If you were to choose....

[65ShelbyClone]

A scattershield is a blowproof bellhousing like a Lakewood or McLeod. The block plate is the thin piece of steel or aluminum that goes between the bell and block. Scattershields usually include a thicker block plate that is required for the SFI cert.

If a cable setup stretches and linkages have flex, how are they better than a hydraulic?

 

[jcode68]

The blocking plate is also called a scater shield, if you are doing ebay searches try with that name as well.

Sorry, but this is incorrect. Scattershield is a high strength bell housing and if you searc for a scattershield, you will not get any hits on a block plate. If you can't find any online (pretty spotty on eBay and usually lots of bidders) try a boneyard or even machine shops or garages in your area. You can also buy them new. Go to www.moderndriveline.com and you can buy just about everything needed for this swap from them if you like. I found them good to deal with.

As for the Shift fork ball stud, it should be in the bellhousing you buy, I think even if its a brand new one it should still come with it but I'm not sure on that.

This is not necessarily true. The used BH I purchased off eBay did not have it and I don't think the new BH's have them either. If you buy used, ask just to be sure. Summit has them cheap if needed.

You can use a stock style clutch or a latemodel style clutch. Depending on which clutch you get it may effect your flywheel choice.

If you go with the late model BH, you will also need to change your flywheel to match. If you go this route, you should go with the late model clutch setup as you will get much better performance for essentially the same money. I got a brand new FW off eBay for $90 and got a 10.5" King Cobra clutch kit to match.

 

[LMan]

so back to the parts for the swap...
this is the list of parts ive gathered that you guys have told me i need. i have a couple of questions about some of them. and if there is anything else, please let me know. im going to do this swap with some buddies and we have never done a swap before. hince why i ask all the questions.

T5
Bellhousing
Blocking plate
Shift fork
Shift fork ball stud
Flywheel
Clutch/press plate
Thrust bearing
Trans/BH hardware kit
Cross member
Trans mount
Slip yoke
Fork dust boot
Hydraulic Clutch Kit
Clutch Pedal
Shift handle and knob
Shortened Driveshaft

ive been lookin at all the parts online and ive found different things...
like the bellhousing. my block is 5 bolt but i see something about early 5 bolt and late 5 bolt. and also differnt bellhousings. how do i know which one to get? i cant seem to find a blocking plate anywere. for the flywheel and clutch...do i just get one for a new t-5 or is there a certian year, model, ect that i need. i do know i need a 28 oz balance thou.
i think ive decided to go with the hydraulic clutch because from what i have learned, prior to all the arguing here, that fluids will transfer much better than a cable and pivot points. its alot more costly but i think it will be worth it.

does anybody have any parts, kits, ect that could maybe help me out?

thanks everyone for the help!

did you do any searches on Google for "T-5 swap?" There are hundreds of articles covering every aspect of this. I ran this about 8 days ago for someone else on here and posted almost 10 seperate articles and sites. I dont think the Kennedy assassination has as much documentation available.....

I think you will have to use an old 5-bolt bell since the latemodel bells are all 6-bolt. Thats a big minus for you. If you dont already have a 5-bolt bell, good luck finding one try the "Ebay and Pray" method

Heres your block plate: http://ddperformance.com/ford_bellhousingsblock_plates.htm

..that took 5 seconds on Google. No offense intended, but are you searching the same Internet as the rest of Planet Earth?

You need a T-5 flywheel and clutch, in the correct imbalance. T-5 wheels come as 50 oz, so you will need to get one rebalanced at a local shop (typically ~50.00) or now you can order them direct from the T-5 swap vendors.


Awright, I got my Cranky Old Bastid fix today. Thanks for the assist

 

[Rusty67]

I have heard it called a scatter shield many times by many people, maybe its a common misnomer in my area.

As for the ball stud, I didn't say it WOULD come with it I said it SHOULD. And on that note, I've got a broken bellhousing with one in it that I could send you. I've been saving it for no reason and I need to throw the thing away as is so the ball stud is yers if you want it.

If you go with the late model BH, you will also need to change your flywheel to match. If you go this route, you should go with the late model clutch setup as you will get much better performance for essentially the same money. I got a brand new FW off eBay for $90 and got a 10.5" King Cobra clutch kit to match.

I'm fairly sure you can use the stock 3 finger clutch with the original 4 speed flywheel and a late model bellhousing as long as you use the correct starter because of the different count on the ring gear.

