|
|
|
Your donations help keep this valuable resource free and growing. Thank you.
|
T96J with torque tube.. What are my options? |
Post Reply 
|
Page <1 3456> |
| Author | |
farna 
Supporter of TheAMCForum 
Moderator Lost Dealership Project Joined: Jul/08/2007 Location: South Carolina Status: Offline Points: 19676 |
 Post Options
 Thanks(0)
 Quote Reply
 Posted: Nov/04/2017 at 7:19am |
|
Since you know someone who can respline the shaft and not "scared" to do it, sounds like you're good to go. IIRC the shaft is straight, not larger or smaller on the splined ends. I'm pretty sure they are cut, not rolled, splines, but this is from memory...
Machine the standard adapter for the larger bearing -- I bet that's what AMC or Borg-Warner did (just a guess though). IIRC there wasn't a big difference in the front bearing size. If the T-86 trannys were behind a six (there was an HD option... not sure if it was a T-86 or T-85 -- whichever AMC used behind the 250/287 V-8s) you should be good. The HD option probably included an AMC 20 and V-8 TT so it would share all the V-8 components. I don't know if AMC used a special bell with the HD option or the bolt pattern is the same as the T-96. The V-8 trannys have a longer input shaft. You will either need a spacer/adapter or machine the input to fit. IIRC the difference in bell depth is something like 1.5" though (6.5" for six, 8" for V-8?). Not sure the shaft can be shortened that far, but I bet a good machinist can. You mentioned a lathe... sound like you do some machine work for yourself. If they used a shorter input shaft the T-96 TT should work -- there are only two TT assemblies, six and V-8. Here are pics of Ford T-86 (top) and T-85 OD trannys. The OD case is slightly different on these, and of course the adapters are different. Ford used enough of them to have their own cases cast, and may have license produced the BW OD the same as they did the M-8 auto trans, and made case/VB changes but still used BW rotating assemblies. The T-85 is often mentioned as a bit stronger than the T-86, but I am under the impression that they are similar in strength, the case (top vs side loading) is the main difference. Could be that the shifting mechanism is stronger in the side loaded T-85?  |
|
|
Frank Swygert
|
|
 |
|
|
First_Gear
AMC Addicted 
Joined: Jan/18/2010 Location: Mukilteo WA Status: Offline Points: 644 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: Nov/04/2017 at 9:24am |
|
My thought on this was that if I could find a T86 with a long enough input shaft. So far I have not found any. I am picking up those ford parts today but the input shaft on those ones is an inch and a half shorter than the T96 so it would be impossible to use this transmission. I cannot simply switch the input shafts to one of the longer "wagoneer" ones I see on ebay like I had originally thought and like you said the TT od unit will not bolt on so I'm in the same boat hunting for rare parts.
It would be much easier to just fix the T96J, still calling junkyards. I have a lead on a 66 ambo in idaho and a guy in cali with a "pile" of old overdrive trannys but they haven't gotten back to me yet on the casting number. I am curiuos though if the T96H adapter plate is exactly the same except for a smaller bearing. Maybe the ID of the bearing is the same. I am going to call blasers tomorrow and see if they can measure a bearing for me. Edited by First_Gear - Nov/04/2017 at 9:27am |
|
|
|
|
tomj
AMC Addicted
Joined: Jan/27/2010 Location: earth Status: Offline Points: 7544 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: Nov/04/2017 at 9:14pm |
|
i would think the driveshaft-mod solution would be to cut it in the middle were it doesnt matter. sleeved and welded.
