New Tremec transmission

[eschaider]

Originally Posted by Grubby

Unfortunately for TKO owners, I bet Tremec will offer zero improvements.

John

And definitely no trade in incentives or loyalty atta-boys of any kind.

Considering their demonstrated (or is that demented), unsavory attitude and customer service performance over the last 15 to 20 years with these TKO boxes — not to mention their product performance, why would you possibly be entertaining some type of delusional hope for a product improvement or upgraded components?

A wise man would resolve never to buy from that type of vendor again. Vote with your feet and your dollars! It is the only message that they will understand - maybe.


Ed

[RUFdriver]

Originally Posted by Grubby

Unfortunately for TKO owners, I bet Tremec will offer zero improvements.

John

I would hope Tremec incorporated improvements along the way, so that the TKO600 I purchased this year is the most up to date version. This is what any other manufacturer would do...am I wrong?

[RUFdriver]

Originally Posted by eschaider

And definitely no trade in incentives or loyalty atta-boys of any kind.

Considering their demonstrated (or is that demented), unsavory attitude and customer service performance over the last 15 to 20 years with these TKO boxes — not to mention their product performance, why would you possibly be entertaining some type of delusional hope for a product improvement or upgraded components?

A wise man would resolve never to buy from that type of vendor again. Vote with your feet and your dollars! It is the only message that they will understand - maybe.


Ed

Unfortunately, Tremec basically owns this market, albeit it’s a very small market. There’s no incentive for Tremec to do anything.

[hauss]

Looks like a good opportunity for some aftermarket co. to step in and make a simple rail for us tko guys . Look at the tkx a simple clip to hold the finger on the rail. Wish I was a machinist I would start selling them right away.

[jetblue69]

Originally Posted by RUFdriver

I would hope Tremec incorporated improvements along the way, so that the TKO600 I purchased this year is the most up to date version. This is what any other manufacturer would do...am I wrong?

Absolutely NOTHING wrong with a TKO if you're using it on the street... I wouldn't get rid of it for the TKX. Now it's a different story if you don't have a transmission, buy the TKX. If you're going racing, drop a Toploader or a Richmond Competition 5 speed in it! And if you're racing then the cost of the Richmond shouldn't matter. You gotta pay if you wanna play!

[eschaider]

Originally Posted by RUFdriver

I would hope Tremec incorporated improvements along the way, so that the TKO600 I purchased this year is the most up to date version. This is what any other manufacturer would do...am I wrong?

Yup!

Tremec's demonstrated performance is the polar opposite of what you just suggested and has been for nearly two decades, probably even longer. In fact they still use a two piece countershaft in the TKO 500 with a single woodruff key holding the front and back of the TKO 500 countershaft together. That was one of the driving forces behind the birth of the TKO 600.

Tremec clearly understands the use of splined shafts and gears to transmit torque in the transmission, they use them everywhere, Why would they possibly use a single wimpy woodfuff key to hold the front and back half of the countershaft together? The same countershaft that transmits all the torque from the input shaft to the output shaft of the transmission?

BTW when they built the TKO 600 they went to a one piece countershaft to fix the two piece countershaft problem and then misaligned third gear because they were too lazy to do the engineering to build it correctly. It was a low buck get it out the door quick deal. In the FWIW bucket they never fixed the two piece TKO 500 countershaft problem they just introduced a new transmission, with its own shortcomings.

This idea of introducing a new transmission instead of fixing the existing product short coming is well worn model at Tremec. Think about it, The TKX is just the next box in the TKO line up — this time addressing TKO 600 shortcomings. It hasn't been in service long enough for the end user to discover its shortcomings — yet.

Fixes from Tremec for the TKO 600 — never did it before. I would be surprised to see them do it this time. Don't forget that takes away TKX unit sales for what amounts to parts sales for an old transmission.

Just what have you ever seen them do that would lead you to believe they would perform the way you suggest?


