engine/tranny question

Roboticist · PORT COLBORNE, ONT

engine/tranny question

Petebil · ONTARIO

Roboticist wrote:

So here's the questions: What transmission do I look for? Will it fit the existing drive shaft yolk?

It depends if it's hard boiled or poached. wink

Roboticist · PORT COLBORNE, ONT

Yea, ok smart guy. ;)

Spell check doesn't like me.

Petebil · ONTARIO

Sorry, couldn't resist. biggrin

427CARL · CLINTON, ONT

Roboticist wrote:
Hey guys.
I am in the midst of buying a donor truck to use the frame for my '52 Mercury build. I'm looking at a 96 Ranger at the moment.
I'm also looking at a 1969 Inline 6 to put in the truck. It comes with a 3 speed manual, but I need an automatic (For various reasons).
So here's the questions: What transmission do I look for? Will it fit the existing drive shaft yolk? Will it fit the cross member or will I need to modify?
I already know the existing transmission will not fit. It's electronically controlled and does not fit the Ford small block pattern. I know the engine will fit the frame with a few clever modifications to the engine mounts. Exhaust should clear if I go with stock exhaust on the inline 6.
Any suggestions?
Thanks in advance.

Can you not use the Ranger automatic and adapt the 6 cylinder to it ?

Roboticist · PORT COLBORNE, ONT

As mentioned, the tranny is electronically controlled and won't fit a sbf engine. I don't know of any adaptor kits, and I also don't know how to control an electronic transmission with a carburetted engine from the 60's.

If anyone knows how, or with what, I'm all ears!

Thanks!

shag766 · FOXBORO, ONT

if there is an o/d that fits it now is the time.
? what size 6 are you using. i had 3 or 4 300ci's years ago in delivery trucks and was more than happy with them.
? #2-lol, what direction are you going with the build using that frame and the mec cab?
-
just curious. i like the father/son christmas gift format. rick

-- Edited by shag766 on Thursday 21st of April 2016 11:32:44 PM

Roboticist · PORT COLBORNE, ONT

I am looking at a 240 for sale here locally.

The truck is going to be a 52 Merc cab and hood with 1928 Chev car front fenders (See avatar pic). I want a flatbed with stakeside. I need the inline 6 to clear the bodywork we're building. My son gave me the cab for Christmas and is in process repairing the rust. We're also replacing the stock hinges someone cut with a torch. We figured out that VW Beetle hinges will fit just fine. Also the door latch and window regulator should fit with minor modifications. The bear claw latch should be a bit safer as well. I'll start a build thread as soon as I have more interesting pictures and progress to show.

I need this truck to have automatic so I can drive it. Yes, I can drive stick, very well in fact, but recent health issues require that I get it automatic (No clutch). The truck's current automatic (1996 Ranger) is mated to a much smaller engine and is not compatible with the bolt pattern of the inline 6. It is also electronically controlled, so unless the kit to attach the motor also comes with a transmission computer it's a no -go situation.

Here's my questions again. Please help where you can:

What transmission do I look for?

Will it fit the existing drive shaft yoke?

Will it fit the cross member or will I need to modify?

One further question: Would anyone like the 3 speed manual that's attached to the engine in trade for an automatic?

Thanks for any help you guys can give.

Petebil · ONTARIO

When you do decide on a drivetrain, don't use anything from 95-96. These were transition years when OEM went from OBD1 to OBD2 which means the transmissions had many unique , 1 year only parts that can be expensive when rebuilding. The GM 4L60E is a good example. The easy way would be to put in a GM engine and trans because there's so much information out there on these swaps. Being a Merc truck, I'm sure you want to keep it all Ford. I would too. You basically have 3 choices;
A- Late model all computerized engine/trans from a donor truck which includes harness and computer.
B- 92ish or earlier engine with OD hydraulic transmission
C-Pre-emission era engine and trans
If it was me, I would chose A. You'll have a nice driveable truck that you wont be wrenching on everyday.
Just remember, if you choose A or B you will need to run all emission controls that come from the donor vehicle to be legal.

