You must have some odd V6 shafts...My T5 is a GM 60* V6 and other than the spline count, it's the same as a V8 input shaft...the L28 Nissan T5 has the same length input shaft, but different pilot and spline count, the ford I4 uses the same length and pilot, but different spline as the Nissan...
here in the US there are two major divisions of T5, Ford pattern and Chev pattern...If it ain't a chev, it's got the ford pattern box in it.
big boys T5 options for the V6.
-
Xnke
- Posts: 59
- Joined: Thu Sep 24, 2015 3:42 am
-
immortality
- Posts: 3820
- Joined: Thu Apr 09, 2009 2:31 am
- cars: VS,VT,VX,VE
Re: big boys T5 options for the V6.
.
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
-
vlad01
- Posts: 8548
- Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2012 8:41 am
- cars: VP I S
VP I executive
VP II executive
VP II executive #2 - Location: Kyneton, Vic
Re: big boys T5 options for the V6.
Apart from the main case, general hardware and main shaft and input shaft tooth profile and count being the same as 3.35 ratio boxes they are a complete custom creation.
Even the gears with same ratio and tooth count from other unrelated gear sets don't match due to the profile being different.
Just to make it a bitch none of the holden v6 gears have part numbers either. For my box I opted for a mustang 068 gear set and used my input shaft as mentioned the input shaft tooth count and profile at least there matches to a global standard in T5s
But luckily we do have a drop in option of a replacement get set for the v6 and its from one of the top gear makers in the world to boot.
http://www.ppgearbox.com.au/page.asp?productid=34
Even the gears with same ratio and tooth count from other unrelated gear sets don't match due to the profile being different.
Just to make it a bitch none of the holden v6 gears have part numbers either. For my box I opted for a mustang 068 gear set and used my input shaft as mentioned the input shaft tooth count and profile at least there matches to a global standard in T5s
But luckily we do have a drop in option of a replacement get set for the v6 and its from one of the top gear makers in the world to boot.
http://www.ppgearbox.com.au/page.asp?productid=34
-
vlad01
- Posts: 8548
- Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2012 8:41 am
- cars: VP I S
VP I executive
VP II executive
VP II executive #2 - Location: Kyneton, Vic
Re: big boys T5 options for the V6.
immortality wrote:
how are they measuring the shaft? 9 1/4" is standard US for mustang boxes. Holden V6 is 11 5/8"
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
-
VK_3800
- Posts: 578
- Joined: Sun Jul 04, 2010 5:15 am
- cars: SS Torana
- Location: NZ
Re: big boys T5 options for the V6.
That's likely to be from the front face of the box, could even be just the bell housing length rather than input shaft
-
vlad01
- Posts: 8548
- Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2012 8:41 am
- cars: VP I S
VP I executive
VP II executive
VP II executive #2 - Location: Kyneton, Vic
Re: big boys T5 options for the V6.
Very old thread, but things have changed a bit over the years and it's always been in the back of my mind to find a solution to a decent box to suit the more high powered and/or high revving V6s out there, including that one day project of mine :laugh: 
I found this nice chap in Perth, Mike from Racing Solutions, I wish I had found him a bit over a year ago, would have been able to source a good used input much easier and not had to stuff around getting my used one also repaired.
https://racingsolutions.com.au/
We talked for a while and I got some good info.
Years ago Quaife had dog box sets that he reckon they might have some old stock laying around and if I got onto the right person there, they could do a custom input to suit. I wasn't so confident all those things would align to be honest and being in Pounds, the price is similar to PPGs
PPG was said to be good to deal with, he advised against using the straight cut set they offer for the V6 as his opinion was that it needs hearing protection, like wow, I had no idea they were that loud and I always had the impression that PPG's straight gears were a much better profile compared to most to give a smooth transition from tooth to tooth to make them last longer, less stress and much more quiet, so the quiet part is relative I guess lol.
