MG-Cars.info

Welcome to our Site for MG, Triumph and Austin-Healey Car Information.

Parts

MG parts spares and accessories are available for MG T Series (TA, MG TB, MG TC, MG TD, MG TF), Magnette, MGA, Twin cam, MGB, MGBGT, MGC, MGC GT, MG Midget, Sprite and other MG models from British car spares company LBCarCo.

MG MGB GT V8 Factory Originals Technical - T5 question

Now that I'm siting my v8, it's becoming obvious that the shifter location on the T5 that I have may be too far forward. The shifter will come up about 2" this side of the radio panel. The heck of it is, when the guy built the tranny for me, he asked me where I wanted the shifter, but since all the info wasn't in, I had to guess, and guess what? Now I've lost his number; Bill in West Seattle is all that I can remember. And I'm sure that he has the parts to change it for me if I could get ahold of him. I'm guessing that the tailshaft that I have is out of an S-10 truck; the shifter comes up about 7.5 inches behind where the case splits. I need to move the shifter postion about 4-5 inches aft. Does anyone have a suitable tailshaft housing for a T5 they'd be willing to sell me? I think I'd also need the longer shifter 'rod' or whatever is inside to go with it. Please help, as this is a major sticking point on the project.

Joe
Joe Ullman

I think it can be done with the tranny as is. Looking at the T5 drawings from articles in old issues of the V8 newsletter, I see that my transmission is definately a hybrid of GM gear case and maybe some other kind of GM or possibly Ford tailhousing. The whole thing is only 20.5" long, and the mounting pad is in an unusual location, and is either flat bottomed, or angled very slightly,like 3 or 4 degrees, like on some Mustangs. Hard to tell laying on the floor underneath. But the beauty of it is that the mount ends up directly over the stock MG tranny crossmember. The shifter will come out farther forward than usual, but by fudging the location of the radio panel back an inch or more, the shifter will 'fall easily to hand' as they say. The shifter should be 4-5 inches aft of the panel, so I 'don't forsee' any interference, and the stock chrome ring will fit in okay, I think. I'm fairly short, so I sit pretty far forward, anyway.
The only thing that I'd really prefer not to have happen is that it looks like that ribbed reinforcement at the rear of the tunnel is going to interfere with the prop shaft. I figure I'll peel it off and lower it however much. Oh well, that'll be a job for after the floor pans are welded back in.
Joe Ullman

I am a little lost on what problem you are having. From all the 215 V8's I have seen and my own 302 conversion, the shifter should be 1-2" forward of the stock shifter location. With a T5 there should be no way it is all the way up at the radio console.

Head down to one of our South end meetings, if it is a nice day Kurt often drives his V8. As soon as mine is done I will be driving it as well though it may not be until the Aug meeting at the rate I am going.. Last Tues of each month, @ the Yankee dinner just off of I5 in Tacoma. meeting starts 7:00pm, people usually start ariving ~5:30pm.
Larry Embrey

I was talking with a transmission guy about sourcing a GM T5....He had just fitted one to a morgan and used the S-10 tailhousing since it was the SHORTEST one available and it needed to be short for that application.

It seems like you just need to get yourself a standard Camaro tailhousing and you'll be right where you need to be.

Joe Pitassi
Joe Pitassi

Yes, that's what it's come down to. I finally got ahold of the guy who built the tranny for me, and he's agreed to fit it with the Camaro housing and mainshaft. Not cheap, and means a lot of driving back and forth, but is definitely the best solution.

Thanks, Joe
Joe Ullman

Be prepared to fabricate a new rear mount as the Camaro T5 was tilted about 17 degrees from verticle and the rear mount will be tilted this much when the transmission is installed vertically.
Bill Young

I was just commenting on another thread about my brotherís Camaro. The Camaro used the angled bell housing for only two years before the Camaro went to a hydraulic clutch. I havenít seen a transmission from one of these, but according to the illustrations, the transmission sits upright, as it is identical to the standard transmission except the lugs where it mounts to the bell housing are angled.
George Champion

I used the transmission from an '87 Camaro. The rear mount attachment on the tail housing is angled to compensate for the angled mounting on the bell housing. Also, the shifter was bent so that it would be vertical in the car, so I had to heat and bend the shaft to have it work in the MG. By the way, it was a hydraulic clutch car.
Bill Young

So much for the value of illustrations. After I commented earlier, I began to wonder if the transmissions continued to be angled in Camaros after going to hydraulic clutches. I think itís odd they angle the transmission to get the clutch fork to clear the floor, when all they needed to do was rotate the pivot point. Perhaps there is an additional reason. Still, itís handy to know the transmission can function on an angle without lubrication problems.
George Champion

Ok to anyone who know's MG's:

I have a 1978 MGB that I have stripped to the main structure and am rebuilding from the ground up. I have driven it for about 6 months before doing so and I really wasn't impressed by the drive train (although the handling was excelent) and I love the car but hate the performance factor.

So I now would like to put a V8 into the vehicle to make this one a leader of the pack. I want to put a Ford 351W into it with a C-4 AOD tranny. But I don't know if it will fit. Seeing is how the ford is almost 3 times the size of the 1.8l stock 4 banger. If anyone knows on ford V8 conversions any or all info would be of great help.