i'm curious, you talk about long vs short input shafts? i was under the impression that all T96 input shafts were the same length, 7". is yours longer? hey, could you measure your bell depth and input shaft length? i'm trying to compile this info. http://www.sensitiveresearch.com/1961-Rambler-Roadster/transmission/T5research/index.html ignore this if it's a bother. |
|
|
1960 Rambler Super two-door wagon, OHV auto
1961 Roadster American, 195.6 OHV, T5 http://www.ramblerLore.com |
|
|
|
|
farna
Supporter of TheAMCForum
Moderator Lost Dealership Project Joined: Jul/08/2007 Location: South Carolina Status: Offline Points: 19676 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: Nov/06/2017 at 6:56am |
|
nother option, though a lot more work, is to switch to an open driveshaft. There is a short seal adapter for the OD unit that just presses in when you take the TT adapter off. I did that to use a Classic OD unit on an American. Of course you can leave the TT adapter in place -- the seal works with a T-96 open drive yoke. You will need to have a driveshaft made and of course a rear suspension. Late Ford Ranger rear axle fits, and a 7.5" would be relatively cheap and easy -- and plenty strong for a 232 or even a 4.0L EFI engine, or small V-8. If the T-96J quest gets too expensive that might be the way to go.
|
|
|
Frank Swygert
|
|
|
|
|
First_Gear
AMC Addicted
Joined: Jan/18/2010 Location: Mukilteo WA Status: Offline Points: 644 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: Nov/06/2017 at 6:20pm |
I will measure this and send you the info when I have it reassembled. I am referring to a T86 off of a ford. I had the guy measure the input shaft to see if it was even an option. Turns out it was shorter than mine. So then I thought I could get a longer shaft for another application on ebay but the gears didn't have the same count (ford gears vs AMC gears) so I concluded that it wasn't an option. This was before I found out that the OD casings were different sizes despite having the same guts. This is what I am considering right now: #1 Finding the necessary parts to fix the T96J #2 trying to adapt T96H (standard) parts to fix mine. It looks like the only difference is that the T96J has a bigger rear bearing.. Not totally positive but it looks like the regular adapter may just bolt on and work the same.. I don't think the smaller bearing matters since the ID is the same. The T96J has bigger synchros than the T96H hence why I am going through the trouble of trying to use this trans. #3 What about ditching the engine, transmission and bellhousing and finding a T86 w/ OD out of a V8 TT car. Then I would be able to spring for a fuel injected 258 since amc changed the pattern to the v8 in 72 and it would all theoretically bolt up? I don't really want a V8 car.. I'm building this car for long 1500 mile road trips and want fuel economy. This still requires me to procure a relatively rare transmission. #4 convert the car to the much more common and durable automatic transmission however this would require a whole new steering column and pedal assembly.. I kinda like the 3 with OD though. #5 Ditching the entire drivetrain and torque tube and starting from scratch. This sounds like alot of work and from what I was reading the stock suspension is superior. #6 putting in a T96H standard behind a 232 with a two barrel carb.. I feel like this is just asking for trouble..
|
|
|
|
|
farna
Supporter of TheAMCForum
Moderator Lost Dealership Project Joined: Jul/08/2007 Location: South Carolina Status: Offline Points: 19676 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: Nov/06/2017 at 7:37pm |
|
#1 -- Did you try the guys in Greenville, SC?
#2 - I think that will work, especially if the ID of the bearings is the same. That adapter will bolt up -- AFAIK all the AMC ODs have the same bolt pattern on the back. I've swapped OD units between Americans (no torque tube) and Classics. #3 - Should bolt to a T-10 bell. Might be a bit expensive though. Three speed manuals were all but phased out in the big cars by the early 70s. #4 - Not necessarily. I ran my AW4 with a column shifter... three speed MANUAL column shifter! I just locked the two shift arms together so I didn't accidentally move the shifter forward or back when I wanted to shift gears. Pedals? Just remove the clutch pedal. Not that hard. I don't have a shift indicator on my column now, though I did change it to an auto column later -- a late 90s S-10 tilt column. Takes just a couple drives to figure out where the gears are, and it's not like you shift them a lot! Good theft deterrent too... Long trips and reasonable economy is why I put an EFI 4.0L in mine. I wanted to keep the OD, and did for a while (a T96J!), but I finally had to get something stronger (actually had a 4.6L stroker...). #5 - It's a lot of work, having done it a couple times, but not as much as you'd think. The rear suspension is the hardest part, and it doesn't have to be. Use a universal four link kit or make a set of long ladder type bars (truck arms), something similar but simpler than TomJ's 63 American Roadster banjo setup. Will require some welding though. Once you have the rear suspension done you have all the hard work out of the way. Since you have a 232 a 258 or 4.0L will all but bolt in. Not terribly hard to find an AW4 rear drive only, not in the southeast anyway. #6 - Well, I don't think so. Putting the T96J behind a 4.6L stroker was asking for trouble, but I spent $800 on a total rebuild and tried it anyway. It was asking for trouble. Synchro only lasted a couple hundred miles.... I've posted this before, so will stop now... Anyway, if you drive pretty easy with it I think it would be fine. But there's only one way to find out.... Might lose the synchro like I did, but I'm pretty sure that would be it. |
|
|
Frank Swygert
|
|
|
|
|
purple72Gremlin
AMC Addicted
Charter Member Joined: Jul/01/2007 Location: Illinois Status: Online Points: 16611 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: Nov/06/2017 at 8:26pm |
|
Just be aware, the T10 bell is 8 inches deep. If you find a T15, that uses the same bell as the T10. I don't know the interchange between the T14 and T96. But the T14 was the standard 3 spd on the 304s, and it's the shallow bellhousing.
