Hello Group,
I got my NEW Borg warner T-5 tonight. I will be showing how I rebuild and install this tranny in the coming weeks. I have hurt my old T-5 and will be replacing it with this newly aquired unit.
This is the "World Class" T-5
My install will be behind a 2.0 Turbo BUT should help othersW 2.3 in their quest for overdrive tranny.
From Pintony
Tony, have you decided how to handle the input shaft length and O.D. sizes?
Hey Brad,
Do you know the difference between the WC and NWC?
From Pintony
Hello Group,
Here is the difference between the WC and NWC Borg warner T-5.
I will als be listing ways to I.D the WC and the NWC.
World Class & Non-World Class
There are two basic kinds of T-5's, Non World Class (NWC) and World Class (WC). The first T-5 was non-world class. In 1983 and 84 Ford used the Non-World Class T-5 to improve the Mustangs performance and gas mileage. All the V8 NWC boxes had 2.95 first gear set with .68 overdrive. All the main output shaft gears and 1st, 2nd, 3rd, gears riding on a solid output shaft with deep oil grooves to provide lubrication. The lower counter gears spin on straight cylindrical bearings with a thrust washer in front to provide support when under load. All the synchronizer rings are made of solid bronze which are of different size than those found in a would-class T-5. It is because there is no bearing under each gear and the bronze synchro rings that the NWC use the heavy 70w gear oil. Torque rating for the NWC was 265ft/lbs.
1985, Ford introduced the World Class T-5 installed with 3.35 first gear set with a .68od behind the 5.OL. T-5 was also used behind both the standard 2.3L with a 3.97 first gearset and the SVO Mustang. SVO received a one year only 3.50 first gear ratio as the 3.97 gear ratio was too low for the added power of the turbo charged 2.3L. No longer were 1st, 2nd, and 3rd gears spinning on a solid output shaft as needle bearings were installed under each gear to reduce drag. The lower counter gears saw tapered bearings to replace the bronze thrust washer. All main shaft synchro's were fiber lined steel rings to improve rings friction surface while 5th remains bronze. By improving the surface friction the synchro slows the gear faster making for smoother shifts. The design remained the same until 1989. Torque rating remained the same at 265ft/lbs.
From Pintony
if this works out for you Tony, i'll move it to the FAQ section when your done if thats ok with you. Jeff
Hello Jeff,
Please! Feel free to do what you feel is best for the Pinto group.
From Pintony
Quote from: Pintony on October 18, 2005, 08:38:28 PM
Hey Brad,
Do you know the difference between the WC and NWC?
From Pintony
Tony, Im not quite sure what you mean. Was it a question that you needed an answer to or a statement?
To see the differences of these trans. Please click on the PDF file below and rotate it correctly. You might want to print it out for future use. This file shows the input shaft length and OD size differences for the different T5 applications.
Hey Brad,
As I understand it...., the tranny I have "IS" the WC style
My NEW tranny is the 8th one down on your list. 162
Everything I read is that the 4 cylinder T-5 is also WC.
The difference as I understand it is the WC has fiber syncros Except 5th gear and the NWC has brass on all 5 gears. Also the WC has tapered roller bearings all around The NWC has needle bearings.
Please let us know if you have a different view.
From Pintony
Hello Group,
I ordered my T-5 rebuild kit today.
I also ordered a 6 tooth drive gear for my speedometer.
Should be here in a few days.
Anxious to see what I get.
There are companys that list some basic parts kit and some that offer Master parts kits.
I got my kit from http://www.gearstogo.com/
I dealt with the company owner Brent.
He called me back 3 times to help answer my questions and get me the 6 tooth gear I wanted.
Thats Service!!!!!
I know there are more companys with BIGGER names out there BUT Brent helped me out and really seemed like he wanted to provide the service I needed for my 4cylinder T-5 rebuild.
Other companys I called acted like if I was not doing a V8 tranny they did not have time to deal with me.
We will see if the shipping is as good as the service. ;D
From Pintony
Hello Group,
Here is a photo of a rebuild kit for the NWC Borg Warner T-5.
Notice the Brass syncros and the caged roller bearings this is why the NWC is less desireable.
The brass syncros make for clunky shifting and the caged roller bearings do not provide good side lateral support for the stresses of masive torq.
From Pintony
Hello Group,
Here is a photo of the WC Borg Warner T-5.
Notice the fiber lined steel syncros and the taperd needle bearings.
The WC T-5 gear clusters ride on needle bearings too.
Unlike the NWC that ride directly on the shaft.
Remember this ALL kits are NOT created equal!
The price varies as much as the pieces included in each sellers kit.
From Pintony
I purchased a T-5 out of a 2.3 turbo T-bird. Is there a way to know by looking externally if the trans is WC or NWC ???. Thanks!
Hello Gearhead440,
That is a great question!
Depending on year of your transmission??? The WC will have an electrical plug in the top cover.
See the list of WC trannysthat Brad posted above for your part number. If you have the tag.
From Pintony
Hello Group,
I got my WC T-5 transmission rebuild kit today.
It came from gearstogo.com
I have to say... I'm not happy.
I can not recomend this company.
There are many service items missing from this kit.
For what I payed... I got burned BIG time!
This kit will be going back.
I have already ordered a T-5 kit from Hanlon. Be here mon. or tues.
I'll be posting the photos and the shipping reciepts with prices later.
