Complete T5 swap thread - one way to skin the cat

[jocko]

oohhhhh..... I'd be sweatin that a little bit - 18' sounds like a monster to me.

Anyone else have any experience haulin a trailer that size with a T5??

[shok]

Maybe find out what the tow ratings were in T5 equipped s10's?
Posted via Mobile Device

[CRGRS 66]

Originally Posted by shok

Maybe find out what the tow ratings were in T5 equipped s10's?
Posted via Mobile Device

good call, thanks, will look into that and post up what I find

[CRGRS 66]

I found this, which was apparently taken from original vehicle spec's, 5spd manual was listed as standard equipment, horsepower was listed as 180 with a 4.6L V6

Payload & Towing 2WD
Standard Towing (lb.) 1600
Maximum Towing (lb.) 5900
Standard Payload (lb.) 1246
Maximum Payload (lb.) 1622
Standard GVWR (lb.) 4200
Maximum GVWR (lb.) 4600

I also read that in general maximum towing should not exceed GVW, max Maximum GVW Rating on my truck is listed as 5000lbs..., 18' trailers are well under that, I would think that pulling a 3000lb trailer 3-5 times a year shouldn't be an issue.

[Bazooka]

What would it take it get a aftermarket electric speedo working with a T-5? I already have the S-10 tailshaft and will be using a 88-92 WC T-5 from a Camaro. Do I still have to modify the output shaft to move the speedo gear location to get a electric speedo to work with the S-10 tailhousing like you do to usea mech. speedo? I'm not familiar with how electric speedos/senders work

[C-10cutty]

Originally Posted by Bazooka

What would it take it get a aftermarket electric speedo working with a T-5? I already have the S-10 tailshaft and will be using a 88-92 WC T-5 from a Camaro. Do I still have to modify the output shaft to move the speedo gear location to get a electric speedo to work with the S-10 tailhousing like you do to usea mech. speedo? I'm not familiar with how electric speedos/senders work

Good question.

Picked up my tranny and it has a tag number of 222....1993 WC.

[jocko]

Originally Posted by Bazooka

What would it take it get a aftermarket electric speedo working with a T-5? I already have the S-10 tailshaft and will be using a 88-92 WC T-5 from a Camaro. Do I still have to modify the output shaft to move the speedo gear location to get a electric speedo to work with the S-10 tailhousing like you do to usea mech. speedo? I'm not familiar with how electric speedos/senders work

Bazooka and C10 Cutty, I wish I had a good answer for you. Most people are trying to convert a newer electronic speedo tailhousing to a mechanical speedo drive in the old trucks - but apparently you have an "older" T5 and an electronic speedo hookup in your truck (i.e. aftermarket gauges??)

I would think the easiest approach would be to find a later model T5 tailshaft housing. I would also be willing to bet there are about 50 guys on here with a newer T5 seeking a mech speedo hookup that would want to swap straight over becasue your tailshaft is the more desirable (i.e. in more demand).

[Bazooka]

Originally Posted by jocko

Bazooka and C10 Cutty, I wish I had a good answer for you. Most people are trying to convert a newer electronic speedo tailhousing to a mechanical speedo drive in the old trucks - but apparently you have an "older" T5 and an electronic speedo hookup in your truck (i.e. aftermarket gauges??)

I would think the easiest approach would be to find a later model T5 tailshaft housing. I would also be willing to bet there are about 50 guys on here with a newer T5 seeking a mech speedo hookup that would want to swap straight over becasue your tailshaft is the more desirable (i.e. in more demand).

I have a electric speedo S10 tailhousing (or did have I should say). Maybe I'm mistaken but I thought Camaro and S10 tailshafts have the hole in a different spot for the sensor? I know I can use the factory speed sensor but was wondering what if anything I would have had to do to the output shaft since I was going to use the electric speedo S10 tailshaft assuming the hole in the tailshaft is in a different spot like I thought. The 89 WC camaro t5 that I was able to do some trading for has a factory sensor in it. I punted the tailshaft I had for some quick cash so cant compare side by side. I'm not sure if I'll get another electric tailshaft or try to find a mechanical tailshaft. Depends on what the easiest way to have a working speedo is I guess. I dont have gauges yet.

