Want an All(most) American Transaxle?

[Jac Mac]

Most of you will have read my posts on building my own Transaxle. In my searchs for donor parts I found many other bits that while of no use to my project they were interesting enough that I saved the relevant data in case I needed it one day! Thanks to this info gathering exercise I am now at a point where my own trans is going to be a lot closer to what I want than I thought possible. However thats not the reason for this post...

With all the info gathered it became obvious that the components needed for a really strong-----one size fits all-with three basic configurations,street, race, & all out balls to the wall--- with virtually any ratio you want, along with any traction aid device desired, yet be able to rebuild it yourself if you have previously rebuilt an American 4/5 speed trans or a Ford 9" diff.---Actually the options dont stop there either as it can be 4/5/6 speed & with a bit of forethought designed in the case either gate or sequential shift. The real deal is that virtually all of the internals reqd to do this [less the castings reqd for the transaxle] are out there on the market today for less than US$5000.00 for the basic street version to around US$8000.00 for the all out deal.

Now whats that got to do with you... either lots or nothing.... do you really care, or are you happy enough with the current options you have. If I like what I hear I might chuck the whole concept up for all to see.
BTW I am not a vendor or looking to become a manufacturer-- the best way IMHO to make this happen would be to convince the original part manufacturers to create castings to accomodate this project and thereby be able to warranty the product etc, however in todays world it might be necessary to have a third party make castings & assemble or sell in kitset form with you the purchaser assuming all responsibility from there.
This is simply an idea that has got way past the lightbulb stage that I would like to see put into metal, hell perhaps GT40's ..... would like to become the controlling entity for the whole deal..

 

[Randy V]

Count me interested in a Gate-Shifted alternative!

 

[Ron Earp]

Jac Mac,

I would think this sort of project would be perfect for DYI car folk. If someone could supply a case that would take the common components like you mention it'd take care of the transaxle issue for GT40s and many other types of cars. Having a $8000 transaxle that can handle whatever you can throw at it is a deal.

For the quick rundown:

• Porsche - My 930 should be good for a lot of power/torque. However, it isn't perfect, has only four speeds, and when said and done cost about $6500 all up. Parts for it are expensive. G50s are in the same boat. 915s are even less capable.

• ZFs are rare, can break, and are costly to fix. Large money new, used, or rebuilt.

• Audi boxes are basically unsatisfactory but usable to some extent. They too can cost some serious money when outfitted.

• Over here in the US Renault boxes are as common as rocking horse poo.

I think you could get on very well indeed with this sort of project. How much torque can one of these proposed boxes handle? If the number starts with a 6 or higher then I think you've got a winner.

Ron

 

[Scott Calabro]

Sorry for the slight thread drift Jac.

I think you may do well if you can get the price point low enough.

Ron no need to get upset, I was not advertising, just correcting a factual error posted on your part.

Our transaxle's are not rare in the USA, anyone can purchase one by simply malking a phone call.

S

 

[Eric A.]

I would be seriously interested in a design that would take around 500 HP and torque. I have a shop and could do my own machine work. Having castings made might be a little out of my league.

 

[Cliff Beer]

I ain't never seen no Renoo tranny here in the US of A...

Seriously, I think the last car Renault sold here was the Le Car - I had one in high school 25 years ago. The only thing that car was good for was my guy friends being able to stand up out the pull-back rag top and BA girls as we passed by. I don't recall it having any kind of a decent transaxle....

 

[Jac Mac]

I suppose France could have been part of the USA at one point, but I had no intention of incorporating any part of a 'Renault' Trans in this idea. I think they are best left for fitment to cars with HP & strength & intended usage values to match.
The internals I have in mind are good for more than ' a number beginning with 6 ' plus a couple of zero's thru 8500 rpm in their current applications in the 'race' versions. Have a gut feeling a certain 930 T/Axle owner is gonna be back on my case about this come march next year, will wait & see

 

[Roark_John]

WTF??? Why am I reading Renault transaxle this, Renault transaxle that...when Jac Mac specifically said this has NOTHING to do with Renault or Porsche?

This is about the potential of a kit built transaxle using locally sourced components.

