Has anyone been happy with the install of the tremec 5 speed #3550? I have a '67 ss350 with a 3.42 rear and am a little nervous about plunking down $2k.

------------------
jd

John,

Welcome. I'm installing a Tremec 3550 in my 67 ragtop, and while it has been a struggle to some extent, I am happy with the purchase. Are you replacing a manual or an auto?

I'll write you a longer response tomorrow as I'm going to update my web-site tonight with some more pictures of the install. As a start, suggest you do a search of this site for "Tremec" and you will see several threads on the topic.

CarlC and several others have installed Tremecs in their cars but there are some issues unique to the 67. More later and welcome. I have found this site to be an extremely valuable resource.


------------------
Mark M.
Red 67 Convertible
Red Deluxe Interior
383/Tremec 5 Speed
4 Wheel Disk

Here's a link to my Richmond 5 speed conversion for compairison sake. I've got some gear ratio charts there too.
http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/David_Pozzi/first_gen_camaros.htm#Transmission

Dont forget to add up the cost of the yoke and extra parts. The Richmond does not need a shortened driveshaft, but the shifter is close to $300. and must be modified to fit in a console.
David

------------------
Check my web page for First Gen Camaro suspension info:
David's Homepage (http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/David_Pozzi/)
67 RS 327
69 Camaro Vintage Racer
65 Lola T-70 Can Am Vintage Racer

John,

I updated my web-site last night and you can see it at www.clubmac-camaro@bigstep.com (http://www.clubmac-camaro@bigstep.com) Click on the Tremec/Console link on the left and you can see a picure of my final installation and how the shifter works with the console.

I was converting from a powerglide and took a look at Muncie 4 speeds and the Richmond and Tremec 5 speeds. I ended up going with the Tremec because I liked the idea of a modern 5 speed and I felt the cost was competitive with the Richmond and even the Muncie. I was also sold (probably oversold) by the Super Chevy article about putting a Tremec in a 68. You can download this article in PDF format from Super Chevy's web site or I can e-mail you a copy.

I bought all my stuff from Forte's Parts Connection. They are at www.fortesparts.com (http://www.fortesparts.com)
I bought a 3550 ($1675), speedo adapter for 3:08 ($60), yoke ($60), X-member ($125) and the special shifter for 67-69 F-bodies ($269). They threw in the backup switch for free. Total with shipping was $2279

I would say the special shifter is an option. It moves the stub forward about 1.2+ inches which helps with console compatibility. I still had to move my console back 1.5 inches but you don't notice it in the car. Others have installed the Tremec with the standard shifter and just had to move the console back further.

Mike @ Fortes has struggled with his supplier on the x-members. They are modified TH400 units and on mine the pad was not quite centered so I can't bolt up the tranny. I should get a new one within a week or so. Some have chosen to just buy a stock TH400 x-member and modify it themselves.

I went with the 3550 even though I am pushing its torque handling capability as I'm running a 435 HP, 490 ft lb torque 383, but I don't expect to flog it that often. The TKO version handles more power but is more expensive. I went with a 3:08 rear end.

The tremec bolts right up to a stock bellhousing but as I didn't have one, I am using a Lakewood but others have preferred the McLeod. I am using a McLeod clutch. Don't use the Lakewood clutch fork, use a stock GM unit. You should use the Lakewood adjustable ball stud and CarlC has said to place it 4.75" back from the rear face of the engine.

There are two 67 unique issues I have discovered during the installation. On the TH400 x-member, the mounting holes on the side that attach the x-member to the frame are 2-1/2" on center. The frame on a 67 is only drilled for x-members that are 3" on center as they only offered saginaws, muncies, PG and TH350s and I guess they all used 3" center x-members. The frames on 68-69 Camaros have a slot and two holes at the front location enabling them to accompodate 2-1/2" and 3" x-members. I just had to drill another hole in the frame.

If you are converting from an auto to a manual and buy one of the clutch linkage kits from the parts houses, the bellcrank bracket that mounts to the frame does not match the factory holes that are on your 67 frame. The lower two fit, but I had to drill and tap a new hole for the top one. No big deal. This is a classic example of a part being advertised as 67-69 when it is really a 68-69 part that can be adapted to a 67.

