ned
|
| posted on 8/3/05 at 10:50 AM |
|
|
long input shaft type 9 boxes..
I've been contemplating getting hold of one of these, I know what cars they come out of, just wondered whether I really need one or not.
I understand the ratio's are better than the standard type 9 and the box will be slightly further back in the chassis due to the 20mm approx
longer input shaft. mating with my bellhousing isn't an issue as I'll make up a small sandwich plate to suit.
Obviously this'll get the weight further back in the car which is what I'm after and the gearstick position should be better.
any other thoughts anyone?
I hope my engine will produce circa 240-250bhp so I will need to put uprated internals in it anyway, so is it worth it over a standard type 9 that I
already have? the longer nose box was used in v6's so was designed ot take more power with the mainshaft being better supported. can anyone also
tell me if the front plate of the gearbox is the same as a standard type 9 ie will my hydraulic clutch fit ont he front of the box the same as the
normal type 9?
thanks,
Ned.
beware, I've got yellow skin
|
|
|
|
|
NS Dev
|
| posted on 8/3/05 at 11:37 AM |
|
|
With that power Ned I wouldn't worry. Whatever box you start with will need to be gutted and it's internals replaced with uprated ones
from Quaife etc, in which case all the internals which matter will be changed anyway!
A std XE producing 200hp will dramatically limit a type 9's life expectancy, even in a 7. In a car weighing 800kg (my RWD 205 Pug) a heavy duty
type 9 (long input one)seemed to last about a week behind a 200hp XE engine.
I'm confused by your sandwich plate comment? Presumably you are using an aftermarket type 9 to XE bellhousing (as I am) in which case these are
available to suit either long or short input shaft boxes, and 7 degree slant or vertical installation, so you needn't make up the plate!
|
|
|
ned
|
| posted on 8/3/05 at 11:52 AM |
|
|
NS Dev,
I already have a short type9-xe bellhousing, hence with a longer input shaft box i'd need to make a plate to suit the difference.
Ned.
beware, I've got yellow skin
|
|
|
stressy
|
| posted on 8/3/05 at 01:19 PM |
|
|
For the hassle of making up an adaptor plate (which will have some weight) and given for the power youll be getting a HD bearing and gearset anyway
its probably not worth it, allyou will gain is a 10mm move,movement in the cg of the box. why not go for the short box and move the engine instead if
thats your aim?
WHO DARES SPINS
|
|
|
ned
|
| posted on 8/3/05 at 01:20 PM |
|
|
transmission tunnel is already modified and engine is already back against the bulkhead..
Ned.
beware, I've got yellow skin
|
|
|
NS Dev
|
| posted on 8/3/05 at 01:21 PM |
|
|
Also, if you really want the long input shaft, then those bellhousings are worth s/h more or less what they are new, so you may as well sell it and
get a long input one.
|
|
|
Mr G
|
| posted on 8/3/05 at 01:30 PM |
|
|
I just wrote an essay and had'nt logged in so lost the lot 
If by uprated internals you mean a straight cut kit + uprated bearings then i'll just point out that tran-x no longer do a straight cut input
shaft for long length.
You'll be supprised what a hammering a type 9 can take. Alloy casing with uprated bearings is the way to go though. Pity flowtech went under.
Cheers
G
Edit : billys going the same way with making up a spacer.
[Edited on 8/3/05 by Mr G]
|
|
|
britishtrident
|
| posted on 8/3/05 at 01:32 PM |
|
|
I think I start by getting hold of a T5 box a type 9 even with straight cut internals is iffy at that kind of power level.
|
|
|
flak monkey
|
| posted on 8/3/05 at 01:43 PM |
|
|
According to burtons the Clubman Quaife type 9 internals are good for upto 175BHP. The heavy duty Quaife gear kit is good for upto 275BHP. Will set
you back a tasty £1100 though...or £1875 for a complete box... 
Anyone know what power the standard internals are ok to in a Locost?
I remember back axles being covered, and the conclusion being they dont really need uprating due to being able to spin the wheels easier in a Locost
than a normal car, therefore max torque through the axle wont be that much more than normal....(though i am not sure what power that applied up
to)...so why the problem with the gearboxes?
David
PS sorry for the slight hijack...
Sera
http://www.motosera.com
|
|
|
ned
|
| posted on 8/3/05 at 01:54 PM |
|
|
already bought a cossie t5 box, but sold it on as it was big, heavy and didn't fit anywhere near my transmission tunnel and there wasn't a
bellhousing commercially available for it.
Ned.
ps i believe the most powerful thing ford every hooked a type 9 box upto as standard was the v6's which were around 150bhp iirc. They would have
used the longer input shaft version though, standard type 9's would only have very had to cope with a pinto as changed to mt75 before dohc or
anythig else cam along afaik.