I have had NO luck in finding a way to use the Steel bearing retainer from the V8 tranny to use on the 4 cylinder tranny.
It seems FORD in their infinate wizdom decided to play god again and actually put a BIGGER bearing in the Turbo 4 tranny.
I guess I'm stuck with the aluminum bearing retainer for now.
From Pintony
Hey Pintony,
Looking at your research I have to say I'm flabbergasted! :o
Had no idea of all the variations. I picked up my first one, (it has the plug in the top cover), but after the install I found I couldn't downshift from 4th to 3rd gears. I got another one like it, (both were discarded from local ministock racers who can't use them on a 1/3rd mile circle track), and had it rebuilt from a friend who does drivetrain stuff for these guys. Where the boxes came from I don't know, Mustangs I think as that's what they race.
By bearing retainer, are you talking the front input shaft one? You know, the one the thrust bearing rides on? I guess it's a bearing retainer.
Anyway, I tried to use a replacement from Jeg's that was touted as being better for the thrust bearing to ride on. When I tried to put the thrust shaft bearing on it - twas too big a shaft. Had to send it back. Afterwards, I had to use a different thrust shaft bearing, one that was longer from stem to Stearn as well for my application.
There are two different sizes available from Walsh and Esslinger, forgot which one I used but it worked with the original 4 cyl retainer.
Also, (and this is a first for me), my first T-5 had ATF for lube. I've heard of it in air compressor pumps, but never in manual transmissions, just me I guess.
Is gear oil better, like 70 weight, or is the ATF the yellow brick road?
What do you run in yours? Are seals affected by either one, I wouldn't think so.
What do you figure?
Al
UltimatePinto,
Don't use gear oil in the trans. WC T-5 with fiber syncos use ATF.
I can't remember exactly but gear oil will either ruin them or prevent
the trans from shifting properly.
Bob
Hello Group,
I agree with Bipper!
The T-5 uses about 3 Qt. ATF Not gear oil.
A good rule of thumb is... If yur tranny has a Cast-iron case it uses 70wt. gear oil if the case is aluminum it uses ATF.
CHECK with your local Ford dealer if you have doubt.
From Pintony
Quote from: Pintony on October 29, 2005, 11:08:54 AM
Hello Group,
I agree with Bipper!
The T-5 uses about 3 Qt. ATF Not gear oil.
A good rule of thumb is... If yur tranny has a Cast-iron case it uses 70wt. gear oil if the case is aluminum it uses ATF.
CHECK with your local Ford dealer if you have doubt.
From Pintony
Yeah, and its really fun to fill the trans up with ATF when its in the car. I use a hand pump and it works real good.
A BIG funnel with a 3 to 4 foot piece of 3/8 fuel hose works too.
But it takes patience to allow the slow mooooving fluid to go down the small tubing.
"Something I lack"
I'm with Brad though I use the pump that connects to the bottle too.
From Pintony
Hello Group,
Here is my T-5 case cleaned and ready to start re-assembly.
Here is The case in the bearing press ready to have the front cluster bearing race installed.
Notice the old race already pressed out.
Hey Tony, If you really want to impress the group, polish the case..................... ;D ;D :o :o ;) :police:
Here is the main shaft with the rear 1st gear and 5th gear re-installed.
Notice the BLACK 6-tooth speedo gear I have installed.
The 7-tooth yellow is the gear I'm replacing. This gear is only placed just to show the difference.
Quote from: turbopinto72 on November 03, 2005, 09:23:04 AM
Hey Tony, If you really want to impress the group, polish the case..................... ;D ;D :o :o ;) :police:
Hey Brad,
Who is going to see the my shiney transmission at 130 MPH???? ;D
Quote from: Pintony on November 03, 2005, 09:29:28 AM
Quote from: turbopinto72 on November 03, 2005, 09:23:04 AM
Hey Tony, If you really want to impress the group, polish the case..................... ;D ;D :o :o ;) :police:
Hey Brad,
Who is going to see the my shiney transmission at 130 MPH???? ;D
I will " know" its shiny and therefore asume your car is going faster than it is........... ;D ;D :o
Nearly complete T-5 output shaft.
Here I have the output shaft re-installed in the case.
Here is my T-5 fully re-assembled.
I still have to set the end play. But I'm still trying to find a way to use the V8 Steel bearing retainer.
Notice how this bearing retainer has large amount of wear.
Quote from: Pintony on November 04, 2005, 01:35:34 AM
Here is my T-5 fully re-assembled.
I still have to set the end play. But I'm still trying to find a way to use the V8 Steel bearing retainer.
Notice how this bearing retainer has large amount of wear.
Yeah, thats what happens when your flywheel/clutch/pressure plate assy comes off the end of the crank shaft and spins wildly around on that shaft in the bellhousing................. ::) ::) :o :o :'( ( It happend to me to ).... :'(
Darn, your fast ;D About how long did it take you? Was this your first T5 you rebuild? What special tools did it require?
Am wondering what throw out bearings are out there so that you could use the V-8 retainer? ???
The size,( OD ),of the surface that contacts the fingers on the pressure plate,(plus overall length), is this what you are looking for?
What do you figure would be the difference between V-8/4 CYL thrust bearings, (besides the bearing retainer diameter) other than general size? Have never bothered to look at V-8 ones. I guess that you might have to change the fork as well.