Ed

[eschaider]

Originally Posted by jetblue69

Absolutely NOTHING wrong with a TKO if you're using it on the street... I wouldn't get rid of it for the TKX. Now it's a different story if you don't have a transmission, buy the TKX. If you're going racing, drop a Toploader or a Richmond Competition 5 speed in it! And if you're racing then the cost of the Richmond shouldn't matter. You gotta pay if you wanna play!

There are many things "wrong" with the TKO 600 and the other members of theTKO family. These shortcomings have been documented in part in this and similar threads. If you are comfortable with your TKO purchase that's excellent. Don't worry be happy, as the old song suggests. There are many other owners that have buyers remorse and are not at all happy and yet others who experience recurring failures like Hauss who continually experiences fifth gear failures.

Shortcomings not withstanding the TKO. 600 is stronger than either the Top Loader or the Richmond 5 speed. Using either of those two transmissions would be a step backwards strength and durability wise.


Ed

[olddog]

Originally Posted by eschaider

Shortcomings not withstanding the TKO. 600 is stronger than either the Top Loader or the Richmond 5 speed. Using either of those two transmissions would be a step backwards strength and durability wise.

Ed

Hence the popularity.

[Unique427]

Originally Posted by eschaider

There are many things "wrong" with the TKO 600 and the other members of theTKO family. These shortcomings have been documented in part in this and similar threads. If you are comfortable with your TKO purchase that's excellent. Don't worry be happy, as the old song suggests. There are many other owners that have buyers remorse and are not at all happy and yet others who experience recurring failures like Hauss who continually experiences fifth gear failures.

Shortcomings not withstanding the TKO. 600 is stronger than either the Top Loader or the Richmond 5 speed. Using either of those two transmissions would be a step backwards strength and durability wise.


Ed

Would TKO 600 be measurably stronger then even the
1-3/8" big input NASCAR Toploader?

[jetblue69]

Originally Posted by Unique427

Would TKO 600 be measurably stronger then even the
1-3/8" big input NASCAR Toploader?

It's not, I just don't argue with internet commandos.

By the way the Richmond Super Street 5 Speed is good for 600ft/lbs of torque out of the box!

Have a great day!

[hauss]

To be clear, it is the rail, not the gear. A simple fix in my opinion . tremecs marketing however should open the door wide! for aftermarket companies .

[eschaider]

Duplicate post

[eschaider]

The simple answer to your question is in bold about midway down this post. The why and wherefore stuff is what is in front of and behind the answer.

For transmissions, strength is not a horsepower metric it is a torque metric. Most enthusiasts loose site fo this and fall back onto the romantic notion of who has more horsepower going through their transmission as an indicator of strength. Transmissions are torque multipliers and as such their measure of strength is their capacity to transmit torque.

There are three metrics that in large part determine a transmission's torque capacity (strength);

The first is the center to center distance between the mainshaft and the countershaft. The greater the distance the greater the torque capacity — all other considerations being equal. Larger center to center distances provide larger levers if you will.

Think of the distance from the gear tooth's optimum tooth contact point to the center of the gear as a lever. Just like when you use a pry bar to open a box, the longer the pry lever the greater your leverage. In the transmission it is similar but we rely on the gear ratio for the leverage. The center distance is a measure of how much gear mass that leverage (torque multiplication) is spread across. Not surprisingly more is stronger less is weaker.

Now expand the single gear image in your mind to two meshing large diameter / large center to center spaced gears vs two smaller diameter, smaller center to center gears. You don't need the math to get the right answer. The bid stuff wins every time!

The second metric is gear face width. This one is comparably straight forward. Wider faced gears are stronger than narrower faced gears. It's not rocket science. Once again in this situation more is better.

The challenge the design engineer has with large diameter, wide tooth faced gears is inertia. When you change gears, it is the synchronizer's job to match gear speeds on the gear change so you have a smooth (hopefully fast) gear change possible. The large diameter wide tooth faced gears have huge inertia.

That is one of the reasons the TKO shifts so poorly. It literally uses 1960's Top Loader synchronizers to attempt to synchronize much larger heavier gears than they were ever designed to handle. When Trmec did the T-56 they initially used double cone synchronizers because the gears were so huge. Later for selected OEM customers they began to supply (without a lot of fan fare) triple cone synchronization which later found its way into the T-56 Magnum.

