Ouch! T-56 Carnage Pics Inside
07-05-2013, 09:44 PM
#42
TECH Fanatic
Thread Starter
Soo...everyone is about to get a little insight into the type of luck I've been having lately.
After measuring the slave/clutch finger clearance at .307", I ordered the .113" shim from Tick. Luckily I got it today (a day in advance of the scheduled delivery) and set out to get everything together and back on the road.
Not to bore everyone with my entire day of lifting this heavy bitch up and down, re-measuring the bellhousing clearances, etc. I finally throw in the towel and leave it on the bench.
Looking at it on the bench, I noticed something that may be an issue. I take one last measurement, unbolt the slave, unbox my core T-56 (thanks to the holiday week has not been picked up yet), bolt the slave on and make another measurement.
It's then that I find the input shaft on the new trans is just over 1/2" too short (.693" too short to be exact). FML....
After measuring the slave/clutch finger clearance at .307", I ordered the .113" shim from Tick. Luckily I got it today (a day in advance of the scheduled delivery) and set out to get everything together and back on the road.
Not to bore everyone with my entire day of lifting this heavy bitch up and down, re-measuring the bellhousing clearances, etc. I finally throw in the towel and leave it on the bench.
Looking at it on the bench, I noticed something that may be an issue. I take one last measurement, unbolt the slave, unbox my core T-56 (thanks to the holiday week has not been picked up yet), bolt the slave on and make another measurement.
It's then that I find the input shaft on the new trans is just over 1/2" too short (.693" too short to be exact). FML....
07-05-2013, 09:58 PM
#44
TECH Fanatic
Thread Starter
Yes, it's the Rockland unit. I feel like an *** for not seeing it from the get but I guess it's always the most obvious that gets overlooked. I guess I'll spend the week or so it takes to get another trans at the gym b/c I was spent...the last time I got the trans up there I swear I was going on only pure rage.
I guess it can only get better from here...at least I sure as **** hope so LOL.
I guess it can only get better from here...at least I sure as **** hope so LOL.
07-15-2013, 10:39 PM
#45
TECH Fanatic
Thread Starter
Update - The Franken-tranny is together and I have put a few miles on it. First off (and Fuzzy, you're not going to like this) the 2.66 first gear ratio is no good with the 3.55 rear, even with as much torque as my combo is making. I ordered the entire trans with standard LS gears, 2.66 first through .50 sixth (1700 RPM @ 75 MPH). I'm thinking 3.90 rear gears would be perfect with this trans. It's only money.
Overall impressions, it's notchy as hell...to the point where it is difficult to engage first, second, and reverse. I'll have to shim the detents next time I have it out to loosen it up a bit to where I find it acceptable. Third and fourth are perfect, if I could get the rest of the gears to engage the same I would have no complaints at all.
I am really not impressed with the RXT at this point, I'm going to shim it a bit more and loosen the pressure plate torque to see if it gets better. So far with about 150 miles on it, it chatters pretty bad maybe 1 out of 5 times on initial take off and it does not feel linear, almost like one disk is grabbing before the second.
I'm out of time at this point, I need to limp it through emissions (to fail again) and I'll be back in September to get everything squared away.
Overall impressions, it's notchy as hell...to the point where it is difficult to engage first, second, and reverse. I'll have to shim the detents next time I have it out to loosen it up a bit to where I find it acceptable. Third and fourth are perfect, if I could get the rest of the gears to engage the same I would have no complaints at all.
I am really not impressed with the RXT at this point, I'm going to shim it a bit more and loosen the pressure plate torque to see if it gets better. So far with about 150 miles on it, it chatters pretty bad maybe 1 out of 5 times on initial take off and it does not feel linear, almost like one disk is grabbing before the second.
I'm out of time at this point, I need to limp it through emissions (to fail again) and I'll be back in September to get everything squared away.
07-15-2013, 10:57 PM
#46
Sounds like your transmission is misaligned and you overtorqued the pressure plate bolts on the McLeod RXT (absolute maximum per the manual is 32 ft-lbs, but more realistically like 26-28 ft-lbs). Shimming the detent is only going to make the shifter sloppy.
And still loving my McLeod RXT. Grabs instantaneously and silently. And still planning on going 2.66 close-ratio TR6060 with 3.31 differential. If you have something more concrete than "I don't like it," feel free to share. Personally, I'm tired of having a four-speed transmission, and I haven't even graduated into the 400 RWTQ club yet.
And still loving my McLeod RXT. Grabs instantaneously and silently. And still planning on going 2.66 close-ratio TR6060 with 3.31 differential. If you have something more concrete than "I don't like it," feel free to share. Personally, I'm tired of having a four-speed transmission, and I haven't even graduated into the 400 RWTQ club yet.
07-16-2013, 09:37 AM
#47
TECH Fanatic
Thread Starter
Fuzzy - PP was set to 30 ft lbs, my instructions said 35 was max. Engagement is about midpoint of the pedal, but feels like **** and is not linear as I described. The trans is not misaligned. Like I said, I'll play with shims and torque when I get back and try to get it to be acceptable to me. Oh, and I am not planning on shimming the shifter detent, rather the shift rail detent at the front of the trans. If it doesn't work, I'll take it out. I've wasted more time and money on lesser things. The T56 is notchy to begin with, this one seems exceptionally so.
Don't know what your looking for in terms of data, from a dead stop to about 20 mph there is a significant bog, even with as much torque as I'm making. The 3.55's simply do not provide enough mechanical leverage considering the weight of the vehicle and new first gear ratio. I though the 3.55's were almost perfect with the 2.97 first gear ratio, 3.42 may have been a touch better. It feels like a moving van in first gear now, only you don't have to shift for a while lol.
Don't know what your looking for in terms of data, from a dead stop to about 20 mph there is a significant bog, even with as much torque as I'm making. The 3.55's simply do not provide enough mechanical leverage considering the weight of the vehicle and new first gear ratio. I though the 3.55's were almost perfect with the 2.97 first gear ratio, 3.42 may have been a touch better. It feels like a moving van in first gear now, only you don't have to shift for a while lol.
07-16-2013, 10:14 AM
#48
I don't know what to tell you. If the pressure plate bolts weren't evenly torqued and in a star pattern, it might explain why you're having engagement problems. It may be matter of recalibrating your expectations, too--a clutch designed to hold 1000 HP will grab very hard and quickly. No clutch engages linearly--they all have an exponential engagement profile.
That's not to say that your old clutch didn't "feel" linear--if you were putting out more torque than the clutch was designed to optimally function with, you may have been slipping the clutch a lot as your gas pedal and clutch pedal crossed paths.
I wonder whether your supercharger, compression ratio, cam, or tune is responsible for your dislike of the 2.66 transmission and 3.55 final drive. If your car is a total dog out of boost, it may explain why you're having trouble in first. With me driving, my car is barely uncontrollable in first (and for my friends, totally uncontrollable). First should be renamed "sideways drive." Do you have a dyno graph that reads below 2000 RPM?
That's not to say that your old clutch didn't "feel" linear--if you were putting out more torque than the clutch was designed to optimally function with, you may have been slipping the clutch a lot as your gas pedal and clutch pedal crossed paths.
I wonder whether your supercharger, compression ratio, cam, or tune is responsible for your dislike of the 2.66 transmission and 3.55 final drive. If your car is a total dog out of boost, it may explain why you're having trouble in first. With me driving, my car is barely uncontrollable in first (and for my friends, totally uncontrollable). First should be renamed "sideways drive." Do you have a dyno graph that reads below 2000 RPM?