[silversnail86]

Well thanks Jocko, just finished my t5 swap. Mine went into an 86 though. Still alot of useful info here. I love this trans compared to my 700r4. I didn't quite skin my cat the same as yours, I cut my trans to fit, but it works. And wouldn't ya know it there is a WC V8 Camaro T5 just posted on Craigslist in my area for 350. Oh well I am set up for the next trans anyway. Can't thank ya enough for the write up Jocko.

[Bazooka]

There is a couple T-5 S10 tailhousing and top covers on ebay right now if anyone is looking..

[brokenspoke]

One thing to be aware of is the T-5 S10 is metric....the input shaft is 3 thousands smaller than the original transmission....I used a pilot bearing from the T-5...not using the metric bearing can cause a vibration

[jocko]

That interesting Brokenspoke, thanks for posting. I had never heard this before. I used the sbc input bushing and did not develop any vibration. May have been luck. But if I ever do it again, I might choose to use the newer metric pilot bushing.

Here's the more important question - is the T5 metric pilot bushing designed for a metric opening in the back of the crankshaft?? If so, I'd be more concerned with that fit (pilot bearing in the crank) than the fit of the pilot shaft into the pilot bearing. Don't want that pilot bushing to slip in the crank.

If, however, the opening in the end of the crank is the same between old sbc and newer vehicles (that came with an T5), then I agree, metric pilot bushing is probably a better idea. Thanks again - great info.

[brokenspoke]

Originally Posted by jocko

That interesting Brokenspoke, thanks for posting. I had never heard this before. I used the sbc input bushing and did not develop any vibration. May have been luck. But if I ever do it again, I might choose to use the newer metric pilot bushing.

Here's the more important question - is the T5 metric pilot bushing designed for a metric opening in the back of the crankshaft?? If so, I'd be more concerned with that fit (pilot bearing in the crank) than the fit of the pilot shaft into the pilot bearing. Don't want that pilot bushing to slip in the crank.

If, however, the opening in the end of the crank is the same between old sbc and newer vehicles (that came with an T5), then I agree, metric pilot bushing is probably a better idea. Thanks again - great info.

Both the old sbc and metric od of the bearings are the same

[jocko]

Originally Posted by brokenspoke

Both the old sbc and metric od of the bearings are the same

That's great info - thanks for sharing. I will definitely use a metric pilot bushing next go round. (Again, for those of you that did NOT use a metric one, I would not fret, I didn't either and it's still running strong with no vibrations - or at least it wasn't when I sold it last week... ) But the correct answer would be what brokenspoke outlined - pilot bushing from the S10 side of the equation (metric) vice original sae pilot bushing for a sbc.

[Bazooka]

I was able to dig up the answer. It may already be in this thread maybe I missed it. The hole for the speedo gear or sensor on S10 tailshafts is different then the camaro on both the electric and mech s10 tailshafts. So either way you have to modify your output shaft. You can swap WC s10 output shafts into WC camaro trans if you rather not modify the output shaft. I think same goes for non WC so you can swap a non WC s10 output shaft into a non wc Camaro trans. You cant mix WC and non WC tho. of course all this involves tearing down the tranny.

[Summabish]

Just pulled a t5 out of a 95 s10 should be starting the process of getting everything laid out for it. My question is do you need a support for the t5 when using the stock 3spd bellhousing? I've got an extra 3spd laying around for all build stuff so I don't have to wait until I pull the 3spd that is currently in the truck until I'm ready to preform the swap.
Posted via Mobile Device

[jocko]

no, if you have the normal engine mounts and the bell housing mounts, you should not use a rear trans mount. If, for some reason, you eliminated the bell mounts, then you'd need a trans crossmember. There should only be one additional mounting point in addition to the engine mounts themselves for the engine/trans combo - can be either the bell mounts OR a rear crossmember, but not both.

[socaljess]

hey summa the 1995 s10 trans wont work on a chevy bellhousing it has the ford style mounting ears fyi you need a pre 92

[brnrbrt1]

Originally Posted by socaljess

hey summa the 1995 s10 trans wont work on a chevy bellhousing it has the ford style mounting ears fyi you need a pre 92

i have purchased flywheel ,clutch kit,new slave cylinder, and a t5 from a 85 camaro before i found this thread.i planned on using the stock camaro bellhousing and just add a crossmember to the rear of the trans. but you say the camaro bh has a twist, is this something that can be corrected by bending the shift arm before it enters the cab thru the floor?

