T-5 + 3.55 = 1 happy 200!!!

Varilux

Well-known member
I've often heard the phrase "don't fear the gear," but now I understand it...

During the initial resto of my '65 Mustang coupe inline, I swapped out the non-sync 3-speed tranny for an 85-89 T-5. At the time, I had the original 3.20 7.25" rear end in my car, and the improvement was dramatic to say the least!

Shortly thereafter, my 7.25" gave up the ghost- and I installed an 8" with 3.25 gears. Unfortunately, the pinion had a bit of play and the resultant vibrations were almost as bad as the shot 7.25".

This week, I finally replaced the chunk, and- after a lot of deliberation- decided to go with an open 3.55... holy crap, what a difference. The car is now PERFECT (knock on wood)!

The combination of the T-5, 3.55 gears, DUI ignition, and the Classic Inlines dual out header has really woken this car up! I've previously owned a '65 289 with 2.80 gears and C-4 auto, and I have no doubt my 200 six coupe would have smoked that car off the line. I'm sure there are a lot of set-ups for the 200, but the T-5 with 3.55 gears (IMO) is just perfect for the six! I never thought I'd be laying rubber down with my inline, and its just amazing how good the car feels with this combo.

Sorry for blathering on, but its been a long road to this day. I would never have sorted out some of the obstacles on the way without the tips I've picked up on this site by asking/searching, so thanks! I've documented the journey on my blog: http://www.just-a-six.tumblr.com
 
Is it a 4 cylinder T-5 or V8? Want to know your take on the low first gear mixed with the 3.55’s.
 
Boedy1":1lxvuo8r said:
Is it a 4 cylinder T-5 or V8? Want to know your take on the low first gear mixed with the 3.55’s.

his T5 is the V8 version as noted by the 3.35 first gear ratio. the four cylinder version would have a first gear ratio closer to 4:1.
 
That's awesome. I'm dreaming of doing something similar with my Bronco... then a Cougar. How'd you adapt your 200 to a T5? Did you use a low-mount starter 200, or is there an adapter available for a mid-60's 200 block? The reason I ask is that I don't recall this option with the high mount starter in the Scheldahl's Performance Handbook.
 
edgewood bronco":3ekelcg8 said:
That's awesome. I'm dreaming of doing something similar with my Bronco... then a Cougar. How'd you adapt your 200 to a T5? Did you use a low-mount starter 200, or is there an adapter available for a mid-60's 200 block? The reason I ask is that I don't recall this option with the high mount starter in the Scheldahl's Performance Handbook.

classicinlines is your friend;

http://classicinlines.com/products.asp?cat=135
 
I purchased everything for the T5 swap from Modern Drivelines (including the T5 itself, the adapter plate, a 1" relocation for the shifter, and a shifter and knob that looks like the original lockout). I expected some challenges with the install, but when my mechanic and I went through the process, everything bolted right up.

According to the invoice, the T5 is an 85-89 V8 service model (I've been told to stay away from the 4 cyl version). I've looked up some data on it, and it looks like its good to 300 ft/lb torque (which should be well above what my 6 will ever produce). I've had the chance to try it with 3 different gears (2.80, 3.25, and now 3.55). The 2.80 made first very "civilized," but not all that inspiring. The 3.25 was pretty nice in 1st. The 3.55 packs a lot of grunt (I can now go from a dead stop in 2nd if I choose), but I am getting out of 1st pretty quick now. I'm used to that though- because my DD is a '14 GT with 3.73 gears.

Actually, having the 6spd in the '14 makes for a challenge going between cars. With the 3.25, I never ran out of gear- even at 90mph. Now, around 75 I feel the need to shift again (and reverse sits right where 6th does in the '14 :shock: , so you can guess what I've already tried to do once :oops: ). All in all, the 3.55 makes all the gears in the T5 fall into line. With the 3.25, 55-60mph was just a pain (4th felt like it was too short, 5th just didn't have a lot of power). I was at right around 1600rpm at that speed in 5th. Now I'm around 1800rpm at 60mph, and that seems to be nicely in the power band.

The dual headers really help as well. With the stock manifold, it seemed like the engine "couldn't get out of its own way," but now it just zips up through the RPMs. It was tight with my starter (as I recall, its the high mount), but you can make it fit if you elongate the holes on the header just a bit to slide it forward about 1/4". The A/C bracket did need to be modified (I have the compressor on top and the alternator on the bottom). Finally, I think the DUI (with its better advance over the SCV on the 1100) has helped a lot. All in all, the car just brings a smile to my face now. The only other upgrade I might do is the aluminum head from Classic Inlines.

One of my car buddies (who has a '69 GTO) took her for a spin today, and he said "if I didn't know there was only a six under the hood, I'd swear this was a V8".

Now I need to swap the speedo gear. According to the calculator I need to go from my current 18 tooth to a 20 tooth.
 
The block is original to the car, so it should be a 1965 (the number of freeze plugs indicates its a 7 main 200). Its bored +.040, and I run a 3 row radiator. The head was replaced during the rebuild, and I notice there are no adjustment nuts on the rockers, so I assume they're the non-adjustable type (sorry, I'm a fairly decent at hanging parts, but I'm no engine builder).
 
