Here is the second T10 I have available to me. Per the first thread, the last one out of a 66 Mustang was not very desirable for our cars. I'm having a hard time with the tag number. I see 4A3-N-1(i). The case still shows in yellow paint "C4AR" which I break down to C4 = 1964, A = full size, R = ?
The input shaft snout is thicker than the Mustang t10 and shorter.
With the large dip in the tail housing, I'm am starting to believe that it was from a bbf full size car.
Experts please speak up.
More pictures
That looks like an early T-10 for a full size Ford with a big block FE. The speedo is on the left side for one. What is the bolt spacing on the tailshaft mounting flange? 1 3/8" diameter input shaft?
Won't the input shaft be too short if it came from behind a FE?
Quote from: hiball3985 on 2021-03-14 10:44
Won't the input shaft be too short if it came from behind a FE?
Correct. As I have learned that I would have to change out the input shaft and retainer.
This trans except for the nose is perfect. Maybe a longer pilot bearing? Try TransDapt for one.
This trans will have a 2.36 1st gear. It may be hard to find the correct input. It would have come in a 289/271 hp car or GT-350.
Good luck,
Ron.
Part number is Pioneer PB50H, but not sure where you can find one. The pic shows Ford small block pilot bearing, small block pilot bushing and extended length small block pilot bushing, left to right.
Allegedly, an early Ford 300 inline 6 cylinder uses the same bushing under a Ford part number, but idk if that is true....
The transdapt number appears to be 716174.
Pic off their website and seems still available, but pricey..
Thank you Ron and Brushwolf!
Your welcome! Now how about some pic's!
Ron.
Seems I over looked this thread ...
If the TAG is correct to the trans, it breaks down as -
4A3-N-1
1964 FORD 390/427
Or Jan 3rd, 1964
Ron.
Quote from: SkylinerRon on 2021-03-19 17:14
Or Jan 3rd, 1964
Ron.
What about Jan 03, 1964? How would one ascertain application from a DATE CODE?
Ron,
I there something that I have done to upset you? You seem to post negatively to anything I post recently.
If this forum is a private sandbox, let someone know and I will move on ...
Nothing personal, I just try to add correct info to the knowledge base we have here. We have had 57 Skyliners in my family since 1961 and I have always been a fan of them. Have been collecting the parts, books and cars forever it seems, mostly before the internet.
4A3 is the factory build code for Jan 3, 1964.
Ron.
Quote from: brushwolf on 2021-03-16 01:33
Part number is Pioneer PB50H, but not sure where you can find one. The pic shows Ford small block pilot bearing, small block pilot bushing and extended length small block pilot bushing, left to right.
Allegedly, an early Ford 300 inline 6 cylinder uses the same bushing under a Ford part number, but idk if that is true....
Out of curiosity I picked up a couple of the old NOS pilot bushings for the 6 cylinder. Part number C5TZ-7600-D. Looks like it would work, but it may be susceptible to working its way out of the crank flange cuz a little too short.
Pics left to right are std Ford small block bushing, both sides views of the 6 cylinder bushing and the Advance Adapters Jeep swap bushing. All have the same inside (pilot) and outside (portion that goes into the crank) dimensions. The only material difference is length. (stock = 0.557, 6 cylinder bushing = 0.860, Advance Adapters bushing = 1.223)
Been measuring crank flange lip distance from the block, subtract thickness of engine plate (0.057),since that effectively moves the rear of block the thickness of the plate. I came up with 351c crank flywheel mount surface sitting 0.281 off the block rear, 0.218 more then from flywheel mount surface to rear most portion of crank center flange since the Advance Adapters bushing would shoulder on that surface.
So, 0.281+ 0.218 - 0.057 = 0.442 is how far that shoulder should sit rearward of the block with the motor plate on it.
70's era pickup 164t bellhousing is bolted to 62 T10 transmission, so measured distance from the front bell plane mounting surface to see how far rearward from that plane that the pilot bushing should extend to just fill that gap without creating pressure on the input shaft. I come up with 0.962 for that.
Being the pilot surface ends 0.962 rearward from the bellhousing front plane and the shoulder that the adapter pilot bearing will seat on is 0.442 rearward of the same plane, then the remaining space is 0.962 - 0.442 = 0.520. Roughly a half inch...
However the Advance Adapters bushing shoulder is 0.612 in width on the shouldering portion, so it appears that I have 0.612 - 0.520 = 0.092 more bushing length than I need.
The beveled transition between the transmission pilot bearing surface and the input shaft splines appears to me to be where I can probably subtract this excess length down by reaming the rearward hole of the adapter so it sits that 1/10" closer to the transmission splines.
Not gonna do that yet, because I think I will be using the 63 Galaxie T10 instead with the shifter off the 62 Galaxie T10. The 63 transmission I bought off EBay in unknown condition, but it was flawless inside and so only put new seals in it. I think they are identical other than the 62 has a fine spline input shaft and the 63 has the usual 10 spline input shaft.