On the hydrolic issue, if you don't want to believe me, thats fine. No one ever does.

 

[BlueMonster65]

i'd go for the 5sp either the TKO 500 or 600, not sure if they fit properly in a 65-66 mustang but i'm probably goin to find out this year since i'd like to ditch my c4 in favor of a manual transmission. as far as clutch assemblys go the hyd. throwout bearing is by far the best. i am not a big fan of cable clutchs. having owned several mustangs of the fox, sn95, and now 05 variety i can say that i have never experienced any problems with the hydaulic clutch on my 05. . the same cannot be said of the inferior cable setup on the sn95 cars. i do not race my car but i think the most car owners would be much happier with a hyd. clutch setup vs. the cable.

 

[65notch]

the prices on this modern driveline site look pretty decent, around the same estimate ive been recieving.

 

[65ShelbyClone]

I'm fairly sure you can use the stock 3 finger clutch with the original 4 speed flywheel and a late model bellhousing as long as you use the correct starter because of the different count on the ring gear.

On the hydrolic issue, if you don't want to believe me, thats fine. No one ever does.

Yes, you can use an early flywheel in a latemodel application and you can use a latemodel flywheel in an early app. The only thing that has to be the same is the ring gear size and counterbalance. My Fidanza flywheel has a removable balance weight and two sets of pressure plate holes. One has SAE threads for the old cars and one with mertric threads and alignment dowel holes for late diaphragm clutches. I'm using it between an an early style three finger clutch, a latemodel block, and Toplaoder transmission.

On the other issue, I guess we can agree to disagree.

 

[Route666]

On the hydrolic issue, if you don't want to believe me, thats fine. No one ever does.

People believe things with evidence behind them. Since you were arguing that the lag in a hydraulic system leads to extra transmission wear because your buddy breaks his transmissions and has a hydraulic clutch, your theory can be similarly nullified by the argument that cables move around inside their sheeths, and stretch, and stick, and do not self-adjust, leading to more "lag" than a hydraulic setup.

Heck the self-adjusting factor alone means that every time you use the cable clutch it disengages slightly less every time (due to clutch wear), meaning there is a greater period of engaged time (load on transmission - lag) when shifting until you adjust it. With the hydraulic, it adjusts back after each use, and so the amount of disengaging remains constant.

Then there's the historical evidence that shows clutches went through a mechanical era, cable, then hydraulic, which surely can't be because it's a worse solution, especially since cost cutting vehicle manufacturers certainly wouldn't use a worse system if it was going to cost them more to make it.

Surely race teams would have gone to cable brakes if they gave better response (less lag) than hydraulic ones.

My vote is for using a hydraulic clutch in your conversion, it will lessen the effort involved in using the clutch. In fact, I recommend using a hydraulic TO bearing, it cuts down the number of parts involved.

 

[Rusty67]

Ok, now we have to kick a dead horse.

I NEVER said that because my friend brakes transmissions and has a hydrolic clutch setup that the two are directly related. What I said is that it is an example of what I am talking about. If you read my post I also said that the drive has a large part in braking components.

As for the self adjusting setup, there are cable clutch setups that are self adjusting as well. And the lag created from lag in a cable clutch is noticable by the user. At that point the cable can be adjusted for proper tension (in a non-self adjusting setup of course).

Better solution/worse solution doesn't really mater to the automotive industry. If you believe that then I got some swamp land in Florida to sell you. The automotive industry cares about the CHEAPEST method for them that will pass DOT standards. Keep in mind that they have massive economy of scale working for them and we don't.

Drag race teams are just like the people posting on StangNet. Some use hydrolic, others use some mechanical form. Every team is different, there is no accepted standard.

Now, if you feel the need to keep arguing about it then PM me and we can get into it that way. Its already been said that we can agree to disagree.

 

[Route666]

I prefer not to go to PMs, as I believe this topic is a public one, that is relative to the thread, as it affects the choice someone might make of a component in their conversion. Of course you are free to not reply, if you don't mind if others disagree, however I'm giving others reasons as to why the hyd version is a better solution.

I understand that you are saying the clutch lag leaves the gearbox under some load while the gears are being changed, which leads to wear, and then failure.

By the time the slack is noticable enough for the user to tell, and to adjust it, it's already far worse than a self adjusting system, thus allowing the drive to be putting more strain on the box over longer periods during gear changes, which is what I was saying, and what you were saying the apparent lag in a hydraulic system does. I do concede that a cable system could self adjust though, but I've never heard of, nor seen one, mainly because they haven't been used here for about 20 years, except in motorcycles, where you hardly need to use the clutch to shift anyway.

