Register now to get rid of these ads!

1962 4 Speed transmission options

Discussion in 'The Hokey Ass Message Board' started by The37Kid, Dec 25, 2011.

  1. The37Kid
    Joined: Apr 30, 2004
    Posts: 30,629

    The37Kid
    Member

    If it was 1962 and you had a 354 HEMI in a 1932 Ford chassis what 4 speed transmission would you use?:confused:
     
  2. TexasSpeed
    Joined: Nov 2, 2009
    Posts: 4,631

    TexasSpeed
    ALLIANCE MEMBER
    from Texas

    The BW T10 4-speed was available from GM in 1957 until GM started using the Muncie M20 in '62.. Or was it '63? Not much knowledge on Mopar or FoMoCo transmissions but hopefully my recently acquired knowledge of GM transmissions helps you out some..

    Edit: just went and looked.. GM started using the Muncie M20 in '63.


    iPhone - TJJ app
     
  3. The37Kid
    Joined: Apr 30, 2004
    Posts: 30,629

    The37Kid
    Member

    Thats were I am, I want a finished car that I could have built in 1962 with all 1962 or older bits in it. Reality of ever finishing it is remote, but the project is enjoyable.
     
  4. falcongeorge
    Joined: Aug 26, 2010
    Posts: 18,341

    falcongeorge
    Member
    from BC

    T-10, I am looking for one too. I am accumulating pieces for the same kind of deal, 1959/60 is my cut-off. As far as the "run what you like" bs, my response to that is "period-correct cars ARE what I like, I AM building it my way". If you think its funny, then why are you reading it? Title of the thread is very clear. Muncies are '63-up.
     
    Last edited: Dec 26, 2011

  5. The37Kid
    Joined: Apr 30, 2004
    Posts: 30,629

    The37Kid
    Member

    Just toured that "Auction site" the T-10's don't go cheap do they?
     
  6. TexasSpeed
    Joined: Nov 2, 2009
    Posts: 4,631

    TexasSpeed
    ALLIANCE MEMBER
    from Texas

    I can relate. I was sitting at my car club's Christmas party telling the older guys that I wanted to run a '39 Ford 3-speed in my A and they all gave me this puzzled look as if I had just committed a sin for not running an automatic..

    That's when I realized they really are street rodders. :rolleyes:


    iPhone - TJJ app
     
  7. fordcragar
    Joined: Dec 28, 2005
    Posts: 3,198

    fordcragar
    Member
    from Yakima WA.

    All T-10's aren't created equal, so do some research on them before going too far.
     
  8. fordcragar
    Joined: Dec 28, 2005
    Posts: 3,198

    fordcragar
    Member
    from Yakima WA.

    Back in the early 1960's and earlier there wasn't a lot of stick shift options that were strong.
     
  9. TexasSpeed
    Joined: Nov 2, 2009
    Posts: 4,631

    TexasSpeed
    ALLIANCE MEMBER
    from Texas

    That's true. I realize the '39 isn't strong either but there's no reason it can't be reliable. I'm not looking to set the world on fire with my A.


    iPhone - TJJ app
     
  10. The37Kid
    Joined: Apr 30, 2004
    Posts: 30,629

    The37Kid
    Member

    That's what I plan to do, are there long tails and short tails and different Hurst shifters? :confused:
     
  11. The37Kid
    Joined: Apr 30, 2004
    Posts: 30,629

    The37Kid
    Member

    It does matter to me, that is why I asked the original question. I need to have the transmission and adaptor to setup the chassis. The rebuilt ones are pricy, not the as pulled ones. :)
     
  12. TexasSpeed
    Joined: Nov 2, 2009
    Posts: 4,631

    TexasSpeed
    ALLIANCE MEMBER
    from Texas

    I have a spare '46 I can pull the guts from. Early Ford transmissions aren't extinct. In fact, I see there are several in the classifieds right now. Sure, it won't be an all-out hot rod like some of the others on here but it will be a hot rod in the sense of if a kid just put together what was available at the time. Just over 200 horsepower in an A will make it scoot just fine.