[Edited on 8/3/05 by ned]
beware, I've got yellow skin
|
|
|
ady8077
|
| posted on 8/3/05 at 02:10 PM |
|
|
Hi Ned
Have you seen BGH geartech?
http://members.aol.com/dvandrews/bghpage.htm
Theres a few members of the sylva list using them, the heavy duty range should cope with your power in a seven
Adrian
|
|
|
britishtrident
|
| posted on 8/3/05 at 03:23 PM |
|
|
With most boxes (don't know about the type9 ) after you uprate the gears the casing tends to be the limmiting factor it has to be strong enough
to hold the gears in mesh
|
|
|
ned
|
| posted on 8/3/05 at 03:53 PM |
|
|
I believe the quaife/tranx type alloy top cover is supposed to increase the rigidty of the box to address these types of issue. There is of course the
complete ally casing to be had, though reasonably costly and i don't know what structural improvements it gives if any, main advantage is weight
reduction of course..
Ned.
beware, I've got yellow skin
|
|
|
GeoffT
|
| posted on 8/3/05 at 05:24 PM |
|
|
Quote;-
I hope my engine will produce circa 240-250bhp so I will need to put uprated internals in it anyway, so is it worth it over a standard type 9 that I
already have? the longer nose box was used in v6's so was designed ot take more power with the mainshaft being better supported. can anyone also
tell me if the front plate of the gearbox is the same as a standard type 9 ie will my hydraulic clutch fit ont he front of the box the same as the
normal type 9?
Quote;
Ned,
I've currently got a shortshaft AND a longshaft T9 sitting on the floor of my workshop with their bellhousings removed. If you like I can
put them side by side and take some photos of the front ends so you can make comparisions. Let me know, it may a day or two before I can get round to
it though.
Geoff.
|
|
|
NS Dev
|
| posted on 8/3/05 at 06:42 PM |
|
|
The only difference at the front (other than the long input shaft!) is the "boss" at the end of the layshaft. The end of the gearbox
casing is machined out bigger and instead of needle roller bearings running directly in the end of the box casing, they run in a machined boss bolted
into the larger machined hole in the front of the casing.
|
|
|
Mr G
|
| posted on 8/3/05 at 07:42 PM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by NS Dev
The only difference at the front (other than the long input shaft!) is the "boss" at the end of the layshaft. The end of the gearbox
casing is machined out bigger and instead of needle roller bearings running directly in the end of the box casing, they run in a machined boss bolted
into the larger machined hole in the front of the casing.
2lt
v6 bellhousing recess for bolt on layshaft cover
|
|
|
Stu16v
|
| posted on 8/3/05 at 08:11 PM |
|
|
IMHO I wouldn't bother with the V6 type 9.
The boxes do break, but it does depend on how they are being used. The Quaife Clubman kit - in theory at least - cannot cope with a standard XE in
decent tune, but to be fair, Quaife are probably expecting the box to end up in a Mk2 Escort to be thrashed to within an inch of it's life...
The life of the box in a Locost is highly likely to be far easier on the box. The other thing that 'kills' a type 9 is revs. the
'Professional' kit has bearings where the clubman/standard doesn't, and goes a long way to assisting relaibility.
To unleash 240bhp, you will be wanting to rev it Ned. But realistically, how often will you actually *get* to rev it that hard?
My Clubman kit has been fitted nearly a year now, on the back of a (ATM) standard XE on carbs. In that time, it has done well over a thousand track
day miles, and even more on the road.
*touches wood*
So far, it has been fine. If I am really giving the motor some revs, I do my utmost to ensure that I don't just 'smash' the
gearstick into the next gear, IYSWIM, just to give the syncros a fighting chance. Which is another valid point - dont be too hasty fitting a quick
shift. shortening the gearstick will be more than enough - and your syncro's will thank you for it.
HTH Stu.
[Edited on 8/3/05 by Stu16v]
Dont just build it.....make it!
|
|
|
APR
|
| posted on 8/3/05 at 10:19 PM |
|
|
have fitted v6 type 9 box to a zetec 1.8 by modding the input shaft after that it fitted ok, should hopefully be trying it at the weekend!!!:
|
|
|
ned
|
| posted on 9/3/05 at 10:22 AM |
|
|
ok, so you've convinced me that a v6 type 9 would be a waste of time and money as I need the uprated internals anyway.
Stu, I hear what you're saying but think I'd be chancing my luck with the clubman kit if my engine does make the sort of power I'm
hoping for.
Next question I guess then is which uprated kit should I go for? At the moment I'm going to be running a 3.92 dif and 14" wheels with yoko
a539's
I'm not too fussed about top speed, more midrange, I think I know what ratio's would suite best as I've played around with various
options with the quaife gear speed calc.