Roboticist · PORT COLBORNE, ONT

Thanks Petebil.

I have considered all these options. Since I'll be using an original style fuel tank from the 52, using emissions controls is a moot point. I am an electronics tech with many years experience including engine swaps and computer mods. I prefer a carb. I have driven both types of vehicle as well, and even if a carb gets fouled it can still get you home to fix it. A blown computer will leave you on the side of the road every time, and it's usually a surprise. The last thing I want is a spaghetti factory under my hood and having to pay the driveclean tax to drive this truck. It will be registered as a 52 and have an early engine in it.

I will be staying away from modern Ford transmissions. I just don't want the headaches.

GM is not an option for me. Personal reasons.

So now I just need to know which trans to look for and if the yoke and crossmember will fit.

Thanks.

chips · Veteran Member

From info gleaned from your post it, I believe the engine you intend to use is a Ford inline six that has a sbf bell housing bolt pattern. Isn't the simple answer "you need to find an automatic with a SBF bolt pattern". If that is correct, just locate an old C4, three speed auto from a SBF.

As for "will it fit the existing drive shaft yoke and will the cross member fit?" questions ... WAY too much depends on the cross member question but I'll stick my neck out and state "I doubt there is ANY chance that the factory stock location of the Ranger trans cross member will be acceptable for your intended engine/trans/body/fender installation". You need to do a total mock-up of the chassis, with the body in position AND the fenders you intend to use, so you can then determine where you need your engine and trans to sit ... THEN you build a trans cross member and engine mounts.

As for the yoke .... no idea if it the one you have will fit into a C4 (if that's what you end up using), but that is NOT a huge issue to deal with as any decent drive shaft company can help you with either modifying your existing shaft, building you a new one, changing one end of the shaft, or using a dual pattern U-joint as well as supply you with the correct yoke for a C4.

Roboticist · PORT COLBORNE, ONT

Thanks Chips!

Yes, exactly. This is the information I was looking for.

I suppose I need to mount a few things to get the spacing right, so I agree there. Also, I knew if I used a different tranny I'd wind up modifying SOME thing or other. Sure would be nicer (read cheaper) if I could just bolt on existing stuff though. I know from my reading that some people put sbf engines into the Ranger. I just haven't found details yet on what parts, other than custom engine mounts.

So now I'll just look for a C4 transmission, unbalanced flex plate, and yoke from a donor vehicle or scrap yard.

Anyone have something like that laying around?

Thanks!

Roboticist · PORT COLBORNE, ONT

Well, interesting day.

I never got the seller top get back to me, so I looked again locally. I now have a 1998 F150 with 4.2L and 4R70W transmission. Good price, and the body and bed are going back to the same wrecker once I remove them. I have read that it's possible to control this trans with an external box and a throttle position sensor.

Anyone have any experience with running a 4R70W transmission with a carb engine?

It would save me some fabrication to re-use this trans with my carb engine.

Thanks!

hotrod-steve · PORT ROWAN, ONT

You may find that the 52 body is too wide for the ranger frame. I just bought a ranger frame that had a 53 Ford cab on it and the body was way too wide. Ranger frames have a narrow track-about 62 in. Better break out the measuring tape before you get too far. -just sayin.

Petebil · ONTARIO

Just curious, but why do you want to make things so difficult? If you're going to use that 98 transmission, then drop the 98 engine in as well and have the OEM computer run them both. If you're dead set on using an older carbureted engine, then run an old style hydraulic transmission. If this was a GM transmission, I say go for it because there's plenty of support out there for oddball swaps, but being a Ford, you're gonna have a hard time finding help/info. IMO, you're opening an expensive can of worms for yourself.

Roboticist · PORT COLBORNE, ONT

hotrod-steve wrote:
You may find that the 52 body is too wide for the ranger frame. I just bought a ranger frame that had a 53 Ford cab on it and the body was way too wide. Ranger frames have a narrow track-about 62 in. Better break out the measuring tape before you get too far. -just sayin.

Yup. Figured that out. That's why I got the F150 frame. Thanks.

