|
|
05-29-2006, 09:10 AM
|
#1
|
|
I should be WORKING now
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Eastern Ontario
Posts: 4,791
|
taller tranny
(* motivated by SVOBoy's Project: KDA (Engine and Auto to Manual Swap)
Exactly when I would make the time to do this, I don't know. I already have too many projects stacked up in a holding pattern over the airport.
But, I figure: start this thread and maybe it'll motivate me or someone else.
Last edited by MetroMPG : 11-28-2007 at 01:04 PM.
|
|
|
|
05-29-2006, 09:15 AM
|
#2
|
|
*shrug*
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 7,406
|
Man, your gear ratios suck! 
Anyway, I'd def do it, I'm already loving the rpm change from my own conversion. With this you can go faster at the same rpm level, which doesn't mean you should go faster, but means that places where you might be forced to go faster will not take such a toll on your total FE. |
|
|
|
|
05-29-2006, 09:19 AM
|
#3
|
|
I should be WORKING now
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Eastern Ontario
Posts: 4,791
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by SVOboy
Man, your gear ratios suck!
|
I'm not surprised. Why do they suck? I'm guessing it's because my torque sucks. |
|
|
|
|
05-29-2006, 09:20 AM
|
#4
|
|
Constantly Spouting Off
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Alberta, Canada
Posts: 589
|
Man! I am so jealous of your guys' garages and wealth of junk/spare parts. If I had the parts I would have no where to put them...I need a garage! 
__________________
|
|
|
|
|
05-29-2006, 09:23 AM
|
#5
|
|
I should be WORKING now
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Eastern Ontario
Posts: 4,791
|
Garage, schmarage. The transmission isn't very big, and it only weighs 65 lbs. You could easily put it (hide it) on the shelf in a coat closet.  |
|
|
|
|
05-29-2006, 09:29 AM
|
#6
|
|
Constantly Spouting Off
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Alberta, Canada
Posts: 589
|
Hmmmm...
*considering it*
__________________
|
|
|
|
|
05-29-2006, 09:30 AM
|
#7
|
|
I should be WORKING now
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Eastern Ontario
Posts: 4,791
|
Some more to think about: this car's 0-60 time in stock form is about 15 seconds. This swap will make it ... much worse! One teamswift member found this swap intolerable.
Then there's the issue of the speedometer/odometer being off. Can compensate for that in the ScanGauge though.
|
|
|
|
|
05-29-2006, 09:33 AM
|
#8
|
|
I should be WORKING now
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Eastern Ontario
Posts: 4,791
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by 95metro
.I need a garage! |
Put stuff in the Aerostar! |
|
|
|
|
05-29-2006, 09:35 AM
|
#9
|
|
Constantly Spouting Off
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Alberta, Canada
Posts: 589
|
So it's just the torque difference between the 3 and 4 cylinder that makes it bearable with the 4? Any possibility of keeping the 3-cylinder final drive and just changing the 3rd, 4th, and 5th gears to smaller sizes?
__________________
|
|
|
|
|
05-29-2006, 09:36 AM
|
#10
|
|
Constantly Spouting Off
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Alberta, Canada
Posts: 589
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by MetroMPG
Put stuff in the Aerostar!
|
Where do you think most of my tools are???
PS: I'm serious on that one!
__________________
|
|
|
|
|
05-29-2006, 09:49 AM
|
#11
|
|
I should be WORKING now
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Eastern Ontario
Posts: 4,791
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by 95metro
So it's just the torque difference between the 3 and 4 cylinder that makes it bearable with the 4? Any possibility of keeping the 3-cylinder final drive and just changing the 3rd, 4th, and 5th gears to smaller sizes?
|
It's all about the torque.