    Anyone can put a 5-speed behind their Hemi but it takes dedication to run a '39. Personally, if 37kid wants a T-10 in his period correct for '62 hot rod, I can appreciate the effort and thought he is putting into it and would encourage that based on the fact that he has a goal and is sticking to it.


    iPhone - TJJ app
     
  13. fordcragar
    Joined: Dec 28, 2005
    Posts: 3,198

    fordcragar
    Member
    from Yakima WA.

    What I was talking about were the gear sets. Some are weaker than others. There were some healthy trans' behind some of the big Chev and Ford engines, that's probably a good place to start looking. I'm not sure what Chrysler was running for transmissions back then.
     
  14. greg32
    Joined: Jun 21, 2007
    Posts: 2,230

    greg32
    Member
    from Indiana

    The Super T-10 is a big improvement over the originals, looks the same. A well broken in T-10 shifts better than a Muncie in my opinion. With a 354, you shouldnt have to worry about breaking an original one. They took big blocks back then.
     
  15. ChassisResearchKid
    Joined: Feb 18, 2006
    Posts: 765

    ChassisResearchKid
    Member
    from Michigan

    I also agree that a T10 is the way to go. I've had a lot of 62/63 Impala's some 327 some 409, never broke a trans. Axle shafts on the other hand didn't fare so well.
     
  16. F&J
    Joined: Apr 5, 2007
    Posts: 13,222

    F&J
    Member

    How true. Even in the middle 60s, a 4 speed for a hotrod build was out of reach for most backyarders. So, if a 62 built rod had one, the rest of the car would be very upscale as far as money spent on other goodies and chrome.

    Bob, you could get a cheap broken T10 just to get the car set up. Spend your money on the adapter/flywheel for now, then a good priced T10 should pop up during the build.
     
  17. jimi'shemi291
    Joined: Jan 21, 2009
    Posts: 9,499

    jimi'shemi291
    Member

    Post #1 was clear, and it's a real HAMBer's concept. Nothing after 1962. The main person whose opinion matters is the owner/builder. If it's as-conceived, that's an achievement he can be proud of. Any post '62 components, of course HE will know it himself.

    That said, one of the best I let get away (story another time) was a '62 Hawk TT (TwinTrack) coupe with 289 4-B and B-W 4-sp, coupled to the TT rearend. All factory stock (and with HillHolder, too!).

    SO, if 37Kid uses the B-W AND the limited-slip diff, THAT would make it even better, wouldn't it? I think Stude was offering the TwinTrack a year before GM offered it on (what?) Pontiac?
     
  18. jimi'shemi291
    Joined: Jan 21, 2009
    Posts: 9,499

    jimi'shemi291
    Member

    Of course, GM called their limited-slip the "Posi." Should have said that detail.
     
  19. Heo2
    Joined: Aug 9, 2011
    Posts: 660

    Heo2
    Member

    Facel vega and Ford Comete Pont moason (sp)
    4spd alu case
    I think a few 300s used it to
     
  20. turdytoo
    Joined: May 14, 2007
    Posts: 1,568

    turdytoo
    Member

    I had a close ratio Muncie in a coupe with a 283 and it was a ball to drive and the music from the motor at hard pull was sweet. The 3.50 gear was a tad high in first and a tad low in fourth though. My current ride has a t-5 and though I have a gear for any occasion it isn't as much fun to drive.
     
  21. F&J
    Joined: Apr 5, 2007
    Posts: 13,222

    F&J
    Member

    Some old adapter companies made trans adapters to fit the 49-up Ford 3 speeds. If there was one made for the 354, and if you could find one, you could use the Ford "big car" very early T10 with that tall narrow trans pattern. That trans would be the right date.

    Heathen would know if an adapter was made for a 354, and if they are possible/impossible to find.
     
  22. Rusty O'Toole
    Joined: Sep 17, 2006
    Posts: 9,657

    Rusty O'Toole
    Member

    I think the only 4 speed in an American car was Chev 1957 up until 1962 when Ford and Chrysler introduced theirs. So unless you went to the Ford or Chrysler dealer parts dept and bought a brand new one, the Chev was the only choice in 62.

    There is a tiny chance someone adapted a Moss 4 speed out of a wrecked Jag sedan. They were sold in the US from 1951 on and a few must have found their way into junk yards. But off hand can't think of anyone who actually used one in a hot rod.
     