The third and final (for this discussion) metric is the steel and it corresponding heat treat that the gears are made out of. We all have heard the common 4000 series molybdenum steel designations like, 4130, 4140, 4340 etc. There ar other steels up in the 8000 series that are used is some ring an pinions and a few specialty steels like the high nickel 9310 steel that is useed by Rockland Gear in their T-56 Tranzilla six speeds.

The overall strength of a given sized gear can be enhanced through the selection and use of specialty steels heatreated to a particular strength and hardness. Generally harder, tougher (hard to get both together) and higher tensile produce more desirable gears but each comes with it own set of idiosyncrasies the need to be catered to for a successful implementation.

Tremec uses a proprietary steel that has served them well (for the most part) in daily driver type applications. Rockland uses a particular 9310 alloy and heat treatment for the strongest T-56 six speed derivative available any where today. The Rockland T-56 style Tranzilla has a torque rating in excess of 1000 ft/lbs of flywheel torque. Liberty uses yet a different alloy for their Prostock clutches transmissions. Each alloy / transmission design is optimized for the target market the manufacturer was aiming at.

Now to your original question about the 1⅜ inch Top Loader input shaft.

By increasing the diameter of the input shaft you increase its strength only. It will have no impact on the strength of the gears internal to the transmission only the input shaft.

This becomes apparent with the original Tremec T-56 offerings for the Mustangs. Originally, they used a standard Ford input spline configuration. In service behind the supercharged 03/04 Cobra's these shafts began to shear off. The Tremec fix was to offer a larger diameter 26 spline input shaft based off a GM spline spec. It wasn't the spline count that saved the day (although it didn't hurt) it was the larger diameter input shaft. The input shaft change in diameter had no effect on the torque capacity of the transmission's internals, they remained the same.

You will see transmission manufacturers from time to time rate a transmission they offer at a particular torque spec. If you ask them how the transmission's torque capacity was determined (and you are persistent enough to pursue the answer) you will find that they have no real torque rating capacity available to them or that they want to use. Tremec does and for the most part their recommendations are pretty much the way it really is.

The aftermarket manufacturer that is blowing smoke up your behind will couch his torque rating representation with words like, "but not in a heavy vehicle" or in cars below XXXX lbs. This is someone who is trying to sell you a transmission and doesn't want the diminished torque capacity of the design to kill his sale. you should put as much distance as you can between those businesses, their transmission and your car as you can.

If a transmission is capable of XXX ft/lbs of torque transmission then it can do that in a light car or a heavier car. XXX ft/lbs is the same in either situation. What is not the same is the impact the gear teeth see at the time the clutch is released.

The shock loading on the gear tooth face from an aggressive clutch goes up considerably as vehicle weight increases. FWIW aggressive clutches that shock the drive train do nt perform as well in a race environment as a smooth engaging clutch that does not shock the driveline.


Ed

[RUFdriver]

I will just avoid “ power shifts”, which has no place on a road course anyway, and upgrade my TKO 600 if it ever fails. Like the Dude says “f*ck it”.

[Grubby]

Tremecs bread and butter is OEM sales to GM, Chrysler and others. We have seen iterative improvements in those OEM transmissions over the years.

T56 and TR6060 are strong and shift great. They are true performance transmissions.

They had no choice but to make improvements. GM would not tolerate no improvements.

The TKO hasn't changed much since introduction. They don't sell many, compared to an OEM application and thus don't make much.

They can sell transmissions that are sub par because there aren't many choices for aftermarket 5 speeds that can handle 600 ft/lbs.

I suspect they are seeing big slow downs coming in the OEM market. Demand for manuals is dropping rapidly. This may be motivating them to improve the aftermarket and sell more transmissions.

They didn't come up with the TKX because they are good people. They did it to improve their market position.

I was going to have to swallow really hard before buying a TKO for my current build. I looked into Richmond, but it wouldn't easily fit in an ERA. TKO was really the only option for OD behind a big block.

