i have the 92 v6 camaro. I read that the 92 had a little better T5 rated at 300 ft lbs. But i am putting in a turbo, cam, and posi this summer. It should get me to around 300 maybe a little more. And i am currently running M50 superwides on the back. All i really like to do is kick the back end around at slow speeds. But isn't that the worst for a tranny? Would i just ended up blowing it right away??

the v6 cars didnt get the WC t5 AFAIK, so who knows. keep a stock clutch, so at least it will slip before the tires overpower the trans, (hopeful thinking)

For more info on the T5, check the stickies at the top of the page.

JamesC

I thought all of the thirdgens from 89 on got the WC T-5. If not I'm glad I found out now.

It all comes down to the driver

I am still running v-6 t5 transmission hooked up to my 350 with a "few" mods. it is my second tranny in that car, but first one to see V8. So far, surprisingly, it has holden up. I don't drive the car much- but when i do, I beat on it. It is currently under construction. I think the only thing that has saved it so far is old dry tires. I would break them loose in 2nd and spin from 2 to 3rd shift. I never get on the car hard in first as there is absolutely no traction-so its pointless. Buying new tires soon, so we will see how long it will last after that.

"WC" :barf: is just some junior "one-minute manager" 's idea of how to use a captivating 80s buzzword in their product. I want to PUKE every time I see someone post it. It physically makes me sick. I've been on enough PIT teams and ISO-900x audits over the last 25 years to be able to see through the smoke and mirrors.

All that means, is the 2nd design. The various auto mfrs got onto B-W's case about gas mileage, and B-W slightly re-designed the T-5 in response before they sold the remains of that product line to the Mexicans. After all, when you're GM or Frod and dealing with CAFE requirements, even .5 mpg in a SUPER popular car, does WONDERS for your CAFE.

So that's what the "WC" : puke: :clean up KB & mon: T-5 is: a minor re-design to reduce parasitic losses and thereby increase fuel economy. It's still the same weak product, barely able to withstand a 6-cyl, and totally inadequate for a V8.

Frod began ordering it in 87 IIRC, and GM in 88 IIRC. (I could be wrong; but I distinctly recall at the time, Frod spec'ed the new one before GM, maybe their testing dept got done first...) So it has NOTHING WHATSOEVER to do with "6-cyl" or "V8", it's all about YEAR MODEL.

Of course if you know me, you'll aready be aware I don't give a flying fornication at a rolling donut about turbos and the rest of that other import buzzword crap on a 6-cyl; but that hardly matters. The fact is, ALL of that monkey-spank counts for NOTHING, but if you take your existing 6-cyl POS and put tires with some traction on it, you'll be able to DESTROY that T-5, whether 1st design or 2nd design, the VERY FIRST clutch dump if you want it to. The first 4 or 5 T-5s I tore up, were with the STOCK 305 that came in my car, and the no-traction Goodyears that came on it. So assuming you car hooks up, I foresee a very short future for whatever T-5 you have in your car, even if it has some 6-cyl in it.