control+F (Find): external

http://www.kajunjon.com/Main/flywheel_clutchkit.html


only $125. is it too good to be true? hehe

 

Here's the easiest route if your going 400 and considering a T56 swap. As stated, the 400 is externally balanced unless.....you begin your build with an internally balanced crankshaft from Eagle or Scat. Scat has a very affordable Cast Steel internally balanced 400 crank. Under $250 last I checked. Then you can use the Centerforce T56 flywheel for internally balanced SBC cranks. They can be obtained used on this site and ebay. They are fairly common. These are the least expensive flywheels for a T56 swap involving older 2 piece main seal blocks. An LT-1 flywheel will not work. It's for a one piece main seal block.

Another affordable route is go 383 using a one piece main seal 350 block as the foundation. Again....use a 383 Eagle or Scat internally balanced crankshaft and then you can use the cheap, easy to find LT1 flywheel.

Incidentally, these engine plans work for a T5 as well. GM sells a lightwieght flywheel for internally balanced one piece and two piece main seal blocks. I've gone this route with a Hanlon Motorsports modified T5. It worked great behind a 400 and street tires. I don't think any factory T5 can be modified to work behind a car with slicks. Problem with the T5 is the mainshaft is long and doesn't have enough support internally in the T5 case to take too much abuse. So you can throw the strongest parts on the planet in a stock T5 case but you can't provide more support for that long mainshaft. That's the problem.

 

Won't work. You need a T56 specific flywheel. Those would work great in a T5 application. I question the fact that they can be both for externally and internally balanced motors. No such thing unless a balance plate is included in the externally balanced set-up. Bolt on balance plates are the last resort and I wouldn't use one on the strip. They are definetly for lower rpm, low to medium performance applications.

 

thanks i figured it wouldn't work but figured i would post it so someone could confirm.

 

Spohn makes a x-member and a special TQ arm to mount to it to put a Muncie or T-10 in a 3rd gen.

 

very true. Besides, an aftermarket crank is a cheap investment for building a solid bottom end. - as for the 383, personally, I like bore size. Increasing bore is a bigger hp boost than increasing stroke. Stroke does more to widen the powerband.

as for the clutch, Pat is right on. That 1/2" of disc isn't much. - as for the trans/flywheel compatibility, that all comes down to the trans that you buy. If you go to an aftermarket T56(not an OE takeout) you can buy one to drop behind a standard sbc flywheel/clutch/bellhousing assembly.