Al
Quote from: TIGGER on November 04, 2005, 12:18:54 PM
Darn, your fast ;D About how long did it take you? Was this your first T5 you rebuild? What special tools did it require?
Hey TIGGER,
My rebuild took about 8 hrs. BUT that is including the soak time in the parts cleaner to soften the old silicone adhiesive. All the parts I.E. gears and counter-shaft were cleaned and reused.
All bearings and seals were replaced. + all the syncros and blocker rings.
List of tools.
Torque wrench, 3/16 punch snap ring pliers "2 kinds" brass mallet, rubber-plastic mallet, Bearing cup holder. 50 BUCKS! Ouch... I also needed a #40 torx bit that would allow me to tighten the countershaft bolts.
BIG damn Bearing press. My little press was good for somethings BUT I had to go to a local shop for some of the pressing. A nice parts washer is good too!
From Pintony
Quote from: UltimatePinto on November 05, 2005, 12:02:16 AM
Am wondering what throw out bearings are out there so that you could use the V-8 retainer? ???
The size,( OD ),of the surface that contacts the fingers on the pressure plate,(plus overall length), is this what you are looking for?
What do you figure would be the difference between V-8/4 CYL thrust bearings, (besides the bearing retainer diameter) other than general size? Have never bothered to look at V-8 ones. I guess that you might have to change the fork as well.
Al
Hey Al,
I'm afraid I am stuck with the factory aluminum unit. I'm sure that I will not really NEED the steel bearing retainer. Especially that I won't be utting that many miles on it.
The problem is that the STEEL retainer is beter and stronger and MOST of all cheaper.
I have found the Steel retainer for 29.00 BUT the factrory aluminum unit is 50 bucks ! :'(
From Pintony
Quote from: TIGGER on November 04, 2005, 12:18:54 PM
Darn, your fast ;D About how long did it take you? Was this your first T5 you rebuild? What special tools did it require?
When you set the end-play on the counter shaft and the main shaft you will need a dial caliper and magnetic base.
Being as the case is aluminum... I had to drill some STEEL brackets to bolt the steel to the case so my magnetic base had a place to attach.
From Pintony
Thanks for the info, I have all but the bearing tool and press :( I passed on a couple V8 T-5's for my future Mustang project due to them needing a rebuild. I was always curious to know what was needed to rebuild them. I will keep my eyes open for a press and then I will attempt one ;)
So Pintony,
How much $$$.$$ total in parts for the WC rebuild.....and will there be more coming on the mods for the install. Lots of photos will make sure all your Pintos go to heaven with you...lol.
I wont be converting untill summer 06, but when I do it will be a WC/2.0 car.
Forgive my lack of research, please let me throw a few ?s out to you.
Do 2.0/2.3 motors from pintos use different bellhousing with same 4spd ?
If so
Will a 2.3 4spd BH bolt to a WC t-5, and is it the proper depth for input shaft ?
Does 2.0 flywheel accept proper clutch/pressure plate for the t-5
Is end of input shaft proper diameter for 2.0 pilot bearing
Thanks ;D
Quote from: ETPinto on November 10, 2005, 09:34:09 PM
 So Pintony,
How much $$$.$$ total in parts for the WC rebuild.....and will there be more coming on the mods for the install. Lots of photos will make sure all your Pintos go to heaven with you...lol.
I wont be converting untill summer 06, but when I do it will be a WC/2.0 car.
 Forgive my lack of research, please let me throw a few ?s out to you.Â
Do 2.0/2.3 motors from pintos use different bellhousing with same 4spd ?
If so
Will a 2.3 4spd BH bolt to a WC t-5, and is it the proper depth for input shaft ?
Does 2.0 flywheel accept proper clutch/pressure plate for the t-5
Is end of input shaft proper diameter for 2.0 pilot bearing
Thanks ;D
Wow!
Those are great questions!
I have many more photos to share with this group.
The rebuild kit I used came from Hanlon. 169.00 + shipping and I also purchased the 1st gear roller bearing +36.00.
This kit comes complete with all the goodies.
I will be showing the diference between 2 kits that I bought from different supplyers.
BIG Difference! In the amount of parts small difference in the Price.
To answer your direct questions
1.Q, Do 2.0/2.3 motors from pintos use different bellhousing with same 4spd ?
A, The Ford Pinto used the EXACT same bell bolt pattern for the 2.0 and 2.3 "4SPD"
To use the T5 bell on a 2.0 you will have to modify to use all 6 bolts.
2. Q, Will a 2.3 4spd BH bolt to a WC t-5, and is it the proper depth for input shaft ?
A, I do not think the borg warner T-5 will bolt to the Hummer 4spd tranny????????
3. Q, Does 2.0 flywheel accept proper clutch/pressure plate for the t-5?
A, The stock Pinto clutch can be used BUT you have to use the 10 spline disc
The bigger clutch assy. from a Turbo T-bird will bolt directly to the 2.3 crank.
.4. Q, Is end of input shaft proper diameter for 2.0 pilot bearing/
A, Yes
From Pintony
Thank You ;D I am collecting information from the many and sundry sources for this conversion....Maybe I'll build an instruction manual with photos, Hmmmmm.
Thanks again.
Hello Group,
Here I have my old T-5 Transmission out of my Purple Pinto.
I already took the input shaft out and did not find "ANY" reason for the noise I was experiencing.