Last edited by MetroMPG : 11-28-2007 at 01:06 PM.
|
|
|
|
|
05-29-2006, 09:56 AM
|
#12
|
|
*shrug*
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 7,406
|
If you took all the other crap out of my swap it would've only take a few hours with jared's help. The biggest thing I think is experience. Now that I've done it I don't have to fool with all the stuff that went wrong,
EDIT: Just saw I was the motivation, yay. When I get home from this graduation party I'll post my gear ratios for you to drool at. |
|
|
|
|
05-29-2006, 09:57 AM
|
#13
|
|
Constantly Spouting Off
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Alberta, Canada
Posts: 589
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by MetroMPG
Also, that would mean taking the tranny apart, which is slightly scarier and requires special tools, I think.
|
Yeah, I know. I tend to make projects more difficult then they generally have to be, but I'm also generally happier with the final results. Of course, in our case maybe the slower 0-60 time is a good thing. We're hardly trying to break any speed records.
A perfect solution would be to fabricate a custom six-speed. I'm always reaching for the shifter and suddenly realizing I'm already in 5th. But, there I go making it even more difficult again.
Still, a full custom gear set would be really cool. 1st to 4th for town and a cruising gear for the highway. Perhaps one of these days when I have a garage... 
__________________
|
|
|
|
|
05-29-2006, 11:08 AM
|
#14
|
|
Constantly Spouting Off
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Alberta, Canada
Posts: 589
|
You got my brain scheming, Darin. Here's some good, general info on transmission gears (copied from http://www.innerauto.com/Automotive_...mission_Gears/):
Quote:
Most cars have from three to five forward gears, and one reverse gear. The transmission changes the ratio of the engine speed and the wheels by connecting gears in various combinations. If a gear with 10 teeth is driving a gear with 20 teeth, the drive would be said to have a 2:1 ratio. First gear connects the engine power to the drive wheels via a pair of reduction gear sets, which gives increased power and reduced wheelspeed when the car is beginning to move. This means the engine is turning much faster than the output shaft, typically around a 4:1 ratio. Intermediate speeds are delivered by changing the gear ratio closer to 1:1. Final drive is usually accomplished by directly linking the input and output shafts, giving a 1:1 gear ratio. Using a moveable set of different sized gears, it's possible to get several degrees of torque output. The differential pinion, driven by the drive shaft, turns the ring gear, which acts like a single speed transmission. This further reduces RPM's and increases torque by a set ratio.
Gears work exactly like levers. A small gear driving a larger one gives an increase in torque, and a decrease in speed, and vise-versa.
Transmission gears are heat-treated, high quality steel. They have smooth, hard teeth, cut on precision machinery while red hot. There are many types of gear teeth, but most transmissions use spur and helical gears. Most of the gears are the helical type, because they last longer and are more quiet than spur gears. There has to be enough room (a few thousandths of an inch) between the gear teeth for lubrication, expansion, and any irregularities in size.
|
__________________
|
|
|
|
|
05-29-2006, 03:05 PM
|
#15
|
|
I should be WORKING now
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Eastern Ontario
Posts: 4,791
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by 95metro
Any possibility of keeping the 3-cylinder final drive and just changing the 3rd, 4th, and 5th gears to smaller sizes?
|
Sounds like the "nerd gear" option that my brother in law and I talked about. As in - why wouldn't the manufacturers offer a taller that stock top gear for the hard-core FE nuts?
Last edited by MetroMPG : 11-28-2007 at 01:06 PM.
|
|
|
|
|
05-29-2006, 03:18 PM
|
#16
|
|
Constantly Spouting Off
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Alberta, Canada
Posts: 589
|
Just pondering some more and I was wondering if those two older Swiftclones you have actually do have the same gear ratios as the Blackfly. The late 80s early 90s clones certainly seemed to get better FE than the mid 90s to 2000 3-cylinders.
They were lighter, maybe even more underpowered, but were the gears identical? Maybe look at putting the old Firefly tranny in the blackfly? I thought I read somewhere that there were some slight transmission variations besides final drive.
__________________
|
|
|
|
|
05-29-2006, 03:43 PM
|
#17
|
|
I should be WORKING now
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Eastern Ontario
Posts: 4,791
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by 95metro
They were lighter, maybe even more underpowered, but were the gears identical? Maybe look at putting the old Firefly tranny in the blackfly? I thought I read somewhere that there were some slight transmission variations besides final drive.
|
Lighter, less rotating mass (12 in wheels & tires); also the pre-86 cars EPA ratings were higher, even though they used the same test method (they introduced a "fudge factor" and changed the ratings even though the cars didn't change).