Roboticist · PORT COLBORNE, ONT

Petebil wrote:
Just curious, but why do you want to make things so difficult? If you're going to use that 98 transmission, then drop the 98 engine in as well and have the OEM computer run them both. If you're dead set on using an older carbureted engine, then run an old style hydraulic transmission. If this was a GM transmission, I say go for it because there's plenty of support out there for oddball swaps, but being a Ford, you're gonna have a hard time finding help/info. IMO, you're opening an expensive can of worms for yourself.

Simply put, because I don't have a 98 engine or computer. All I have is a frame with transmission.

The transmission doesn't look too hard to set up. There's aftermarket stuff to make them run, but there's also a $20 solution using a programmable chip. Since I'm an electronic tech I might give that a go.

Wires and computers don't scare me. I just prefer a carb to a computer. With a vintage truck it allows me to forgo the driveclean tax as well. With the programmable transmission I get to control performance vs. fuel mileage. Can't do that easily with a hydraulic trans.

Hope this answers your question.

Petebil · ONTARIO

An electronic transmission will need a lot more than just a TPS to get it to run smoothly. You have the lockup converter to control as well as the overdrive, not to mention the controller needs to have inputs like a MAP for load, VSS for speed etc...and it has to tell the transmission when and how hard to shift.An electronic transmission is basically a bunch of electric solenoids waiting for an signal. You ain't gonna do that with a $20 chip. Hey, if you want to re-engineer the wheel, I say go for it and keep us posted. I for one would be very interested how it works out.

Roboticist · PORT COLBORNE, ONT

So, what you're saying is, don't do this:

http://www.picaxeforum.co.uk/showthread.php?24190-4r70w-ford-transmission-controller-20x2

hotrod-steve · PORT ROWAN, ONT

I would go with an older 302 and hydrolic overdrive trans. Im not familiar with Fords but I have run 305 Chevs with overdrives and got good mileage. My 57 would get 25+ mpg .

henrys57wagon · WOODLAWN, ONT

I say go with your dream. If all the inventors/ dreamers played it safe and did status quo we would still be walking. I was told some things I did on my 57 would not work but I did them and have been enjoying them for almost 10 years. GO FOR IT.

Petebil · ONTARIO

Roboticist wrote:
So, what you're saying is, don't do this:
http://www.picaxeforum.co.uk/showthread.php?24190-4r70w-ford-transmission-controller-20x2

I'm saying do whatever you want. After all the screwing around you'll have to do to get that electronic transmission working , all you're going to have at the end is something that will be no better than a C4. Have at it and keep us posted.

chips · Veteran Member

Petebil wrote:

I'm saying do whatever you want. After all the screwing around you'll have to do to get that electronic transmission working , all you're going to have at the end is something that will be no better than a C4. Have at it and keep us posted.

Completely agree with this.

Are you honestly really going to drive this truck enough and under the correct conditions to the point of actually utilizing the benefits of an overdrive trans over the simplicity of installation and operation of an early C4 automatic trans? I doubt it.

Roboticist · PORT COLBORNE, ONT

chips wrote:
Petebil wrote:

I'm saying do whatever you want. After all the screwing around you'll have to do to get that electronic transmission working , all you're going to have at the end is something that will be no better than a C4. Have at it and keep us posted.

Completely agree with this.

Are you honestly really going to drive this truck enough and under the correct conditions to the point of actually utilizing the benefits of an overdrive trans over the simplicity of installation and operation of an early C4 automatic trans? I doubt it.

Chips, I'm disappointed. You have no idea how I intend to use this truck. It's going to be a daily driver and work truck. I intend to haul stuff and possibly drive cross Canada with my lovely wife. Therefore, yes, I am honestly going to see benefit from an overdrive transmission. If I can make it work the way I think I can, I can do better than the C4 for this application.

I realize you guys have a lot of experience with cars, especially hotrods. A few of you may even be real mechanics. I really appreciate that, but please, don't assume because it's a hotrod that I'm not going to use this thing for my daily life. Also, don't assume it will take me forever to do a little control job like turning a few solenoids on or off really fast. Just look at my screen name. It's not just a nick name, it's what I do for a living.

