Aren't rebuild kits setup sort of like carburetor kits, where just a handful of kits will work for numerous applications? I called one of the big online toploader parts folks , and while they were certainly nice enough, they only speak 4 speed for the most part, the standard or "light duty" 3 speed gearbox might as well not exist. Mostly it's just synchros and gaskets that are needed, no?
@Truck64 That's correct. The usual wear parts. I have found that there are different sized synchros in some of them, so just need to get the correct kit. They don't include the different sized synchros for free. I think I may have found one. Waiting on a response from them. It would probably be easier to use a car trans, but this short tail shaft will fit nicely most places. A top loader 4 speed would be cool too, but the asking prices are ridiculous. Besides, who wouldn't want a 401 with a top loader? These 3.03s are supposed to be pretty rugged, so a stock Nailhead that doesn't get whaled on too much should stand up.
I like to order stuff and have on hand, for the inevitable. That just isn't always possible with some of this stuff, and manual transmissions like the 3.03 qualifies. It looks like if you did disassemble it, it's possible to order just the parts needed in onesies and twosies though. Should have no problem with the 3.03 they are pretty tough. If you find a kit part # be sure to let us know
I did just as you are talking about in my 39, 3.03 with Jeep T150 shifter. Man it is a nice little set up. The biggest difference to take note of in the 63-64 trans is the case legnth. The 63 64 case is about 3/4 of an inch shorter than the later case. I discovered this when i was goinig to swap all the guts from a mint low mile 63 fairlane 3.03 into a later truck 3.03 main case to get the later bolt pattern. I ended up using a cheap ebay gasket and seal kit and doing the jeep top shift conversion. Pretty happy with it, my only complaint is that i wish 1st gear was a little higher ratio, but thats probably due to 3.50 gears in the rear and 31 inch tall rear tires. All in all its a great setup and i had to power shift mine from Nebraska to Bonneville just a few weeks ago due to a throw-out bearing failure. Got it fixed at Bonneville and still works perfect.
@Nailhead Jason Thanks for this reply. None of this pertains to my '39 Standard, so I'm not copying you! I have a '63 401 & a '64 425. Both need rebuilds (coming soon). 1 six deuce log manifold. 1 Bendtsen bell for GM manual trans. 1 Offy bell for the early Ford trans. One of the engines (along with the log manifold) & the GM bell (with a Saginaw 4 speed) are slated for my '49 Merc. The other with the 3.03 (If I can make the truck trans work) will end up in one of my other projects ('40 Ford Deluxe coupe or '41 Chev 2 door.) I was thinking it could be a pretty cool set up. I'm glad you have tested it out for me.
The '63 and '64 three speeds were indeed toploaders, at least the ones we're covering in this thread. They do have the early narrow bellhousing pattern so are different in that way from the '65 and up three speeds. The '62 and back were a side cover design, and not synchronized. Except for Canada, where we got to "enjoy" the non-synchro three speeds up to the 1964 model year. The spacer between the bellhousing and transmission will not affect the clutch linkage and operation. A spacer between the engine and bellhousing will definitely affect the clutch linkage geometry and thus operation.
I think he’s confused because the FOUR speed toploader derivative of the three speed toploader design didn’t show up until 1965. The fully synchronized three speed was the first release of the basic concept, and that happened in the 1963 model year. Interesting ot trivia you probably all know is that Ford manufactured a version for sale to GM. It was the base HD three speed transmission standard in the mid sixties GM muscle cars
Pretty sure the four speed toploader was also introduced in 1964. If you ordered a four speed car you could get either a T10 or the Ford gearbox, randomly. A lot of the Ford confusion in 1964-65 is due to that pesky little sporty car that came out in April(?) of 1964 as a 1965 model. So early ones could have five bolt bellhousing 289s or 260s that really were 1964 engine. Since the car pretended to be a 1965 model, people still think a 260 was available in 1965.
You’re probably right that there wasn’t a clean model year break for the four speed transmission. I think Falcon and Mustang were still using T10s in 65 too. The 3.03 three speed wasn’t even totally clean, as the “ small six” powered compacts didn’t get it until later, well after the 1963 introduction in the truck and large cars.
Yep. I had a '64 Fairlane and a '64 Comet, both Canadian cars with 260 engines and they both had the non-synchro first gear transmissions. Swapping in the 3.03 trans was a real improvement. It's possible the 289 in the same cars came with the 3.03 in Canada, but I don't have any first hand knowledge. I think Ford used up the leftover old stuff in Canada. We also got the flathead V8 one year longer than in the US.
from the DUH files: I was not wanting to tear this apart, so my kid can gain some knowledge when he takes a crack at rebuilding it. So, ask questions on the HAMB. Scour the internet & sift through tons of "info." Hmm... how do I determine if it has different sized synchros without taking it apart? Well, how about just looking and maybe even put a tape measure to it? With the top cover off, it was pretty easy to figure out. Sometimes, I ain't too bright. I'll be ordering up a rebuild kit for it today.
I looked up an old Motor Trend Road test on the 64 Fairlane. The three speed fully synchronized 3 speed was standard on all engines except the 289 HiPo 271 hp. The 260 had the 3,03 standard, but a 2 speed automatic or a non synchronized 3 speed / overdrive was an option. That’s likely what yours likely had. The od was only available on the 260 cars.
