T-96 Clunking in 1st

A Rebel shouldn't have a T-96.  The T-96 was only used behind the 195.6 and 199/232 in small cars through about 1972. If you have a Rebel with a T-96 it's not factory. It might be a T-86, which is a larger three speed with no synchro in first. I could be wrong, but I'm pretty sure the T-96 wasn't used in the big cars except with the 196 or 199 (66-67 only 199, IIRC).

In any case, if the problem is only in first gear it could be the roller bearings on the shaft. Looks like the trans needs to come apart. The T-86 and T-96 are both similar in construction, the T-86 is just a much heavier duty trans.

RebelRay wrote: You're probably right.  I was told that by another member, or picked it up somewhere.  I've never actually looked to find out for sure.   Would the later t-14's from Jeeps work in the older cars?  They seem to be the most readily available.  Although, a t-5 would be splendid.

Jeep T-14 wont work, T-14 has to be 2wd.

the T-96 is grossly inadequate for even a 232ci in a Classic. it's barely adequate behind a 195.6ci in an early American! which is what i drive... its a very small and weak transmission. only Nash, Rambler and Studebaker used it.

i had a newly rebuilt one behhind a 232 in a '63 classic wagon and i sheared teeth off first cresting a very steep hill, clutch fully engaged, no funny business.

with one broken tooth (and likely many chipped, if old) you won't hear any noise. multple teeth missing you would hear, but it would be very rapid.

the T-14 fits in the same hole (bell pattern and clutch) but the overall length is different. a passenger car T-14, not a Jeep T-14.

is the Rebel a torque tube car? everyone hates TTs, i dont; while they're a mild pain to work on, being sealed they last forever. but it confounds transmission choice.