The input shaft has some small wear on the spline where the clutch disc rides.
The end-play is non-existant! It rotates good W/O any "UNUSUAL" noise???
I am puzzeled again as to what was causing the noise I'm hearing???
From Pintony
When I removed the 2 rear U-bolts they were not real tight? But NOT LOOSE.
There is no marks on the u-joint caps and the yoke is NEW and in perfect condition.
I replaced the tailshaft bushing to match up with the new yoke before installing the first time.
I FOUND THE NOISE!
Quote from: Pintony on November 13, 2005, 01:10:31 PM
I FOUND THE NOISE!
Yeah....Tony.Um I dont think there is supose to be a screwdriver between the clutch disc and the flywheel............ ::) :o. Im sure that caused a bunch of noise................... :police: ;D ;)
Still tring to decide what to do about a clutch for my T-5 install.
I can not seen to find a suitable solution that is NOT 300+ BUCKS.
From Pintony
Hello Group,
I have my T-5 back in my P.P. tonight.
Here is a shot me checking and setting the end play.
The end play should be 0 so I need a .022 thick shim.
You have to mike the shims to find the correct one.
Then re-install the front bearing retainer and check the end play again.
I actually ended up using a .025 shim to get 0 end-play.
Just have to say THANKS Pintony, and to the rest of you out there who so freely share your Pinto wisedom. This site and all it's resources is invaluble! I raise a toast to you all! :drunk:
Ok, back to business. I've located a T5 and from what I'm seeing in the ID chart, I'm guessing that it is a WC tranny. It is a 1352-209. It has the same spec's as your 162. Am correct in this assumption? WC T5 2.3.
Hello DragonWagon,
Your 1352 209 spces. out just like my 162. Same gears and input shaft length.
You just want to stay away from the 1351 tranny.
From Pintony
Cool, thanks. It's always nice to have confirmation that I might have some idea what I'm doing!
Tony, I have located several t5's in a local wrecker. One is in a 2.3 turbo coupe and the others are in n/a 2.3 mustangs. Which would be the better gearbox? Also, I checked with my local transmission shop and they said about 700 to rebuild it (bench job, no install) How difficult are they to go through (the right way)? I really don't want to fork out the bucks if I could do it my self. I do have access to the presses to take care of the bearing races.Thanks...Rob
Rob, I would lean more towards the Turbo Coupe 5spd if it is in good shape. My 86-1/2 Turbo Coupe came with a Hurst short throw shifter from the factory. I am running a Steeda Tri-ax in my Mustang and I love it. It has been one of the most enjoyable mods I have made to date, IMO.
I'm converting my 1.3 mile oval track Capri 2 with a 2.3 to try road racing and I found this site to help on trans selection:
http://ddperformance.com/Trans%20ID%20chart.htm
What I'm looking for is a 2.3 T5 from a '91-'93 which has the closest ratios...anyone In So. Calif. area have one?
So Pintony, are you still happy with the Hanlan T5 kit? I just picked up a tranny and will be rebuilding it with the help of this thread and also this excellent pdf as a reference guide.
http://www.ttcautomotive.com/English/media/pdfs_autogen/T-5_Service_Manual.pdf (http://www.ttcautomotive.com/English/media/pdfs_autogen/T-5_Service_Manual.pdf)
Unfortunately, my T5 didn't come with the bell housing. Can I use my stock 4sp BH on the T5?
Hello DragonWagon,
You really need a T5 bell.
Yes Hanlon was the best kit. Not the cheepest though.
From Pintony
The D9 bell (4spd.) will bolt to a t-5 and will keep you from having to notch the crossmember.
Bill
Ok thanks for the info guys. I'll do some more junkyard scrounging when I have time... and it stops raining. I need to find an 8" rearend and a driveline anyway. Is there a cheat sheet of 8" numbers out there? Like the T5 one. A lot of this is new to me, so the more info the better.
All hail, Pintony!!
I was just thinking to myself the other day, as I was watching traffic passing me in my (badly vibrating) rear view mirror, how nice it would be if my '73 had one more gear.
The engine's freshly rebuilt but the gearbox is a little tired and cranky.
This older guy I know suggested a Columbia two speed rear end(!?!) which, aside from actually finding/refurbishing/adapting/installing such a thing, still doesn't address rebuilding the stock 4-speed.
I'm still trying to catch up with y'all---Pintony, sounds like you'd already fit a T5 into your 2.0L...? Have you published a 'how to' or ever thought about it? I'd *definitely* be willing to pay/make a donation/volunteer in exchange for reasonably complete documentation of the swap.
--Pinto Girl
Hello Pinto_Girl,
Yes My T5 is working great!
The re-build and install is an outstanding improvement over the 4 speed Hummer tranny.
Actually I have had my T5 in my P.P. since 1995.
Do you have any idea what rear axel ratio you have??
I'm running a 4.11 so I really need the overdrive.
My last Turbo Pinto had 4.62 gears W/ no overdrive.
But I was young then and it did not bother me. ;D
Gas was only 65-75 cents too!
I will help anyway I can.
The most important piece is the modified Bell house for the 2.0
Lucky, WE having the early Pinto do not have the cable issues like the late model Pinto does.
From Pintony
Bump!