I don't have much respect for ADULTS who don't have the ability to read or comprehend what they are reading. Especially ones that I assume work for a living and have responsibilities. Stay on topic, or take some adult Ritalin. Otherwise go pollute a RENAULT TRANSAXLE thread.

Some of us are genuinely interested in hearing Jac Mac's ideas and possibly contributing.

 

[Jac Mac]

WTF??? Why am I reading Renault transaxle this, Renault transaxle that...when Jac Mac specifically said this has NOTHING to do with Renault or Porsche?

This is about the potential of a kit built transaxle using locally sourced components.

I don't have much respect for ADULTS who don't have the ability to read or comprehend what they are reading. Especially ones that I assume work for a living and have responsibilities. Stay on topic, or take some adult Ritalin. Otherwise go pollute a RENAULT TRANSAXLE thread.

Some of us are genuinely interested in hearing Jac Mac's ideas and possibly contributing.

Maybe because they have over indulged in a practice that is reputed to cause blindness amongst several other debilitating afflictions. They are probably waiting for a 'hands free' transaxle so that they wont suffer from 'habitus interuptuss'.

 

[Jack]

+1 Jac Mac!

 

[Ron Earp]

Renault info moved to another thread. Now back to your regular programming.

 

[Jac Mac]

Right, heres a couple of pics to get you on the same wavelength. Look at & read the info on the pics carefully , I seem to have developed a low tolerance level lately toward those that dont.

 

[Dave P]

Jac:
The machining of the castings would be the hardest part. Fixturing for the production would have a bit of cost or are you thinking having each person receive blank castings? If you need G code programs for cnc I could give you a hand.

 

[egoman/ Shawn Wedge]

My idea is still to use the quick change RP and mount the trans out back with the quick change option. Ny machinist buddy has fallen in love and its progressing slowly at this point.I am planning on using the ford toploader gears and dont feel the need at this time for more gears. ( Light weight car and quick change gears). We (lovesick boy and me ) have decided to do a billet case for the first one and if it can prove useable then we would think about a casting. There was a company that was doing auto trans bellhousings for drag cars that had them sfi approved as scattershields. I believe the alloy was called tinzalloy and would probably look into casting the complete housing out of this material. I just remembered that we were also going with a 2 piece housing in order to make for a quick replacement trans. My idea like jac macs is to be able to use the off the shelf parts to round out the assembly as easily as possible.Gears for the toploaders are available in so many different ratios if you need them as well as the quick change stuff. I am shying away from the 9 inch stuff only because the gear change would require you to go deeper than the casual enthusiast would attempt. Thats my 2$ worth(cant get anything for 2 cents anymore).

 

[Roark_John]

Any reason why the Dana 44 R&P wasn't included? Forgive me, I don't have the dimensions memorized, but I know there are factory and aftermarket reverse-pitch R&Ps available as this is a fairly common front axle in 4x4s.

I don't mean to opine out of order, but I envision a small family of transaxles...a "light" duty 5 speed, using Dana 44 R&P with T5 internals (at least as strong as an Audi unit, possibly much stronger with upgraded gearsets)...a "medium-heavy" duty 6 speed, using Dana 60 R&P with T56 internals (much stronger than the plain-jane Porsche unit)...and the "overkill" 6 speed, using 10" QuickChange R&P, with T56 internals USING twin cluster shafts...using completely stock out-of-the box components, this version would be able to withstand 1200 ft lbs of torque...that's modified turbo-diesel territory.

Right, heres a couple of pics to get you on the same wavelength. Look at & read the info on the pics carefully , I seem to have developed a low tolerance level lately toward those that dont.

 

[Jac Mac]

Dave.
The main reason for choosing the Richmond trans as the basis is its 3.5" center dimension, given the layout dwg the reason is a little obscure as this doesnt seem critical @ first glance.
The Richmond 5/6speeds are derived from the 'old' Doug Nash 5 speed, They have dimensions in common with the 'Liberty 1000hp capable' 5 spd straight cut dog box which in turn has a stablemate twin countershaft version.
The twin countershaft 1500+hp version is of no interest to us, BUT the tooling & programming to machine those three parallel shafts @ 3.5" centers definitely is. The 'new' castings could be machined on the existing setup with probably only a few changes for thru bolt positions & the revised shifter mechanism ( That is simply a flat face with attachment bolts-- The shifter mechanism would be self contained with selector forks etc in/on its own bolt on housing which is interchangeble from side to side for LHD/RHD..).
Since the QC gear centers are also 3.5" the now redundant countershaft bore is used for the 'Jac Shaft' from QC gears to Pinion.( BTW, before everyone gets excited by QC gear whine... they have been available for some time in 'helical cut'.

