Railguy

Anybody know anything about 5 speeds.I was going to put a NV 3500 in in my Omega,but thought I might be better off with trans out of a newer Camero V8car of course.Does anybody know if it would hold up.My Omega is a lot heavier and probably a few more HP.The reason I want a 5 speed is for the overdrive.
railguy

oldsmobiledave

You can run the Richmond 5 speed with highway gears or the Richmond OD with steeper gears to accomplish the same thing. If you want to go 6speed there are many choices.

Railguy

I was kinda want looking for a cheaper way.I have a Camero 5 speed located for $500 to $600
railguy

joe_padavano

The inexpensive five speed transmissions are inexpensive because they are weak and undesireable. The NV3500 is a truck trans. First gear is probably only good to the other side of the crosswalk. You'll really have a three speed with OD and a granny gear low. An "$500" five speed from a Camaro will be a T5, which is only rated for about 300 ft lbs in the best possible versions (and less than that in most versions). There's a reason why the other five speed transmissions cost more.

Railguy

This is why I'm asking.I probably won't do it this winter but maybe next I'm collecting parts now and hope to have everything when I'm ready.which trans would you suggest.I found this one at Jegs.
http://www.jegs.com/i/Richmond-Gear/...rentProductId=
railguy

joe_padavano

Note the gear ratios:

This is NOT an overdrive trans. You'd need to use a very low numerical rear axle to really use this trans on the street, then first wouldn't be that great.

Railguy

I'm running the original 2.72 or 2.73 I can't remember which.I don't see the point in gearing it down when I can buy a trans to suit it.I do plan on making it a posi later but not changing the whole rear.The car will probably never see the strip and I baby it pretty good but I would like a little better take off.
railguy

joe_padavano

Correct, though 2;73 gears might be a little too low numerically. 3.08s would be better. Effective ratio in first with the 2.73s will be 8.95:1. I think most folks recommend about 10:1 in first. This trans with your 2.73s will be about equivalent to a wide ratio Muncie with 3.55s off the line.

dc2x4drvr

A few considerations..
Shifter location, modifying your hump to fit the Richmond, trans. mount, crank drilled for MT?
Do your homework

joe_padavano

All good points. The good news is that the Richmond (formerly Nash) five speed uses a side-mount shifter like a Muncie. The bad news is that the trans is considerably larger than a Muncie (as are most five speed transmissions). You'll likely need to modify the tunnel. The shifter cannot be easily relocated but you can likely get a stick to put it where you need it.

oldsmobiledave

I have the Richmond 5 speed with 2.73 gears in my 65 442. Great combo.

If you have a 10 bolt rear end you can access 2.93 gears which would have been my 1st choice. With the Chevy 12 bolt I settled on the 2.73s. With a small block under the hood the 3.08s will be a better choice. With the power of a 455 under the hood 1st gear is just fine with 2.73s.

You do not have to have an OD gear if you stick enough gears out in front of the 1:1 top gear. This is the premise of the Nash / Richmond 5 speed. This is how many German made cars will built many years ago.

You will need to use a tubular cross member from a Chevelle & have a correct length driveshaft made up. I converted a floor shifted automatic car to manual shift & used the pedals a hump from a donor '65 442. It is very easy to do with the Richmond trans.

Do not waste you money on the used weak GM 5 speeds from the 80s or on the truck trans. You will never be happy with the results.

Railguy

The crank is not drilled but there are ways around that.I was hoping to not cut the tunnel but I am aware that this is not going to be a small project.I want to go to OC in the spring thats why I'm not doing it this winter.
railguy

garys 68

With a 2.73 rear gear, you wont have many 5 speed OD trans to choose from. Most have around 0.6x OD and that will lug down all but big low rpm torque motors.
The Richmond 5 speed with 1:1 5th will work fine. Note that Jegs trans is without a shifter, that adds $5-600. You can get the Richmond 6 speed (0.76 OD) for only a few hundred more and includes the shifter. Depending on your motor/cam/etc, you might be able to run the 2.73 rear with 0.76 OD. You can find the Doug Nash/Richmond used on ebay fairly often.
If you're considering the 1:1 5th Doug Nash, why not use a 4 speed?
I've got a 2.73 rear with a T10. The Muncie that originally came with it had a 2.6 1st gear that was kinda tall with the rear so I swapped out for a 81-82 T10 with 3.42 1st gear. Great combo if you have a broad torque band.
I found the used T10 locally for $100 and rebuilt it for another $100.

