Anyone have a Keisler RS 500/600?
 

I'm looking for a new manual trans. I'm leaning towards the Keisler RS 600 right now but can't really seem to find much on it here on the forum. Is anyone running one? I understand they are fairly new but the guy on the phone made it sound like they are flying off the shelf.

I was told it's a better trans than the TKO series but the significantly cheaper price makes me raise an eyebrow(about $800 less on my quote). Can someone explain the differences to me? Anyone have a RS love it or hate it? Thanks guys!

I would love to hear opinions too!

I can't say amything about the RS, but I have a TKO-600 in my '71 and I LOVE IT!!! The install was clean, with no mods except the removable crossmember. I am not sure how it could be better...but if it is, it's gonna be GREAT!!!:cheers:

I would go to their website:
http://www.keislerauto.com/

The site indicates that the new RS400/500/600 require no cutting of the tunnel or the crossmember. I sent an email last week to confrim, but have not had a reply.

I have a quote on the RS500 for 2.5K which includes required pilot bearing, drive shaft with tranmisison yoke and transmission.

That is $500 or more less than the TKO or the Richmond.

Hi Folks,

The RS400/500/600 models are in production now, and will be shipping in the coming weeks. The RS are NO CUTTING in ALL CORVETTE.

The predecessor to the RS is T45RS, which we have been selling since 2007. In a C3 4-speed equipped car, the T45RS required extending the shifter hole to the right about an inch. This is NOT required for the RS. The RS uses our new PerfectFit design parts for a not cutting, perfect fit, correct driveline angle install.

There are people running the T45RS600 on Pro-Touring.com. Go on there and look at the threads on it, and you can ask them questions.

Alan Covin, the editor of the former Corvette Fever magazine, did a full feature on the T45RS500 in 2009. And you can see his driving video at www.keislertv.com. He was very impressed with the transmission, and liked the shift quality much better than the TKO.

Cory70- I found this over at the pro-touring forum. I hope the Keisler guys don't mind but I'm just cutting and pasting a response they posted over there. This was the info I was looking for, a bit more detailed than on their web-site. I took it out of the thread linked below. Take a look as a couple guys review the RS in it as well. I really think that this is the way I'm gonna go. The RS600 seems like a pretty good match for what I'm looking for. Not to mention a great price quote. Much friendlier than the TKO on the wallet.

I'd still like to know if anyone here is running one and what they think. Anyway,here's the info I found.

http://www.pro-touring.com/showthrea...-Keisler-RS600

Originally posted by Keisler:
Hi Guys and Gals,

We will be launching the new Keisler RS PerfectFit 5-Speed officially next month. We debuted it at the Chicago Muscle Car and Corvette Nationals last weekend. Here is some info about it, compared with our previous offerings. As this product will prove itself in the months and years to come, it is a major advancement in the market, and is Keisler's new flagship product.

DESCRIPTION ... KEISLER Rallye Sport "RS" 5-speed
The evolution of the Keisler T45RS line started back in 2007, the Keisler RS 5-Speed product line takes our overdrive transmission systems to a higher level of quality, value and performance.

1) A Perfect Fit
Thanks to an all new feature rich extension housing case and a heavily revised shift system, we are able to package the RS as a PerfectFit for a no cutting, no compromise fit in most popular muscle cars and classic sports cars. PerfectFit with the RS is standard - not an upcharge (like our tremec tko perfectfit kits). More than 15 shifter handle mounting positions exist for all popular domestic cars, sport trucks and kit cars.
> GM A-body NO CUTTING - For the first time ever, owners of Chevelle, GTO, Skylark, 442 will be able to install a 5-Speed with NO CUTTING to the tunnel ... a major improvement over our tko perfectfit kits. The RS provides uncompromised driveline angle and assures your engine won't be tilted back with exhaust headers pointing down to the ground, and you won't have driveshaft vibration - typical problems found when a tko is installed.
> GM F-body NO CUTTING - owners of Camaro and Firebirds will no longer have to notch the shifter hole and use a compromised boot sealing arrangement (req'd by tko).
> Corvette NO CUTTING - the main advantage of RS for Corvette owners is that there is no compromise of the driveline angle, and there is MUCH more clearance between the transmission and floor tunnel.
> GM B-body, NO CUTTING - For the first time ever, owners of Bel Air, Impala, Biscayne and other apps will be able to install a 5-Speed without the major tunnel surgery typical of the tko.
> GM X-body and other apps like Cobra kit car having a shallow tunnel will greatly benefit by the RS PerfectFit design, allowing installation with little (gen 1) to no mod (gen 2) to the floor tunnel, while keeping perfect shifter position. Again, these

2) Unsurpassed Shift Quality, High RPM Shifts, NO 2-3 Misssed Shifts
Thanks to the Borg Warner designed carbon fiber lined Blocker Rings in all gears, and Double Friction Cone system in 1st and 2nd gears, the RS features the best shift quality of any aftermarket manual transmission (including tremec tko, 3550, 3650, t5, t56, Richmond). At Keisler, we redesigned the shift systems of reverse, added bearing support under the shift forks and other portions of the single rail system. While the BW T45 was designed several years after BW T56, and shares it's synchro system design, the shift quality is even better than T56 because the shifter rail/fork/interlock system has less mass and fewer joints. The result is a very nimble shifter feel. Additionally, the advanced carbon lined synchro system has a much higher coefficient of friction than paper lined blockers, or just plain brass blockers (like TKO). The result is far less shift effort at the handle. The shift quality right out of the box is clean and smooth with no break-in, and a world of difference better than the best highly modified, proshifted TKO; withouth the big price adder.

The Keisler RS cleanly shifts at 7000rpm - more than 1000rpm higher than TKO's 6000rpm cutoff.