|
|
|
|
|
tomj
AMC Addicted
Joined: Jan/27/2010 Location: earth Status: Offline Points: 7544 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: Nov/07/2017 at 12:31am |
is your crank end a flat butt or volcano? i'm assuming flat -- for $75 you can convert it to volcano and use short-shaft transmissions. this is why i'm curions about your stock bell depth and the length of the "stickout" of the transmission input shaft, from the mounting face to the tip... |
|
|
1960 Rambler Super two-door wagon, OHV auto
1961 Roadster American, 195.6 OHV, T5 http://www.ramblerLore.com |
|
|
|
|
tomj
AMC Addicted
Joined: Jan/27/2010 Location: earth Status: Offline Points: 7544 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: Nov/07/2017 at 12:39am |
|
i'm not really suggesting that you go my route, eg. the rigid wishbone, but on a car with a rear transmission crossmember it would be a heck of a lot easier than on the nash-based americans where i have to convince the tub to take the load. that is what required all the spider cage etc.
torque tube cars *already* put fore/aft thrust onto that x-member, and already do torque lift/brake pulldown there. it's why i copied that geometry. its very good. given engine torque at the flywheel, multiplied by 1st gear and the axle, there's a likely peak of some 1200 ft/lbs at the rear wheel hub. with a 60" (approx) torque tube -- or wishbone -- that's only 250 lbs of up or down force at the front end of the tube/bone. fore/aft (accell/braking) in the big cars is primarily through the (forgotten) side sill torque links that tie the x-member to the "frame" sills (and the source of much tdriveline noise when the go bad -- and they are bad if you've not changed them) and secondarily through the engine and transmission mounts (pushing on trans/engine that pushes on the body). it's far superior in every way to anyone's 4-link rear, flat out. but it's work. |
|
|
1960 Rambler Super two-door wagon, OHV auto
1961 Roadster American, 195.6 OHV, T5 http://www.ramblerLore.com |
|
|
|
|
farna
Supporter of TheAMCForum
Moderator Lost Dealership Project Joined: Jul/08/2007 Location: South Carolina Status: Offline Points: 19676 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: Nov/07/2017 at 7:09am |
|
I'd just weld mounts to the trans crossmember (and replace the rubber end mounts!) and run two long 2" square tubes from axle to the crossmember, angled in (mount on crossmember just to each side of the trans mount). Basically "truck arms". 11 gauge 2" square (or even round) tubing will be enough. Some kind of rubber bushing on the crossmember end, rigidly bolted to the axle. The bushings can be as simple as two piece late model AMC strut rod bushings -- that would make the mounts on the crossmember simple as well, and just weld threaded studs to the crossmember end of the arms. Late model Ford Ranger axle fits. The axle needs to be bolted to the arms in such a way that you can adjust pinion angle with shims to get that right.
|
|
|
Frank Swygert
|
|
|
|
|
Post Reply
|
Page <1 3456> |
Tweet
|
| Forum Jump | Forum Permissions You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot create polls in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum |
Click for TheAMCForum Rules
Topic Options
tomj wrote: