transmission planning for a CJ7
#61
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: transmission planning for a CJ7
The only difference is the world class one is supposed to be smoother
shifting.... Same guts otherwise I believe.
My overdrive is useless with my 3.31 gears and 33's. It will still pull
along, but it lugs the engine so the gas mileage goes to crap. I stay
in 4th on the highway and get about 23 US mpg.
I don't know what the real advantage for changing unless it was cost. I
have never heard of anyone breaking the 'light' aluminum T5 case so
don't see what a cast case will add besides weight.
As Bill noted, the lower 1st is a thinner gear, but I very seldom use
1st low myself so wouldn't switch for that reason.
Mike
Rusted wrote:
>
> So do you still have a strong argument for me to keep my '83 T-5 that is non
> World Class? I do like the 1:.76 5th gear because it gives me a wider
> range of gears. I will lose that if I change transmissions.
>
> "Mike Romain" <romainm@sympatico.ca> wrote in message
> news:428B9D62.B725F720@sympatico.ca...
> > Sleestak wrote:
> >>
> >> Mike Romain wrote:
> >>
> >> > As far as I am aware, you now have the best combination going, the Borg
> >> > Warner 'World Class' T5 with the Dana 300 t-case. That T5 is the same
> >> > one Ford puts behind Mustang V8's and is a strong one.
> >> >
> >> > I have abused mine, run it totally dry 20 miles from a road and came
> >> > limping out with it going bang! bang! bang! in every gear except 3rd,
> >> > only to fill it up and keep on going. That was 6 years ago too....
> >> >
> >> > I kinda like mine.
> >> >
> >> > Mike
> >> > 86/00 CJ7 Laredo, 33x9.5 BFG Muds, 'glass nose to tail in '00
> >> > 88 Cherokee 235 BFG AT's
> >>
> >> Hi Mike. I always thought that the 80s Jeep CJ T5s were of the non-world
> >> class variety. Please tell me I am wrong and that my 86 is a world class
> >> T5 :)
> >
> > You are wrong sort of... I forgot about that, they didn't start with
> > the world class ones until 85.
> >
> > http://www.5speeds.com/comp.htm#t5w
> >
> > So we should have one, the OP doesn't.
> >
> > Mike
shifting.... Same guts otherwise I believe.
My overdrive is useless with my 3.31 gears and 33's. It will still pull
along, but it lugs the engine so the gas mileage goes to crap. I stay
in 4th on the highway and get about 23 US mpg.
I don't know what the real advantage for changing unless it was cost. I
have never heard of anyone breaking the 'light' aluminum T5 case so
don't see what a cast case will add besides weight.
As Bill noted, the lower 1st is a thinner gear, but I very seldom use
1st low myself so wouldn't switch for that reason.
Mike
Rusted wrote:
>
> So do you still have a strong argument for me to keep my '83 T-5 that is non
> World Class? I do like the 1:.76 5th gear because it gives me a wider
> range of gears. I will lose that if I change transmissions.
>
> "Mike Romain" <romainm@sympatico.ca> wrote in message
> news:428B9D62.B725F720@sympatico.ca...
> > Sleestak wrote:
> >>
> >> Mike Romain wrote:
> >>
> >> > As far as I am aware, you now have the best combination going, the Borg
> >> > Warner 'World Class' T5 with the Dana 300 t-case. That T5 is the same
> >> > one Ford puts behind Mustang V8's and is a strong one.
> >> >
> >> > I have abused mine, run it totally dry 20 miles from a road and came
> >> > limping out with it going bang! bang! bang! in every gear except 3rd,
> >> > only to fill it up and keep on going. That was 6 years ago too....
> >> >
> >> > I kinda like mine.
> >> >
> >> > Mike
> >> > 86/00 CJ7 Laredo, 33x9.5 BFG Muds, 'glass nose to tail in '00
> >> > 88 Cherokee 235 BFG AT's
> >>
> >> Hi Mike. I always thought that the 80s Jeep CJ T5s were of the non-world
> >> class variety. Please tell me I am wrong and that my 86 is a world class
> >> T5 :)
> >
> > You are wrong sort of... I forgot about that, they didn't start with
> > the world class ones until 85.
> >
> > http://www.5speeds.com/comp.htm#t5w
> >
> > So we should have one, the OP doesn't.
> >
> > Mike
#62
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: transmission planning for a CJ7
not even close - the 5.0 litre there makes 330hp or 66hp/litre compared with
the TVRs 105hp/litre.
Dave Milne, Scotland
'91 Grand Wagoneer, '99 TJ
"L.W. (ßill) ------ III" <----------@***.net> wrote in message
news:428BA58D.CAF2FA2E@***.net...