They could potentially do a custom set with slight helical teeth, but I now know that for what I want to do one day, the standard sync rings won't cut it for the RPM and inertial for twin disk clutch (a way to get good hold and have a light pedal (Tilton ST-246 for example)).
So we are talking maybe 15-20K USD price for a custom gear set as a guess, the ones they make now are around that 6K USD for 1-5 set.
I looked at liberty gears, they do dog (face plate) conversion, but appears they stopped all work on the T5 where custom work is involved.
Astro T5 was discontinued around the time of this thread starting.
Gforce still make an upgraded set for the Ford only, they stopped the dog sets around 8 years ago though, so it's just a Mustang 500-600hp rated standard sync kit. It's actually pretty well priced at 1600 USD or there about. So I can pretty much forget dog gears and custom inputs there.
With PPG being the only drop in option and still limited with teeth, lack of dog option and stupid prices, I started looking into the recent TKX (came out in 2022 I believe)
Well, this is where things get interesting. The TKX has a good following and will for at least a decade more I reckon, so the aftermarket is slowly starting to emerge with different shifters, and a dog gear set currently being developed, in Melbourne out of all places. Priced well actually, less in AUD than the PPGs gear set in USD. So half price basically! 4999 AUD for a 1-4 set, 5.5k for 1-5 and nearly 6k for added REM treatment, no doubt where I got my input shaft REM treated in Melbourne to aid with repairing it.
With the stock TKX being 7500 rpm shift capable and 600 ft-lb, it would be overkill for most people, however, there is no denying that dogs are the way to go for higher rpm applications where one wants effortless shifts. This mob stuck to helical gears, so making it suitable for street driven cars as well as track. Nicely done there!
There is a mob in the US called Sikky manufacturing? that make a variety of offset shifter, remote ones basically. All the way to 10" I think.
So I said, right, time to do some back of envelop engineering.
I got all the specs for both Ford and GM type TKXs. I found sizes, and even a cad overlay of the TKX vs T5 and vs TKO. The TKX is indeed very close to the T5 size and shape wise, much smaller than the TKO.
I figured out the input differences from the V6 input to case length (~ 9 and 1/32"), the GM TKX is 6.71 and Ford is 7.21.
One of the side quests was finding out the spigot side of things, firstly I found out using the data on the SKFs bushing documents and catalogs and calculated the max RPM a sintered bronze bush can do is 5m/s linear speed, when calculating that to RPM, I found the 15mm spigot size is only good for a delta of 6300 RPM, so delta as in the speed the bush sees from the difference of the input at any given time and the RPM of the engine, and I quickly realized the stock bush is well... stock, it's only good for a stock-ish engine, even on stock it is possible to exceed the speed briefly on hard downshifts where moving the shifter into gear before the road speed goes down , eg braking hard and hard down shift to maximize decel for late cornering, the RPM could well be over 7k for a bit.
So I figured, well what needle roller can I put in there, and it turns out there is a common needle roller drawn cup bearing with open ends and integrated seals. Same as what OEMs use as the spigot bearing.
The static, dynamic loads were in the range of 10kN, so heaps of durability if it was to vibrate or something not balanced right with the disk/s. The RPM range greased is around 13K, so perfect!
The size is 15mm ID, 21 OD (same as the stock bush and crank housing) and the depth is 16mm, so it will work with a typical input spigot length.
Now, there would be a change needed to the distance from the box to the engine decreasing by about 6mm, as the stock bush has a mighty thick flange for some reason, a full 1/4" thick, so the spigot is actually not all that far into the end of the crank. There normally is about 3mm of clearance from the splines to the end of the bush, being the flanged face. So moving the box in will be necessary to allow needle rollers to be used.
This is were things turn out to be surprising.
I tried calculating the shifter stick position and the location of the box based on the input lengths and also subtracting the 6mm as well for the spigot insertion.
I then added 6" to the total for the shifter offset, 6" seems to look right.
I got two values.
