dgcustomz

iTrader: (127)

Like the title says!!!

dgcustomz

iTrader: (127)

hmmmmm. 55 views and not one bent shift fork?

calhoon

iTrader: (6)

Most T56 fork damage is with the aluminum 3rd/4th shift fork. They actually don't bend. The rail hole enlarges/ wallows and the fork travel becomes too little to stay in gear. It acts like a fork that is bent but if you look at one of those things, it is not likely they will bend with loading in the transmission. There are some cases where 5th & 6th forks and Reverse forks( both are Iron) bend at the tines but these issues are not as common.

thesource

iTrader: (60)

I got some broke forks. Would that work for you?

TDP

iTrader: (23)

I think that is his point. I just did a search for "bent shift fork" and came up with 246 threads.

dgcustomz

iTrader: (127)

I think I need to call mythbusters. lots of threads talk about bent shift forks but yet not one can prove it or get pics. Just thought this should come out. I'm still in for pics....

wrd1972

iTrader: (12)

Jamie and Adam do have a beat to **** purple LT1 car at their disposal.

dgcustomz

iTrader: (127)

If the car has more power than stock it would be a good candidate. Alot of the lt1 t56's that come in are in almost in new condition. Reason being is the Lt1 cars don't have the power to break stuff like the the LS cars do. The LS cars tear up more crap inside.

85MikeTPI

iTrader: (9)

Calhoon already explained the "bent fork" behavior, the rail holes enlarge and/or spread causing play in the 3/4 fork.. I've got a box of 3 dozen forks I can post a picture of, but it won't show you much... GM moved to standardize the steel 3/4 fork in 2004, so you can bet it wasn't done without reason.

dgcustomz

iTrader: (127)

True, but the reason was not beacause of a bent fork. it was the wear of the shift rail hole on the fork itslef. This will help people understand the myth.

calhoon

iTrader: (6)

So, then, what is the useful pyrpose of your post?
Mike, GM did not put the iron fork in Fcar T56s, even though it was available.

jmd

iTrader: (4)

To repeat the posts about erroneous bent fork diagnoses I used to blather on about in 2004.

I didn't think anything production GM got the iron 3-4 fork until post-2002.

TDP

iTrader: (23)

To point out the...

...that you see people post day after day on this site...

Example:
Poster A: "My tranny is grinding going into fourth, what could be causing this?"
Poster B: "Must be a bent shift fork."

jmd

iTrader: (4)

Ah, memories.

85MikeTPI

iTrader: (9)

So are you saying you have an issue with the term "bent" ? Or claiming that the stock aluminum 3/4 forks are never a problem?

They do bend, as a result of the spreading of the rail hole. But this may not be what most laymen think of as a bent fork. The fork pads/arms do not bend, the entire fork bends/flexes at the rail hole..

jmd

iTrader: (4)

I've always had a problem with the term "bent" as it's overused.

In order of occurrence, it's probably something like cracked stock pads > broken off fork tongs > wallowed rail hole > actually "bent" forks and much of that is secondary or due to hamfisted resolution of synchro key problems.

TDP

iTrader: (23)

As we all know, the 3-4 fork has problems flexing and causing issues. The term "bent shift fork" is not accurate. Excessive play in the shift rail hole caused from flex does not constitute a bend or bent fork. It would be more accurate to say "I've got a wallered out fork hole." Or you could just say "worn shift fork"

jtut90

iTrader: (5)

my shift fork on 3-4 was missing a quarter inch from wear, but the trans shop couldn't seem to see it so 3 months later i got my car back and 621 miles later i have a horrible vibration in 5-6 and no 2nd gear gotta love wasting 1200 dollars