Remember my cars were Canadian. That's why they had the obsolete non-synchro transmissions. And yes, the horrible two speed Fordomatic automatic was used on the 260 here and the excellent C4 on the 289, same as in the USA. Also according to the shop manual the overdrive wasn't available in Canada. Well actually it said the overdrive was "Available in USA". The above is specifically for 1964 model year.
I built a 3.03 for my '50 last winter. It came from a Canadian 64 Comet with 289. I ran one of these 3.03 transmissions for a while in my '55 Ford back in the late 60s. I drove it pretty hard and it proved to be a pretty tough transmission.
I've got this one in back of my 389 for my Vicky. A little machine work on the bearing retainer and the T 150 conversion was all it took. Everything else was factory parts and the Ram clutch and flywheel setup. I did mill the bosses off the side and plug them to get the extra inch or so on the drivers side. Not on the road yet so I'm hoping for the best.
So it looks like if you bought the 260 you got the non synchro transmission, but if you stepped up to the 289 you got the good one (in Canada).
A note on the T150 top cover. My HEG-K (65 Galaxy FE) 3.03 has about a 9 3/4" long main case and my HEF-CV (65-66 Mustang V8) has a 9 1/4" long main case. I haven't received the T150 top yet, but from my readings it sounds like the T150 will only work on the smaller length case. HEG - H.D case (F.E and Big Blocks ??) and maybe RAT HEF - Med Duty (Small block V8) and maybe RAN (which include some 6 cyl models also)
The 3.03 trans is very rugged. GM used them behind 389 and 396 engines until they made their own full syncro 3 speeds. I have one with a Laycock overdrive on it that came from the AMC factory as an option on 75-77 Pacers, Gremlins, and Hornets. It is hooked to my 354 hemi and has been for 14 years without a problem. I put a Jeep T-150 top cover on it and when installed, the shifter sits within one inch of where the original 32 shifter came through. That trans is hard to hurt, though if you are dedicated enough, it can be done. Noting is completely idiot proof, except maybe a small ball bearing. My hemi hasn't hurt it in all the time I have driven it and it doesn't get babied!
The C3AR 7006 E is a casting number, not a part number, and relates to a casting with it's engineering paid for by the full-size Ford vehicle line (A) for the '63 model year, so production could have started in mid-'62. It could have been used by any vehicle line, but "A" paid for the engineering. The E suffix would designate which '63 basic trans case casting it was
So, after some clean up, the tag is completely readable: HEF AU From a Ford truck message board: HEF-AW & AU = F100/250 114" & 120" w/bases 292. It came with a Y block bell housing (anybody need one?). So, it is indeed, a '63 F250 transmission. And now, has been rebuilt. Side bosses where the shifting used to happen, have been milled off & tapped & plugged. Shift mechanism eliminated. Jeep T150 top shift needs to be reassembled after blasting. I'll get some pics after it's completed & painted. And, I'll try to find the rebuild kit # and post that too. But, the kit we used had the wrong front seal. Need to find the correct, larger one before it can be finished.
For those wondering: the rebuild kit I used is BK111WS. WS=with synchos. I think the BK111 kit doesn't include them. I'm guessing it's pretty much the same kit for all the 3.03s. But, that kit had the wrong bearing retainer/input shaft seal. The local parts stores couldn't figure out what I needed, as they only listed for a BW trans. Rock Auto had the correct one. CR #13534
Here's one that is up for auction locally. Current bid: $5 https://www.montgomerycompanies.net...a6UyBDBoNVQ==&Filter=ITUHdU2DoqWvw89vAOs0Dw==
Just make sure you have the correct one. I shouldn't have said that the kit fits most 3.03s. There are 2 different styles of trans. One has both synchros the same size, the other (like mine) has different sized ones. Easy to see which you have by pulling the cover off.
Price is right. Not all of these are the same. Mine is an early ('63-'64 style) that doesn't have a rear trans mount. The Y-block bells have mounting ears on them. I will have to make one that bolts to the tailshaft bolts. Also, some of these had the yoke built on the rear of the output shaft. Mine has a "normal" splined output.
I just picked up this same transmission. How did the top loader work out for you behind the Buick. Any updates?
Cant speak for his set up but mine is great. 63 Fairlane 3.03 with 79 Jeep T150 top shift conversion. original shift shaft case holes were tapped and plugged. I used an MEC adapter for ford top loader, and my buddy built up aluminum at the bottom for the early case mount holes and drilled and tapped the holes for the 49 to 64 trans bolt pattern. It is really tough, i beat on it all the time, I used a dual friction clutch disk, ceramic pucks on the pressure plate side and organic on the other, and it is smoot as glass and grabs really hard. I am in the process of getting things in line for a mustang T5 swap into my 39, but not because of any problem with the trans. I just need an overdrive, i drive this car a lot, and going back and forth to Bonneville and to North Carolina from Virginia has convinced me i need to not be spinning 3000 plus RPM for hours if i want this motor to last. Although i do have an original 327 365 horse short block on deck for just in case.... But i will hold on to this trans set up, and it will find its way into another project.
Thanks, Jason. Mine is missing the tag but by case number is from '63, a long shaft with mount. I may use it behind my Olds in the 31 sometime in the future.
light duty has the aluminum tail housing and if it was for a fairlane (possibly others) there is no provision for a shifter on the tail housing, they were all column shift.
The Jalopy Journal