Ford was 825.5~ mm and the GM one came out as 8.12.5~ mm, those are ish sizes, I am not going to bother with the exact decimal places.
So I then put a shifter on my spare box, just the bottom plate, with guts removed as I had that on hand and it was going to make it to the mm accurate to measure. Well damn! The GM TKX read exactly within the mm as the stock V6 one, with the 6mm offset forward and then 6" offset for the shifter rearward.
I also had a dilema on the spigot size. Google is often useless for the right info, much of whats out there is plain wrong. I kept getting a figure of 16.99mm for the spigot for both Ford and GM, the only diff mentioned was the input length.
But looking at pics of brand new spare input shafts, I swear the GM one looked smaller, longer too, same as the V6 one I was thinking. Well, if I ask google a different question, what diameter is the TKO (not the TKX) input pilot/spigot for the GM version, it said 0.590" or 15.00mm. So I was right, the pic was showing that GM used this size commonly, not just some weird size the Holdens used.
So not only was the TKX GM the perfect length with accommodation for spigot bearing changes, but was also the right spigot period.
The GM version also had significantly longer 26 splines than the Ford's 26 splines. They both use the GM standard as that is basically the industry standard for performance clutches.
The 26 spline is what many of the nice twin disk Tilton organic street/daily clutches use, so it opens all the options. The longer splines also make it fully compatible wit the twin and multi disks, where the Ford version would be more limiting there.
So I went further and got the height of the shifter mounting face to the main shaft center line (google got a random number out of thin air, none of it's sources mentioned the figure or anything to do with that measurement), a nice person on the FB Tremec group measured it for me. It was about 2.8"
I got the drawing from Sikky for the remote shifter, and that had a max height of 2.64" on the two size rails that are just under the stick, this would be the highest point that's under a rubber floor boot. The rails drop down as it heads to the front, and I checked all the points against my VP while I have the floor plate off on the white car, and it does seem to clear all of the tunnel side of things, the front lever on the offset shifter does get close to the edge of the tunnel opening, but should clear by 8mm and shifting will actually drop the max height as it follows a curve, with N being fully vertical.
A custom floor plate would be needed, but it is only around 15-19 ish mm higher at high point along the top of rail than the floor plate height, and only 6mm on at the worst part on the flat front section of the rails.
Under the console and radio, there is way more than enough room to make a raised and/or humped floor plate without needing to touch anything else.
Where the front lever is, a little extra can be had by dropping the trans down say another 5-10mm, then there would be without a question, no clearance issues.
What about the bellhousing I hear you say? Well Dellow are happy to do custom one offs, they are in the game to do that and they may already have something they can alter a little or not at all to suit the TKO, which the TKX's input, pattern, mounting etc... are all based off. A TKO bellhousing is fully comparable and drop in for a TKX.
I also looked at actual flywheel size in the stock housing and could see that heaps of material could be pissed off the exhaust and clutch fork side of things on the driver side, and drastically be simplified, as well as a simple laser cut dust cover, eliminating the complex contoured dust covers and gaining a ton of room for the headers, I think modeling up a mock-up and having a custom one made based on that deign would be well worth the effort. Opens the doors for larger and longer tube headers than normally possible.
Another plus of this is, that there are many hydro bearings that are made for the TKO/TKX, Tilton for eg. So the swap is actually far more doable than I ever though and as far as all my measuring including the shape of the TKX rear bulk area vs the T5 and the VN-VS tunnel, there is basically no real clearance issues.
I also calculated the mounting would need to offset 28~ mm forward for the TKX vs the stock Holden, which is actually very little given the whole box moves about 3" forward. The TKX and TKO all have the mount a fair bit farther rearward than the T5, so even after the shorter input moving the lot forward by a heap, the mounting ends up pretty close to the stock location.
The tail shaft ends up longer too, but by around the same amount the auto shaft is longer than the manual. So making an auto tailshaft an excellent donor to have modified for the TKX and it's 31 spline.
