Okay first I want to thank everyone on here who has helped me with my Turbo swap. Could not have done it with out the info from you guys.
One last question (I hope). My car is alive, at least it runs. When I put it in I hooked it up to the stock four speed to get it running.
But now I have a T5 ready to install (just found it). Eveything I have read says you have to cut a notch in the crossmember. I am using the bellcrank housing.
1. Is there any easier way. It looks from the measurments I took the cable will clear. Could shorter linkage lever work?
2. Can I use the stock Pinto clutch cable or do I have to have one that is differnt?
The trans and clutch came out of a 88 mustang 2.3
Thanks in advance :)
Hmm??
1)http://www.fordpinto.com/index.php/topic,4106.msg46105.html#msg46105 (http://www.fordpinto.com/index.php/topic,4106.msg46105.html#msg46105)
2) http://www.fordpinto.com/index.php/topic,4106.msg41010.html#msg41010 (http://www.fordpinto.com/index.php/topic,4106.msg41010.html#msg41010)
Bill
Thank you, Bill you have been a big help on every question. It's nice to be able to ask the expert
Okay one more question. What flywheel and clutch for the T5. I have looked for the answer, but can't find.
I can use the 8.5 clutch that was stock on the Pinto or should I use the bigger 9 in clutch and if so do I need a differnt flywheel.
Hello RKK,
I used the 8.5 clutch.
Yes the Turbo coupe flywheel is necessary if you use the 9" clutch.
I bought a high $ clutch rom racerwalsh and centerforce.
But guess what?? I'm running an 8.5 Autozone replacement clutch and it works just fine behind my T-2.0.
From Pintony
I used the T/C one.
Bill
As I mentioned in the thread Bill refereed to, the actual cut into the crossmember is not all that difficult, if you decide to go that route.
I think that it, ( the crossmember), stayed the same throughout the production years. In design anyway. It's only about 14 gauge sheet where you have to cut into it. Four inch square tube works great. I took care to drill holes in the bottom of mine to plug weld it to the bottom of the cross member, again using c-clamps to make sure it was pressed against the thick part of the crossmember.
I set up a bare block to my T-5 in the engine compartment to make sure I placed the square tube correctly. I did have to make my clutch cable longer but my application is for a two liter.
Al
I would reccomend using the 9 1/4 inch flywheel and clutch/pressure plate setup from the Turbo Coupe. With a good tune and a little extra boost the small clutch won't take the abuse the engine will put it through. Clutch slippage is probably the biggest problem with these swaps.=====Well, except for traction.
Thanks for your help everyone. I priced clutches for both through summit and they aren't any more for the 9. Except I have to buy a flywheel, but even that is cheap, about $60 which is almost the price of getting one resurfaced. Just have to figure out now what input shaft diameter I have. You guys probably already know this but T5s came with either 1.063 or 1.125 input shafts which I guess will make a difference on the throw out bearing.
I keep learning :read:
It is like remodeling a room in your house one thing leads to another.
Hey Tony I am going to try the bracket we discussed for the clutch. If it doesn't work, try something else. I just hate to pull my engine backout to cut that channel.
Quote from: rkk on December 04, 2007, 03:09:13 PM
Hey Tony I am going to try the bracket we discussed for the clutch. If it doesn't work, try something else. I just hate to pull my engine backout to cut that channel.
COOL!!! Keep us posted if it works out!!!!
The way i understand it, the 4 cylinder T5s have a smaller input shaft than the V8 T5s so likly you need the smaller T/O bearing.
Im kinda curious to know if a 2.3 has the power to pull the OD in a T5 with 3.00 gears. Does it make much of a milage difference? My wagon with 3.55s should definntly benefit from the OD both milage wise and wear on the engine wise. Also i think really the T5 might actually make our cars perform better in town because the drop from 1st to 2nd gear surly isnt as steep as it is on the pinto 4 speed. If i remember right the drop from 1st to 2nd gear is almost 2 full points!! They did that for the economy of it im sure. My 76 performs great in first gear but the R's drop WAY down in 2nd gear and it becomes a slug until the R's get back in the 2500-3000+ range. I might be satisfield with the performance of this thing with a T5 but i still want fuel injection, and if i am going to mess with that i might as well do the efi turbo swap and have some fun too, right? ;D :D
lol @ me posting 3 times in a row on the same topic. Anyways i forgot to mention something else that ive been thinking about alot that i always forget to post. In i think 92 ford changed over to a high torque starter (mini starter i think) on the 2.3s. (the price also jumped like 5x lol) I am curious if i could put one of those on (or if itd be required with the T5 flywheel) when i change to a T5. The newer starters seem to be quieter and i imagine they turn the motor over faster and maybe even more efficently (less battery drain). These old stock pinto starters are loud as hell. And each one seems to sound different. Hoping the newer type starter will be quieter. Converting to a T5 trans will make these cars seem like a whole new car. The trans is surly quieter, the gearing better (plus having od) and hopefully a quieter starter. Thats a BIG change.