The RS has a guide plate shifter system unique to any manual 5-speed on the market. This guide plate mechanism cleanly guides the shifter in/out of gates 1-5 & R. A 2-3 miss shift so common to TKO - as many of you already know - is nearly impossible with the RS. I haven't been able to miss a 2-3 shift with the RS.

4) Close Ratio & Standard Ratio Gearsets
Standard Ratio Gearset - 3.37, 1.99, 1.34, 1.0, .67 (1.38 step change in 1st, 33% RPM drop in overdrive)
RS400 (400 torque): 1-1/16 x 10 spline input shaft, SAE 8620 nickel-moly steel alloy
RS500 (500 torque): 1-1/8 x 26 spline input shaft, SAE 9310 chrome-nickel-moly high strength steel alloy, CNC ground gears

Close Ratio Gearset (new)- 2.80, 1.99, 1.34, 1.0, .67 (.81 step change in 1st, 33% drop in overdrive)
RS600 (600 torque): 1-1/8 x 26 spline input shaft, SAE 9310 chrome-nickel-moly high strength steel alloy, CNC ground gears

3) Lower Cost and Better Value than previous offerings
Keisler Engineering created the business of retrofitting Tremecs and have sold more than 13,000 of those units since 1999.
The Keisler RS 5-Speed now sets the new benchmark of the flagship overdrive transmission system. And, we've managed to do it for hundreds of dollars less than the tko. And we're going here in the USA - gears, cases, shifter components

Shafi informed me today via email that in order to install a RS500 or RS600 in my 71 I would have to unbolt the motor and move it forward a few inches or remove the motor.

I ordered a TKO600 and two days later they announced their RS600. I changed my order and saved $500. Like they said, they're in production and I'm waiting for delivery. I ordered it just before X-Mas and was told that delivery wouldn't be until February. Better timing for me anyway. I'll post a writeup when I get it and install it. When I talked to them on the phone (great Customer Service btw) they raved about the RS compared to the TKO.

Scott

Why would you do that? You support the rear of the motor and you tilt it down for ease of getting to the upper bell housing bolts.

I keep forgetting about the non removable cross member. Get the removable cross member and make the job easier.

^ I am just posting what he told me. I am trying to figure out if I want to order the RS500/RS600/TKO500/TKO600. I am comparing all 4 of them.

Who sells the replaceable cross member kit? A link would be appreciated. That would definitely help with the install. I just did a spreadsheet comparing all the gear ratios.
My 71 has 4:11 gears, 255/60/15 tires, 350 motor with LT-1 heads (330 hp heads) and a 4-71 roots style blower. Should be around 450 hp (on paper).

The RS 5-speed is synchronized in reverse (TKO is not), and the lower portion of the extension housing is longer to the rear of the car due to this fact. When installing the transmission, it is too difficult to install with the WELDED IN Crossmember that all 4-speed Vettes are equipped with through 1979.

We make a really nice removable crossmember kit. Check it out here.

Moving the engine forward for the install gives you the room needed to do the job easier when working underneath the car. Removing the engine is a more practical approach for the owner that doesn't have a lift.

Which one would you recommend to a big block car? TKO's have been quite popular here in Finland and I too am planning to get a 5 speed. I don't mind if its cheaper and easier to install. But I don't want any kind of durability issues - if there is any?

The close ratio RS600 sounds interesting. How is the 1st gear in city traffic?

It really depends on a couple of things. Weight of the flywheel and your rear end gear.

I have the TKO600 2.87 first with 22 pound flywheel and this year changed to 3.55 rear end. 3.55 makes the first 4 gears very useable around town and the OD is for over 70 KM.

If you have a 3.36 or 3.08 rear it would require a little slip to get going.

3.36 it is. No idea about the flywheel though. Probably something stockish.

Isn't the 1st gear ratio for M21 2.20? So if RS600's 1st is 2.80 and RS4/500's 3.37 then the RS600 would be closer to the original? I don't know if I am thinking this the right way but wouldn't the RS600's ratio make it easier to get going than M21's?

Far easier 2.80 or 2.87 compared to a 2.20. It's just math. 3.36 X 2.80 = 9.04 overall ratio

Where you might or might not be unhappy is the final gear ratio jump. 1-1 to OD of .64 or .67 is big and unless you have power. With a 3.36 rear end I would look at the .82 OD TKO 600. It really comes down to how fast you drive

Haven't dynoed it so no idea but doesn't feel weak (engine specs). I guess my highway speeds are mostly 70-90mph so my revs are a bit too high to my liking - compared to my C4 with 700R4. I would prefer a good drop in revs while cruising on highways. In fact 4/5 of my driving is hw so I think I would mostly spend my time on 5th.

ToniH did state "big-block". With my 454 I have a 3.08 rear gear with a TKO (0.67:1 OD). No problems at all, love it. I get 75mph @2000 rpm. I can lug it down to 1500 in 5th with no problems.

I went to toniH's web site and he has a 238/248 108 assuming H-flat cam. That might be kind of like my motor. Not real happy in OD at sub 2000 rpm. At his 70 - 90 mph it would work

Yeah, 454 too. Mech flat tappet cam.

Thanks guys, most helpful. I must do some thinking but I guess its not so complicated after all. I would drive in 1-4 gears in all other situations but hw cruise. So, I think it wouldn't bog down too badly. Now its other way around: 2500rpm @ 60mph (I think, 5 months since I tug her into the winter hibernation).

