thinking about going with a zf6
#1
Member
Thread Starter
thinking about going with a zf6
i found a deal on 94 zf6.
I know it will be a lot of work. can i use the lt1 bell housing and convert to hydraulic throw out bearing.
I know I will need a custom cross member and torque arm mount, custom drive shaft and trans tunnel modification.
I think the vette used a pull type clutch. What did the firehawk use for a clutch setup. I know they used a custom bell that had provision for the t5 slave cylinder, but was there a specific clutch and pressure plate?
Thanks,
Chris
I know it will be a lot of work. can i use the lt1 bell housing and convert to hydraulic throw out bearing.
I know I will need a custom cross member and torque arm mount, custom drive shaft and trans tunnel modification.
I think the vette used a pull type clutch. What did the firehawk use for a clutch setup. I know they used a custom bell that had provision for the t5 slave cylinder, but was there a specific clutch and pressure plate?
Thanks,
Chris
#2
Supreme Member
iTrader: (4)
Re: thinking about going with a zf6
Originally, the 89-96 L98, LT1, and LT4 models used a dual-mass flywheel.
Instead of a clutch disc with sprung center hub, the flywheel had the sprung hub. The clutch disc was solid. Then, they had the same Valeo pressure plate as the 93-97 4th gen.
The flywheels were limited availability, last I checked. Going with a different clutch set-up can make the S6-40 trans. make noise.
The Firehawk, if memory serves, used the Vette aluminum S6-40 bellhousing, modified to fit. Magnesium bells were used in some but not all Vettes. Hydro TOBs have been adapted to the trans; Ram used to offer a setup.
The Firehawk floor had a shifter opening hump welded on and the console was different to suit the S6-40 shifter location.
The S6-40 speedo drive was speedo gear driven VSS, like the third gens.
The S6-40 is strong, but parts to service a T56 or TR6060 are going to be more available for longer. While the argument could be made the S6-40 is stronger than a T56, it's really the only argument to go with it at this point.
Instead of a clutch disc with sprung center hub, the flywheel had the sprung hub. The clutch disc was solid. Then, they had the same Valeo pressure plate as the 93-97 4th gen.
The flywheels were limited availability, last I checked. Going with a different clutch set-up can make the S6-40 trans. make noise.
The Firehawk, if memory serves, used the Vette aluminum S6-40 bellhousing, modified to fit. Magnesium bells were used in some but not all Vettes. Hydro TOBs have been adapted to the trans; Ram used to offer a setup.
The Firehawk floor had a shifter opening hump welded on and the console was different to suit the S6-40 shifter location.
The S6-40 speedo drive was speedo gear driven VSS, like the third gens.
The S6-40 is strong, but parts to service a T56 or TR6060 are going to be more available for longer. While the argument could be made the S6-40 is stronger than a T56, it's really the only argument to go with it at this point.
#3
Member
Thread Starter
Re: thinking about going with a zf6
well the deal on the zf6 fell through, so sticking with the wct5 for now.
thanks,
Chris
thanks,
Chris
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
91RedRagtop
Transmissions and Drivetrain
11
09-18-2005 10:38 AM