While the conversion has been an adventure, I am really excited about it. I love the short throw of the shifter and having the overdrive will be nice.


------------------
Mark M.
Red 67 Convertible
Red Deluxe Interior
383/Tremec 5 Speed
4 Wheel Disk

Mark, Dave,

Thanks for the quick response, this site is great! My Camaro is basically a stock restored RS-SS 350 w/air and power windows. It was a powerglide, but I converted it to a 4sp. I went with an M-20, a Hurst shifter, and pretty much stock everything else except for the clutch. My transmission pops out of 2nd on the decel. I had the blocker rings/synchros and some chewed up gears replaced, but I'm still having the same problem. My mechanic who did the rebuild wants to check out the side plate and fix the muncie. I started thinking about that tremec article in Super Chevy and started to do some research. I did call forte's and they quoted me everything you mentioned except the shifter. They made it sound as though it was included in the tranny price ($1675) I will obviously confirm everything, but now I'm just trying to get some feedback on my gears (will I hate my 3:42's?) and on the tremec itself (will it fit, and shift silky-smooth and be worth every penny?) Again, thanks for all the great info.

John

David,

What all was involved in modifying the shifter for the Richmond? I want a 5-speed, but don't want to modify/move my console.

Thanks,

Scott

Scot,
Hit the link on my post above and then click on the photo or where it says "transmission swap"
It will take you to a second page with more photos and info on what I did.
If I get enough interest I may make up a kit for doing it.
The T400 crossmember makes a really clean swap. I have found differences in needed rear trans mount locations between a 67 and 69. I believe it might be because of differences in the 69's thicker motor mounts. The 69 also used a block plate between the bellhousing and block that I didn't use.
David

------------------
Check my web page for First Gen Camaro suspension info:
David's Homepage (http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/David_Pozzi/)
67 RS 327
69 Camaro Vintage Racer
65 Lola T-70 Can Am Vintage Racer

John,
I have a 67 with a Tremec 3550. I have been driving it for a couple months now. I have 3.08's. The Tremec 1st gear (3.27) works really well with the 3.08's. 2nd gear is 1.98 or so, that is when I wish I had a little deeper rear gear ratio. 3.42 sounds like it might be close to ideal, at least in 2nd thru 5th gears. 3.42's with a 3.27 1st gear should give you a pretty hard launch. Probably the equivalent of a Muncie with a 4.56 rear gear. With 3.08's I cruise 60mph at 1700 rpm. 100mph is about 2900rpm.
As far as the shifters, the $1675 price tag does include the factory shifter. If you want the custom shifter it's an extra $270 or so. I went with the included factory shifter. I had to move my console back a couple inches and slightly to the right to make it work.
I also purchased my own TH400 xmember for $76 and had a welding shop re-weld the mounting flange for $27.
I am currently fighting an engine vibration, so I haven't had a chance to run the tranny hard yet to give you much feedback.
Mark,
I have clicked on the link in your post a couple of times, it sends me to the wrong site because I don't see any links for tremec or anything car related for that matter. I'm probably just doing something wrong though.

Rich

[This message has been edited by Rich253 (edited 09-06-2000).]

Rich,
I found Mark's link to be wrong too.
Here's the correct one. http://www.clubmac-camaro.bigstep.com/

The tremec is cheaper, but the gears are closer together on the Richmond, more like a close ratio with 4.10 gears with a 3.08 ratio in fifth.
Both have the same gear ratios in first, but the Richmond is not overdrive in 5th like the Tremec.

David

------------------
Check my web page for First Gen Camaro suspension info:
David's Homepage (http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/David_Pozzi/)
67 RS 327
69 Camaro Vintage Racer
65 Lola T-70 Can Am Vintage Racer

David,

Thanks for the correction on the web site. I usually check this site pretty early in the morning and must not have been quite awake that day.

I like the extra flange you put on your TH400 X-member to mate with the wider frame holes on a 67. As I haven't actually drilled my frame yet, I may go your route. May even try to get Mike @ Fortes to do it for me.

Mark M.