Back to the point about the best or cheapest method for the auto industry, that is my point, they would most likely use the cheapest if there was no other significant advantage to using one over the other, but a hydraulic system, with seals, pistons and fluid, is going to be more expensive, yet all current production cars here use hydraulic. And if you think using the best tech in the auto industry is "not all that important" then don't tell that to our auto makers, they make us cars with aluminium cylinder heads with double overhead cams, variable valve timing, sequential electronic fuel injection, turbos, air conditioning, in dash cd stacker, radial tyres, alloy wheels, disc brakes, independant rear suspension, etc, etc. (And that's only one family sedan, add the turbo for the sporty version.)

And what DOT standard does the clutch disengagement mechanism have to meet? Here the standards are for safety and emissions. The government couldn't give a crap whether your car doesn't work half the time, as long as it is safe and doesn't grossly pollute.

I wasn't talking about the brake systems that drag racing teams use, I was talking about racing in which brakes are actually used IN the race (not where it is made as light as the rules will allow), circuit racing, where it would be imperative to get the best response from them at every corner, lap after lap.

Overall I don't think any lag of either system is substantial enough to warrant the other being the definite choice, for any intended use, but there are other factors that deem hydraulic to be better overall, such as effort, hose VS cable routing, and cable sticking. I especially don't agree that if you race with a hydraulic clutch that you will break your gearbox BECAUSE of the hydraulic clutch.

 

[Rusty67]

The Mustang was using a cable clutch up until recently. I don't know when the switched but I would guess from 05 on they are using hydrolic being as someone said that their 05 or 06 has a hyrolic setup from the factory.

I wasn't talkin about brakes when I said drag racing, I was talking about clutch setups. I don't recall anyone using anything but hydrolic brakes for anything other then a parking brake but I wouldn't doubt there are other systems.

DOT has fairly tight regulations on hydrolic components of all kinds. DOT requires everything to take a minimum specific load and for all rubber lines there is an endurance test that they must pass.

Remember that manufacturers have an extreme economy of scale. If 5/6 of the main auto manufacturers are using hydrolic components then it may cost a company less to produce hydrolic setups then cable setups because they are producing them in such high volume.

The auto industry doesn't mass produce the best technology into the passenger car market. That stuff is reserved for racing. Why ? Its too damn expensive. Eventually that technology is made scaleable or in some small way trickles down into the passenger vehicle.

Companies always have to one up each other to sell a new vehicle. Some technologies that come out don't really work all that well but are marketed because they are new. Marketing sells cars, not good technology. For example, Chevy developed an injection system that only used 1 injector but it would fail at about 60,000 miles. So it was cheaper for them to mass produce but it wasn't really that reliable. Because if this they stayed with multipile injector EFI. Is it the best ? Not really. Its not as efficient and it costs more. But they still use it because its the best reliable alternative. The automotive industry cuts cots where they can and competes where they have to.

 

[Route666]

Alright all this is going off topic, so lets go back to the real issue, explain to me where the hydraulic system's lag is - what gives it this trait.

The only place I can see it coming from is the tubing from the MC to the slave swelling when pressure is applied. At normal levels (swelling that is not considered to require replacement of the hose) I cannot see how this can be any worse than a cable stretching and being loose inside the sheath.

 

[Route666]

The Mustang was using a cable clutch up until recently. I don't know when the switched but I would guess from 05 on they are using hydrolic being as someone said that their 05 or 06 has a hyrolic setup from the factory.

Yes and the Mustang has built its legacy on being a cheap car for the masses.

Ferrari's F355 F1 uses a computer controlled hydraulic actuator for its clutch which is praised for being able to shift in as little as 0.15 seconds. Surely if Ferrari build a semi-automatic box to shift as quickly as possible they are going to use the best practical alternative. You can't tell me it's not practical to choose cable over fluid and hydraulic components in a Ferrari if it is better solution to this particular requirement.

 

[dachillman65]

i did my cable clutch with a t5 for way less than all you guys did.

heres a general breakdown:

-recent rebuilt T5 $500
-cable clutch kit from Mustang Steve $150
-bellousing and parts etc in one auction on eBay $150
-crossmember from modern driveline $150

plus a few very small odds and ends for right around 1K, less than most pay for just the transmission. just shop around for a while. youll find a good deal and get it done for cheap.

hope that helps

brian