Same here, you have some torque then no problem with 3.08 I have absoultly no problem driving around town and love to drop it down to the .64 OD and cruise at 80mph at less than 2000rpm. Best mod I have ever done.was the TKO 600. If road racing you want the higher OD gear .82 or some thing like that :cheers:

Standard Ratio Gearset - 3.37, 1.99, 1.34, 1.0, .67 (1.38 step change in 1st, 33% RPM drop in overdrive)
RS400 (400 torque): 1-1/16 x 10 spline input shaft, SAE 8620 nickel-moly steel alloy
RS500 (500 torque): 1-1/8 x 26 spline input shaft, SAE 9310 chrome-nickel-moly high strength steel alloy, CNC ground gears

Close Ratio Gearset (new)- 2.80, 1.99, 1.34, 1.0, .67 (.81 step change in 1st, 33% drop in overdrive)
RS600 (600 torque): 1-1/8 x 26 spline input shaft, SAE 9310 chrome-nickel-moly high strength steel alloy, CNC ground gears

Maybe its just me but does anyone question why the step between first and secone gear in the wide ratio is so big, its like a granny gear and then there is a huge drop to second. For a 327 I'm thinking the RS600 is the better choice but I certainly do not need the torque rating it offers or the added price to get a close ratio box.

I called them yesterday to inquire about this. They have no plans to make the 400 or 500 version with the close ratio first gear- the 600 is the only choice if that's what you want. I'm interested in a unit for the car in my avatar because it has 4.10 rear gears and the close ratio Muncie 4 speed that it came with. The 600 is my only option or 1st gear would be worthless. He said the 600 is the same trans as the 500 except with the close ratio 1st gear. I asked about the different torque ratings between the two, wondering if the extra torque multiplication of the lower 1st gear ratio in the 500 made it more vulnerable to failure, but never got a clear answer. Other than that he was real nice and very helpful. I'm in no rush so I'll see what kind of reviews they get as more people start using them.

How much hp can each trans handle? Does anybody know?

HP is "number" that is why they give a TQ rating and the TKO 600 is a 24 hour test not just a motor that flashes to 600 every once in awhile

This is a good read

There's been a certain amount of discussion, in this and other files, about the concepts of horsepower and torque, how they relate to each other, and how they apply in terms of automobile performance. I have observed that, although nearly everyone participating has a passion for automobiles, there is a huge variance in knowledge. It's clear that a bunch of folks have strong opinions (about this topic, and other things), but that has generally led to more heat than light, if you get my drift :-). I've posted a subset of this note in another string, but felt it deserved to be dealt with as a separate topic. This is meant to be a primer on the subject, which may lead to serious discussion that fleshes out this and other subtopics that will inevitably need to be addressed.
OK. Here's the deal, in moderately plain english.


Force, Work and Time
If you have a one pound weight bolted to the floor, and try to lift it with one pound of force (or 10, or 50 pounds), you will have applied force and exerted energy, but no work will have been done. If you unbolt the weight, and apply a force sufficient to lift the weight one foot, then one foot pound of work will have been done. If that event takes a minute to accomplish, then you will be doing work at the rate of one foot pound per minute. If it takes one second to accomplish the task, then work will be done at the rate of 60 foot pounds per minute, and so on.
In order to apply these measurements to automobiles and their performance (whether you're speaking of torque, horsepower, newton meters, watts, or any other terms), you need to address the three variables of force, work and time.

Awhile back, a gentleman by the name of Watt (the same gent who did all that neat stuff with steam engines) made some observations, and concluded that the average horse of the time could lift a 550 pound weight one foot in one second, thereby performing work at the rate of 550 foot pounds per second, or 33,000 foot pounds per minute, for an eight hour shift, more or less. He then published those observations, and stated that 33,000 foot pounds per minute of work was equivalent to the power of one horse, or, one horsepower.

Everybody else said OK. :-)

For purposes of this discussion, we need to measure units of force from rotating objects such as crankshafts, so we'll use terms which define a *twisting* force, such as foot pounds of torque. A foot pound of torque is the twisting force necessary to support a one pound weight on a weightless horizontal bar, one foot from the fulcrum.

Now, it's important to understand that nobody on the planet ever actually measures horsepower from a running engine. What we actually measure (on a dynomometer) is torque, expressed in foot pounds (in the U.S.), and then we *calculate* actual horsepower by converting the twisting force of torque into the work units of horsepower.

Visualize that one pound weight we mentioned, one foot from the fulcrum on its weightless bar. If we rotate that weight for one full revolution against a one pound resistance, we have moved it a total of 6.2832 feet (Pi * a two foot circle), and, incidently, we have done 6.2832 foot pounds of work.

OK. Remember Watt? He said that 33,000 foot pounds of work per minute was equivalent to one horsepower. If we divide the 6.2832 foot pounds of work we've done per revolution of that weight into 33,000 foot pounds, we come up with the fact that one foot pound of torque at 5252 rpm is equal to 33,000 foot pounds per minute of work, and is the equivalent of one horsepower. If we only move that weight at the rate of 2626 rpm, it's the equivalent of 1/2 horsepower (16,500 foot pounds per minute), and so on. Therefore, the following formula applies for calculating horsepower from a torque measurement:

Torque * RPM

Horsepower = ------------

5252


This is not a debatable item. It's the way it's done. Period.
The Case For Torque
Now, what does all this mean in carland?
First of all, from a driver's perspective, torque, to use the vernacular, RULES :-). Any given car, in any given gear, will accelerate at a rate that *exactly* matches its torque curve (allowing for increased air and rolling resistance as speeds climb). Another way of saying this is that a car will accelerate hardest at its torque peak in any given gear, and will not accelerate as hard below that peak, or above it. Torque is the only thing that a driver feels, and horsepower is just sort of an esoteric measurement in that context. 300 foot pounds of torque will accelerate you just as hard at 2000 rpm as it would if you were making that torque at 4000 rpm in the same gear, yet, per the formula, the horsepower would be *double* at 4000 rpm. Therefore, horsepower isn't particularly meaningful from a driver's perspective, and the two numbers only get friendly at 5252 rpm, where horsepower and torque always come out the same.