Yeah, the 3.55 is probably perfect for the T5 for a mild cruiser with an occasional spirited spurt of driving. I was running a 3.40 with the V8 T5 because I feared the gear. the 3.40 is just a tad too low, mostly for 5th gear. I have to be above 60 prior to 5th being useful. Now for back roads, it's not a bad combination since I rarely went into 5th anyways (rarely above 50 MPH). But yeah, once I get my car to Texas and get it running again, swapping to a 3.55 is on my list of things to get done.
 
rbohm":4tjzuur0 said:
edgewood bronco":4tjzuur0 said:
That's awesome. I'm dreaming of doing something similar with my Bronco... then a Cougar. How'd you adapt your 200 to a T5? Did you use a low-mount starter 200, or is there an adapter available for a mid-60's 200 block? The reason I ask is that I don't recall this option with the high mount starter in the Scheldahl's Performance Handbook.

classicinlines is your friend;

http://classicinlines.com/products.asp?cat=135
So this kit is good for a high-mount starter?
Mine engine is a '78, but I did not realize this adapter would work.
 
At the Classic Inlines link you provided, they ask for your bell housing number. Based on the number you provide, they'll send you to the correct adapter plate.

The adapter plate changes the bolt pattern from your existing bellhousing to the one required for the T-5. As long as you correctly identify the housing, you should be good to go (IIRC, the bellhousing number will indicate whether the starter is high or low mounted, but regardless its the pattern of the bolts on the bellhousing that is the important thing).
 
If its V8 gearbox, the US T5 had CAFE gearing, with 5th a loping 0.72 or 0.67 overdrive. The Aussie journalists had been brought up on a diet of 2.6 Chryslers and Falcons and the Aussie T5 gearbox in the Commodore 5.0 SS, which was on par with the Mustang 5.0. They instantly commented on the wide ratio spread which made the US gearbox very odd to deal with in the 87Mustang, the Turbo Coupe T bird and the Camaro and Monte Carlo SS. Since you haven't experienced close ratio gearsets, here is the Aussie X-flow and 3.2 CFI info for 121 hp to 135 hp engines in 2910 to 3270 pound four door 110 inch wheel base Falcons.

In Aussie, our 1982-1987 3.3's and 1988-1991 3.2 OHC's had a Borg Warner Single Rail Manual with 25.6 inch tall tires, and close ratios.
82-87 HAD 3.23 AXLE GEARS
1st: 3.24:1
2nd: 1.96:1
3rd: 1.26:1
4th: 1.00:1
5th: 0.79:1
Reverse: 3.37:1

Overall top was 2.55:1

In 1988 to 1991 3.2 OHC had a 2.92 diff and much better aerodynamics.
88-91 HAD 2.92 AXLE GEARS
EA Falcon 3.2 T5

1st: 3.50:1
2nd: 2.14:1
3rd: 1.39:1
4th: 1.00:1
5th: 0.78:1

Overall top is like a 2.28:1 diff

Then after the 200 Falcon based 3.2 got ditched, and the 250 based 3.9 got made standard

EB2-EL T5 (6 cyl),

the axle gears became 3.08 or 3.27

1st: 3.25:1
2nd: 1.99:1
3rd: 1.29:1
4th: 1.00:1
5th: 0.72:1

Overall top 2.22:11and 2.35:1 respectively.


Your 0.72 is 2.55 with 3.55 gears. Your third and first gears are lower with the US T5 V8 and 3.55 gears.

It looks like the shorter fifth gear T5 4 cylinder top gear 0.79 set with the Aussie close ratio 3.25/1.99/1.29 would be best with a set of 3.23's.
 
I have a 4cyl T5 with in mine with a 340 rear gear. It is a blast to drive and gets going quick. I wish the OD was .69 not the .79 that it has. I am running about 2700 at 75MPH. It would be nice to be about 2000-2200. But the price was right for the 4cyl. T5 is the best mod you can do to it.
 
Varilux":37cwbmlz said:
I've often heard the phrase "don't fear the gear," but now I understand it...

It goes both ways for cruising rpm, verses axle ratio, but gearing down for an I6 axle ratio to a numerically lower ratio is just fine.The stock non Fox 3.3 Mustang gears were 3.20 manual, 2.88 auto, so 3.55 and 3.40 is certainly great with any T5 5speed. If it was auto, you just lost at least 16 hp flywheel around town, and your always running a taller than manual axle ratio that's over 10 % taller geared if the car was born an auto. That's why running a manual makes a formerly auto 200 feel like its grown about 50 cubic inches, to behave more like a 250, 255 or 260 engine torque wise. Its that significant vote in favour of having a manual T5 3.3 with your gearing.You've cracked the code! A 5 speed 302 Mustang feels like a 370 cube engine compared to an AOD 5.0. Same dynamic applies, more around town hp loss, and a loss of acceleration because almost always Ford gears the autos up more than 10% higher.