A reducer/adapter of sorts would need to be machined up to weld the fatter yoke tube size, to the odd sized - in between standards - smaller Holden one.
I am glad I went down this rabbit hole and did the maths side of the engineering and finding out the TKX is an excellent candidate for upgrading the 5 speed in the Holdens with the V6.
I am seriously considering going this route for whenever I get to that project car, at this stage life is well in the way of tackling projects like this, for many reasons I am sure other's all experience, but doesn't stop me doing all the theoretical work first and going over other potential paths in advance.
Sometimes not starting a project for a long time is a blessing in disguise as it lets you learn, experience and see other ways of doings things and allows new things to enter the market that never existed, and that always leaves you better off on your project when you do get to it.
I will do another post later to share some of the links and pics showing the measurements and what not.
I found this nice chap in Perth, Mike from Racing Solutions, I wish I had found him a bit over a year ago, would have been able to source a good used input much easier and not had to stuff around getting my used one also repaired.
https://racingsolutions.com.au/
We talked for a while and I got some good info.
Years ago Quaife had dog box sets that he reckon they might have some old stock laying around and if I got onto the right person there, they could do a custom input to suit. I wasn't so confident all those things would align to be honest and being in Pounds, the price is similar to PPGs
PPG was said to be good to deal with, he advised against using the straight cut set they offer for the V6 as his opinion was that it needs hearing protection, like wow, I had no idea they were that loud and I always had the impression that PPG's straight gears were a much better profile compared to most to give a smooth transition from tooth to tooth to make them last longer, less stress and much more quiet, so the quiet part is relative I guess lol.
They could potentially do a custom set with slight helical teeth, but I now know that for what I want to do one day, the standard sync rings won't cut it for the RPM and inertial for twin disk clutch (a way to get good hold and have a light pedal (Tilton ST-246 for example)).
So we are talking maybe 15-20K USD price for a custom gear set as a guess, the ones they make now are around that 6K USD for 1-5 set.
I looked at liberty gears, they do dog (face plate) conversion, but appears they stopped all work on the T5 where custom work is involved.
Astro T5 was discontinued around the time of this thread starting.
Gforce still make an upgraded set for the Ford only, they stopped the dog sets around 8 years ago though, so it's just a Mustang 500-600hp rated standard sync kit. It's actually pretty well priced at 1600 USD or there about. So I can pretty much forget dog gears and custom inputs there.
With PPG being the only drop in option and still limited with teeth, lack of dog option and stupid prices, I started looking into the recent TKX (came out in 2022 I believe)
Well, this is where things get interesting. The TKX has a good following and will for at least a decade more I reckon, so the aftermarket is slowly starting to emerge with different shifters, and a dog gear set currently being developed, in Melbourne out of all places. Priced well actually, less in AUD than the PPGs gear set in USD. So half price basically! 4999 AUD for a 1-4 set, 5.5k for 1-5 and nearly 6k for added REM treatment, no doubt where I got my input shaft REM treated in Melbourne to aid with repairing it.
With the stock TKX being 7500 rpm shift capable and 600 ft-lb, it would be overkill for most people, however, there is no denying that dogs are the way to go for higher rpm applications where one wants effortless shifts. This mob stuck to helical gears, so making it suitable for street driven cars as well as track. Nicely done there!
There is a mob in the US called Sikky manufacturing? that make a variety of offset shifter, remote ones basically. All the way to 10" I think.
So I said, right, time to do some back of envelop engineering.
I got all the specs for both Ford and GM type TKXs. I found sizes, and even a cad overlay of the TKX vs T5 and vs TKO. The TKX is indeed very close to the T5 size and shape wise, much smaller than the TKO.
I figured out the input differences from the V6 input to case length (~ 9 and 1/32"), the GM TKX is 6.71 and Ford is 7.21.
