Re: [Amc-list] T-96 woes (again)

[Tom Jennings <tomj@xxxxxxx>]

Frank Swygert wrote:
> Having worked on those things, I'm with you -- stack clearance seems
> to be a bit more critical than one would believe! That's the only
> thing I can think of that would make much difference -- unless the
> parts themselves are inferior grade materials.

yeah, I eyeballed the clearances, but didn't go the last mile -- which
is a PITA because you need to disassemble and exchange thrust washers of 
different thicknesses. Easy -- if you are Borg Warner. Not easy, poor 
schmuck in a home shop 50 years later. But I should have done it 
(probably, obviously).

Parts were all Borg Warner NOS, cept bearings and seals, quality was not 
my problem.


> Time to look for a T-14 with OD, or even a T-86 from behind a 232
> (V-8 model would have too long an input shaft). Might have to custom
> make a drive shaft, but that's no big deal. Then you could keep the
> Twin-Stick.

Well, I will fix this trans. It's immaculate otherwise, and since it 
shifts smoothly otherwise, makes zero noise, doesn't leak, etc it's 
otherwise as good as new. Just a PITA!!!

> 
> If you have to ditch the BW OD, maybe think about a T-4 instead of a
> T-5. Darn! I keep forgetting those things have internal rail
> shifters!! 

Depends on whether the shifter comes up in the middle of the seat. Car's 
so small inside, it for sure won't appear under the dashboard!


> Maybe a 80s Ford four speed with OD fourth -- might fit
> the bell housing. 

I'm on (but inactive) on a Ford six forum, those peeps would know what 
transmissions would fit in the Ford T-96 hole, I bet. I'm sure they love 
the T-96 as much as we do.

I hate to lose the Twin Stick though!
_______________________________________________
Amc-list mailing list
Amc-list@xxxxxxxxxxxx
http://splatter.wps.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/amc-list