Pintony,
When you installed your T-5, did you use the cable operated clutch like the 4 speed pinto used or did you have to get creative to make everything work properly? I'll be doing a 302 / T-5 install soon and would like to use the existing 4 speed clutch cable system if possible, or I have hydraulic slave / master cylinder on the shelf if need be. Thanks!
Hello gearhead440,
I used the stock Pinto clutch cable. I did have to take the mounting tab loos from the inner fender but I'm not sure how the later Pinto cable runs.
Some have said that the cross member is in the way on the 74 up Pintos when using the "bell-crank type bellhouse".
You may not have this problem as you are using the V8 bellAgain my T-5 install was for a 2.0 I4 install your V8 conversion may vary from what I did.
From Pintony
Thanks Pintony! You are the man :male: !
Hello Pintony. I'm want to install a t-5 trans into my 2.3L 1973 Pinto sation wagon. I have read everything I can. I still have some questions if you could help me out that would be cool. I'm looking for WC T-5 trans with the bell crank type of bellhousing, if I'm not mistaken. I found A 1987 T-Bird turbo trans, complete from flywheel to shifter.
Q. Is the 1985-1986 Thunderbird 2.3 Turbo trans a better set up than the 1987 2.3 Turbo, for this mod?
a. Are they the same? Besides the gear ratio's?
Q. To use a cable type clutch vs hydraulic. What is going to be the best bell housing to use?
a. The Original one from the 1987 T-Bird?
b. A D4 or D9 has been mentioned?
Q. What mods will need to be done to the crossmember with my future set up?
a. Flip the crossmember 180*?
b. Notch the crossmember?
c. Build a custom bracket off the bellhousing to accommodate cable hookup?
Q. If I was to use a D4 or D9 bellhousing can I still use the T-Bird factory clutch?
Q. Will I need to modify my bellhousing, when using the 2.3L engine?
Q. Is a T-5 Thunderbird 2.3L Turbo trans better than a non turbo trans?
Q. Will I need to use a different trans mount?
Q. Will I need to notch the trans mount?
Q. Will the stock shifter from the T-Bird need mods?
Q. Does any of these mods with the Flywheel/clutch assembly effect the starter motor?
I'm sure I have more questions. Let's see how this works out first. Thanks' for any and all help! :-\
Hello,
Welcome to the world of Pinto's. I see that you are commenting off a post that is nearly 6 years old. A number of years ago "Pintony" was barred from posting to this forum. I will leave it to someone higher up in the PCCA to explain why. Additionally, Pintony was not a fan of converting a '71-'73 Pinto from stock (in most cases). That said, I have a '73 wagon that I have converted to 2.3 Turbo and a T-5. I'll do my best to answer your questions:
1 & 2 . The T-5 had only one ratio set with the 2.3 motor. Mine is a '88 ('87 is the same) T-5 and I converted to an '86 bellcrank. The '87-'88 hydraulic (at least as used in the Turbo Coupe) is NOT the way to go. I'd recommend the bellcrank because of availability and the fact that the arm needs to be bent slightly to align (when moving the cable upward to clear the suspension crossmember).
3. I assume you are talking about the transmission crossmember. Reverse it and slot the bolt holes. I slotted ALL the holes to give a little flexibility. If your talking about the suspension crossmember I cleared the cable over it by using a small metal plate (with two holes) that bolted to the original cable hole and then the cable. It moved the cable upwards and slightly outwards.
4. I believe all the 2.3 clutches are basically the same. The clutch and pressure plate from the '86 I got the bellhousing from looked great and I used them on my '88 flywheel.
5. I have no experience with the D-4, D-9 bellhousings.
6. I think the Turbo trans was rated to the engine output. Not sure if non-turbos were rated differently The input shaft for sure is a different length than the V-8 transmissions.
7. I swapped over from a C-4 automatic and I just reused that mount. The '87-'88 Turbo Coupes has a round mount that if it even would work needs fabrication to use.
8. Yes, the transmission crossmember bolt holes (as stated above) will need to be slotted.
9. Shift mods will depend on your size and preferred driving position. I made a plate to move the shifter back about 2" as well as shortened it by cutting and welding. It is my opinion that the shifter is too far forward. I also feel the shifter is too long. But, I'm 6' tall, long waist-ed and prefer my legs out straight.
10. I'll make a guess on the starter motor and say no, it shouldn't be an issue but can't confirm for sure.
If you search my posts "Wittsend" you can see write-ups and pictures of the swap. Hope this helps.
Tom
Here is the post I made on the D5 & D9 bellhousings. They aren't too hard to dig up but they aren't cheap. I haven't decided which one will go in which car yet.
http://www.fordpinto.com/pinto-faq/comparison-between-d5-d9-direct-pull-bellhousings/ (http://www.fordpinto.com/pinto-faq/comparison-between-d5-d9-direct-pull-bellhousings/)
For a clutch I picked up an '87 TurboCoupe flywheel part#50-703 through Advance Auto Parts & I got the TurboCoupe clutch kit part #MU47827-1 since you need a 10 spline clutch disc to use with the T-5. I also Have the complete clutch/flywheel assembly that's in my '87 Mustang parts car. This should be virtually the same as the new one.
None of my T-5's are from turbo cars but they are all 4 cylinder versions that take a speedo cable.
I think any 2.3 starter works. I have never heard anything to the contrary.
This thread has most of the info I'm after but it doesn't reference the stepped dowel pins. Does anyone have a source for them? I remember someone on here was making them.