In contrast to a torque curve (and the matching pushback into your seat), horsepower rises rapidly with rpm, especially when torque values are also climbing. Horsepower will continue to climb, however, until well past the torque peak, and will continue to rise as engine speed climbs, until the torque curve really begins to plummet, faster than engine rpm is rising. However, as I said, horsepower has nothing to do with what a driver *feels*.

You don't believe all this?

Fine. Take your non turbo car (turbo lag muddles the results) to its torque peak in first gear, and punch it. Notice the belt in the back? Now take it to the power peak, and punch it. Notice that the belt in the back is a bit weaker? Fine. Can we go on, now? :-)


The Case For Horsepower
OK. If torque is so all-fired important, why do we care about horsepower?
Because (to quote a friend), "It is better to make torque at high rpm than at low rpm, because you can take advantage of *gearing*.

For an extreme example of this, I'll leave carland for a moment, and describe a waterwheel I got to watch awhile ago. This was a pretty massive wheel (built a couple of hundred years ago), rotating lazily on a shaft which was connected to the works inside a flour mill. Working some things out from what the people in the mill said, I was able to determine that the wheel typically generated about 2600(!) foot pounds of torque. I had clocked its speed, and determined that it was rotating at about 12 rpm. If we hooked that wheel to, say, the drivewheels of a car, that car would go from zero to twelve rpm in a flash, and the waterwheel would hardly notice :-).

On the other hand, twelve rpm of the drivewheels is around one mph for the average car, and, in order to go faster, we'd need to gear it up. To get to 60 mph would require gearing the wheel up enough so that it would be effectively making a little over 43 foot pounds of torque at the output, which is not only a relatively small amount, it's less than what the average car would need in order to actually get to 60. Applying the conversion formula gives us the facts on this. Twelve times twenty six hundred, over five thousand two hundred fifty two gives us:

6 HP.

Oops. Now we see the rest of the story. While it's clearly true that the water wheel can exert a *bunch* of force, its *power* (ability to do work over time) is severely limited.


At The Dragstrip
OK. Back to carland, and some examples of how horsepower makes a major difference in how fast a car can accelerate, in spite of what torque on your backside tells you :-).
A very good example would be to compare the current LT1 Corvette with the last of the L98 Vettes, built in 1991. Figures as follows:

Engine Peak HP @ RPM Peak Torque @ RPM

------ ------------- -----------------

L98 250 @ 4000 340 @ 3200

LT1 300 @ 5000 340 @ 3600


The cars are geared identically, and car weights are within a few pounds, so it's a good comparison.
First, each car will push you back in the seat (the fun factor) with the same authority - at least at or near peak torque in each gear. One will tend to *feel* about as fast as the other to the driver, but the LT1 will actually be significantly faster than the L98, even though it won't pull any harder. If we mess about with the formula, we can begin to discover exactly *why* the LT1 is faster. Here's another slice at that formula:

Horsepower * 5252

Torque = -----------------

RPM


If we plug some numbers in, we can see that the L98 is making 328 foot pounds of torque at its power peak (250 hp @ 4000), and we can infer that it cannot be making any more than 263 pound feet of torque at 5000 rpm, or it would be making more than 250 hp at that engine speed, and would be so rated. In actuality, the L98 is probably making no more than around 210 pound feet or so at 5000 rpm, and anybody who owns one would shift it at around 46-4700 rpm, because more torque is available at the drive wheels in the next gear at that point.
On the other hand, the LT1 is fairly happy making 315 pound feet at 5000 rpm, and is happy right up to its mid 5s redline.

So, in a drag race, the cars would launch more or less together. The L98 might have a slight advantage due to its peak torque occuring a little earlier in the rev range, but that is debatable, since the LT1 has a wider, flatter curve (again pretty much by definition, looking at the figures). From somewhere in the mid range and up, however, the LT1 would begin to pull away. Where the L98 has to shift to second (and throw away torque multiplication for speed), the LT1 still has around another 1000 rpm to go in first, and thus begins to widen its lead, more and more as the speeds climb. As long as the revs are high, the LT1, by definition, has an advantage.

Another example would be the LT1 against the ZR-1. Same deal, only in reverse. The ZR-1 actually pulls a little harder than the LT1, although its torque advantage is softened somewhat by its extra weight. The real advantage, however, is that the ZR-1 has another 1500 rpm in hand at the point where the LT1 has to shift.

There are numerous examples of this phenomenon. The Integra GS-R, for instance, is faster than the garden variety Integra, not because it pulls particularly harder (it doesn't), but because it pulls *longer*. It doesn't feel particularly faster, but it is.

A final example of this requires your imagination. Figure that we can tweak an LT1 engine so that it still makes peak torque of 340 foot pounds at 3600 rpm, but, instead of the curve dropping off to 315 pound feet at 5000, we extend the torque curve so much that it doesn't fall off to 315 pound feet until 15000 rpm. OK, so we'd need to have virtually all the moving parts made out of unobtanium :-), and some sort of turbocharging on demand that would make enough high-rpm boost to keep the curve from falling, but hey, bear with me.

If you raced a stock LT1 with this car, they would launch together, but, somewhere around the 60 foot point, the stocker would begin to fade, and would have to grab second gear shortly thereafter. Not long after that, you'd see in your mirror that the stocker has grabbed third, and not too long after that, it would get fourth, but you'd wouldn't be able to see that due to the distance between you as you crossed the line, *still in first gear*, and pulling like crazy.

I've got a computer simulation that models an LT1 Vette in a quarter mile pass, and it predicts a 13.38 second ET, at 104.5 mph. That's pretty close (actually a tiny bit conservative) to what a stock LT1 can do at 100% air density at a high traction drag strip, being powershifted. However, our modified car, while belting the driver in the back no harder than the stocker (at peak torque) does an 11.96, at 135.1 mph, all in first gear, of course. It doesn't pull any harder, but it sure as hell pulls longer :-). It's also making *900* hp, at 15,000 rpm.