[rmsteph828]

I am posting this in regards to the first section of the Complete T5 swap.

"This discussion is about swapping an S10 T5 (in my case, into a 66 C10) – if you have a Camaro T5 then you don’t need the spacer plate or bearing retainer index ring extender outlined below, just drill out the 4 mounting holes on the trans to ½” and bolt the T5 in with the appropriate clutch/pressure plate combo for the trans (i.e. a Camaro clutch kit) and you’re good to go. But, of course, the underlying reason folks like the S10 T5 is the forward shifter mounting location that works so well with truck bench seats."

I took this as truth and found my self a 92 Camaro V6 T5 to drop in my 1964 C10 chevy 230CID. I planned on obtaining the S10 tail housing to move the shifter farther forward. Unfortunately the swap has not been this straight forward as illustrated above. First off the v6 camaro T5 has the ford bolt pattern not the GM(with the ears). Second the spline length is different from the munice sm420 that came out of the C10. The Muncie sm 420 has a spline length of 6.5" while the camaro wc t5 has a spline length of 182.1mm(7.16929") resulting in a difference of .66929". To combat this I bought my self a v8 camaro t5 wc case with the GM bolt pattern(not cheap). I plan on milling myself a spacer plate to make up for the difference. I am posting this to find out if any one else has ran into my same problems and for anyone else planning to attempt this swap.

Thanks

http://www.novak-adapt.com/knowledge/sm420.htm
The spline length of the 92 camaro I found in a book How to Rebuild and Modify Your Manual Transmission (Motorbooks Workshop)

[jocko]

rmsteph, not sure I could have been more thorough in my post, and I take minor issue with implying it's "not truth"... My goal was to help folks with the issues I encountered when installing a T5 in a V8 truck that had a 3-speed, not an SM420 - but I had to learn a lot myself before I purchased a trans as well. Anyway, I'm sorry you're having problems. However, it may not have been wise to plan your entire build off of one sentence in a 5 page thread - I believe you may have benefited from reading a little further or a little more of the detail perhaps. As stated in the thread (later), you need a pre-92 trans or it will have a Ford bolt pattern. It has nothing to do with whether it came from a V6 F-body - your issue is the year of mfgr you chose. I didn't know this either and learned it as the thread developed - that is why it's posted later by another helpful member. That tidbit is, however, outlined in some of the links I provided.

Spline length differences are outlined in the thread, but the variables between an S10 and an F-Body (and apparently the differences you're stating between a V6 and V8 F-body?) are the reason I mentioned you may want to make a 2D mockup of your disk/pressure plate/release bearing stacking height. It's the only way to know what you have.

I am curious how you ID'ed the trans you bought? Did you physically pull it from a 92 Camaro or were you going by a part number on the trans?

Thanks for posting and letting others know of the problems you've encountered - it may help someone else out with the same swap.

Also, so you know, your post is identical to a new thread you started, probably no need to start a duplicate and have the info floating around in 2 places. Not a big deal though.

[BAT]

What an amazing and articulate write up! I must be one of the few lucky ones because the '70 C10 I recently bought already had a Z28 T5 with an S10 tail shaft! My only issue is that it has an electronic speedo output. Is there a way to convert that or should I seek out a mechanical speedo tail shaft ('91 or earlier if I understand correctly)?

I am aware of the Cable-X option but from what I have read I don't think I want to go that route.

Thanks again for an amazing thread!!

BAT

[oldtrux]

hey all,just for the info i just calipered input shaft of 3 trannys,original 66 3 speed,89 camaro wc t5,86 s10 t5 donor t5,all of them are 0.592.which ones are metric?

[padresag]

Originally Posted by oldtrux

hey all,just for the info i just calipered input shaft of 3 trannys,original 66 3 speed,89 camaro wc t5,86 s10 t5 donor t5,all of them are 0.592.which ones are metric?

t5 are metric. the measure on the pilot shaft part of the input measures 15mm which equals 0.5906. that makes a variance of 0.0014" between them and the earlier std input size of 0.592"
ron

[oldtrux]

Originally Posted by padresag

t5 are metric. the measure on the pilot shaft part of the input measures 15mm which equals 0.5906. that makes a variance of 0.0014" between them and the earlier std input size of 0.592"
ron

thx for the info!
ordered the .590 size today,i'll get this figured out yet!