ImBatman

I have all the modifications in place for the conversion auto to 4 spd. Also while the car has been apart I added a 3:70 rear gear. I am planning on running the TTII 17" rims. Now I am wandering what type of trannie I should go with. :confused: Since the car is for weeekends and and other special occasions I am not to concearned with higher cruising RPM's but should I give more consideration to the ROD? The muncie and the T10 are both are definately more affordable but in the future I did have plans of some type of 5 or 6 speed. What type of cost\further mods am I going to be looking at for an ROD? Any comments and detailed cost analysis would be great! thanks for any advice or comments.

A C

If I was you I would take a hard look at Kiesler's new 6 speed. Whether you go with the ROD or the T-56, I am sure you'll be happier with a 6 speed and a higher geared rear end on the street. You may not be concerned with cruising RPMs now, but there will be a point in time where you will appreciate the overdrive. JMO

MassVette

Put a ROD in the '79 along with a ZZ/502; never regretted the swap!
The car was an auto, so it had a removeable crossmember- made things easier.
:yesnod: :chevy :chevy :yesnod:
P.S.
I liked the ROD so much, I put one in the '67 too!
:crazy: :lol: :lol: :yesnod:
The car was a Muncie 4 sp, so the trans. went in with the motor.
(non-removeable crossmember)
:yesnod:

Flareside

Here's my (slightly biased by experience) take on it:

Richmond 6: Up until recently, this was THE tranny for a C3, but time marches on. Pretty easy to install, and has good gear spacing. It's expensive at $3k+. IMO, the shifting is a little notchy for my tastes. I missed lots of shifts in my ROD equipped car when I drove it hard (catch 5th instead of 3rd, etc.), even after I removed the shifter for a full workover and adjustment. I did some research on this, and found that the Richmond 5 and 6 speeds use very large and heavy gears that are very strong, but because of that they take lots of force to get moving via the external shifter. Modern trannies with these big, strong gears us an "internal rail" shifter system that has the shift forks riding on strong support bars (rails) inside the transmission to keep the force out of the shifter linkage. The result is smoother, more reliable shifting.

Richmond 5 is basically the same as the 6, but without overdrive.

T56: I don't really get the buzz about this tranny. Why does everyone want to cut up the car and spend more money for a (IMO) useless double overdrive? I can understand the .5 overdrive if you have to worry about meeting corporate fuel averages, mega top speed and such, but why would you want that in a C3? Is somebody here really trying to cruise at 180+? :confused: How many carbureted hi-po engines around here will even tolerate those super low rpms on the highway?

Tremec TKO: IMO, this is the biggest "no brainer" mod out there for the C3. It has pretty good ratios for the typical street performance car as long as you're not running some small displacement, no torque screamer engine. The 5th gear overdrive is just about perfect for highway cruising with a stout engine, the 3.27 engine will give you an awesome launch, and the tranny uses a nice, solid internal rail shifter. I recently drove a TKO equipped Mustang, and liked the tranny so much that I'm getting one (Keisler) for my '68. Too bad the wait is 6 weeks...

Everyone spends LOTS of money on these transmission, and nobody wants to hear anything bad about their stuff, so even though these are my first hand experiences I usually don't post them. I promise to post my experiences with the TKO as well, even if it sucks! :lol:


[Modified by Flareside, 10:20 AM 7/19/2003]

spikezz4

I ran a Richmond 5-spd between 1992 up to rebuild time in 1998. Like it. Most people would say that's the way GM should have built and geared the car. (w/3.08 rear gears). Can't say much about the Hurst linkage. The 5-spd is not nearly as good as the old Competition Plus 3 and 4 speed linkages. Never could figure out why.

For the rebuild, we went with the ROD-6 with Long Linkage. The T-56 only recently became available, but we already have the Richmond installed. I have done the ratios on the T-56 with a 3.90 rear end, and those numbers, multiplyiers, and gear change percentages look very good. Ah, well, can't have everything.

Hopefully, the LS-6 will be happy cruising at the higher OD RPM of the Richmond.

Spike