Of course, folks who are knowledgeable about drag racing are now openly snickering, because they've read the preceeding paragraph, and it occurs to them that any self respecting car that can get to 135 mph in a quarter mile will just naturally be doing this in less than ten seconds. Of course that's true, but I remind these same folks that any self-respecting engine that propels a Vette into the nines is also making a whole bunch more than 340 foot pounds of torque.

That does bring up another point, though. Essentially, a more "real" Corvette running 135 mph in a quarter mile (maybe a mega big block) might be making 700-800 foot pounds of torque, and thus it would pull a whole bunch harder than my paper tiger would. It would need slicks and other modifications in order to turn that torque into forward motion, but it would also get from here to way over there a bunch quicker.

On the other hand, as long as we're making quarter mile passes with fantasy engines, if we put a 10.35:1 final-drive gear (3.45 is stock) in our fantasy LT1, with slicks and other chassis mods, we'd be in the nines just as easily as the big block would, and thus save face :-). The mechanical advantage of such a nonsensical rear gear would allow our combination to pull just as hard as the big block, plus we'd get to do all that gear banging and such that real racers do, and finish in fourth gear, as God intends. :-)

The only modification to the preceeding paragraph would be the polar moments of inertia (flywheel effect) argument brought about by such a stiff rear gear, and that argument is outside of the scope of this already massive document. Another time, maybe, if you can stand it :-).


At The Bonneville Salt Flats
Looking at top speed, horsepower wins again, in the sense that making more torque at high rpm means you can use a stiffer gear for any given car speed, and thus have more effective torque *at the drive wheels*.
Finally, operating at the power peak means you are doing the absolute best you can at any given car speed, measuring torque at the drive wheels. I know I said that acceleration follows the torque curve in any given gear, but if you factor in gearing vs car speed, the power peak is *it*. An example, yet again, of the LT1 Vette will illustrate this. If you take it up to its torque peak (3600 rpm) in a gear, it will generate some level of torque (340 foot pounds times whatever overall gearing) at the drive wheels, which is the best it will do in that gear (meaning, that's where it is pulling hardest in that gear).

However, if you re-gear the car so it is operating at the power peak (5000 rpm) *at the same car speed*, it will deliver more torque to the drive wheels, because you'll need to gear it up by nearly 39% (5000/3600), while engine torque has only dropped by a little over 7% (315/340). You'll net a 29% gain in drive wheel torque at the power peak vs the torque peak, at a given car speed.

Any other rpm (other than the power peak) at a given car speed will net you a lower torque value at the drive wheels. This would be true of any car on the planet, so, theoretical "best" top speed will always occur when a given vehicle is operating at its power peak.

"Modernizing" The 18th Century
OK. For the final-final point (Really. I Promise.), what if we ditched that water wheel, and bolted an LT1 in its place? Now, no LT1 is going to be making over 2600 foot pounds of torque (except possibly for a single, glorious instant, running on nitromethane), but, assuming we needed 12 rpm for an input to the mill, we could run the LT1 at 5000 rpm (where it's making 315 foot pounds of torque), and gear it down to a 12 rpm output. Result? We'd have over *131,000* foot pounds of torque to play with. We could probably twist the whole flour mill around the input shaft, if we needed to :-).

The Only Thing You Really Need to Know!

Repeat after me. "It is better to make torque at high rpm than at low rpm, because you can take advantage of *gearing*." :-)
Thanks for your time.

George

Ive got a headache now:lol: I just wanted to know if these transmissions could handle high hp or torgue. are they as strong as the tkos?would it hold up to a 572 GM crate engine?

George likes giving people headaches. ;) The numbers assigned to each transmission correspond to their torque rating- 400, 500, and 600.

I put ~ 600tq through miine evey timei I take it out more then one too, they will hwndle anythhng you put through it short of a S/C big block :thumbs:

Thank you,kinda what i thought. :cheers:

That would be a good Q for Keisler. When Tremec rates a transmission it's 24 hours sustained load. Does Keisler rate the same way? If so, I wouldn't hesitate to put a transmission rated for 500 ft-lbs behind a 600 ft-lbs motor. Actually, that's exactly what I did years ago: The original Tremec TKO (rated 500 ft-lbs) has lived behind my 550+ ft-lbs 454 for years with no problems at all. I recently bumped the cam & compression up a bit and I'm making closer to 600 ft-lbs now. I don't expect any problems.

I too would like to hear from Keisler how the new RS boxes compare to TKO's in strength.

Sounds like the torque on the layshaft and the final gear set, created by 1st gear ratio, is the bottleneck in terms of tolerable mechanical stress.

2nd to 5th gears are able to handle the 600 ft-lbs anyway and by reducing the 1st from 3.37 to 2.80 leads to exactly 20% less load which is needed to increase torque capacity from 500 to 600 ft-lbs.

Carsten

Someone here has the TKO 600 on a chassis dyno at around 1000 HP or so with no problems.

Between two identicall transmissions it seems the first gear dictates the HP/Torque rating. The lower the first gear the lower the tranny is rated at.

If you look at the front page of the Keisler website they have 2 trannys
there that I believe are identical except for the first gear. The one with the 2.8 1st is rated at 600ft/lbs and the one with the 3.37 1st is rated lower at 500 ft/lbs :thumbs:

gkull, Thanks for posting that. It improved my understanding of HP vs Torque, in a practical (automotive) sense, well beyond what my physics classes ever did.

According to an older post I found in the C2 section Keisler stated that the RS400 can be ordered with a close ratio 2nd gear set making it a RS400C and for future HP upgrades all one has to do in change the main input shaft. What about the internal bearings and gear cuts, do they all remain the same? From the limited information about these RS transmissions it seems to read or imply that these are starting out as used transmissions and the advertsing states something to the effect that all worn parts are replaced or upgraded I for one being a mechanical engineer want to read/see exactly what has been upgraded in these T45s. The T45 has been known to have had problems in the Mustangs over the years which do not put out anywhere close to 500 or 600 ft lbs of torque. What has Keisler done above and beyond what BW did during the design and testing of these units for production?