The TKX looks to have some of the DNA from the TR6060 and T56. I will buy that without too much concern.

I bet there will be a lot of cheap TKOs for sale in the next few years.

John

[cycleguy55]

Originally Posted by eschaider

There are many things "wrong" with the TKO 600 and the other members of theTKO family. These shortcomings have been documented in part in this and similar threads. If you are comfortable with your TKO purchase that's excellent. Don't worry be happy, as the old song suggests. There are many other owners that have buyers remorse and are not at all happy and yet others who experience recurring failures like Hauss who continually experiences fifth gear failures.

Shortcomings not withstanding the TKO. 600 is stronger than either the Top Loader or the Richmond 5 speed. Using either of those two transmissions would be a step backwards strength and durability wise.


Ed

The old 1:1 5th gear Richmond was rated at 450 ft. lbs. of torque, IIRC. That's the one I have. The new / current version with overdrive has a much higher torque rating, however.

Per Richmond: "The SUPER STREET is fully rated at 600 ft. lbs. of torque"

https://www.richmondgear.com/wp-cont...hmond/RG22.pdf

[eschaider]

Originally Posted by cycleguy55

The old 1:1 5th gear Richmond was rated at 450 ft. lbs. of torque, IIRC. That's the one I have. The new / current version with overdrive has a much higher torque rating, however.

Per Richmond: "The SUPER STREET is fully rated at 600 ft. lbs. of torque"

https://www.richmondgear.com/wp-cont...hmond/RG22.pdf

And if you look at the transmission internals they are very nicely done with fully machined countershafts and corresponding splined gears along with an attractive selection of gears to choose from so you can get multiple gear selections to choose from to suit your personal tastes.

Richmond used to put the center to center distance on their engineering drawings they published on their site but I could not find it on the current drawings. Using the information from the drawings they do publish it can be calculated and it appears to be a 91mm center to center distance compared to the TKO's generous but smaller 83mm center to center distance for the main and countershafts. Very nice transmission and very nice Long shifter.

FWIW, the tail shaft mount location iis different than a TKO. According to mfg published specs, the TKO tail shaft mount is 15.49" from the bell housing face and the Richmond is 18" from the bell housing face so there may be a little massaging required one to the other.

The other slight difference is the bell housing face to end of tail shaft. The TKO measures 23.8 inches and the Richmond comes in at 24.0 inches — likely no driveshaft mods required. Net net bottom line a nice alternative to a TKO.


Ed

[Gaz64]

Originally Posted by eschaider

And if you look at the transmission internals they are very nicely done with fully machined countershafts and corresponding splined gears along with an attractive selection of gears to choose from so you can get multiple gear selections to choose from to suit your personal tastes.

Richmond used to put the center to center distance on their engineering drawings they published on their site but I could not find it on the current drawings. Using the information from the drawings they do publish it can be calculated and it appears to be a 91mm center to center distance compared to the TKO's generous but smaller 83mm center to center distance for the main and countershafts. Very nice transmission and very nice Long shifter.

FWIW, the tail shaft mount location iis different than a TKO. According to mfg published specs, the TKO tail shaft mount is 15.49" from the bell housing face and the Richmond is 18" from the bell housing face so there may be a little massaging required one to the other.

The other slight difference is the bell housing face to end of tail shaft. The TKO measures 23.8 inches and the Richmond comes in at 24.0 inches — likely no driveshaft mods required. Net net bottom line a nice alternative to a TKO.


Ed

Only 1st gear has one of 3 optional ratios.

Very nice trans, I would have one for next car.

[eschaider]

Originally Posted by Gaz64

Only 1st gear has one of 3 optional ratios.

Very nice trans, I would have one for next car.

You're right, Gary!

I didn't page over to read the entire chart. Second and third gear selection scarcity not withstanding, like you say there is still a lot to like about that transmission.



Ed

[Buzz]

I was always disappointed that the Richmond 5 Speed didn't offer a 5th gear overdrive ratio. It's been a long time coming, and as has been said, finally a viable alternative to the TKO.