I will mock up the 63 transmission on the motor first, but if I find the adapter bushing still shows being too long by that 1/10", is there any issue with the wide-shouldered bushing being 1/10" closer to the clutch plate? It would not actually intrude on the splines, just on the transition between the pilot surface and the input shaft splines...
I dragged the 63 T10 out of the pole building and swapped the shifter over to it from the 62 T10 to make sure it fit. Noticed there were a couple other small differences besides input shaft spline counts.
The shift shaft for reverse on the trans dated April 1962 has only a 5/16 diameter stud and the trans dated June 1963 (late 63 or early 64 trans?) has a thicker 3/8" inch stud. And while both have new seals, the 62 trans rear seal sticks out past the tailhousing about 1 1/4" where the 63 trans rear seal is flush with the tailhousing.
But the mounting was the same other than that and the shifter swapped over. Shifter arms are the same, just had to keep the securing nuts with their respective transmissions. I will take the shifter off again, clean up the 63 case and inspect the shifter components as it seems a little sloppy.
Pic 1 is the 62 trans, pic 2 is the 63 trans. Anyone recognize that shifter in pic 3 off the 62 trans in case I need parts?
That looks like a standard Ford shifter with a different shift handle. Here is a pic of one....
https://www.ebay.com/itm/154359863887?hash=item23f0909a4f:g:F54AAOSwQjNgQoN3
Thanks for the link. I had wondered over the last 20 years whether that handle was homemade since it appeared to never have been chromed. But now I won't feel bad if I have to modify it to clear the bench seat or dash. Or maybe just shorten it a bit. I have several Hurst shifters around here too, but IDT any of them fit these transmissions.
Back in the day I put a Hurst Shifter on a T-10. It cleared the bench seat nicely. I believe the Hurst adapter for the early Galaxie Toploaders fits a T-10. The stuff is still around if you do a little research and shopping. There are not that many variations of the Comp Plus...
Yeah I have some GM as well as Ford Hursts and they look all the same except mounts and linkage rods. But I doubt the linkage rods work between the 2 shifters (Ford and Hurst)..
Ran into another issue that explains why the 62 transmission fits the 70's C5 bellhousing I have on the 351c. Measured the input bearing retainer on the 62 trans which fits the 164t bellhousing perfect. Measured the 63 bearing retainer and it was smaller than the 62 bearing retainer. WTH?
Upon closer examination I see the casting number on the 62 retainer says C5. The casting number on the 63 retainer says T85.
So, apparently someone switched the bearing retainer on the 62 trans before I got it. They are the same length and bolt pattern, but not the same diameter where it mates with the bellhousing. So, have to swap these retainers as well.
I was wondering about that topic coming up now and again and it baffled me cuz my 62 trans fit my 70's era bellhousing with the C5 casting number. So I pulled both bearing retainers off. Of course the gaskets broke so will have to scrounge up another one now...
The pics of the two retainers show the OS diameter difference and the thicker retaining surface of the C5 retainer. They are the same length and throwout bearing surface diameter though the C5 retainer positions the throwout bearing 1/8" closer to the transmission than the T85 retainer. The front seal also rides 1/8" further back on the input shaft on the C5 retainer than the T85 retainer.
Got the front bearing retainers swapped and cleaned up the 63 transmission. Decided not to paint it cuz it looks ok as-is and still has yellow paint markings on the case that say " C3AAE.." something... Whatever that indicates... Also has "F243 2" stamped on the side of the main case.
I have it bolted to the bellhousing now and idk why, but the depth of my pilot bushing rearmost surface into the bellhousing changed from 0.962 to 1.10 with the 63 transmission. Gained 0.138 of clearance. That allows the shoulder of the Jeep adapter bearing to have a maximum width of 0.658 (1.10 - 0.281 - 0.218 + .0.057) and since the shoulder width is 0.615 it should fit now with 0.043 of clearance remaining between the rearmost surface of the pilot bushing and the beginning of the splines on the input shaft.
So it looks like it is going to work with no modification to the Jeep adapter pilot bushing. But, I will mock up the engine to bell and transmission with no clutch or flywheel on it so I can check it again. Wouldn't be the first time I screwed up measuring something.
Supposed to rain tomorrow, so idk whether I will make any progress on it. Have to drag the 62 trans back to the pole building and bring a cherry picker over here cuz the engine is still on the engine stand and will have to roll it outside to do that...
Engine should soon be sitting in the engine bay though, first time it has had an engine in it since I had a Cadillac 500 sitting in the engine bay back in the 1990's. (Actually looked like the 500 would have mounted in there fairly well too, but that went in an 83 Regal instead....)
F243 2 is the build date of your T10
F = June
24 = day
3 = 1963
2 = 2 nd shift
C3AAE = 1963 , Ford (full size) 352,390,406
Thank you. Handy to know in case I have any issues with it..