David,
In the Reference section of Camaros.net, there is an article about gear ratios. http://www.camaros.net/techref/ftecref24.html It suggests multiplying the trans gear ratio by the rear end ratio, in order to compare two different set-ups. For instance, a Muncie 1st gear of 2.4 multiplied by a rear gear of 4.1 = 9.8 Compared to a Tremec 1st gear of 3.27 multiplied by a rear gear of 3.08 = 10.07
I am running a 3.08 with my TRemec, so I guess this means I have a harder launch than a muncie matched up to a 4.1 rear gear. In fact, my launch is about as hard as a Muncie with a 4.56 rear gear.
My dilema is, if I were to use a deeper rear gear ratio, in order to take advantage of the Tremec 2nd thru 5th gears, wouldn't my 1st gear become almost useless? If I went with a 3.73 rear gear, that would give me a multiple of 12.2, which is considerably higher than the above mentioned examples.
I have calculated my rpm would be approaching 6000 at 35mph with a 3.73 rear gear, 24.5 inch tires and 3.27 1st gear.
Does a 3.27 1st gear and 3.73 rear gear seem too deep to you?

[This message has been edited by Rich253 (edited 09-07-2000).]

David,

Thanks for the directions to your other link on your 5 speed intall. It has answered alot of questions for me.

Scott

Rich,
I did a spreadsheet comparison between the Richmond and Tremec M20 and M21 for myself and a friend who was considering a tremec.

The advantage of the Richmond is the gears are closer together.
With the Tremec, you will have a bigger drop in rpm between each gear.
I think dropping to a 3.73 would give you a very low first gear.
I ran 4.56 gears with a wide ratio M20 trans. The first gear overall ratio was 11.85 which gave me a speed of 40.9 mph using a 26.5" tall tire.

I used to shift to second about half way through an intersection. I could easily take off in second gear.
The car would be driveable that way but you'd do a lot more shifting.

The thing to think about is do you have enough traction to make use of such a low gear?
I don't see much purpose in gearing way down where you are just going to spin the wheels more. If you are putting slicks on and racing on the weekends then it makes more sense.
I just added a tremec graph on my trans page to compare to my Richmond graph. http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/David_Pozzi/first_gen_camaros.htm#Transmission
Just click on the link "Transmission" or the photo to go there.
David

------------------
Check my web page for First Gen Camaro suspension info:
David's Homepage (http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/David_Pozzi/)
67 RS 327
69 Camaro Vintage Racer
65 Lola T-70 Can Am Vintage Racer

Mark,
I decided the crossmember was a lot easier to modify compared to screwing with the subframe.
I put a little drop section in the crossmember to cover myself on trans height. It turned out we didn't need the extra room and added a spacer to move the trans back up to where it was. There is a little difference in height of the trans mount on the Richmond compared to the Muncie. I think the Richmond is a little closer to the output shaft centerline compared to a muncie. It's less than a half inch but makes a slight difference in driveshaft angle.
David

------------------
Check my web page for First Gen Camaro suspension info:
David's Homepage (http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/David_Pozzi/)
67 RS 327
69 Camaro Vintage Racer
65 Lola T-70 Can Am Vintage Racer

A 3.73:1 ratio makes shift pretty quickly out of first gear. Second gear starts can be done but slipping the clutch is necessary, too much IMO for everyday use. It would be better with a 3:55 or 3:31 gears. It would be nice if the 1st was somwhere around 2.90:1.

One major advantage to the Richmond is that the differential can spin much slower but still allow for the same overall ratio. This will lead to longer life of the differential components.

The Forte's "Adjustable Shifter" is just a different mounting plate for the shifter. It moves the shifter forward for use in the stock location. This plate does not allow the use of an aftermarket shifter, the stock one must be used.

Tremec? Richmond? Either one is a good unit. Just be sure to match the differential gear ratio to the trans.

Once you go overdrive you will never go back.

memcgraw,

Please feel free to forward any of the info I sent you.