Also with regards to the use of Carbon fiber, we all know at least one top rear-end rebuilder who will not use carbon fiber clutch disks for the simple reason they do not hold up in high torque/ HP applications, fine for a mild HP application otherwise they comes apart. So it will be very interesting to see how these transmissions hold up in some of these applications.

Before I plunk down this much cash I want to know exactly what I'm buying.

I changed out my 4.11 rear gears with my tko 600 because first gear was kind of worthless. In a full on drag race type launch with sticky slicks. You really needed a shift light because in about 1.5 seconds or 60 feet you already have to yank it down into second gear because you would be going into the rev limiter at 7000 rpm.

4.10 is fun in OD. I had a friend that want to experiece high speed in my vette. so just for fun I ran it up to just over 6000 rpm in 5th (@180mph)

This will help your figure out what tranny a rear gears you need


http://www.secondstrike.com/Technical/GearCalc.asp


Second Strike Gearing Calculator

4.10 rear end gears

335 Rear Tire Width 35 Rear Tire Aspect Ratio 17 Rear Rim Diameter

Speed (MPH) in Gears at RPM

Gear 1st 2nd 3rd 4th 5th
Trans Ratio 2.87 1.89 1.28 1.00 0.64
Overall Ratio 11.77 7.75 5.25 4.10 2.62
Split 1.52 1.48 1.28 1.56
Rev/Mile 9,309 6,130 4,152 3,243 2,076
1500 10 15 22 28 43
2000 13 20 29 37 58
2500 16 24 36 46 72
3000 19 29 43 55 87
3500 23 34 51 65 101
4000 26 39 58 74 116
4500 29 44 65 83 130
5000 32 49 72 92 145
5500 35 54 79 102 159
6000 39 59 87 111 173
6500 42 64 94 120 188
7000 45 69 101 129 202

OK it's been a couple of months since this post came to life about the RS tranny's.....IS ANYBODY RUNNING ONE YET THAT CAN COMMENT ON HOW WELL IT PERFORMS IN A C3?

I called Kiesler today to order a new speedo gear for my TKO600 since I've just installed a new 3.73 rear gear set, while looking up their phone number on the website I saw the RS advertisement. Of course I had to inquire about it since my biggest beef with the TKO is hitting 3rd gear consistently if pushing it hard. Lead time is quoted at 90+ days right now :eek: I was told that one of the gear vendors had gone TU and they were scrambling to find a second source, hence the long lead time. They did acknowledge the 24 hrs at 600 ft lbs for torque rating and said "probably OK" for instantanous 650 ft lbs. The only option they have for >700 is a 6 speed. This would be cool for a road race/strip combo application with the close ratio of the new RS600 and if 1:1 was 4th gear then 0.82 and 0.67 final OD.

I think I'll wait a year and see what's happening then.
:cheers:

I am in line to receive a RS500 in June. I hope to find another C3 with a TKO for a side-to-side comparison at Car Craft Summer Nationals in St. Paul. Of course, we'd post our impression here. You may not need to wait a year to see what's happening with TKO vs. RS conversions. :thumbs:

GREAT:thumbs::thumbs: I will be waiting and looking for that comparison MN80

shmoky

I'm waiting for my RS600 still. I ordered just before X-MAS '10...which puts me as one of the first.

I think the RS500s may have started to ship.

Keisler rs 400 vs 500
 

I have a 67 L79 350 hp with 3:70 rear gear. Any ideas on using the new RS trans 400 vs 500..non racing just cruising.

Based on your info the RS400 will be all you need. The only difference between the two is the input shaft and spline count.

RS400= 1-1/16" Ford style 10 spline input shaft
RS500= 1-1/8" GM "fine" 26 spline input shaft

The 500's input shaft is stronger allowing for the added 100 lb-ft torque capacity.

wouldn't the RS600's gear ratios be a better fit with his rear end ratio though?

With a big block it would for sure but with a lower torque 327 I prefer the lower gear to get the engine up on it's legs so to speak. Realistically, at 5000 rpms there's only a 5-7 mph gap between the 3.37 and 2.80 first gear.

makes sense.

I'm going to be going with the RS500, as my rear gears are 2.87 :ack:

L79 and keisler 400 vs 500
 

Keislerjeff , thanks for the response. I had a tremec 600 with a ls2 engine in a 67 restomod i made .it was great, this car is a matching number but i love driving it. I was wondering about the launch with the 3:70 reargear and the different gearing between the 400 and the 500 close ratio 1st and second gears. Should my launch wi th the 3:70 and the 400's 3.37 be rapid, smooth and not need to slip , or should i buy the 500 with the 2:80 ratio?

:iagree:

400 vs 500
 

I will order a 400 today...thanks

Great! The phones are busy and I have a guy out so hang in there if you can't get me. Thanks!

Keisler,

As was asked earlier, I'm also curious how you arrive at the stated torque limits for each. What does your test consist of? Would an engine that occasionaly flashes to 435TQ kill the RS400? Also, if one wants to upgrade from the 400 to a 500 due to engine upgrades what would it take, just the different shaft? Would you sell this to customers?

Thanks,
Bryan

The test is a continuous duty cycle of 24 hours at the stated torque rating. The RS400 for example, sees 400 lb ft for 24 hours straight. A flash of 435 or even 485 would not hurt the trans.

I refer guys to this video on youtube quite frequently. This guy is running the original stock T45 in his car. Check it out!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MfGKMUb1GCA

Thanks for the reply and the link!