Here is a link with the T5 transmission gear ratios
http://www.britishv8.org/Articles/Borg-Warner-T5-ID-Tags.htm
The starter sounds like a pretty good idea. Just depends how much you want to spend
Quote from: pintoguy76 on December 04, 2007, 10:42:23 PM
Im kinda curious to know if a 2.3 has the power to pull the OD in a T5 with 3.00 gears. Does it make much of a milage difference? My wagon with 3.55s should definntly benefit from the OD both milage wise and wear on the engine wise. Also i think really the T5 might actually make our cars perform better in town because the drop from 1st to 2nd gear surly isnt as steep as it is on the pinto 4 speed. If i remember right the drop from 1st to 2nd gear is almost 2 full points!! They did that for the economy of it im sure. My 76 performs great in first gear but the R's drop WAY down in 2nd gear and it becomes a slug until the R's get back in the 2500-3000+ range. I might be satisfield with the performance of this thing with a T5 but i still want fuel injection, and if i am going to mess with that i might as well do the efi turbo swap and have some fun too, right? ;D :D
Keep in mind that the "tallest" overall gearing Ford put in Pintos was 2.73 (4th gear 1-to-1 and a 2.73 rear). If you run the 86 T/C T-5, the O/D gear is .81 (others are similar), so if you run a rear that is 3.40, in O/D you will be about the same as the 1-to-1 fourth (all Pinto 4spd's have 4th gears that are 1-to-1). A stock Pinto 2.3 might have some issues with gears from 2.73 to 3.40 and an O/D of .81; with gas economy being so critical in the later years of the Pinto, I am sure Ford put the TALLEST gears they knew would work.
When I first put the T-5 in my tan car, I still had the 2.79 gears in the 8" rear. It was OK in O/D,
but I have the EFI 2.3T. At the time I only had one 8" rear with 3.40 gears and I was not sure of it's condition, but I figured that 3.00 would work (I had 3 carriers with them) with the power I had if the 3.40's were shot. The 3.40's are fine, and with 215 60-14's on the rear, I think the car is geared perfect for me and how I drive the car; I am not shifting out of 1st gear too quickly and 5th lets me be well under 3K at 65MPH. I do need to install a locker to keep the right rear from spinning right before I shift from 2nd to 3rd.
Bill
RKK,
I don't qualify as an expert, but in preparing to do a like swap I've investigated similar considerations. I compared my likelihood of using 215-60-15 tires and a 3:40 rear to the Turbo Coupes 225-60-16 and 3:55 rear. They are VERY close in comparision (65 MPH in O/D).
Stock Turbo Coupe, 26.6" Tires (225/60-16), 3.55 Stock Rear Ratio = 2331 RPM
Pinto 25.2" Tires (215/60-15) 3.40 Rear Ratio = 2357 RPM
When one factors in that the Pinto is about 1,000 pounds light it was my inclination that 3:25's might give the best of both worlds.
Remember to factor tire size (as well) and not just ratios. It is a combination of the trans gears, the rear gears AND the tire size that determine the overall results. It is worth the time to do the math and compare the "effecive" ratios of any change. If you have a basis (running car) to compare to, then you can have some idea of what your end results will be.
Tom
Quote from: Wittsend on December 06, 2007, 01:30:14 AM
RKK,
I don't qualify as an expert, but in preparing to do a like swap I've investigated similar considerations. I compared my likelihood of using 215-60-15 tires and a 3:40 rear to the Turbo Coupes 225-60-16 and 3:55 rear. They are VERY close in comparision (65 MPH in O/D).
Stock Turbo Coupe, 26.6" Tires (225/60-16), 3.55 Stock Rear Ratio = 2331 RPM
Pinto 25.2" Tires (215/60-15) 3.40 Rear Ratio = 2357 RPM
When one factors in that the Pinto is about 1,000 pounds light it was my inclination that 3:25's might give the best of both worlds.
Remember to factor tire size (as well) and not just ratios. It is a combination of the trans gears, the rear gears AND the tire size that determine the overall results. It is worth the time to do the math and compare the "effecive" ratios of any change. If you have a basis (running car) to compare to, then you can have some idea of what your end results will be.