I think a straight cut dog box would be a bit OTT but I see listed on raldes there is a helical option, is this the best option with a synchro box or
am i talking b*ll*cks? Not at the buying stage yet, but what is a heavy duty operating block and are steel baulk rings needed? With the heavy duty kit
I assume the issues stu raises about a quick shift wouldn't apply?
thanks,
Ned.
[Edited on 9/3/05 by ned]
beware, I've got yellow skin
|
|
|
NS Dev
|
| posted on 9/3/05 at 11:08 AM |
|
|
It all depends on how much you want/can afford to pay Ned.
All the normal Quaife boxes are straight cut (as are the "normal" Tran-X ones)
Basically, bottom of the price and strength ladder is the clubman synchro kit as per Stu's post above.
Next is the Pro Synchro Kit, much stronger but much more expensive as it replaces the mainshaft
Next is a dog-engagement box, ultra strong but a pain when you're not driving at "full bore" (I have used one, I know!!)
With the synchro options, you can opt for steel baulk rings, but I wouldn't! They need regular finddling and when we tried them in the rally
car, were never as clean shifting as the std Ford ones, but they don't break!
Top of the list is the sequential dog engaged box, which is what we eventually used on the rally car, but it's around 5 grand if my memory
serves em right.
If you really are going to make 250 hp (so you'll have the Doug Kiddey steel crank, Arrow con-rods and accralite/omega slipper pistons then,
with the £2500 bill that goes with those!) then you will need the Quaife/tran-X Pro kit, which is basically a grand, and good for 275 hp ish. With a
£4000 engine, a £1000 gearbox is not really an issue.
In most motorsport, the gearbox is by FAR the most expensive part of the car. I remember somebody I used to know from rallying circles being very
happy as they had just got a bargain of a Ford motorsport 7 speed sequential gearbox for their Escort GpA Cosworth, it was only £27,000
secondhand!!
I also remember going to a GT race with my mate (the one who runs Ultima) a couple of years ago to see an Ultima racing. It was in the pits with the
gearbox being worked on. Apparently they had problems as they had got a cheap Hewland and it had done rather a lot of work, but it only cost them
£15,000 so they couldn't complain!!!!!!!!!
|
|
|
ned
|
| posted on 9/3/05 at 11:18 AM |
|
|
Well,
As said I hope to be making 240-250 but i won't be using all those expensive bits you mention, but I don't want to get sidetracked by
engine spec, been there already on another forum recently arguing the point..
I've heard a lot of people say the straight cut boxes are very noisey/whiney for road use and I gather that straight cut gears are in fact
weaker than helical ones. The main advantage as I see it is shift speed as they mesh quicker + easier.
A 6 speed sequential would be nice, but not within my grasp at the moment or forseeable future! I watched the one that went on ebay recently for
£3k
But what is the 'heavy duty operating block' ? it's not hte casing as that is listed seperately..
And roughly how long do/would the standard baulk rings last? (obviously use dependant)
Ned.
beware, I've got yellow skin
|
|
|
NS Dev
|
| posted on 9/3/05 at 02:02 PM |
|
|
The std baulk rings "last" fine, in that they don't tend to wear too badly but they can split suddenly if you hash a gearchange.
Straight cut gears can be stronger or weaker than Helical, it depends on the dimensions of the teeth. For a gievn gearbox like the type 9, the
straight cut is stronger, and doesn't put (as much) end load on the bearings.
|
|
|
NS Dev
|
| posted on 9/3/05 at 02:04 PM |
|
|
The heavy duty operating block is the bit on the selector shft of a type 9 'box that operates the selector forks. it is normally a block
roll-pinned to the selector shaft, with a hardened pin pressed into the side of it to move the selectors.
The std block apparently can break (though I have not seen it happen) and quaife machine a one piece one (where the "pin" is machined from
the same piece as the block)
The gears don't actually come in and out of mesh in a synchro 'box, so the fact they are straight cut makes no odds at all to the shift,
they are meshed all the time anyway. The synchro is what makes the gearshift quicker or slower (I won't go into the detail of how it works, but
the little teeth on the edge of the mainshaft gears are what do the meshing and driving) and using dog engagement instead of synchro means the shift
is much faster, as the synchro doesn't have to spin the gears up before they engage the synchro sleeves.
[Edited on 9/3/05 by NS Dev]
|
|
|
ned
|
| posted on 9/3/05 at 02:08 PM |
|
|
so my best option would be a straight cut synchro box then if I don't mind the noise it makes?!
Thanks for the explanations NS Dev.
Ned.
beware, I've got yellow skin
|
|
|
NS Dev
|
| posted on 9/3/05 at 02:10 PM |
|
|
Yes, in a nutshell that's it.
It is noisy, but it will take the power.
|
|
|
fastavatar.jpg){kind=avatar}