Carl

Carl and David,
Good points, I guess I should be looking for a gear ratio somewhere in between 3.08 and 3.73 . I wonder what the reasoning was for making 1st gear so deep in the Tremec. It seems to me, if they made the overall gear ratio similar to the close ratio Muncie for instance, the low geared rear end needed would have been compensated for by the .68 overdrive. That would have made that close ratio between gears we like possible and would have made cruising at highway speed comfortable too.
Rich

Rich,

Don't forget that the Tremec is a late-model transmission meant to go into a car that has to meet certain CAFE (Corporate Average Fuel Economy) requirements. If CAFE is not met then severe cost penalties are involved. Hence, 0.68 overdrive gets combined with an appropriate gear ratio to obtain low RPM and improved mileage.

------------------
Click here to see see my car and hear 5-speeds. http://www.geocities.com/casanoc

May I add my two cents, please.

Just what rear end gear and transmission gear spread would be as close to ideal as can be ordered with respect to a Richmond 4+1 transmission.
Say with a 26.5" tire??? (275 to 295 size)
The reason I bring this up is because The General never made a strong four speed overdrive transmission but Ford has an overdrive exterior shift linkage Top-Loader and Chrysler has a similar A833 transmission.

Looking at the Ford and Chrysler overdrive coventional four speed transmissions makes them out to be three speeds with an overdrive fourth gear.

I know this type of setup isn't as modern or up-to-date as a Richmond or Tremac 5, but they are relatively strong and are overdrive to hold engine wear down.

Am I being stupid or what, but a Top Loader or an A833 overdrive can be picked up and installed for less than $500.00 to $750.00.

I would love to have a Richmond 5 with ideal rear gears to match, just like I want a 250 BB ProCharger setup. But I have to be realistic hear (money wise).

Lets "stir the pot"!!! pdq67

Hi, pdq67 -

Unless Ford has a different version of the Top-Loader series I haven't seen, I think you'll find that 4th gear in the Top-Loader is 1:1. I've built and used three of them while building Cobra replicas, and as far as I know (other than some case differences and big-vs.-small input shafts), both the wide-ratio and close-ratio versions have 1:1 direct 4th gears. Tough tranny - heavy due to iron case, but never lunched one. Have no personal experience with the Chrysler 4-speed, but my neighbor has an original '69 Hemi Roadrunner 4-speed, and 4th in his car is also 1:1.

------------------
JohnZ
'69 Z28 Fathom Green

A Richmond 5 speed with 3.08's would give almost the same gearing as a close ratio Muncie with 4.10's in the first four gears.
Fifth would be the 3.08 ratio of course.
The other thing about the Richmond is the driveshaft is turning slower due to fifth not being an overdrive ratio.
With the Tremec fifth is spinning the driveshaft faster than the engine. At very high speeds with the Tremec (150 and up) it might be possible to exceed the "critical speed" of the driveshaft. And have a failure.
This assumes you have enough horsepower and road to go that fast.

The tremec would give better fuel economy in fifth if you ran a 3.08 to 3.55 gear.

Some time ago I read about a place called "Stick City" in Sun Valley California that did top loader conversions to overdrive to make a 5 speed out of them.
There are aftermarket overdrives you can add behind the trans but the cost would be more than a Tremec or Richmond.

It would be nice to hear what ratio first gear and rear end ratio works well with street tires. How low is too low a first gear overall ratio for street? There is no use going too low and just spinning the tires.

I ran 4.56 gears and a wide ratio Muncie in my 67 and that was a little too low a gear for street. I could just come down on the gas and light the tires up. That was a 11.58 first gear ratio overall. (2.54 X 4.56 = 11.58)
Anyone care to share their experience/ setup here?

------------------
Check my web page for First Gen Camaro suspension info:
David's Homepage (http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/David_Pozzi/)
67 RS 327
69 Camaro Vintage Racer
65 Lola T-70 Can Am Vintage Racer

David,

It's "Stick Only", and it is in Sun Valley, CA

------------------
Click here to see see my car and hear 5-speeds. http://www.geocities.com/casanoc