Railguy

Not knowing anything about trans' I'm leary about buying a used one from a stranger 100's of miles away.I guess if I got it cheap enough and had it rebuilt.I'm researching right now.Thank for the info.
railguy

joe_padavano

My point exactly. The car neither knows nor cares if the trans has an OD fifth or not. All that matters is the effective ratio at the wheels.

I'm sorry, but I continue to be amazed by this whole "lug the motor" issue with an OD trans. I now have three 1980s GMs with the pavement-ripping VIN Y 307, a 200-4R with 0.68:1 OD, and a 2-something rear axle. All three cars pull just fine in OD on the freeway. Yes, when you want to accelerate the trans downshifts, as you would have to do manually with a five speed, but so what? There is absolutely NO lugging, farting, grunting, or any other ill effects when in OD at freeway speeds.

Railguy

What do you think of this?
http://www.ebay.com/itm/Doug-Nash-5-...fabd64&vxp=mtr

oldsmobiledave

Identical to the trans in my 65 442. Go for it!

joe_padavano

I think it's "reserve not met", so you have no idea how much he really wants for it. In any case, the Nash and Richmond are the same trans.

copper128

I sold a used DN 5-speed in like-new condition a few years back for $1400 including shipping, shifter, yoke, Lakewood BOP bell, clutch & pressure plate. So you don't necessarily have to spend a fortune, just keep watching for a deal.

garys 68

Gotta disagree, an auto is not a manual. They unlock and downshift themselves. Besides, I shouldn't have to downshift at every little hill...I'm old and would forget
I run a Richmond with a 0.76 OD and 3.08 rear in my 68 vette, love it. I would also put one in my 72 Olds with a 2.73.
Do the math 26.5" tire, 70mph, 2.73 rear, Richmond 0.76 OD = 1850rpm
Same setup with TKO 0.64 OD = 1550rpm
1550rpm is OK if you have a newer vette/Camaro/etc with sequential or direct fuel injection, modern electronics, etc. (3.42 rear, 0.5 OD). But old carbed motors with big cams don't like 1500 rpm.

garys 68

Just an FYI on the close NV 3500 trans. The ratios are not bad for a 2.73 rear. However I think the bellhousing will be for the big truck 12" clutch, so fitting it in your tunnel might be tight.
So if you're ok with a 1:1 Doug Nash 5th gear, why not a Muncie/T10 4 speed with 1:1 4th gear?
BTW, what are your engine specs?

Railguy

I have an old 4 speed steel/iron case.How do I tell what it is.It came out of a vega.I had a 350 in it and broke everything but it.But the vega weighed about 1/2 of my Omega.
railguy

copper128

Most likely a Saginaw.
One of my buddies fragged one all to pieces doing a big burnout in a '57 210 coupe with a hot 383 SBC

joe_padavano

The bellhousing is also integral to the trans case, so you can't easily use it on a BOP engine.

So long as you don't want much off the line acceleration. Again, the Nash has a 3.28 first, the Muncie has a 2.52 (or 2.20) first. For a while, my 70 W-30 had an E-block 400, a wide ratio Muncie, and a 3.08 rear (don't ask...). It was a dog off the line.

garys 68

T10 is still available with a 3.42 1st gear. Granted it's only rated at about 300 ft/lbs. If you can find an 81 Camaro T10 with a 904 iron case, they are pretty solid and still have the 3.42 1st gear. Aftermarket versions were available as "drag racing" transmissions.
Autogear makes an upgraded housing available with a 3.00 1st gear that would work well with a 3.08 or 2.73 rear.
I went with the 82 Camaro T10 3.42 1st because they're almost free....ok, about $100, but check the input/countershaft gear, that and 1st gear is generally what dies first on these.
And I couldn't agree more, a Muncie with 3.08 or 2.73 rear is a real dog. Add a big cam with lots of overlap, almost unusable.

joe_padavano

3.42 first and 1.00 fourth? Now THAT'S a wide ratio trans. How big is the canyon between first and second? It may accelerate off the line, but boy it that car going to fall on it's face when you hit second.