> http://www.jeep4.0performance.4mg.com/photo3.html
> God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
> mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/
>
>
> Dave Milne wrote:
> >
> > You get them in TVRs ? Didn't know that. Wish I could afford that
T440R - a
> > 4.2 litre I6 that puts out 440 bhp with a 0-60 time of <4 secs and a top
> > speed of 215mph. Blimey. That would bring a smile to your face and a
> > puckering of the trousers.
> >
> > Dave
the TVRs 105hp/litre.
Dave Milne, Scotland
'91 Grand Wagoneer, '99 TJ
"L.W. (ßill) ------ III" <----------@***.net> wrote in message
news:428BA58D.CAF2FA2E@***.net...
> http://www.jeep4.0performance.4mg.com/photo3.html
> God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
> mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/
>
>
> Dave Milne wrote:
> >
> > You get them in TVRs ? Didn't know that. Wish I could afford that
T440R - a
> > 4.2 litre I6 that puts out 440 bhp with a 0-60 time of <4 secs and a top
> > speed of 215mph. Blimey. That would bring a smile to your face and a
> > puckering of the trousers.
> >
> > Dave
#63
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: transmission planning for a CJ7
not even close - the 5.0 litre there makes 330hp or 66hp/litre compared with
the TVRs 105hp/litre.
Dave Milne, Scotland
'91 Grand Wagoneer, '99 TJ
"L.W. (ßill) ------ III" <----------@***.net> wrote in message
news:428BA58D.CAF2FA2E@***.net...
> http://www.jeep4.0performance.4mg.com/photo3.html
> God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
> mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/
>
>
> Dave Milne wrote:
> >
> > You get them in TVRs ? Didn't know that. Wish I could afford that
T440R - a
> > 4.2 litre I6 that puts out 440 bhp with a 0-60 time of <4 secs and a top
> > speed of 215mph. Blimey. That would bring a smile to your face and a
> > puckering of the trousers.
> >
> > Dave
the TVRs 105hp/litre.
Dave Milne, Scotland
'91 Grand Wagoneer, '99 TJ
"L.W. (ßill) ------ III" <----------@***.net> wrote in message
news:428BA58D.CAF2FA2E@***.net...
> http://www.jeep4.0performance.4mg.com/photo3.html
> God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
> mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/
>
>
> Dave Milne wrote:
> >
> > You get them in TVRs ? Didn't know that. Wish I could afford that
T440R - a
> > 4.2 litre I6 that puts out 440 bhp with a 0-60 time of <4 secs and a top
> > speed of 215mph. Blimey. That would bring a smile to your face and a
> > puckering of the trousers.
> >
> > Dave
#64
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: transmission planning for a CJ7
not even close - the 5.0 litre there makes 330hp or 66hp/litre compared with
the TVRs 105hp/litre.
Dave Milne, Scotland
'91 Grand Wagoneer, '99 TJ
"L.W. (ßill) ------ III" <----------@***.net> wrote in message
news:428BA58D.CAF2FA2E@***.net...
> http://www.jeep4.0performance.4mg.com/photo3.html
> God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
> mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/
>
>
> Dave Milne wrote:
> >
> > You get them in TVRs ? Didn't know that. Wish I could afford that
T440R - a
> > 4.2 litre I6 that puts out 440 bhp with a 0-60 time of <4 secs and a top
> > speed of 215mph. Blimey. That would bring a smile to your face and a
> > puckering of the trousers.
> >
> > Dave
the TVRs 105hp/litre.
Dave Milne, Scotland
'91 Grand Wagoneer, '99 TJ
"L.W. (ßill) ------ III" <----------@***.net> wrote in message
news:428BA58D.CAF2FA2E@***.net...
> http://www.jeep4.0performance.4mg.com/photo3.html
> God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
> mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/
>
>
> Dave Milne wrote:
> >
> > You get them in TVRs ? Didn't know that. Wish I could afford that
T440R - a
> > 4.2 litre I6 that puts out 440 bhp with a 0-60 time of <4 secs and a top
> > speed of 215mph. Blimey. That would bring a smile to your face and a
> > puckering of the trousers.
> >
> > Dave
#65
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: transmission planning for a CJ7
not even close - the 5.0 litre there makes 330hp or 66hp/litre compared with
the TVRs 105hp/litre.
Dave Milne, Scotland
'91 Grand Wagoneer, '99 TJ
"L.W. (ßill) ------ III" <----------@***.net> wrote in message
news:428BA58D.CAF2FA2E@***.net...
> http://www.jeep4.0performance.4mg.com/photo3.html
> God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
> mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/
>
>
> Dave Milne wrote:
> >
> > You get them in TVRs ? Didn't know that. Wish I could afford that
T440R - a
> > 4.2 litre I6 that puts out 440 bhp with a 0-60 time of <4 secs and a top
> > speed of 215mph. Blimey. That would bring a smile to your face and a
> > puckering of the trousers.