JohnZ,

I got my info on the overdrive four speed transmissions from the June 2000 issue of "Car Craft".
The Ford Top loader overdrive was called a "cast-iron RUG" transmission, built in the early '70's.
The Mopar four speed overdrive transmissions were built from '75 to '86.
You talk about a "kick in the head", I was in Macon, MO this afternoon at a small local car show and dropped into the parts swap pavillion. A young man had a Chevy truck "4 x 4" four speed transmission and transfer case on a trailer to sell.
I asked specifically what it was because I didn't recognize it as Chevy.
The transmission looks just like the one in the Car Craft article for an overdrive Mopar A833.
And next a buddy of mine sold a four speed transmission out of an '80's 6 liter Chevy diesel and it looked identical to a Mopar A833 that I have.
Apparently the General is using Mopar A833's in their big pick-up's because they don't make a strong transmission anymore.
Does this make since??? Because if it does, maybe the A833 Mopar transmission in the Chevy application will have a standard Chevy input shaft and such stuff so it might fit in our cars.
Come back with any and all comments please. pdq67

Hi, pdq -

Just dug out the June issue you mentioned - hadn't read it yet (we moved into our new home in May, and I've been stacking them up since to read later once we really get organized). I wasn't aware of the later mid-70's Top-Loader variants (the RUG and Tremec-built units) - I've only worked on the mid-60's iron "traditional" Top-Loaders. Good article, by the way - lots of good swap info. Don't know about the A833 O.D. unit, but if that's what Dodge uses today in their trucks, it's tough - one of my engineers has a '99 4x4 2500 V-10 5-speed, beats hell out of it, and has 50K miles on it with no problems.

------------------
JohnZ
'69 Z28 Fathom Green

David,

Please tell more about this thing called "critical driveshaft speed". I've seen it mentioned several times in recent articles, but none go into detail explaining it in depth.
Does a driveshaft start to spin "end-to-end" as well as "round-and-round" at some rpm??? Even though it's balanced dead-on in all planes.(i.e., center of gravity, center of gyration, etc...)
I do know that if a driveshaft "gets-away", there's "H-ll-to-pay".
Thanks for any comments. pdq67

Pdq67,
I looked for a very good link where I found a calculator for critical speed but can't find it now.
Here is a definition of it. http://www.ccjmagazine.com/Drivglos.htm

What I've read in the past is that it's a speed where the shaft will start to whip and destroy itself.

The thinner and longer a driveshaft, the lower the critical speed.
I've read where you want to keep under HALF critical speed to stay out of vibration problems.
A 2.75 dia shaft in a camaro get's in trouble somewhere around 6500 rpm if I remember right. I wish I could find that critical speed chart.
Of course with overdrive and the engine really revving you'd really be in trouble with a stock dia driveshaft.

I've read where the winston cup cars are very near critical speed on their driveshafts. which are somewhere around 3" to 3.5" dia.
David.

------------------
Check my web page for First Gen Camaro suspension info:
David's Homepage (http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/David_Pozzi/)
67 RS 327
69 Camaro Vintage Racer
65 Lola T-70 Can Am Vintage Racer

pdq67,

I have some formulas that can predict the critical speed of a shaft. Critical speed is just another term for natural frequency. The formula takes into account matierials, cross-sectional properties, moments of inertia, mounting distance, and mounting method (fixed, free, or simple). It ain't a pretty formula and the balance is assumed to be perfect.

Natural frequencies effect all rotating machinery. It is especially crucial in long, slender tubes that rotate (driveshafts, ballscrews, crankshafts, axles, etc.) Though the tube may be perfectly balanced, it will still torsionally vibrate at all speeds. As the speed of the shaft approaches the critical speed, vibration will increase. This is what will start to tear things up.

Driveshafts also have angular deflections (tube twising due to torque), u-joint forces (due to differing angular velocities), are banged around by the suspension, and are not firmly fixed to their end points (the slip joint). These gang up on the shaft and reduce its effectiveness.



------------------
Click here to see see my car and hear 5-speeds. http://www.geocities.com/casanoc

Thanks for all the great feedback everybody, I do think that the Tremec 1st gear of 3.27 is too low for me, I really don't want to change out my rear gears again (3:42's) I think TTC is missing the boat with that choice of 1st gear, They could proboably market it easier to vintage muscle cars who want to keep their gears, but would love to have the overdrive for cruising. Along with a nice shift, that's all I'm really looking for. A first gear that finals out to a mid-to-upper 9's is ideal, mid 10's or higher (numerically) is too low! I think I'll stick with the Muncie for now. Thanks again.

John D
67 RS-SS 350