One of the side quests was finding out the spigot side of things, firstly I found out using the data on the SKFs bushing documents and catalogs and calculated the max RPM a sintered bronze bush can do is 5m/s linear speed, when calculating that to RPM, I found the 15mm spigot size is only good for a delta of 6300 RPM, so delta as in the speed the bush sees from the difference of the input at any given time and the RPM of the engine, and I quickly realized the stock bush is well... stock, it's only good for a stock-ish engine, even on stock it is possible to exceed the speed briefly on hard downshifts where moving the shifter into gear before the road speed goes down , eg braking hard and hard down shift to maximize decel for late cornering, the RPM could well be over 7k for a bit.
So I figured, well what needle roller can I put in there, and it turns out there is a common needle roller drawn cup bearing with open ends and integrated seals. Same as what OEMs use as the spigot bearing.
The static, dynamic loads were in the range of 10kN, so heaps of durability if it was to vibrate or something not balanced right with the disk/s. The RPM range greased is around 13K, so perfect!
The size is 15mm ID, 21 OD (same as the stock bush and crank housing) and the depth is 16mm, so it will work with a typical input spigot length.
Now, there would be a change needed to the distance from the box to the engine decreasing by about 6mm, as the stock bush has a mighty thick flange for some reason, a full 1/4" thick, so the spigot is actually not all that far into the end of the crank. There normally is about 3mm of clearance from the splines to the end of the bush, being the flanged face. So moving the box in will be necessary to allow needle rollers to be used.
This is were things turn out to be surprising.
I tried calculating the shifter stick position and the location of the box based on the input lengths and also subtracting the 6mm as well for the spigot insertion.
I then added 6" to the total for the shifter offset, 6" seems to look right.
I got two values.
Ford was 825.5~ mm and the GM one came out as 8.12.5~ mm, those are ish sizes, I am not going to bother with the exact decimal places.
So I then put a shifter on my spare box, just the bottom plate, with guts removed as I had that on hand and it was going to make it to the mm accurate to measure. Well damn! The GM TKX read exactly within the mm as the stock V6 one, with the 6mm offset forward and then 6" offset for the shifter rearward.
I also had a dilema on the spigot size. Google is often useless for the right info, much of whats out there is plain wrong. I kept getting a figure of 16.99mm for the spigot for both Ford and GM, the only diff mentioned was the input length.
But looking at pics of brand new spare input shafts, I swear the GM one looked smaller, longer too, same as the V6 one I was thinking. Well, if I ask google a different question, what diameter is the TKO (not the TKX) input pilot/spigot for the GM version, it said 0.590" or 15.00mm. So I was right, the pic was showing that GM used this size commonly, not just some weird size the Holdens used.
So not only was the TKX GM the perfect length with accommodation for spigot bearing changes, but was also the right spigot period.
The GM version also had significantly longer 26 splines than the Ford's 26 splines. They both use the GM standard as that is basically the industry standard for performance clutches.
The 26 spline is what many of the nice twin disk Tilton organic street/daily clutches use, so it opens all the options. The longer splines also make it fully compatible wit the twin and multi disks, where the Ford version would be more limiting there.
So I went further and got the height of the shifter mounting face to the main shaft center line (google got a random number out of thin air, none of it's sources mentioned the figure or anything to do with that measurement), a nice person on the FB Tremec group measured it for me. It was about 2.8"
I got the drawing from Sikky for the remote shifter, and that had a max height of 2.64" on the two size rails that are just under the stick, this would be the highest point that's under a rubber floor boot. The rails drop down as it heads to the front, and I checked all the points against my VP while I have the floor plate off on the white car, and it does seem to clear all of the tunnel side of things, the front lever on the offset shifter does get close to the edge of the tunnel opening, but should clear by 8mm and shifting will actually drop the max height as it follows a curve, with N being fully vertical.
A custom floor plate would be needed, but it is only around 15-19 ish mm higher at high point along the top of rail than the floor plate height, and only 6mm on at the worst part on the flat front section of the rails.
