6 cylinder/ T-5 combo ?

With all the talk on this board about mileage lately, I had an interesting thought ... has anyone swapped in a T-5 manual tranny behind a 6 cylinder?

I did a search, but did not see this previously being discussed.

I bet it would make a really good combination for mileage and driveability. With the really steep first gear in these, it would work fine with the stock 2.73 or 3.00 rear gears. You could even get away with the weaker non-World Class earlier version, so that you aren't paying a premium for the heavy-duty one.

I would bet that a 170 could get 30 mpg on the highway with overdrive and stock gears.

The bellhousing would be the big issue as I see it. The rear pattern on a six is different than on a V8, right?

There is a company that has a line of modular bells that can adapt virtually any motor/trans combo, but I can't remember who right now.

 

...you think the 6 cyl. could pull the 5th gear...

...Frank...

 

Sure ... just not from 10mph ...

Most cars only need something like 40 HP to maintain highway speeds. It's getting up there that takes the grunt.

Something to think about would be passing gear. Probably would have to drop to third in a lot of cases.

 

If you have a 250 six a T5 should bolt right up with the correct parts (flywheel, clutch, etc..) The 250 had the same engine to trans bolt pattern as Ford's small block V8's. The T5 can be bolted to a 200 six but requires a different bell housing and adapter plate. There's alot of info on this swap at Fordsix.com

 

It's been done many times. A T5 will bolt right up to a 250. You need a 0 balance flywheel for a 302, which of course was never a factory produced part, but several aftermarket company's have them. And then take your pick of the many 5.0 Mustang clutches.

The late model (early 80's) 200's also have a partial SBF pattern. Only the top two holes don't line up, but it's very easy to get around.

 

Plenty of late model 4 cylinders have OD... I would hope a 6 could use it.

 

What about an AOD? I've got one sitting in my garage out of an 89GT that would make a nice addition to the Comet.

 

I think the aod's eat too much power.

If I remember right someone just discussed this

 

Would they be a compatible swap otherwise? (motor mounts, water pump, etc...)

Are those fuel injected, too?

If so, a T5 hooked to one of these could be the best gas mileage combo you could wring out of a Mav.

 

There is a company that makes an entire kit for this swap as well, they're listed on fordsix.com somewhere.

 

The rest of the engine is pretty much the same as any other 200, IIRC. They were not fuel injected.

 

My son has an 81 200...
It definately has a different bellhousing.
I was looking at this a while back, but gave up due to the short lived, and oddball bellhousing.
I hope what you say is true Jamie. That'd be cool.

From what I can tell, the 81 200 is setup the same as the earlier ones.
There are 3 huge differences:
1: Bellhousing as mentioned.
2: DS2 ignition (this might not be different for 76-77 200s )
3: The carb studs are spaced differently.

We put a 250 Maverick RBS on his 200, and it works soooooo much better than the crappy Holley 1945 that came on it.

Everything else is same AFAIK.
The 81 had a huge amount of emissions plumbing. Gone now.

Jamie:
If all the side bolts can go up to the 200, on an SBF tranny, can an adapter setup be fabbed to secure the top 2?
Also, the starter placement on the SBF is way different than his late 200.
I suppose it doesn't really matter? It would just be clocked differently...


Thanks for the info...

 

Here is a link to the Ford Six site that describes what needs to be done: http://fordsix.com/tech/engine/bigbell.php

The stud spacing on the carb is easy to change, just swap the carb spacer that bolts to the head. The Duraspark II has nothing to do with the long block itself, just the distributor. The distributors are interchangeable throughout the 70's and early 80's.

 

Good link.

He says the SBF flywheel needs to be drilled to match the 200's crank bolt pattern. I thought the flywheels were interchangeable?
Or is that just SBF to 250?

 

If the 250 straight 6 and the 302 have the same transmission bolt pattern. I would think that the T-5 would be just fine. Granted, the HP would be down, but the extra torque from the inline 6 should make up for the difference. I know we are not talking about a street terror here, but a daily driver with this set up and the right gears could produce some decent MPG numbers. But in the long run, I would stiill choose a modest/hyd. roller 302 V8 T-5/AOD set up. The I-6 will work harder to make the power,thus burn mor fuel. The 302 set up will work less to produce the same power burning less fuel (with a light foot). I had a hard time with the "light foot " when I went from a I-6 to a V-8 in my car in the late 80's (damn I feel old now) the V-8 was stock out of a 72 Mav 2 bbl. I had a I-6 250 before the swap. I was shocked that I was going loner without filling up after the engine swap. Wow, I went way off into this,............I'll just see were this goes from here.