Re: [Amc-list] T-96... again!

[Tom Jennings <tomj@xxxxxxx>]

Frank Swygert wrote:
> I completely understand your pain! Just don't go blaming it entirely
> on the T-96 design. It lasted fine for years. 

Nah, I don't blame the trans. If it indeed has failed again, it's my
doing. I'm confident I assembled it right.

It's not flywheel runout I'm concerned about; I'm sure that's the cause
of the microscopic shudder at launch. It's small enough I'd never
mention it otherwise.

Runout wouldn't cock the inputshaft at a funny angle. What would, if you
can picture this for illustration purposes, is putting a couple of
washers under each of the two lower trans-to-bell bolts. This would put
upward pressure on the pilot end of the input shaft, pivot on the big
bearing, and stress the crap out of the pocket bearings (the 13 rollers
between input and output shafts).

I did not put washers in there of course; but if, somehow, the bell got
cocked on the engine when I reinstalled it all, it might do it. Up/down,
side to side, whatever.

It's the only thing I could picture that would do the damage that I saw.


 > I'm sure a brand spanking new one would perform
 > just fine for it's intended purpose. For a daily driver, however,
 > you're better off with something newer. Maybe you should get that
 > early Falcon adapter and consider a real five speed...

Oh I don't mind it's normal behavior. It's a SLOW! trans to shift! A T-5 
would be nice. But the 3 gears are perfectly matched to car and chassis.

If it doesn't break on me, it'll be in there for a very long time.
_______________________________________________
Amc-list mailing list
Amc-list@xxxxxxxxxxxx
http://splatter.wps.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/amc-list