T96J with torque tube.. What are my options?

Message Topic Search Topic Options Post Reply Create New Topic Printable Version Translate Topic

The difference between the T-85 and 89 are the cut of first gear -- straight cut (and stronger) in the T-89, helical (quieter) in the T-85. The T-86 is similar, but it was never used by AMC or Jeep. It's is a top loaded transmission, T-85 and 89 are side loaded. 

Author	Message Topic Search Topic Options Post Reply Create New Topic Printable Version Translate Topic
farna Members Profile Send Private Message Find Members Posts Add to Buddy List Supporter of TheAMCForum Moderator Lost Dealership Project Joined: Jul/08/2007 Location: South Carolina Status: Offline Points: 19676	Post Options Post Reply Quote farna Report Post Thanks(0) Quote Reply Posted: Oct/20/2017 at 1:50pm
	The difference between the T-85 and 89 are the cut of first gear -- straight cut (and stronger) in the T-89, helical (quieter) in the T-85. The T-86 is similar, but it was never used by AMC or Jeep. It's is a top loaded transmission, T-85 and 89 are side loaded.
	Frank Swygert

First_Gear Members Profile Send Private Message Find Members Posts Add to Buddy List AMC Addicted Joined: Jan/18/2010 Location: Mukilteo WA Status: Offline Points: 644	Post Options Post Reply Quote First_Gear Report Post Thanks(0) Quote Reply Posted: Oct/20/2017 at 2:47pm
	I appreciate all the responses. Thats interesting reading about the V8 ambassador someone is trying to figure out. AMC enthusiast nailed down the clutch problem. I bought the car with a ruined clutch from a leaking rear main seal. All of this will be fixed and I already have a new 10" clutch that will work with my refaced flywheel. I know the clutch is hard to find and a sore issue for some I will post the link of which one I found. so after a tonn of research I'm going to stick with the T-96J after all. Mine had a hardened custom machined end of the output shaft installed by a previous rebuilder that is still in good shape but the shoulder of the original shaft is junky so I will put a spacer washer over it like what is used in the cluster gear. I am currently trying to find a replacement first gear. I think one will pop up eventually. Currently I have this problem: This is the input shaft for the T96J with an unknown synchro ring it has 28.9-14 stamped on it.. The synchro ring is too thin allowing the end of the input shaft to contact the center Synchro hub damaging both. So did the T96J have a wider ring than the T96 standard or is this just the wrong ring someone used? Edited by First_Gear - Oct/20/2017 at 2:54pm

vinny Members Profile Send Private Message Find Members Posts Add to Buddy List Supporter of TheAMCForum Joined: Jan/05/2012 Location: Calgary Status: Offline Points: 2837	Post Options Post Reply Quote vinny Report Post Thanks(0) Quote Reply Posted: Oct/20/2017 at 4:26pm
	I'd say wrong ring unless somehow the tapered shiny part of the shaft as seen through the notch of the synchro ring has worn down. Or, what does the inside of the ring look like? As I recall there should be lines cut around the inside of it so maybe there is wear there but the outside teeth look in new condition. I don't know what that gap should be between the ring teeth and the steel teeth but definitely more than that. Do Northwest Transmission or Fatsco sell parts for manual transmissions? Edited by vinny - Oct/21/2017 at 4:16am

farna Members Profile Send Private Message Find Members Posts Add to Buddy List Supporter of TheAMCForum Moderator Lost Dealership Project Joined: Jul/08/2007 Location: South Carolina Status: Offline Points: 19676	Post Options Post Reply Quote farna Report Post Thanks(0) Quote Reply Posted: Oct/21/2017 at 6:32am
	About 2000 I had a T-96J with OD rebuilt by All-Trans in Greenville, SC. They were able to source a new main gear cluster for it. I don;t think any other gears were replaced, except for the OD gears (drum and planetary set). Costs me around $800 plus shipping to them (included shipping back to me in middle Georgia). They sell parts as well as do service, so they might be able to find the parts you need. http://www.alltransparts.com/
	Frank Swygert

First_Gear Members Profile Send Private Message Find Members Posts Add to Buddy List AMC Addicted Joined: Jan/18/2010 Location: Mukilteo WA Status: Offline Points: 644	Post Options Post Reply Quote First_Gear Report Post Thanks(0) Quote Reply Posted: Oct/21/2017 at 11:11pm
	Its worth a shot. I'll try them on monday. If I really can't get the T96J going I will start looking again for substitutions. I just emailed a few vendors asking about T96J synchro rings. I have to believe that Borg warner would not retool their synchros just for this one application. So maybe T86, T90 or even T14 rings will be the ticket. I filed the ridge off of my input shaft and removed the ring that was on there. It is not very worn and obviously not enough gap on the taper and certainly not wide enough!. The good news is that the shaft other than the edge that was contacting the synchro hub is in good condition. I measured the taper that the synchro rides on with my caliper its: big end: 1.990" small end: 1.910" and it looks like its 0.415" tall. The gear has 30 teeth. Edited by First_Gear - Oct/22/2017 at 12:15pm