Thank you
John Piwko

As a 1989 Camaro owner I just wanted to make a quick comment on the T5. All T5s used in the 3rd generation (1982-1992) Camaro/Firebird used a 'tilted' bellhousing. Therefore the tranny was tilted as well, but like what Bill was saying, the shifter was angled to be vertical. If I remember right the pad mount for the shifter was not tilted, but seemed that way when the tranny was mounted in the Camaro/Firebird because it was bolted to the bellhousing, that's why the shifter rod itself was angled. T5s in the Camaro/Firebirds started using hydraulic setups I believe in the late part of 1985. Starting in 1993 with the 4th generation Camaro/Firebirds the T-56 was introduced and the tranny sits vertical, not tilted like the T-5. Also there was a couple of different T-5 used. There were a total of 3 different ones used that I can think of. 1 was a T-5 that was used behind ALL V6 engines (2.8L & 3.1L) and had a 14 spline input shaf while the output shaft was 26 splines. For the V8s there are two types. One type being a NON-World Class T-5 that was used up till 88 or 89 in the Camaro/Firebird. In 88 or 89 The World Class T-5 was introduced. These T-5s used a 26 spline input/output shafts (Ford introduced the World Class I think in 1985). There is about a 50 ft/lbs difference between the two V8 T5s, which is why us Camaro/Firebird owners prefer the Word Class behind a V8. IMHO though the NON World Class will hold up just fine behind a 350 if treated right and not abused like what most V8 owners do with their cars.
Below I will put a website that has a lot of info on the T-5s and other manual trannies as well. It's a good site if you have a lot of questions about the T-5 and there is also a T-5 tag indentifer to tell you were your T-5 came from.
Sorry this got so long.

www.5speeds.com

Craig
Craig Skiles

JOHN,
I do not know the dimensions of the 351, but a 302 is a tight fit. no worse than a 215, just different issues to solve (headers, oil pan and oil filter being buggest) I will be quite honest, (this is purely my opinion) I would not recommend putting a 351 in it unless you want to use it as a dragster. The 302 will be 100lbs heavier up front than stock motor unless using the alum heads, a 351 could only be worse. I also thin the 351 is a larger outer dimensions so I think you will have problems fitting between the rails. a 302 has more power than a B can use effectively, I mean I see 215 guys getting the rear loose up through 4th gear, the car only has so much traction.. Sorry to rain on your parade, I hate telling people stuff like that (heck people told me a 302 would not fit..), but I think it would end up being major work and you would probably not get all the performance you might think out of it. I am already doubting I will get the full performance from my mild 302.

Course if you are doing a strip car, GO FOR IT!! tub the rear, shortened ford 9", tremec tranny, throw a vortec on it too, she would fly..
Larry Embrey

I'm a complete newbie at MGB-V8 conversions- I recently bought a sad-looking, '70 MGB with a newly rebuilt Buick 215 engine in it and a Muncie 4 sp. trans. The car needs a lot of help cosmetically but the main thing right now is that the Muncie must go- I have a WC T-5 from an '85 2.8 V-6 Camaro to fit in it's place.
I haven't got to the removal of the driveline yet, the project is on hold for the summer but can I ask if the T-5 will bolt up to the bell-housing in the same way as the Muncie?
Thanks, AJM
Anthony Morgan

More questions from a newbie:
Is there a choice of hydraulic throw out bearings for the 215 Buick/T-5 transmission combination? Are Tilton and Mcleod units the same- are there any others to choose from? Is it really neccessary to have a hydraulic t/o bearing for the above combination, could the original GM clutch fork and cylinder work without intruding into the footwell?
The car presently has a Muncie with a very unsatisfactory fork arrangement.
Thanks, AJM
Anthony Morgan

Anthony,
To the best of my knowledge, if a Muncie will bolt up, so will a T5. You must have an aftermarket bellhousing with the standard GM pattern, as opposed to the BOP pattern b.h. that came with the motor originally. Can't tell you if the two HTO bearings are the same, but I feel that you definitely need one. I don't mean to disrepect anyone who's successfully done it, but everything I've heard about trying to fabricate a clutch fork setup in this situation sounds like a bad way to go. For starts, the tunnel is way too narrow. I have many, many hours just in opening up the tunnel in my 68GT to provide clearance for the T5 using a McLeod HTO bearing.
Well, I'm off to Seattle tomorrow to get a Camaro tailshaft housing fitted to my T5, to remedy the problem I outlined at the start of this thread. That'll be a major hurdle overcome, and I'll be able to get my engine mounted solid.

Good luck, Joe
Joe Ullman

Hmm, I think I mis-spoke regarding bellhousing bolt patterns. The tranny to bellhousing pattern I think is the same between GM and BOP, but the bellhousing to engine bolt pattern is different. Regardless, the T5 should fit where the Muncie now is. Hopefully, haven't made myself sound even more ignorant.
Joe
Joe Ullman

Check the S-10 truck bell housing. It uses an internal hydraulic clutch slave with a T-5. I'm not sure if it can be changed over to another bell housing, but might be easier to adapt.
Bill Young

Wow lotsa info on this thread.
Joe Piwko try out the Canadian V-8 site for lots of Ford, Chevy, you name it conversions with pictures in MGs, Triumphs, etc.
Anthony, I have both the Muncie and T-5 trans and the bellhousing will bolt to either one.
Tracy

This thread was discussed between 17/06/2001 and 30/06/2001

MG MGB GT V8 Factory Originals Technical index

This thread is from the archives. Join the live MG MGB GT V8 Factory Originals Technical BBS now