What is the part number & manufacturer of the 10 spline disc that fits the 2.0 pressure plate?
I've seen how Turbopinto72 got the upper holes to work but has anyone tried welding some material to the bellhousing to bolt to the 2.0 upper holes?
As for the step dowels, Paul LeDuc over on TurboFord.org offers them. No answer on the other questions.
http://forum.turboford.org/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=6;t=014626;p=0 (http://forum.turboford.org/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=6;t=014626;p=0)
off this topic, kinda that website is a pain in tha @ss to become a member on!! i have tried atleast 5 times with some type of issue every time!!!
I'm going to see what my machinist wants to turn me a set or 2 of dowels. I'm also going to look into welding some extensions on one of my bellhousings to bolt it to the 2.0L. I think this is the way to go.
Of course none of this matters if I can't source the 10 spline disc for the clutch.
heres pauls contact info...
Send me a PM or an e-mail to turboford@charter.net or call me at 860-642-4429
Thanks,
Paul
I called Pintony today & found out the clutch disc is for a non-turbo '87 Mustang with a 2.3L engine.
He also said that anyone thinking of putting a T-5 behind a bone stock 2.0L was making a huge mistake. The stock engine won't pull 5th gear. I was planning to use it behind my built 2.0 but even at 115-120 HP its not gonna pull hard in 5th. I'm just warning anyone before they waste the time, effort & money trying to run it behind a 70 HP stocker.
What bellhousing was Pintony talking about ?. I have a '72 2.0 with a 4spd now, looking into the future for a 5 speed and need to start collecting parts. The motor/trans are in a Model A with 4.11 gears and I want to stay away from a hyd clutch.
don't even bother with the d4 and d9 bellhousings as a total waste of time, effort as well as money. The cable actuated bellcrank housings are cheap and so plentiful you can't chuck a rock at a wrecking yard and not hit one.. relocating the clutch cable is a matter of a two inch long piece of flatbar with 2 holes drilled in it. bolt it to the original cable mounting hole and raise the cable mounting point an inch. problem solved.
Quote from: 1oldtimer on July 04, 2013, 11:43:03 AM
What bellhousing was Pintony talking about ?. I have a '72 2.0 with a 4spd now, looking into the future for a 5 speed and need to start collecting parts. The motor/trans are in a Model A with 4.11 gears and I want to stay away from a hyd clutch.
I believe Pintony is referring to a non-hydraulic 2.3 bell housing. They can be bolted to a 2.0L using 4 of the 6 bolt holes using step down dowels (in two of the holes for proper alignment). My son has been using one for years behind a 2.0 turbo with no issues. The T-5 trans is a common upgrade if you want a 5 speed. If you are using 4.11s and can use a model A old school (long) stick shift then you should be good. The T-5 is about 1.5 inches forward in the shift tunnel over the Pinto 4-speed (and the T-9 5 speed). I know you're are looking for a T-9 but they are really hard to find in any condition and really expensive to rebuild. The input shaft needs to be modified (it's too long) for a 2.0L. I have extensive mods and big $$$ in mine. The Pinto I'm currently building has the T-5. It's a 2.0L with an A.K. Miller turbo and 3.18 gears (may go with 3.40s). The T-5s are cheap, plentiful, and stronger than the T-9s. I have about $900 in my race mod T-9 and $70 in my Pick-Your-Parts T-5/with bell that does not need a rebuild.
71HANTO
Quote from: 1oldtimer on July 04, 2013, 11:43:03 AM
What bellhousing was Pintony talking about ?. I have a '72 2.0 with a 4spd now, looking into the future for a 5 speed and need to start collecting parts. The motor/trans are in a Model A with 4.11 gears and I want to stay away from a hyd clutch.
The 4 banger Fox Mustangs have the bell you are looking for. They are all cable operated.
Thanks guys, I guess I'll look for both and see which shows up first. I'm going to use old pedals so it will be linkage for the clutch. I was already looking at shortening the shift tube/shaft and moving the housing forward so the shifter will be in a usable area. I've seen the AK Miller set-ups come up for sale once and awhile, right now I just have the edelbrock dual carbs and a header on it.........I drove it home in stock form with a C4 so some more power was needed.
Ok, found some parts after 3 junkyard visits. A 1988 Mustang 2.3 T5 with bell (I think I need to use the 2.0 motor plate?), S10 tail housing and shift rod.
Quote from: 1oldtimer on July 14, 2013, 03:16:20 AM
Ok, found some parts after 3 junkyard visits. A 1988 Mustang 2.3 T5 with bell (I think I need to use the 2.0 motor plate?), S10 tail housing and shift rod.
Your 2.0 isn't stock is it? And yeah, I'd run the 2.0 block plate.
It's stock right now, but before it goes back in it's going to get some head mods and a cam (plus the dual carbs and header). Now the question is do I modify the 2.3 bell (looks like I can cut out the upper bolt section on the 2.0 bell and weld it into the 2.3 bell) or modify the tailshaft/shifter on the 4spd. either way there's cutting and welding of aluminum, but with the T5 I have a chance of using 5th and maybe a turbo in the future ;D.
I like this idea myself. Actually quite simple to do. I trust Pintony on 2.0 advice so be prepared to run around in 4th gear until you have the power to use 5th. I'm going to use the stock 4 speed & only swap to the T-5 if my engine can run the 4 speed to it's rev limit with ease. If I can't go over 4K RPM in 4th at half throttle there's no point adding a gear.