  23. The37Kid
    Joined: Apr 30, 2004
    Posts: 30,629

    The37Kid
    Member

    Thanks for all the help! Are all T-10 cases the same lenght overall, if so I'll get a junk one for setup then find a good one later on. Bob
     
  24. tom406
    Joined: Nov 2, 2011
    Posts: 11

    tom406
    Member

    I think cases are all the same length. There were Ford cases cast in late '61 and '62. They have the narrow bolt pattern and long tailshaft housings. They used a slightly wider ratio gear set, with a 2.36 1st gear. Pontiac started offering the T10 in '61, they're very similar to the Chevy boxes, but the tailshafts were longer on Bonneville and Star Chief models due to their longer wheelbases. Studebaker offered T10s through the early 60s, with the '62 models having a Chevy style bolt pattern, and later boxes having a Ford bolt pattern ( see http://www.348-409.com/forum/index.php?threads/t-10-transmission-identification.19367/ ). Chevy transmissions are all mostly similar, but aluminum cases were introduced in Corvettes and 409 cars around January 1961, with iron cases remaining in most passenger car applications. In 1962, Chevrolet introduced a wide ratio T10, with 2.54 1st gear instead of the close ratio 2.20 1st gear. These gearsets are usable in earlier T10 cases if you like.

    Good luck with your project!
     
  25. The37Kid
    Joined: Apr 30, 2004
    Posts: 30,629

    The37Kid
    Member

    Thanks Tom! Welcome to the HAMB! That's the type of info that everyone here likes to share. Best wishes for 2012. Bob
     
  26. stuart in mn
    Joined: Nov 22, 2007
    Posts: 2,406

    stuart in mn
    Member

    Ford and Chrysler didn't introduce their own four speed transmissions until later (Chrysler in 1963, Ford in 1964) and the Muncie didn't show up until 1963, so a T-10 is pretty much your only choice.

    Besides Chevy, Pontiac also used wide ratio and close ratio T-10 transmissions, depending on the rear axle ratio. As mentioned there were long tailshafts on Bonnevilles and Star Chiefs (my car has one.) They were first available on special order in Pontiacs in midyear 1960, 1961 was the first year they were a regular option.

    Those early cast iron case T-10s weren't very strong compared to later versions, plus they're pretty rare and therefore valuable to restorers. I'd go with a newer Super T-10, you can paint the aluminum case to look like cast iron and no one will know the difference.

    edit: if you do go for an early iron case T-10, if you can find one chances are it will have a short tailshaft - they were all rare, but the long tailshafts even moreso. (note: the 'short' tailshaft was the same length as used in Chevys.)
     
  27. falcongeorge
    Joined: Aug 26, 2010
    Posts: 18,341

    falcongeorge
    Member
    from BC

    I'm actually thinking about buying a eighties s-10 and putting the cast crank 350/t350 I have in my shed in, for a parts chaser/trash hauler ect. :eek: The horror...the horror...
     
  28. jimi'shemi291
    Joined: Jan 21, 2009
    Posts: 9,499

    jimi'shemi291
    Member



    Rusty, no disrespect, but Borg-Warner's 4-speed was in my dead-stock Studebaker Hawk.:cool: I don't know about the '57 Chevy choices.
     
  29. jimi'shemi291
    Joined: Jan 21, 2009
    Posts: 9,499

    jimi'shemi291
    Member

    Sorry. I meant '62 Hawk.

    I looked up the '57 Chevy (great, iconic cars), and Wiki said a 4-speed WAS an OPTION in '57 (and, presumably, thereafter). But it may well have been a T-10, as well, as another source says the Muncie 4-sp was used from '63 through '74 in numerous GM applications.

    Yet another source says that Chrysler's first 4-sp in '63 was the B-W T-10, changing to the A833 (their own design) for '64.
     
  30. TexasSpeed
    Joined: Nov 2, 2009
    Posts: 4,631

    TexasSpeed
    ALLIANCE MEMBER
    from Texas

    You're correct. Mopar still used a 3-speed until '63.. As far as my "Google research skills" can confirm.


    iPhone - TJJ app
     

Share This Page

Register now to get rid of these ads!

Archive

Copyright © 1995-2021 The Jalopy Journal: Steal our stuff, we'll kick your teeth in. Terms of Service. Privacy Policy.

Atomic Industry
Forum software by XenForo™ ©2010-2014 XenForo Ltd.