TREMEC T-45

7173Mustangs.com

Help Support 7173Mustangs.com:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
Joined
Feb 19, 2011
Messages
1,228
Reaction score
4
Location
Southern Arizona
My Car
1971 Mustang Grande,
1973 MAch 1
I have run the standby T-5 behind 302/5.0 engines without problem and have a T-5 from a 1994 3.8 V-6 Mustang to put behind a straight six in my daughters Ranchero. I have an oportunity to buy a T-45 from a 1998 Mustang with a 4.6 and 200,000 miles. I have a couple of questions.

#1 I would imagine that the bellhousing of a 4.6 and a 302/351C would be different but I have no definative facts on that. Anyone know?

#2 Will a T-45 transmission bolt up to a bellhousing from a 5.0 T-5 combo?

#3 What would be a reasonable price to pay for a T-45?

#4 At 200,000 miles would there be any extreme concern of anything being beyond service or repair?

 
Steven

From what I found out the T-45 will not bolt to the 302 bell, different pattern.

A T-45 will also not bolt to the T-5 /5.0 bell. I was told when I started to look at the swap myself that if I wanted the least amount of hassel to stick with a pre 94 tranny.

 
I had a 97 mustang cobra with a T 45

They were not that great of a trans

I would look for a T5

Don

 
What you need to be aware of is the length of the input shaft is about 3/4" longer on the 6 cyl T-5. This is the trans I want to use for that reason. The 3.8 bell does have the same small block bolt pattern.
Jeff

Correct me if I'm wrong but I think with a 5.0 T-5 as is we have to shorten the drive shaft approx. 1" so with a longer input shaft doesn't that throw it out more?

 
What you need to be aware of is the length of the input shaft is about 3/4" longer on the 6 cyl T-5. This is the trans I want to use for that reason. The 3.8 bell does have the same small block bolt pattern.
Okay, so I have a T-5 from a 94 v-6 3.8 that I plan on using for my daughter's Ranchero.

#1 - Why is the 3/4" difference a good thing?

#2 - The W/C T-5 from this application is rated at 175-230 foot pounds while a 5.0 T-5 is rated at 300 foot pounds. What gives it the increase in rating? Evidently this V-6 T-5 can be built to handle the power/torque.

#3 - So is the bellhousing completely the same. Starter, fork, etc.?

 
What you need to be aware of is the length of the input shaft is about 3/4" longer on the 6 cyl T-5. This is the trans I want to use for that reason. The 3.8 bell does have the same small block bolt pattern.
Jeff

Correct me if I'm wrong but I think with a 5.0 T-5 as is we have to shorten the drive shaft approx. 1" so with a longer input shaft doesn't that throw it out more?
Yes it will but since the shaft has to be cut anyway. I planned to use an aluminum driveshaft out of an early 00's Ranger .



Okay, so I have a T-5 from a 94 v-6 3.8 that I plan on using for my daughter's Ranchero.

#1 - Why is the 3/4" difference a good thing?

#2 - The W/C T-5 from this application is rated at 175-230 foot pounds while a 5.0 T-5 is rated at 300 foot pounds. What gives it the increase in rating? Evidently this V-6 T-5 can be built to handle the power/torque.

#3 - So is the bellhousing completely the same. Starter, fork, etc.?
I like that since I'm kinda long legged and like to "sprawl out" in the car. I have moved my seats back 3". The shifter position being back a little bit couldn't hurt. The V-6 T-5 has the same torque rating as the 5.0 T-5 of the same vintage, 300lb/ft IIRC from the chart I have. Yes the bellhousing is just a little deeper than the V8. It does use a 164 tooth flywheel though.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
T-5 is a good transmission as long as you're not putting out too much torque. Look at a performance rebuild or a Tremec 3550 or stronger if you're serious about power.

 
Back
Top