Bottom line is that the overall ratio in each gear has to match the engine's power band and RPM range. The reason new cars are so much quicker while getting good mileage is that they have engines tuned to be very efficient in a narrow power band and use lots of gears (NINE-speed automatics now?!) to keep the engine in that narrow band. A five speed trans will make better use of the available power band while also lowering highway RPMs. Again, the specific ratios in the trans are less important than the total effective ratio in each gear once you include the rear axle ratio and tire diameter.

By the way, if you were going to use a T-10 rated at 300 ft lbs, you might as well just use a T-5 also rated at 300 ft lbs.

copper128

Ain't that the truth.

My Ram 2500 5.7 hemi 5-sp auto has a setup like that. 3.00 first, then something like 1.67 second and 1.00 third. 4th & 5th are both overdrives. Trans sucks for towing because Dodge didn't spend the time/$ to get the gear ratios right.

garys 68

Exactly, it would suck with a narrow powereband. That's more true of old carbed motors with big overlap cams than any new efi motor. New efi motors have great powerbands and 114 to 116 LSA. Those with VVT don't even run out of power at higher rpm.
I'm running it behind an LSx truck motor as a DD. The cam in the truck motors is basically an RV cam. But even the corvette motor with a manual trans run CAGS for fuel efficiency. So these motors pull fine with REALLY wide ratios.
Gotta match the parts to work together. Mine do. The 8 speed trans are for better mileage not because the motors have narrow powerbands.
BTW, 3.42 first, 2.28 second, 1.46 third, spacing is great.
The original poster has a 2.73 rear and wants a cheap ma I like driving the 72 Olds 5.3/T10 as much as my 68 vette 6.0 LS2/Richmond. It probably wont pull a 0.68 OD well of a T5. A 2.6 or 2.2 Muncie would definitely not work well.The NV wont work easily. A 2.88 or 3.42 T10 is a hundred dollar option. If cost were not an issue, just but a $3400 Richmond 6 speed.

Railguy

What is 114 116 LSA?VVT?
railguy

garys 68

Those refer to cam valve timing. Big cams have a lot of overlap with less lobe separation (LSA). That generally makes lots of hp in the upper range, but bleeds off compression at low rpms. That means a big cam makes big hp at a narrow high rpm, all too common in big hp old school motors.
In new motors, they use variable valve timing (VVT) which phases the cam with the optimal valve impulse timing which means you can have a low rpm RV cam but still has 6000 rpm performance.
But if you have a daily driver, get a modest cam, use a trans that works with the motor and rear end.

Railguy

What do you guys think of these? I never heard of them.My first thought is to many thins to go wrong.
http://www.ebay.com/itm/1984-88-CORV...f693b0&vxp=mtr
railguy

Railguy

This looks like just what I need.
http://www.ebay.com/itm/New-Tremec-G...sories&vxp=mtr

garys 68

Forget the 4 + 3, even the vette guys don't like it.
The TKOs generally don't fit A body tunnels, and you need to be able to pull the 0.68 OD. Call them, depending on your engine/cam, I'm pretty sure they'll recommend a higher rear end ratio.

Railguy

I'm running 2.73.
railguy

Railguy

I'm thinking about buying this one anybody have any pros or cons about it.
railguy

oldzzy

I'm installing a TKO600 right now, and you will have to cut your trans tunnel.

Railguy

how much of the tunnel did you have to cut?And where at?The add said the shifter could be moved but it didn't say where.I emailed them and didn't get an answer.
railguy

oldzzy

I had to cut out more than i thought i was going to. By them saying moving the shifter to different positions is you can flip the shifter around to grain more of a forward position. They also sell offset shifters to move the shifter to the side.

dc2x4drvr

The Keisler SS700 was an easy install, just like the Aotogear I pulled out, The higher cost was worth every penny..and the shifter is in the stock location

Railguy

Well the TKO-600 is on it's way.Once it' in I'll need to change the gears in the rear.Anybody have any lying around?
railguy