Last edited by MetroMPG : 11-28-2007 at 01:07 PM.
|
|
|
|
|
05-29-2006, 03:52 PM
|
#18
|
|
Junior Member
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 51
|
I think I am accomplishing basicly the same thing but doing it a completely different way. The whole point of switching out the transmission is to get further down the road for each revolution of the engine. I opted to just swap out the wheels and tires. Going from 155/70-R12 to 155/80-R13 has the same effect as putting in a transmission from an XFi. In addition it only cost me $50 for the wheels and tires. I have ordered the proper lug nuts for another $20 and I am expecting them this week. In my case this has the added benefit of greatly simplifying the task of getting replacement tires as the 12" tires are getting hard to find.
I already swapped out the camshaft for the camshaft from an XFi. I was told that the XFi camshaft gives the engine better low end torque. So I hope to be reporting some excellent numbers when the Gas logs come back.
|
|
|
|
|
05-29-2006, 03:52 PM
|
#19
|
|
Constantly Spouting Off
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Alberta, Canada
Posts: 589
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by MetroMPG
(they introduced a "fudge factor" and changed the ratings even though the cars didn't change)
|
Oh right, I totally forgot about that. The "decreased percentages" from everyone whining that they couldn't attain the numbers the EPA posted.
Thanks for the bedtime reading - but I'll have to do it now. I'm busier at home than at work lately...
GeoMetry - That's very cool about your cam swap. What's the major difference between the standard and XFi cams?
__________________
Last edited by 95metro : 05-29-2006 at 03:55 PM.
|
|
|
|
|
05-29-2006, 03:58 PM
|
#20
|
|
I should be WORKING now
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Eastern Ontario
Posts: 4,791
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by GeoMetry
I opted to just swap out the wheels and tires. Going from 155/70-R12 to 155/80-R13 has the same effect as putting in a transmission from an XFi. In addition it only cost me $50 for the wheels and tires.
|
You're right - same effect. And truth be told, if I knew someone with a big honking set of 14 or 15 inch wheels that would fit our odd-ball bolt pattern, I would like to try them first and do some calculations to see whether or not I'd be happy with the transmission swap.
I probably wouldn't be doing any of this if I didn't have the transmission. It was essentially free.
I'm eager to see your gaslog results too. FYI, I helped Matt with the gaslog a little bit today, running through the new setup looking for bugs/improvements. I think he's close to switching the new garage/gaslog back on. |
|
|
|
|
05-29-2006, 04:02 PM
|
#21
|
|
I should be WORKING now
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Eastern Ontario
Posts: 4,791
|
GeoMetry, if you still have your calculations of what you accomplished with your wheel/tire upgrade (e.g. wheel revolutions per mile, or engine RPM at a given road speed), do you mind sharing them here? Or start a new thread? It's good to have that kind of thing worked out for everyone to see.
|
|
|
|
|
05-29-2006, 04:19 PM
|
#22
|
|
Constantly Spouting Off
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Alberta, Canada
Posts: 589
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by MetroMPG
|
Pretty interesting. So there are no major gear ratio changes (besided FD) until you hit the 1.6L Swifts. At that point you'd be looking at a huge torque difference between the 1.0L and the 1.6L so that probably wouldn't be a wise move at all.
Plus it does nothing for you since you already have the "free" transmission. It's a lot of work for an "experiment" isn't it?
__________________
|
|
|
|
|
05-29-2006, 05:12 PM
|
#23
|
|
Junior Member
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Overland Park in the Great State of KANSAS
Posts: 88
|
Larger diameter tires would be the same as changing the final drive, just looking at the numbers. But a larger diameter tire also has a bigger contact patch and that means more rolling resistance. I don't know how much it would affect things, but if nothing else your car should handle better.