Tom
Also keep in mind that the "tire radius" is measured from the ground to the axis when properly inflated and full load. Using charts is good for estimates, but two tires the same "indicated" size can be very different in overall height and tread width.
Bill
I wondered about 3.25's also. I was just thinking about this a day or two ago. The 3.55s in my wagon seem too low to me without the overdrive (might be ok with a T5 tho) and the 3.00's in my 76 i like, but still are a bit high i think. I was thinking something in the 3.2x range would be just right. But thats for a 4spd and a stock 2.3. I plan on using 3.55s with a 2.3 turbo and T5, but I may change my mind and use the 3.25s or 3.40s. I was told the 2.3T needs lower gears to keep it revved some, i guess to reduce turbo lag or something i dont know. One person i talked to about it said he runs 4.11s with a C4 and a 2.3T (and makes 30mpg freeway. that sound right for having no od?) But i refuse to go that low on gearing. 3.55's is barly tolerable to me with no od.
Quote from: pintoguy76 on December 06, 2007, 01:26:29 PM
....I was told the 2.3T needs lower gears to keep it revved some, i guess to reduce turbo lag or something i dont know...
If the gearing is too short, you won't be able to spool before you need to shift. Turbo lag is an effect on building boost, not keeping it.
Quote from: pintoguy76 on December 06, 2007, 01:26:29 PM
...One person i talked to about it said he runs 4.11s with a C4 and a 2.3T (and makes 30mpg freeway. that sound right for having no od?) But i refuse to go that low on gearing. 3.55's is barly tolerable to me with no od.
Same person maybe??
Does not sound right to me, but it would also depend on the tire size. My tan car with a T-5 and 3.40's gets 30 on long trips. Connie's Pinto had 3.55's with the stock C3 (1to1 3rd) and N/A engine and got 20 highway. Now with the 2.3T, same tranny and 3.00 gears it gets about 24 MPG on long trips (much shorter tires).
(EDITED TO FIX NUMBERS)Bill
Yes it was the same guy. The tire size was different but i forgot what size. Couldnt be too much bigger or they wouldnt fit without work.
I think i want an 85-86 SVO T5. It has a 3.50 first gear (compared to a pintos 3.65-ish first gear) and then a 2.14 second gear (compared to the pintos 1.97-ish 2nd gear) and then third is 1.39 (the pinto is about that also i think) and then 1:1 for fourth, same as the pinto. Od is .78 on that trans i think. A bit steep for a stock pinto motor. The main problem i have with the pinto trans is that drop from 1st to 2nd gear. Its too steep! That would zoop for a turbo. It seems as tho every other t5 has some crappy gear ratios like 4.03 to 2.37 which is an insane drop of 1.66 close to that of a pinto. 3.50 to 2.14 is only 1.37 drop. That will rev it a bit faster and give it some more power. The other two ratios are about right in the pinto i think. The main thing i hate is the drop from 1st to 2nd that just kills it. A lower rear gear would help but if the drop was smaller between 1st and 2nd it would help even even with the lower gear. I would like to use a 2.3T, 85-86 svo T5, and stock size tires and an 8inch rear with a 3.25ish gear. (a good quality tire, or perhaps a little wider but with the same heighth overall and a bigger wheel (thus smaller sidewall for better handling). Thatd give power and milage. The turbo should still boost pretty well that way (especially with the gearing closer together) but the engine wouldnt rev too high on the highway either since the OD would knock it down some. And if you needed a little extra boost, just stay in 3rd gear longer. Its not a huge drop from 3rd to 4th.
Quote from: pintoguy76 on December 06, 2007, 07:28:01 PM
...The tire size was different but i forgot what size. Couldnt be too much bigger or they wouldnt fit without work...
You can get some tall tires on the rear of a Pinto without much work.
Quote from: pintoguy76 on December 06, 2007, 07:28:01 PM
....The main problem i have with the pinto trans is that drop from 1st to 2nd gear. Its too steep! That would zoop for a turbo...
Why do you think that would be a problem with a 2.3T? (I would think durability would be a bigger issue)
Keep in mind that Ford set up the tranny gearing based on the car's weight,
HP (torque), tire size, final drive ratio, and SOMETIMES for MPG.
What works well in a 2.3T might not in a N/A 2.3 and the other way around.
A 2.3T will not be able to build much boost, if any, in 1st gear anyway, so I think you are just better off using a lower gear to get moving. Having THAT gear in the tranny lets you use taller gears in the axle for highway mileage.