I had to wait my RS600 about an year. And i must say i hated it, and i am sure it came thru via my emails to Keisler. But i have to admit at folks at Keisler handle it really well. I got fast and prompt answers to all my emails. Customer service was really good.

I have no idea to this day is it possible to install under the car with engine on but i could not do it. Not wiht hoist or on the floor. So i took the engine out.

There was one flaw on the main case. The mounting holes for the bellhousing side were about 1/8" offset. So when i mate the transmission and bellhousing ( new from keisler ) i could not install the bolts. I had to grind the mounting tab holes to get the holes in line with the bellhousing.

Driving quality was improved about 1000 times better compared my orginal 3 speed... wich was no suprise. But still beats every munchie, dough nash 5speed or ZF6 wich i have had during the years. Allmost as good as T56 wich i had in my 63.

And the fifth, what a pleasure to drive with 3.7 gear i have :cheers:

Just Verifying
 

Very good thread guys. This looks to be a great forum

I just wanted to verify what I've read. I have a 454 HO crate engine ready to install in a 1974. It has the stock 3.36 rear. Kiesler recommended the TKO 600 is that the consensus here or he RS 600.

Also if the engine is out is removing the cross member a must.

I'm not sure they're still making the RS600. It had some hard to manufacture pieces unique to it and they were having a hard time keeping up with demand.

OK that would settle that. The response from Keisler was that with the 3.36 rear end ratio the 5th gear in TKO 600 would provide the best performance and that is what I am gathering from this thread.

Thanks for the input

I have TKO 600 with .64 5th and 3.73.....5th is a very tall gear imo. If I had 3.36 I would go with the .82 5th. Food for thought!

If your car originally had a manual transmission the cross member is non-removable, if automatic than the crossmember is removable. It is my understanding that to remove the transmission with the cross member in place one must unbolt the motor mounts and move the engine forward an inch or two to get clearance to get the trans out. If your motor is already out I think you should be able to get the trans out without removing the cross member. There are also flanges available to convert your non-removeable cross member into a removeable cross member.


http://forums.corvetteforum.com/c3-g...ossmember.html

You might also consider getting the Keisler SS700 transmission which I think is generally regarded as being a better transmission than the TKO.

http://www.keislerauto.com/ss700.html

That's what I was hoping to hear I pulled the engine and Trans together. And figured while it's out now would be the time to get a new Trans. To install are removeable cross member i would have to tow it to a shop for the welding

I researched the SS 700 and that may be too beefy for my driving needs

Thanks for the input

I have the tko 600. Had problem with it shipped it back and they were fast and did a great job.
My vet is in the archive files incredible millage. Picture on Pismo beach . the Doug Nash was a junk transmission.T his transmission was an easy install

http://archive.constantcontact.com/f...799060164.html

Ok..i want the RS600.... with the tall 5th gear... what is estimated delivery date? Pricing?


sent for from your site... please get in touch...i'll take one

Read the other Keisler treads on the forum before ordering so you'll know what you're getting into.

:iagree: They've had some very long delays in delivering their product to the buyer- if they deliver it at all. It doesn't sound like they're in good financial condition at this point, so I certainly wouldn't give them a deposit ahead of time. Those who have done so may never see that money again.

I don't know about their financials, but the product is good. I installed a rs500 in my 71 last winter and couldn't be more pleased. Ordered it at Carlisle and received in beginning of November. A couple of weeks late but reasonable.

Roadster71, what are your rear gears? How do you like the low 1st gear?

He must of been a big money spender, no way should that company fail. In the beginning they has the normal startup f'ups but that was 10 years ago.

Lots of us have their transmissions so someone spent the money coming in or the company was mismanaged or other vendors were undercuttimg them so you have to match the price.

If I want a TKO tranny they are all the same so I am going to buy the transmission for the best price I can get, hope he makes it he' a nice guy :thumbs::thumbs:

I thank this forum for saving my ass. 30 days ago I almost gave them some money for one of there products. I am very glad people had posted their experience with this company. Too bad the product seems to be very good.

Ok...so..i like the short story...and i'm sorry for people that lost money...

From my understanding...short story... Keisler is a no gooey...out of business

TKO 600 = no goey also..?? or still ok to try to buy?

Are we left with the T56?

I like the T56..just wanting to know the options...in a short story...

Which way to go.

thanks guys for all the help on this forum !

Lots of vendors selling Tremec TKOs.

If this is true about Keisler closing their doors, then I'm sorry to hear of this. He was more than fair in my dealings with him. He DID treat me right.

as soon as I heard of this product, I said time will only tell, well after all the posts of waiting months for a trans, I can call summit and have it in 2 days , now that's a good product.as in tremec 500 0r 600 with a steehda shifter.

their website's still running...
hopefully its salvageable

3.36 rears and running a stock zz4 crate engine. The low first gear is a non issue. I prefer it over the stock munch.

Where did you get that info from APGENE?

Agreed. Without anything to substantiate this claim, I find that difficult to believe.

Regardless, this was enough to keep me from buying back when I ordered a new T56 Magnum.

http://www.bbb.org/knoxville/busines...rd-tn-90003844

Just called Keisler to check on my order, the phone message I got was "no one is available to take your call, please leave a message" I hope I'm not screwed here!

This doesn't look good

Chapter 7 petition filed yesterday it seems....

http://business-bankruptcies.com/cas...ngineering-inc

Thanks, looks like I'm screwed :toetap:

Well....SO much for my warranty........ ugh.

I'm more concerned about being able to get replacement parts for my RS400 if I need them. I don't want to have to eventually go to a TKO, unsynchronized reverse, and poorer shift quality. I can live without the warranty if I can still get it fixed down the road if need be.

At least you've gotten your transmission, I'd be happy with that - screw the warranty!