Under the console and radio, there is way more than enough room to make a raised and/or humped floor plate without needing to touch anything else.
Where the front lever is, a little extra can be had by dropping the trans down say another 5-10mm, then there would be without a question, no clearance issues.
What about the bellhousing I hear you say? Well Dellow are happy to do custom one offs, they are in the game to do that and they may already have something they can alter a little or not at all to suit the TKO, which the TKX's input, pattern, mounting etc... are all based off. A TKO bellhousing is fully comparable and drop in for a TKX.
I also looked at actual flywheel size in the stock housing and could see that heaps of material could be pissed off the exhaust and clutch fork side of things on the driver side, and drastically be simplified, as well as a simple laser cut dust cover, eliminating the complex contoured dust covers and gaining a ton of room for the headers, I think modeling up a mock-up and having a custom one made based on that deign would be well worth the effort. Opens the doors for larger and longer tube headers than normally possible.
Another plus of this is, that there are many hydro bearings that are made for the TKO/TKX, Tilton for eg. So the swap is actually far more doable than I ever though and as far as all my measuring including the shape of the TKX rear bulk area vs the T5 and the VN-VS tunnel, there is basically no real clearance issues.
I also calculated the mounting would need to offset 28~ mm forward for the TKX vs the stock Holden, which is actually very little given the whole box moves about 3" forward. The TKX and TKO all have the mount a fair bit farther rearward than the T5, so even after the shorter input moving the lot forward by a heap, the mounting ends up pretty close to the stock location.
The tail shaft ends up longer too, but by around the same amount the auto shaft is longer than the manual. So making an auto tailshaft an excellent donor to have modified for the TKX and it's 31 spline.
A reducer/adapter of sorts would need to be machined up to weld the fatter yoke tube size, to the odd sized - in between standards - smaller Holden one.
I am glad I went down this rabbit hole and did the maths side of the engineering and finding out the TKX is an excellent candidate for upgrading the 5 speed in the Holdens with the V6.
I am seriously considering going this route for whenever I get to that project car, at this stage life is well in the way of tackling projects like this, for many reasons I am sure other's all experience, but doesn't stop me doing all the theoretical work first and going over other potential paths in advance.
Sometimes not starting a project for a long time is a blessing in disguise as it lets you learn, experience and see other ways of doings things and allows new things to enter the market that never existed, and that always leaves you better off on your project when you do get to it.
I will do another post later to share some of the links and pics showing the measurements and what not.
-
VK_3800
- Posts: 578
- Joined: Sun Jul 04, 2010 5:15 am
- cars: SS Torana
- Location: NZ
Re: big boys T5 options for the V6.
GM configuration is generally the way to go as so much more is standardised vs Ford setups.
Regarding the spigot bearing, the standard V8 bell housings (Chevy and Holden conversion) place the box just slightly further back than e.g. a Muncie. This allows a larger OD (proper radial ball bearing) to sit in the torque converter recess rather than all the way into the smaller diameter section of the crank where you'd normally use a sintered bushing. The bearing is a standard part on late model Holden T56/LS1 vehicles, being a special version of a 6302 with slightly larger imperial OD to fit the crank with traditional torque converter sizing. However I found they were stupid expensive so just used a standard 6302 and made a thin outer sleeve to make up the difference.
I was a little disappointed when I first got the TKO as to how much tunnel work was required with the top loading design being so square, it was supposed to be smaller than a T56 but the rounder shape would have been better for clearance. I imagine the TKX is a lot better in this respect; probably the main area of concern would be at the rear as you say but if it can move forward compared to the T5 that would help.
The carbon friction-lined synchros and brass fork pads made a noticeable improvement in the TKO so no doubt the TKX (which already has some of this) is another step up. Shifters are the same as TKO also, aren't they? I've been pretty happy with the Pro 5.0 over the standard one, although it was a major headache to get one to NZ. I use a McLeod twin plate clutch which is a bolt-on Chevy item and still uses organic friction plates; that's not just about road manners but also provides significantly longer lifespan.