(http://i1023.photobucket.com/albums/af357/OrangeCrushMustang/T5bell_zps021b37cd.jpg)
(http://i1023.photobucket.com/albums/af357/OrangeCrushMustang/T5bell2_zps8af8732e.jpg)
Quote from: Pinto5.0 on July 14, 2013, 05:39:03 PM
I like this idea myself. Actually quite simple to do. I trust Pintony on 2.0 advice so be prepared to run around in 4th gear until you have the power to use 5th. I'm going to use the stock 4 speed & only swap to the T-5 if my engine can run the 4 speed to it's rev limit with ease. If I can't go over 4K RPM in 4th at half throttle there's no point adding a gear.
(http://i1023.photobucket.com/albums/af357/OrangeCrushMustang/T5bell_zps021b37cd.jpg)
(http://i1023.photobucket.com/albums/af357/OrangeCrushMustang/T5bell2_zps8af8732e.jpg)
I haven't held the bells together yet.......I didn't think the holes where that close to the 2.3 bell. I see I don't need to cut the two bells apart, that's good. I was kinda planning on using it as a 4spd if all else failed, I just wanted to decide on a trans before I start making a crossmember and modifying the frame.
Apparently he tapped the upper 2 holes in the 2.3 bell & threaded in some all thread. Notching the sides of the bell to use the lower bolt holes is a 10 minute job with a carbide cutter. I like this method because it can be done at home in an afternoon.
Just for reference, below is the link to the nice build thread where those 2.0 to T5 photos are shown.
http://www.fordpinto.com/your-project/73-pangra-project/ (http://www.fordpinto.com/your-project/73-pangra-project/)
I wanted to post a small update. I was having some other aluminum stuff welded so I added the T5 bell to the pile. Fits good, used the '87 clutch set-up, but noticed the that the 2.3 mustang setup isn't level and has the trans at a slight twist to the drivers side.
(http://i1262.photobucket.com/albums/ii602/user1936/1928%20Model%20A%20Tudor/trans-1_zps55b4508e.jpg)
Don't forget to get your pinion angles correct.
http://www.wolferacecraft.com/pinionangle.aspx
'He also said that anyone thinking of putting a T-5 behind a bone stock 2.0L was making a huge mistake. The stock engine won't pull 5th gear. I was planning to use it behind my built 2.0 but even at 115-120 HP its not gonna pull hard in 5th. I'm just warning anyone before they waste the time, effort & money trying to run it behind a 70 HP stocker.'
I would not doubt that one little bit. The zetec engines that Ford used around '95-'05 are rated around 130 HP and once they get well used to let power drop off to around 100 HP or lower an ATX PCM will routinely kick them into 4th at the slightest hint of too much load. The engine otherwise is lugging and not enough power to pull the gear and the PCM has that designed into the software. It can tell by how far you are into throttle (TPS output) to decide the issue one way or the other. Once the engines cross around 150K miles they routinely drop into 4th and stay there at any uphill incline at all. It can get kinda crazy in hilly country and using cruise, lots of upshift/downshift going on there.
If you run into a lugging situation making 5th gear unusable, a recent thread on TurboFord.org suggests that the T5 5th gears can be mixed and matched to get a desired ratio. In addition to engine out put and 5th gear ratio, I believe lugging also depends on tire size, rear gear ratio, car weight, aero drag, etc.
http://forum.turboford.org/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=2;t=057441;p=0
http://www.aicmctexas.com/main/showthread.php?826-Fifth-Gear-upgrades-for-Ford-T5-s&s=7076cf061ebbd37a5b6fdbcc1abe47ae
Both my cable and hydraulic bells have the tilt. Maybe it is to get the shifter closer to the driver, don't know.
I have a 71 with a mildly modified 2.3 and t-5 with 3.55 rear gears and fairly tall tires on 15 inch rims and the overdrive works pretty good even in town at speeds above 45. Yes if I am going slow and climb a hill I have to downshift but if your car has 3.40 and higher gears it should work fine, I would never go back to a 4 speed.
Absolutely, that's why God created the shifter.....................
Quote from: Pintony on October 18, 2005, 08:06:36 PM
Hello Group,
I got my NEW Borg warner T-5 tonight. I will be showing how I rebuild and install this tranny in the coming weeks. I have hurt my old T-5 and will be replacing it with this newly aquired unit.
This is the "World Class" T-5
My install will be behind a 2.0 Turbo BUT should help othersW 2.3 in their quest for overdrive tranny.
From Pintony
I am drooling. The one thing I would like for my hopped-up 2.0L is a 5 speed to get a higher top gear and bring the engine RPM on the highway. But how much modification does it take?
1. Does the driveshaft have to be shortened?
2. Does the gearshift position need to be changed?
3. How do you adapt to the back of the 2.0 engine.
I know little to nothing about tranny interchanges. Where can I get info?
Thanks!
Quote from: Pinto5.0 on July 03, 2013, 09:12:57 PM
I called Pintony today & found out the clutch disc is for a non-turbo '87 Mustang with a 2.3L engine.
He also said that anyone thinking of putting a T-5 behind a bone stock 2.0L was making a huge mistake. The stock engine won't pull 5th gear. I was planning to use it behind my built 2.0 but even at 115-120 HP its not gonna pull hard in 5th. I'm just warning anyone before they waste the time, effort & money trying to run it behind a 70 HP stocker.
What mods have you done to get to the 115-120hp. I'm trying to get an idea of what will a target hp, is 150-175 or even 200 way out of line for a N/A street driven car. I see the GM 3.0 (181 boat motor, derived from the 153 Nova motor) getting 140hp out of the box.......and the 153 getting 120 hp.
The issue isn't horsepower, it's torque. You need enough of it in a "driving" RPM range (Idle to about 3,000 RPM) for everyday general driving. Horsepower is just a result of the torque at a given RPM.
You can build a 200 HP 2.0 but it will likely have to wind it up towards 8,000 RPM to get those numbers. And if you did that the torque in the "driving" RPM's would be worse than stock. I have a friend who builds race engines and he has stated that, "You can only get so much torque out of a given bore/stroke combination. The only way to increase HP is to increase the RPM." And note that when you shift the torque upwards you lose it on the lower end.
I only briefly had a 2.0 / Auto. I installed 225-60-16" tire which would have been similar to running with an overdrive trans ratio. The car was "pedestrian" to start with 13" tire and the 16" put it in the "walker" catagory.
You could effectively run the 5 speed with the right tire/rearend ratios. And you might actually set it up for a very mild overdrive (compared to what you have now). BUT, 1st gear would probably be negated as it would hit "granny" status.
I also notice that the '87 Mustang T-5 was listed as a .85 (vs the .78-.81 listed for other years). Frankly though it is a mote point without considering the trans ratios, the rear ratio and the tire circumference.
Run your current trans, rearend and tires through a calculator. See what the RPM @ driving speeds are. Then do the same with the desired components. Observe the RPM drop. If it is minor then the 5 speed will not offer much advantage. If it is a lot you likely lack the torque to pull the load.
In any case you would need to be building the 2.0 for torque in the stated idle to 3,000 RPM range. I doubt any power increase equipment available is slanted in that direction. In fact the stock engine is likely doing that in its natural state now.
Wittsend, I do not understand it but the torque can be changed without changing bore or stroke. The 71 2000cc had 120 ft-lbs while the 72 2000cc had 103 ft-lbs. The compression was lowered from the 71's 9:1(8.6:1 per Ford manual) to 8.2:1 in 72. Per the Ford manuals, the cams have the same specs but I suspect some tuning changes were made too. Click on the "detailed specs" link in the links below to see the compression ratio numbers.
http://www.automobile-catalog.com/make/ford_usa/pinto/pinto_2-door_sedan/1971.html
http://www.automobile-catalog.com/make/ford_usa/pinto/pinto_2-door_sedan/1972.html
1oldtimer, as far increasing the NA output of the 2000cc, there are some old magazine build articles linked on the PCCA page here. Go to "Community" at top and then to "Extended Community". The article links will be on the lower left side. For more complete builds, David Vizard wrote a good book on the 2000cc engine, see link below. For some reason clicking on the link below does not work but copying and pasting the entire link seems to work.
http://www.bookfinder.com/search/?author=&title=&lang=en&isbn=0-89586-365-0&new_used=*&destination=us¤cy=USD&mode=basic&st=sr&ac=qr
Hi Jerry,
Remember that my friend is building racing engines. A stock engine leaves a lot on the table. So, he is basically stating after everything else has been exhausted you hit a ceiling of the torque you get out of a specific displacement. This is also related to currently available equipment and build concepts at any given point in time. Obviously future development has the potential for increase.
Since HP is factored around torque and RPM to get the HP number higher (at the torque ceiling) the torque has to be shifted to the higher RPM.
He is not some "want to be" engine builder. He did development work for Shelby, built the engine for a record holding Bonneville car and has been in magazine engine building shoot outs. http://www.mitechengines.com/history.htm
My main point to 1oldtimer is that his search for total HP to overcome the 2.0 deficiency with a T-5 was not the solution. The solution was to get maximum torque (or at least an acceptable amount) in the "driving" range that the T-5 would typically be used in. My apology if I caused any confusion.
I also don't mean to contest Pintony who has obviously tried the T-5 with a 2.0. But, in his case we do not know the tire size, the rear ratio, the final ratio in 5th gear (could be anywhere from .78 to .85). If (and I do mean IF because we don't know) he had 15"-16" tires, 3.00 rear gears, the .78 trans and a motor modified that had the torque curve moved higher that might account for the issues. On the other hand if he had 13" tires, 3.55 gears, .85 trans and a basically stock motor (decent torque in the driving range) - and then the car still couldn't handle the overdrive then for sure I would not advise the T-5 either.
I have a 2.3 in my 71 with the t-5 and 355 gears and the 5 speed works great. I only have a ranger header and stock roller cam. Some times I run in 5th in town over 45 mph. Yes if you come to a steep hill you will have to downshift but it works great. Might be different if you have less rear gear than 355
"Effective" gearing is something I touched on in my build thread in the turbo forum.
With 23.9" tires and 3.55 gears, my car has gearing equivalent to 3.94 gears in the Thunderbird my trans came from. 3.94 is pretty steep for that driveline. I can take off in second gear like it's first. To functionally match the gearing that the donor Thunderbird had, I would only need a 3.12 rear end ratio.