tomj Members Profile Send Private Message Find Members Posts Add to Buddy List AMC Addicted Joined: Jan/27/2010 Location: earth Status: Offline Points: 7544	Post Options Post Reply Quote tomj Report Post Thanks(0) Quote Reply Posted: Oct/25/2017 at 12:37am
	wait a sec... the bronze synchro thingie is NOT what prevents the input shaft gear from touching/grinding the output shaft. the synchro ring floats with up to 0.100" of clearance. for thought-experiment purposes, if you assembled the input and mainshafts in the case with all the bearings and thrusts and rollers there would be clearance between the two. (i DISTINCTLY recall this stack because i once ruined a T96 i had rebuilt by not ensuring the front bearing snapring was correctly in place, the shaft pushed back and ground the rollers into dust). you may be worrying about a dimension that is meaningless. i do not know if T96 synchros are the same as T96J, howeever. also it's the inside of the brass thing that wears; when new, it has very thin concentric grooves on the inside, in the cone, where it fits over the cone on the input shaft. that is where the synchronizer "work" is done -- the outer house-shaped dogs are caught by the sliding shift ring, but it's the inner cones that bring the output side shaft up to speed. those grooves carry oil the viscosity of which drags the output side up to input side speed. the condition of the dogs is probably less important than the inside grooves.
	1960 Rambler Super two-door wagon, OHV auto 1961 Roadster American, 195.6 OHV, T5 http://www.ramblerLore.com

First_Gear Members Profile Send Private Message Find Members Posts Add to Buddy List AMC Addicted Joined: Jan/18/2010 Location: Mukilteo WA Status: Offline Points: 644	Post Options Post Reply Quote First_Gear Report Post Thanks(0) Quote Reply Posted: Oct/25/2017 at 1:23am
	It turns out the Synchro rings ARE different for the T96J vs T96. They have different part numbers. I am still trying to figure out what is supposed to keep the edge of the taper on the input shaft from contacting and rubbing against the synchro hub. The synchro hub has severe galling on it and will have to be replaced and the spring got chewed up. I think I can just redress the edge of the input shaft and it will be ok. Maybe low oil? But why would they design it to rub against a spring.. I can't find images of anyone else with a similar failure and the diagram doesn't seem to specify any spacer or anything that I am missing. So I just figured maybe it was supposed to ride inside the synchro until the synchro was pressed against the taper and have deep enough blocks on it to keep it from hitting the hub. If they are supposed to rub maybe low oil caused the galling?

farna Members Profile Send Private Message Find Members Posts Add to Buddy List Supporter of TheAMCForum Moderator Lost Dealership Project Joined: Jul/08/2007 Location: South Carolina Status: Offline Points: 19676	Post Options Post Reply Quote farna Report Post Thanks(0) Quote Reply Posted: Oct/25/2017 at 6:19am
	The standard T-96 and the heavy duty J model are virtually the same, at least in operation. The synchro has to be different because the input shaft is slightly large in diameter of the J model and made of a bit stronger material. IIRC the main gear cluster is larger as well, or has a larger shaft... so it's unique to the J model also. Took the guys in Greenville a bit to find the main gear cluster for mine.
	Frank Swygert

tomj Members Profile Send Private Message Find Members Posts Add to Buddy List AMC Addicted Joined: Jan/27/2010 Location: earth Status: Offline Points: 7544	Post Options Post Reply Quote tomj Report Post Thanks(0) Quote Reply Posted: Oct/26/2017 at 1:49am
	what, precisely, was the failure mode? can you post closeups of the two parts that ground together? are you saying that bit of the cone on the end of the input shaft, shown poking up a bit past the bronze synchro, is grinding against the "front" end of the output shaft? the input shaft of course has the big bearing in front, the output shaft has a bearing in back, and the tip of the output shaft sticks into the tail of the input shaft with rollers between. these three bearing sets are not enough to hold the two shafts in line in the case -- the pilot bushing does that. this is why crank-to-bellhousing alignment or runout is so critical. until you insert the assembled transmission into the bell and pilot bushing you can wiggle the input shaft side to side. i think .006" is max. allowed runout. but i don't recall the assembled transmission, on the bench, able to grind metal to metal. the rollers do mostly hold everything concentric (i suppose you could force it, never tried! :-)
	1960 Rambler Super two-door wagon, OHV auto 1961 Roadster American, 195.6 OHV, T5 http://www.ramblerLore.com

vinny Members Profile Send Private Message Find Members Posts Add to Buddy List Supporter of TheAMCForum Joined: Jan/05/2012 Location: Calgary Status: Offline Points: 2837	Post Options Post Reply Quote vinny Report Post Thanks(0) Quote Reply Posted: Oct/26/2017 at 3:44am
	My failures were both caused by a tooth breaking off the forward end of the rear shaft and during a shift all the stuff just came forward, although I never heard of anyone else having that problem. Would a thicker gasket behind the front bearing retainer plate or a thicker one separating the tail housing help? Seems to me that with the tail shaft into the front shaft with all those needle bearings in there what you are experiencing should not be allowed to happen. I can't remember but is there a washer behind and/or in front of the needle bearings?