Regarding the spigot bearing, the standard V8 bell housings (Chevy and Holden conversion) place the box just slightly further back than e.g. a Muncie. This allows a larger OD (proper radial ball bearing) to sit in the torque converter recess rather than all the way into the smaller diameter section of the crank where you'd normally use a sintered bushing. The bearing is a standard part on late model Holden T56/LS1 vehicles, being a special version of a 6302 with slightly larger imperial OD to fit the crank with traditional torque converter sizing. However I found they were stupid expensive so just used a standard 6302 and made a thin outer sleeve to make up the difference.
I was a little disappointed when I first got the TKO as to how much tunnel work was required with the top loading design being so square, it was supposed to be smaller than a T56 but the rounder shape would have been better for clearance. I imagine the TKX is a lot better in this respect; probably the main area of concern would be at the rear as you say but if it can move forward compared to the T5 that would help.
The carbon friction-lined synchros and brass fork pads made a noticeable improvement in the TKO so no doubt the TKX (which already has some of this) is another step up. Shifters are the same as TKO also, aren't they? I've been pretty happy with the Pro 5.0 over the standard one, although it was a major headache to get one to NZ. I use a McLeod twin plate clutch which is a bolt-on Chevy item and still uses organic friction plates; that's not just about road manners but also provides significantly longer lifespan.
-
vlad01
- Posts: 8548
- Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2012 8:41 am
- cars: VP I S
VP I executive
VP II executive
VP II executive #2 - Location: Kyneton, Vic
Re: big boys T5 options for the V6.
Some of the stuff I used as resources.
https://www.sikky.com/product-category/ ... tion-kits/
These dimensions, which I just realised one of the other ones I used wasn't official info and had some slight errors I need to check over, bloody unless 3rd hand info as always.
The mount offset is a little less now at 25.6mm, not the 28~ mm.
The shifter location only changed by 1mm ish. So the dimensions are all pretty right now I think.
I have up scaled these images using an open source AI upscaler, did a reasonable job as these were pretty much not readable or in the case of the overlays, super blurry, it did wonders on that one. The details are pretty good now.
For the spigot bearing, it will need this needle roller below for the V6 given the small housing size. This is a direct fit in place of the bush, but as mentioned the bush has a very fat flange and is not overly deep, so the box will need to move in by the same flange thickness, about 6mm. But that also lands the trans in the perfect spot for the shifter to be bang on the factory location which is a nice incidental win.
Note, this brand of bearing is only rated for 9-10k rpm, where the Timken catalog states 13k. So I guess the quality matters. I would always try to use Timken or Koyo where I can, Timken being my preferred choice. SKF is another brand that seems to be a big one for these drawn cup needle bearings, but also only rated around that 9-10k. Either way, that's still plenty for this application, but going for higher spec always is better to buy more safety margin, I didn't seen the Timken branded ones anywhere yet in my quick search for the part number.
In the catalog/technical doc, there is a lot of info how to install and extract them. So you'd have to make or find the right tools to the spec to ensure you can install these prick of a bearing design and also importantly, extract old/worn ones without making a mess of the crank.
Tech doc and catalog here. Part number is HK1516-2RS
https://www.bearing.net.au/wp-content/u ... ressed.pdf
I have the Sikky technical drawing too, which is to scale so you can open it in a drawing program that supports pdf, and actually measure areas not already marked, I used it to draw a reference line of where the tunnel opening is, but then when I looked at the car in person, the tunnel opening actually angles up hill towards the front, so there is more room as you move along the shifter towards the front. This actually gave an extra 15mm by the time it got to the front.
I am not sure if I can share the tech drawing, it's got the usual proprietary/confidential note on the bottom. I asked for just dimensions and they just straight up emailed me that with a "here ya go" kinda responses which I always like.