IMHO this is what you need to look at more than just the tranny gears themselves: What did Ford use for final drive gears with the SVO and T/C with EACH T-5 tranny in the different years? What are the weights of those cars compaired to a Pinto? What were the rated HP on those cars? What were the tire radiuses on those cars? What are your goals (what are you going to do with the car)?
Also keep in mind that this is all just theory until YOU test-drive the car.
I recommend doing the same formulas for RPM's on your choices for 1st gear in the tranny.
Bill
Quote from: 77turbopinto on December 06, 2007, 04:01:13 PM
If the gearing is too short, you won't be able to spool before you need to shift. Turbo lag is an effect on building boost, not keeping it.
Bill
Ditto, I pull harder in 2nd and 3rd then in 1st due to 1st gear running out too soon. Now factors like full throttle clutch dumping and slicks might change that theory but you get the picture.
What i was saying about the pinto trans is that i dislike the drop from 1st to 2nd i really meant with the 2.3 and not nessecarily the 2.3T. A T5 is geared with about the same drop and thats where thats where i got that i thought that drop would zoop for a turbo as well. I should have clarified that. That is with the 3.00 gears and stock tires. It just drops the RPM too much. If it were a bit lower i could get better acceleration and leave the stock rear gears alone for better milage overall. However the same thing applies to the 2.3T.
This would all be trial and error and the best combo will just have to be tried. I do think the rear may need a slightly lower gear but also think that 2nd gear being just a little lower would help some too. If the engine drops out of its power range when you shift it really hurts you. The car i'm in refrence to doesnt really produce much power until something like 3,000 rpm. Thats when it seems to come alive. If i revved it a little higher before i shifted then 2nd is better but its still a big drop. With the stock engine being carbureted and naturally aspirated its responce could be very different that that of the 2.3T, and a jet change or something might help get the performance out of the 2.3 a little lower. Ive noticed before when i screwed with the jets that the RPM at which it starts to perform changes. Id rather go EFI anyways tho. The T5 like i was would help in my case now but may not be as good with a turbo i dont know like i said ill just have to try different combos. Sounds like alot of work, but thats what racers do. Performance doesnt always come without some work and trial and error. It may not even be worth it to worry much about transmission gears, i dont know.
Its really hard to explain my way of thinking on here, i hope i'm doing ok lol. I am not disagreeing with you i see all your points, but trying to explain mine too. My view may be distorted due to my setup. 3.00 gears and a stock carbed 2.3. That and my car is totally configured for milage, being an MPG Pony model. My wagon has 3.55 rear gears and 2nd gear is awesome in it, but you pay for that extra gearing all the time. My best friend drives that car most of the time and wont take it out on the highway because he thinks it sounds like its little hamster is gonna have a heart attack (lol). What hes saying is it sounds like its revving the snot outta that little engine. I dont like it either, by the time i hit 70 im ready to back off of it. After 50-55mph it really isnt too comfortable anymore.
My old 76 mpg (not mpg pony) i think had 3.18 gears and i liked it. Its performance overall seemed great. But i havnt had that car in 5 years almost so its hard telling not what it was really like. It didnt matter much to me back then. My new 79 has 3.08s but it is automatic so that wont really be a fair comparison.
I guess i will just see how things go, ill use whatever transmission i get ahold of when i put a 2.3t in (will probably go in the 76 first) and see how everything goes from there. I think i'm leaning on 3.25 gears and the 85-86 svo trans tho. In the wagon since its geard so low, it might be ok having the normal ratios (3.97, 2.3x, 1.39,1.00,0.78). Its gonna have to gear a new rear whenever it gets a 2.3 turbo since it only has a 6.75. So i may make gear changes then on it too. Guess ill just see what happens in the 76 and go from there.