65-coupe":37cwbmlz said:
I have a 4cyl T5 with in mine with a 340 rear gear. It is a blast to drive and gets going quick. I wish the OD was .69 not the .79 that it has. I am running about 2700 at 75MPH. It would be nice to be about 2000-2200. But the price was right for the 4cyl. T5 is the best mod you can do to it.

When gearing for open road, you need more overdrive, and the V8 T5 has a huge over driven 5th.

I've done the research, and at an overall axle ratio of 2.35:1, that 0.69 wouldn't be too high. The Car and Driver 4.2 Capri of 1981 had 0.67:1 top with 3.45 gears, and it was wonderful with just a modified 160 hp 4-bbl. A 3.3 with a CI alumimum head won't have a problem eclipsing a modified 4.2 between 2200 and 3000 rpm. A good little 3.3 is a better engine than a 4.2...but I'm showing you why a little 3.3 can take much wider gearing. The 4 speed auto V8 4.2 verses T5 3.3 is a valid gearing comparison, as a worked I6 has its measure, and is close to the 5.0 2-bbl Fox SROD's which had a 2.13:1 overall top gear. The tallest Fox overall top was generally 2.26, which is a figure no overdrive should go over. Later 5.0's with 2.73's did have a 1.83:1 top, but a 225 hp 5.0 is a very tough act to match, and you wouldn't spoil anything by adding those ratios.

That 2.26:1 maximum means the limits of gearing are

With a T5 5.0 5th of 0.72 or 0.69, that's 3.13 to 3.27 axle gears, so 3.25's will do, but feel free to go 3.4 or 3.55
With a T5 4 cyl 5th 0.79, that's 2.86 axle gears, so a 2.88 will do, but feel free to go 3.0 or 3.20

Evidence to support is http://www.ascmclarencoupe.com/Literatu ... 1_2_04.jpg


Problem is the T5 4 cyl is a a close ratio and wide ratio mixture, its wide ratio intermediates, with close ratio top
The T5 5.0 is close ratio intermediates and wide ratio top.

Its not easy to mix and match the ratios because of the cost of non standard parts

Where it might be a problem is "gaping" it between speeds in give and take roads, but unless your in Idaho or Southern California, maybe you don't have roads like that. The info I have is that its better to find a 0.80/0.79/078 5th, and 3.00:1 with a wide ratio intermediates might be best in that instance. Especially with the excellent CI head, which makes a huge amount of torque over such a a wide rpm range with most Clay Smith cams. Close ratio gearboxes are used when you have a very cammy engine, without low end torque.


The issue is that in a car that isn't as slick as a modern car, its better to keep the upper 3 ratios closer, and gear up the diff. Historically, 5 speed gear ratio selection started to be questioned when the aero cars with 30 to 40 less drag than there previous models hit town in the early 80's. Although its an itty bitty 2.2 5 cylinder, in the 1982 Audi 5000 era, slicker aero figures allowed the German versions to run very wide ratio 5speed gearboxes in a 2800 pound car. Car that couldn't do 118 mph with 0.42 cd could do 128mph 0.32 and still the same 134 hp, a 31% drop in aerodynamic drag. US cars needed a turbo to get not turbo Euro performance, but In the lighter 2500 pound Audi Fox/80/5+5, the2.2 5e with wide ratio 5 speeds were great, but as the pounds were piled on in the bigger car, the wide ratio selection was a real pain to chop and change with the 5000 in the 55 to 100 mph zone. In Australia, it was a problem with the stupid 62 or 68 mph speed limit, so the old close ratio gearbox was employed in the manual versions. The gearing is owners choice, and as long as 3.3 I6 Ford owners are using there own smarts, its doubtful you'll ever be disappointed at the advice here.

The 'Aussie experiment' with Audi 5000 and small Fox 80 5+5 gearing gearing also showed true with the 3.3 to 3.5 liter sedans in the 121 to 142 hp and 173 to 177 lb-ft range like the X-flow 2-bbl I6 Aussie Falcon XE/XF and twin carb or EFI V8 Rover 3500, They used the 3.23 and 3.08 ratios with small 0.79-0.77 overdrives and short, close ratios like 3.24 firsts was perfect with tall tired cars. They did 111 mph to about 117 mph, better than the early box bodied non aero Audi 5000 Turbo. That's how gearing works. The Falcon was a really boxy and un aero car in 1982, yet it did 2200 rpm at 62 mph, and 32.6 US mpg on the economy loop at 62 mph. The 5 speed and 3.23 diff made the car a delight.


I guess the US situation is different, but Ford Oz started to go to shorter, 1st: 3.50:1, 2nd: 2.14:1, 3rd: 1.39:1 intermediates, with taller axle ratios as the cars cd (drag factors) dropped 39% from 0.50 to 0.36, but they kept the over drive ratio well down to a 4 cyl T5 level.

Everything is interrelated to drag at freeway speeds, and Aussie roads are rougher, not often concrete, and modern Ford passenger cars after 1982 are able to take wide ratios, so the donated V8 might not be the best for everyone.
 
Back
Top