I have 2 TKO600's bought from Forum members never installed but modified by Kiesler, the 1st design is a little notchy in shifting but, since it isnt a race car, I'm OK with it, it is a vast improvement over a Muncie. The 2nd TKO shifter is a newer different design that the 1st transmission, this has yet to be installed, I am considering having Libertys Gears doing their syncro modifiactions to this TKO. I think the RS series of transmissions would have cured the TKO shifter hangups but, it seemed to me that Kiesler was moving in several different directions at once, as I recall they even found financing to buy out the GM New Process gear division at one point in their history, seemed like many parts of their story didn't make sense (the GM buyout was a real WTF? moment for me.) The one thing Kiesler had was they had a driveline that actually fit into a C2/3 chassis with their 1310 series U-joints but, the one I installed required reworking the trans yoke as the fit to the Ujoint cap was too lose, I always questioned what kind of quality control they could have had after expiriencing that issue with their product. Its a tough economy and dosent surprise me that these guys have the problems they do. I still feel the Tremec transmission needs to be shortened with a dedicated rear tail housing made to properly work in a C3 Vette chassis. Hope everyone that had orders gets a good resolution in their dealings.

Did you pay with a credit card? Maybe there could be some recourse there?

Sure youll get your trans they arent going anywhere. BK is a business plan for some establishments and people :crazy:

They are done. They filed Chapter 7, not 11. Now the creditors just fight for scraps.

What are you guys complaining about. I installed mine about 3 years ago. Only had one problem. Shipped transmission in and quick turnaround and it was done. I have a 5 year warrenty. After 5 years you fix it yourself. If you are a mechanic you can find parts. Easy install in my C4 is there some screw up in the c3 mounting brackets I haven't heard about. When I had a question I called the owner I won't put up the number but here is his his personal text skeisler@keislerauto.com. He can personally answer the what is real and what is rummor. I am not trying to sell this transmission I have a tko 600 backed by my 383 stroker with super ram.
Find someone with one installed and test drive. That will answer your questions.
My problem may have been my fault on the roller piolet bushing. Bearing went out and the shaft and a grove caused shifting problems. Repaired and shipping was covered.

http://www.keislerauto.com/Keisler_A...gineering.html


Chapter 7 lol

Chapter 7 means liquidation of assets to pay creditors. Secured creditors who have collateral, such as lenders who finance CNC equipment with the equipment as collateral, get their collateral back. Unsecured creditors, like suppliers or people who gave deposits for transmissions, will have to wait to see what's left after the assets are sold and the funds are spread out pro-rata amongst the unsecured creditors. If you gave a deposit, you need to look into filing a proof of claim.

A trustee will be appointed and may elect to continue business operations for a limited period of time during liquidation. That's discretionary and only permitted by the court when it believes that continued operation is in the best interest of the estate and consistent with an orderly liquidation. Those of us who have Keisler products can only hope that someone comes in and buys the assets and reinvents the company.

It's certainly conceivable that Keisler himself, with his own money or money from backers, could purchase the assets of the corporation, including the trademark, and reopen as a new business with the original name. There could be a direct sale of the business by the trustee or the assets could go to auction. The trustee is empowered with the discretion to do what he or she feels is best to raise the most money to pay creditors.

Remember when Crane Cams filed for BK? They arose from the ashes with new ownership who purchased the intellectual property, inventory, equipment, etc., at auction. Crane is alive and doing well today. Will have to watch and see what happens over the next six months with Keisler.

Thanks for the explanation Tom, I've got my fingers crossed that someone will pick up the pieces and start making these trans again.

I can tell you I'm complaining because I am now out $3,300 maybe that's not a lot to you but it certainly is to me...

In order for that to happen with Keisler they'd have to come up with an actual working business plan, rather than the rolling disaster we've been watching for the last few years. He, or they, may have had the best of intentions for all I know- but I don't think I've ever seen a business let more people down in so many ways. I kind of feel sorry for them (assuming they weren't ripping folks off by design), but I really feel sorry for all the folks who had to endure all the broken promises and/or had their $$$ taken from them and got nothing in return.

It all seems very odd to me. They had a product everyone seemed to really like, there was a lot of demand for it but what I don't understand is why they couldn't produce enough to meet the demand after a number of years of knowing they needed to ramp up production.

Thanks for letting us know APGENE. I intended to order a full RS600 auto-to-manual conversion kit. Will have to find an alternative now (for a 3.55 rear end).

Terrible! Really not cool for all those folks who put money down and were waiting for a delivery.

Yes you did warn me but since I paid with my debit card, from money I got from my VA disability back pay, I didn't think I had any recourse with my bank, which they confirmed today, and yes I did buy into his promises and assurances... Now it's going to take me several months, or longer, to save up the money to get another kit, meanwhile nothing else is going to get done on the vette :(

If I was looking for another 5 speed American Powertrain would be the last place I would go, they're not honest brokers themselves.

i can tell you ch 7 is the end.... sorry airbornesilva...for your loss...its sad.. but you are a creditor now at $3300...and it sounds like that they have $1mm to $10mm usd in debt...

sad...i was ready to buy one too...

Thanks, I'm hoping I can get some back...

and i thought people that worked on panteras were flakes and stole money....whew...i need to wake up...hahhahaah

I don't get your post?? LOL that they are chapter 7?
Your 5 year warranty just ran out....Is THAT funny?

Oh- just because their website is still up- means nothing- You usually pay for it a year upfront...

Keisler
 

Wow! I really feel for the guys that put down deposits or worse.

Bill

This has to be one of the most idiotic posts ever made on this forum.

And as far as some secret personal text address, it is posted on his web site.

Sorry Airborne that is a lot of $ to lose.:(

Chapter 7 = Liquidation. There is no company anymore. No warranty. No spare parts. Anyone who paid a deposit and hasn't received their transmission just lost a bunch of money.

"lol" indeed. You're a swell guy.