On second thought maybe not. A taller tire will raise your center of gravity and your might loose handling. Another factor with the taller tire and the car sitting taller is more air going under the car with more aero drag.
|
|
|
|
|
05-29-2006, 05:36 PM
|
#24
|
|
Junior Member
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 51
|
I do not claim to actually know anything about camshafts. I will point you to http://www.teamswift.net/3tech/ They sell several different camshafts for the 3 cylinder Geo Metro including an economy camshaft that is very similar to an XFi camshaft. So close in fact that when I inquired about their economy camshaft they advised me not to purchase it since I already had an XFi camshaft. There are links to reviews of many of their products. I have never actually purchased anything from them but they seem to be highly regarded.
Using the tire circumference calculator at http://www.5speedtransmission.com/calculators.html it appears to me that switching from the standard 145/80 R12 tires that are specified for my 1994 Geo Metro to 155/80 R13 tires would produce almost exactly the same result as swapping the standard 4.105 final drive transmission for an XFI 3.789 final drive transmission.
Cross multiply and divide.
66.3 71.6 Tire circumference
3.789 4.105 Final drive ratio
(4.105 * 66.3) / 71.6 = 3.801
You would have to drive well over 300 miles for the difference to add up to one mile. Since both 4.105 transmissions and 155/80 R13 tires are easier to find I am using the 4.105 transmission and the larger wheels/tires. There are implications to the brake system as well, the larger wheels will make the brakes less effective. I have read a few posts talking about rotational weight and how important it is to keep that to a minimum. What is that all about and how much effect will what I am doing have in that respect? |
|
|
|
|
05-29-2006, 06:02 PM
|
#25
|
|
Junior Member
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Overland Park in the Great State of KANSAS
Posts: 88
|
The more weight you have the more gas you use to get it to move. I forgot about the brakes. Most people go to larger diameter brakes and that's just more weight. You need to keep the same size rotors and go with better calipers that have more clamping power.
|
|
|
|
|
05-29-2006, 07:56 PM
|
#26
|
|
I should be WORKING now
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Eastern Ontario
Posts: 4,791
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by 95metro
Plus it does nothing for you since you already have the "free" transmission. It's a lot of work for an "experiment" isn't it?
|
Well, there's no doubting it would help my overall mileage. The only experimental question is whether it would hurt the car's driveablility so much that I wouldn't like it.
Last edited by MetroMPG : 11-28-2007 at 01:09 PM.
|
|
|
|
|
05-30-2006, 02:31 AM
|
#27
|
|
Junior Member
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 51
|
In my case we are talking about going from 12" to 13" in your case it would be from 13" to 14". I have an XFi transmission sitting in my garage but it has a bad syncro. The advantage to me of using the XFi transmission would be that my speedometer would read correctly. The disadvantage would be the difficulty of finding 12" tires next time I need them. The way I drive these days my tires will probably last forever. I accelerate slowly, I rarely use the brakes. About the only thing I do that stresses the tire is occasionally take a corner a bit fast.
|
|
|
|
|
05-30-2006, 03:35 AM
|
#28
|
|
3 pedals>*
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 2,024
|
My car has the best gearing for fuel economy, if you upgrade to that transmission you'll hate it. I have no power whatsoever in 4th till about 55mph.
I'd love to switch to the 2000-2001 manual tranny, not only will I have manual but it will lower my 1/4 mile time more than a full second. From 16.9 to 15.7 or maybe lower. I would still gain mpg because of the fact that I could do engine off coasting and could coast anytime I want in the top gear.
__________________
|
|
|
|
|
05-30-2006, 05:25 AM
|
#29
|
|
*shrug*
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 7,406
|
I wouldn't call your gearing the best for fuel economy, since mine is better...
Besides, I don't think any gearing that is attached to a torque converter can rightly be called the best, at least not until auto transmission surpass driver abilility.
Anyway, I also do not think darin is terribly concerned with his speed, I know that my car is much slower now and I don't care, though to be honest I'm prolly way low in the rpms, but I dunno since my tach isn't working...
|
|
|
|
|
05-30-2006, 06:13 AM
|
#30
|
|
3 pedals>*
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 2,024
|
you're right, I wish I could put in a 2000-2001 gearing or even get a manual car.
__________________
|
|
|
|
|
Linear Mode
Similar Threads