I could always ask them permission if you are keen for the drawing? It's just the product with some dimensions really, but handy for measuring it up.
https://www.sikky.com/product-category/ ... tion-kits/
These dimensions, which I just realised one of the other ones I used wasn't official info and had some slight errors I need to check over, bloody unless 3rd hand info as always.
The mount offset is a little less now at 25.6mm, not the 28~ mm.
The shifter location only changed by 1mm ish. So the dimensions are all pretty right now I think.
I have up scaled these images using an open source AI upscaler, did a reasonable job as these were pretty much not readable or in the case of the overlays, super blurry, it did wonders on that one. The details are pretty good now.
For the spigot bearing, it will need this needle roller below for the V6 given the small housing size. This is a direct fit in place of the bush, but as mentioned the bush has a very fat flange and is not overly deep, so the box will need to move in by the same flange thickness, about 6mm. But that also lands the trans in the perfect spot for the shifter to be bang on the factory location which is a nice incidental win.
Note, this brand of bearing is only rated for 9-10k rpm, where the Timken catalog states 13k. So I guess the quality matters. I would always try to use Timken or Koyo where I can, Timken being my preferred choice. SKF is another brand that seems to be a big one for these drawn cup needle bearings, but also only rated around that 9-10k. Either way, that's still plenty for this application, but going for higher spec always is better to buy more safety margin, I didn't seen the Timken branded ones anywhere yet in my quick search for the part number.
In the catalog/technical doc, there is a lot of info how to install and extract them. So you'd have to make or find the right tools to the spec to ensure you can install these prick of a bearing design and also importantly, extract old/worn ones without making a mess of the crank.
Tech doc and catalog here. Part number is HK1516-2RS
https://www.bearing.net.au/wp-content/u ... ressed.pdf
I have the Sikky technical drawing too, which is to scale so you can open it in a drawing program that supports pdf, and actually measure areas not already marked, I used it to draw a reference line of where the tunnel opening is, but then when I looked at the car in person, the tunnel opening actually angles up hill towards the front, so there is more room as you move along the shifter towards the front. This actually gave an extra 15mm by the time it got to the front.
I am not sure if I can share the tech drawing, it's got the usual proprietary/confidential note on the bottom. I asked for just dimensions and they just straight up emailed me that with a "here ya go" kinda responses which I always like.
I could always ask them permission if you are keen for the drawing? It's just the product with some dimensions really, but handy for measuring it up.
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
-
vlad01
- Posts: 8548
- Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2012 8:41 am
- cars: VP I S
VP I executive
VP II executive
VP II executive #2 - Location: Kyneton, Vic
Re: big boys T5 options for the V6.
Don't think Timen do this one anymore.
I couldn't find a single listing anywhere, but looking into most of the other brands available, only the Koyo meets the same spec as Timken, actually exceeds it by 1 k, at 14k RPM.
Link to the Koyo's catalog.
https://koyo.jtekt.co.jp/en/support/cat ... s007en.pdf
I couldn't find a single listing anywhere, but looking into most of the other brands available, only the Koyo meets the same spec as Timken, actually exceeds it by 1 k, at 14k RPM.
Link to the Koyo's catalog.
https://koyo.jtekt.co.jp/en/support/cat ... s007en.pdf
-
VK_3800
- Posts: 578
- Joined: Sun Jul 04, 2010 5:15 am
- cars: SS Torana
- Location: NZ
Re: big boys T5 options for the V6.
I mentioned the radial ball bearing setup because they are a lot better than the needle roller conversion. But either way you don't need a bearing capable of that sort of RPM, 99.9% of the time it doesn't move at all and even when shifting at high engine revs the bearing only turns at the difference between gears. I imagine the crank thrust would probably wear out first if you're punishing it enough to need a constant rating that high. Using a decent spigot bearing is more about handling any temporary radial load with minimal runout.