So unless you have something constructive to add please quit trying to get me to change my mind to something "simpler" just because you can't do it. Perhaps if I decide to make this work I'll have a simple but saleable item I could help all you guys out with, especially if I can do it cheaper than the other manufacturers. Or, perhaps I'll just decide to keep you all in the dark from here.

Remember, my truck, my plans, my applications.

Thanks for the input.

chips · Veteran Member

If you haven't already done this, I suggest you search out and verify there is an insurance company willing to insure, as a daily driver/work truck, a vehicle made up of a 90's frame, 50's cab with 20's fenders powered by a 60's engine BEFORE you proceed with said plans. If you are able to find insurance other than the typical "limited yearly mileage, shows and parades only" insurance for something built from so many donor vehicles (read that "highly modified"), I'd be very surprised and if you aren't able to find daily insurance ... then overdrive really IS (in my opinion) virtually (if not entirely) pointless. Don't for a second think that getting insurance is going to be easy either and yes, I do have a personal example for you .... I have a partially finished Manx clone VW dune buggy that I have now found out NO ONE will insure. Not even the specialty insurers like Lant/Hagerty under their "custom wheels" program. The only people with insurance on these things (dune buggies) is due to their policy being continued (read that "grandfathered in") because these same insurance companies (and apparently all others) are now refusing to start a new policy for dune buggies. Either that or they (the owners of VW dune buggies) have illegally misrepresented the vehicle (on the ownership and to the insurer) and are insuring it as a VW bug (the typical donor vehicle for a dune buggy) which leaves them open to being charged for fraudulently titling the vehicle as well as having the vehicle impounded.

As for the overdrive vs no overdrive, I've had both a three speed auto TH350 and a T5 five speed stick (fifth being overdrive) in the SAME CAR. Started with the TH350, swapped to the T5, swapped back to the TH350. All this in a truly daily driven late 30s GM "rod", complete with trailer hitch for dump runs and hauling the boat and trailer to the cottage with. If the rear is geared correctly, I (based on my own personal experience) do NOT believe you will see a tremendous or worthwhile benefit using an overdrive trans over a regular three speed auto like a C4. Basically this ... if you think the mileage is going to go from 19 mpg with the three speed to 32 mpg with the overdrive .... you ARE mistaken.

My feeling is that regardless how capable you are of installing an electronically controlled overdrive transmission, I truly believe the actual real world benefit to you (over a simple and cheap "old school" 3pd auto) will be so minimal to the point of being not worth it.

As for being disappointed in me .... I've gotten used to that kinda stuff over the years .... nothing new smile

Sorry if this post or my previous one offended you. I shall remain silent from this point on.

-- Edited by chips on Monday 25th of April 2016 11:32:37 AM

Roboticist · PORT COLBORNE, ONT

Yup.

Already talked to my insurance company. No issues here. It's not a fibreglass kit car, and the welds are being done by a currently certified welder. It will pass any inspection including a type 6. The frame is not being modified and the cab will be all original Ford, so no problem putting a Ford cab on a Ford frame, regardless of year. As long as I get all my ducks in a row this vehicle will be a daily driver, just like any other hotrod could be if done correctly.

Sorry to hear about the Manx. They are nice cars, and yes, I've heard of the trouble. That's why I talked to the MTO and my insurance agent FIRST.

Gwillyville Kid · BRADFORD, ONT

There is a 292 Chev 6 for sale in Parts For Sale by Redneck Rydes. Add a 700r4 or 200 4r, run an HEI or points, carburetor(s) and away you go. The U joint to join Chevy to your Ford rear axle is just a visit to a Good Parts guy away. NO emission concerns , lotsa torque, Not a Bad fit. Hopefully I did not hit the Ford in a Ford button. Good Luck.

Roboticist · PORT COLBORNE, ONT

I appreciate the input. The drive system is all sorted out now.

240 L6 with AOD transmission. Should drive nicely.