Well on my way home this afternoon i paid close attention to my shift rpm, and performance and all that and it seems to me that in town normal driving, the stock gearing is great. It does bog down a little in 1st but i think thats a carburetor issue. (I still havnt got those all fixed yet. When i rebuilt the carb a few years ago it didnt do that anymore it was amazing. I probably need to kit this one again, its been opened and messed with several times since it was rebuilt.) Anyways, the drop from 1st to 2nd is even ok. BUT if you're driving like youre in the indy 500, that 1st to 2nd drop is a doozie!! This may be the reason ford used the gearing that they did in the 85-86 SVO. Now, this doesnt mean that even the stock gearing (those other than the 85-86 svo) wouldnt be better with with a bit lower gear because id be lying if i said it wouldnt. But with that gearing 3.55s seem too low in my wagon which will have similar gearing ratio to both my 76 and the T5s. So with that being said, i'll be on the lookout for a positrac unit for my 8" rear, and a set of 3.25 gears, or the gears closest to that whatever that might be. Also ill just live with whatever 4 cyl T5 i find. If i dont like it ill use it in the wagon and then go with the 85-86 svo trans. I may even try it with the stock 3.00 gears first. Boy, getting optimal performance (while maintaning decent milage too) is alot of work! But i think it'll be worth it in the end. And it gives me something to tinker with :)
Like I said, what works well with the N/A engine might not be right for a turbo engine. Just something to look at while you are building the car. For me, I put the 8" rear in my car before I got the gears I wanted. Also, I ran my C3 for a while. I knew I where I was going so when the car was not 'right' I just kept swapping parts as I went.
As I have posted, my Pinto has the 86 T/C tranny and 3.40 gears. I also mentioned that IMHO a 2.3T with a T/C T-5 SHOULD work well with a rear from 3.00 to 3.55 depending on tire size. That was NOT to say that others WON'T work. IF (and when) I ever need to pull the tranny back out, I will replace it with my 87 T/C T-5. That change will drop my RPM's by 100 at 65MPH, but first gear will not be effected too much.
One more thing: SVO's are rare, and to find THAT T-5 might be hard, and if you do, it might bring a very high sticker price.
Bill
Yes i agree the same gearing may not work as well for both engines. Thats why i was saying my point of view may be distorted due to the fact that i have an NA 2.3 (with a burnt valve and crap for a carburetor) and the 3.00 gears. I actually like the 3.00's better than i do the 3.55's in my wagon, but it may do well with a turbo. Do you think the 6.75 would stand up to the 2.3T long enough for me to see what i need to change, if anything? I know it will need an 8" but i hate to put an 8" w/ 3.55 gears in it only to find out i hate it and really only want 3.25s or something. Looking online it appears my 76 MPG Pony actually weighs as much as my 74 wagon. The weight went up on these cars every year so once 76 came around even the mpg pony (the cheapest and highest economy version) was heavier than the wagons of previous years. This information courtesy of wikipedia.org under ford pinto. So with this said theroetically whatever works in the 76 should work i the 74. since theyre about the same weight wise. The SVO trans is rare and will be hard to find just as you said however, the same trans with the same gearing was used in many many more GM applications (look at the link RKK posted, any transmission with the "S" code is the trans i am eyeballing). Maybe i could use one of those? The only difference would be the bellhousing right? And that unbolts so you could change it easily. The input shaft could be different too, i dont know. That can be changed too tho. Another option would be seeing if i could find the gears needed to make the trans that ratio, maybe there are gear sets made so you can change the gearing to your needs. The final option is to take what i can get and make it work. Its not like i'm trying to win some big race that i must win to keep my sponsorship or something. But would still be nice to have a perfect setup.
Quote from: pintoguy76 on December 08, 2007, 02:11:33 PM
...The only difference would be the bellhousing right? And that unbolts so you could change it easily. The input shaft could be different too, i dont know. That can be changed too tho...
No, much more CAN be different. Yes, it just unbolts. Yes, it most likely is different. Yes, it could be changed, but that might not be the only thing different. I have never changed one, but I have heard that it is not that easy.
Bill
I agree with Bill. I posted that chart mainly for gear ratio info. If you used a GM trans I think you would have all kind of issues. Although it could probably be done with enough time. My big fear is where the shift linkage would pop out ,could be in some place that would not work. The T5 from a ford is a pretty save bet. But I am just speculating , don't have enough info to be sure. ???
Ray
Go to www.joe-escobar.com/pinto.html Scroll to the bottom. Instead of cutting the crossmember, I just made a new bracket above the original cable hole in the bellcrank bell. has been working fine.
Joe
Quote from: Pangra74 on December 08, 2007, 07:56:21 PM
Go to www.joe-escobar.com/pinto.html Scroll to the bottom. Instead of cutting the crossmember, I just made a new bracket above the original cable hole in the bellcrank bell. has been working fine.
Joe
Hey Joe I give you a 1-UP for the link!!!
I knew someone had done a simple fix for the cable problem.
I just could not remember who it was.\ From Pintony
Quote from: 77turbopinto on December 02, 2007, 03:33:34 PM
1)http://www.fordpinto.com/smf/index.php/topic,4106.msg46105.html#msg46105