Egoman .
The reason for using the Hypoid R&P is simply to reduce the 'Input/Output' height dimension, which shown on the dwg above is 2.00". This helps considerably with engine/flywheel ground clearance & 1/2 shaft geometry. Were we to use your suggested QC R&P we would be locked into that 3.5" height which creates a few problems, particularly with wet sumps & road use. The R&P ratio situation is no different to yours, in fact we have more choices available-- look again... this uses any of the following: up to six R&P ratios, Six or more choices of ratio in any of the four indirect transmission ratios ( Top is 1/1 in the trans section ), and four or more ratios in the helical QC gear selection & should you choose straight cut version a damn sight more than you will ever need.). Add to that it has choices of Detroit Locker/Tru Trac/ Posi-Clutch LSD, & Open Differential.

Wyoming.
Some of the above posts should clear this up. Your suggestions would mean a seperate casting/machining operation for variations of those for each different version as I understand it . This would make the cost of each rather expensive IMHO.

Reverse Pitch R&P... These are available for the R&P I have chosen here also, but think about it, thats not what we need for a Pantera inverted application as we would need to flip the Ring Gear to the 'other ' side of the pinion with tooth pattern to match. The reverse pitch simply has the tooth profile reversed in relation to 'drive/coast' for what would normally be reverse pinion rotation in front wheel drive.

 

[Roark_John]

I like your thinking. One quick question...what about when you want the R&P inverted above the input shaft? Would you then need a reverse rotation R&P? The reason why I ask is that my first mid-engine project was a 67 Corvair with a mid-engine SBC and using the kit I purchased, it drove the coast side of the gear...not a good situation for torque loading, especially on a dainty rear end like the Corvair, and slightly less envious in any other design.

Wyoming.
Reverse Pitch R&P... These are available for the R&P I have chosen here also, but think about it, thats not what we need for a Pantera inverted application as we would need to flip the Ring Gear to the 'other ' side of the pinion with tooth pattern to match. The reverse pitch simply has the tooth profile reversed in relation to 'drive/coast' for what would normally be reverse pinion rotation in front wheel drive.

 

[Dave P]

Jac:
Is the casting going to be simular to the patterns you made. Multiple pieces with front and rear support webs for shafts?

 

[egoman/ Shawn Wedge]

Took me a few seconds to see what you were on about there JM. You are thinking about my proposal in a straight up and down world. Pictur the input shaft coming in from the side at say a 45 degree angle. This leaves the option of putting the crankshaft center allmost anywhere you would want it. This is one of the things that you would build in wood first to get your packaging right.What would you consider a workable crankshaft height? I was thinking 11 inches with the axle centerline at 14.

 

[Jac Mac]

I like your thinking. One quick question...what about when you want the R&P inverted above the input shaft? Would you then need a reverse rotation R&P? The reason why I ask is that my first mid-engine project was a 67 Corvair with a mid-engine SBC and using the kit I purchased, it drove the coast side of the gear...not a good situation for torque loading, especially on a dainty rear end like the Corvair, and slightly less envious in any other design.

Whoops, I mis-read your post, we have the R&P above the input, or did you mean below. Yes, if you wished to use it in say a 'normal 911 Porsche or Pantera type location as you suggest with the inut above output shafts then a reverse rotation R&P with the Ring on the other side of the pinion would be reqd--- that is not going to happen for low $$.
P>S> the reason as Im sure your aware that you 'drove' on the coast side was due to the anticlockwise configuration of the corvair versus the clockwise SBC.

Dave,

Another pic, yes still have each section seperate, the trans case pattern I originally built can/could be lengthened & then split into L/R halves with provision for thru bolts etc to enable this all to happen, but as your aware for my own transaxle which I wish to replicate to a T44 as closely as possible the two cannot mix. This concept is for as the thread title implies a possible solution for the community at large.

Egoman... 45°?, you have lost me & that takes a bit of doing!