> >
> > Dave
the TVRs 105hp/litre.
Dave Milne, Scotland
'91 Grand Wagoneer, '99 TJ
"L.W. (ßill) ------ III" <----------@***.net> wrote in message
news:428BA58D.CAF2FA2E@***.net...
> http://www.jeep4.0performance.4mg.com/photo3.html
> God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
> mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/
>
>
> Dave Milne wrote:
> >
> > You get them in TVRs ? Didn't know that. Wish I could afford that
T440R - a
> > 4.2 litre I6 that puts out 440 bhp with a 0-60 time of <4 secs and a top
> > speed of 215mph. Blimey. That would bring a smile to your face and a
> > puckering of the trousers.
> >
> > Dave
#66
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: transmission planning for a CJ7
Oh, do you want to put a pump on it?
God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/
Dave Milne wrote:
>
> not even close - the 5.0 litre there makes 330hp or 66hp/litre compared with
> the TVRs 105hp/litre.
>
> Dave Milne, Scotland
> '91 Grand Wagoneer, '99 TJ
God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/
Dave Milne wrote:
>
> not even close - the 5.0 litre there makes 330hp or 66hp/litre compared with
> the TVRs 105hp/litre.
>
> Dave Milne, Scotland
> '91 Grand Wagoneer, '99 TJ
#67
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: transmission planning for a CJ7
Oh, do you want to put a pump on it?
God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/
Dave Milne wrote:
>
> not even close - the 5.0 litre there makes 330hp or 66hp/litre compared with
> the TVRs 105hp/litre.
>
> Dave Milne, Scotland
> '91 Grand Wagoneer, '99 TJ
God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/
Dave Milne wrote:
>
> not even close - the 5.0 litre there makes 330hp or 66hp/litre compared with
> the TVRs 105hp/litre.
>
> Dave Milne, Scotland
> '91 Grand Wagoneer, '99 TJ
#68
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: transmission planning for a CJ7
Oh, do you want to put a pump on it?
God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/
Dave Milne wrote:
>
> not even close - the 5.0 litre there makes 330hp or 66hp/litre compared with
> the TVRs 105hp/litre.
>
> Dave Milne, Scotland
> '91 Grand Wagoneer, '99 TJ
God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/
Dave Milne wrote:
>
> not even close - the 5.0 litre there makes 330hp or 66hp/litre compared with
> the TVRs 105hp/litre.
>
> Dave Milne, Scotland
> '91 Grand Wagoneer, '99 TJ
#69
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: transmission planning for a CJ7
Oh, do you want to put a pump on it?
God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/
Dave Milne wrote:
>
> not even close - the 5.0 litre there makes 330hp or 66hp/litre compared with
> the TVRs 105hp/litre.
>
> Dave Milne, Scotland
> '91 Grand Wagoneer, '99 TJ
God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/
Dave Milne wrote:
>
> not even close - the 5.0 litre there makes 330hp or 66hp/litre compared with
> the TVRs 105hp/litre.
>
> Dave Milne, Scotland
> '91 Grand Wagoneer, '99 TJ
#70
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: transmission planning for a CJ7
> Is the T-5 not concidered to be a "light weight" transmission?
Yes it's very light weight. But it depends on what you are gonna be doing
with it. it will last forever behind a 258 with small tires. I put my t5
from my 85 cj7 behind a built 304 with 4.56 gears and 36x12.5" tires and it
lasted about two weeks. It worked fine on the street and as soon as I hit
the mountains it exploded. I would upgrade - no CJ t5 is world class, AMC
was too cheap for that.
Another option for you would be a T176 that would bolt right up to your 258
and d300 and you could even use the same bell housing/clutch. The bell
housing would need some minor machine work (new holes drilled). The t176 is
a medium duty and was put behind v8s from the factory. It has been in mine
for 4 months and i have seen some pretty good trails with it.
--
Yes it's very light weight. But it depends on what you are gonna be doing
with it. it will last forever behind a 258 with small tires. I put my t5
from my 85 cj7 behind a built 304 with 4.56 gears and 36x12.5" tires and it
lasted about two weeks. It worked fine on the street and as soon as I hit
the mountains it exploded. I would upgrade - no CJ t5 is world class, AMC
was too cheap for that.
Another option for you would be a T176 that would bolt right up to your 258
and d300 and you could even use the same bell housing/clutch. The bell
housing would need some minor machine work (new holes drilled). The t176 is
a medium duty and was put behind v8s from the factory. It has been in mine
for 4 months and i have seen some pretty good trails with it.
--