FINALLY…T5 WITH Torque Tube in a ‘35-’40 Ford...The WHOLE STORY!

[tubman]

Gentlemen - This is a thread about T-5's and torque-tubes. If you want to discuss generic T-5 info, I suggest you start another thread. I believe that this subject is important enough to be kept "clean".

[JSeery]

It's v8coopmans thread! LOL. He did an outstanding job on his conversion and it has recieved less recognition than it deserves IMO. Keeping the thread current is a plus, also IMO.

[hook00pad]

Yes. Great thread!

Al Hook

[hotrodder3031]

so what is the update with this project?

[V8COOPMAN]

Originally Posted by hotrodder3031

so what is the update with this project?

This particular project in Heard's '35 pick-up is just now receiving a brand new, fresh 8BA flathead, along with other finishing details wrapping-up a total re-do on an original, stock pick-up. If you're looking for an actual, running, operating and proven Jeep T5 W/Torque Tube project like this one, look no farther than Cory Taulbert's '32 5-window project fairly well detailed in the link below, Post #76. Forget the fact that Cory's powerplant is a little Chevy, as it could just as easily have been a flathead....note Cory's use of the same adapter that Heard used. Cory took his car on a 3,000 plus mile shakedown cruise with nothing but high marks for the performance he achieved. Last I heard, he had well over 6K miles on the Jeep/torque tube combo. Click the link, post #76! DD


https://www.fordbarn.com/forum/showt...=206955&page=4

[IndianapolisRacer]

Sponsored Links (Register now to hide all advertisements)

This is exactly what I was hoping to find , thankyou !!!!

[1oldtimer]

Can an S10 4x4 work as well as a Jeep?.

[JSeery]

Originally Posted by 1oldtimer

Can an S10 4x4 work as well as a Jeep?.

There is a lot of information on this topic on the HAMB. Believe the major difference is the S10 4x4 is a longer case than the jeep case.

[V8COOPMAN]

Originally Posted by 1oldtimer

Can an S10 4x4 work as well as a Jeep?.

Originally Posted by JSeery

There is a lot of information on this topic on the HAMB. Believe the major difference is the S10 4x4 is a longer case than the jeep case.

We don't need no charming H.A.M.B. for this info. We've got it covered right here....INFO and PICS!


1oldtimer …..If you're not familiar with the project that fellow 'Barner Heard and myself did to marry a T5 to a Ford torque tube some time back, click on this link below for the comprehensive thread on how we developed and accomplished such an adaptation.


https://www.fordbarn.com/forum/showt...T5+TORQUE+TUBE


To answer your question about using the S-10 4X4 rear housing and main shaft instead of the Jeep counterparts.....the S-10 takes-up a whole lot more real estate. I'll try, using pictures below, to illustrate some of the important details to consider IF using the LONGER S-10 set-up.


ALL T5 main cases are 9-1/4" long, measured between front and rear faces. Using the JEEP rear housing allows you to assemble the absolute shortest length T5 possible using ALL Borg-Warner factory parts. In fact, we believe that this concoction we've come-up with is actually a transmission that Borg-Warner never intended to be. Most-importantly, every inch of "short" that you can gain in an old Ford chassis is almost priceless when it comes to that transmission/X-member area. The JEEP extension housing is exactly 6" from it's front to it's rear face. I've measured the S-10 extension housings, and the exact measurement escapes me, but going by the pictures below, it seems like it's about 10-1/2" front to rear. The S-10 housing is LONGER than the T5 MAIN case itself.


The first picture below shows a mock-up of our T5 with Jeep rear extension housing sitting behind an 8BA Ford flathead in a 1935 Ford chassis. Note how wide the rear flange is on the rear side of the housing, and how relatively little of the Ford "X" member lip needed to be trimmed to fit. Now try to picture the S-10 housing at 4-1/2" FARTHER back in the chassis (at about the 3-3/4" mark on tape), and how little of the "X" frame flanging would be left in tact. In addition, the majority of the Ford's structural center box section would have to be gutted for fitting. Not only would this compromise strength and integrity, but it would make mounting the stock Ford front WISHBONE ball very difficult, at best. The Jeep parts (only the '82-'86 CJ extension housing, the accompanying main shaft, plus the SMALLER Jeep 23-spline, 26-tooth O/D gear) are a little difficult to round-up, but they're out there. ALL of these parts combine with and bolt to a commonly-found '83-'87 Camaro NWC T5 (or any T5 case) like we used, which has that sweet, close ratio 2.95 1st gear set. You couldn't MAKE me use the S-10 parts, although they MAY be a little easier to round-up. Any questions.....please ask away! DD


Short (6" long) Jeep housing on rear of Camaro T5 transmission gear case. The 6" case stops at the 8-1/4" mark on the tape. The rest is aluminum adapter and '36 Ford torque-tube-bell clam shell adapter.





T5 main case with S-10 housing below....rear housing (left side) is longer than the T5 main case.





S-10 Bare Housing.





OUR Little Short JEEP T5 Complete





And With Torque Tube and U-Joint Hook-Up





Finally, the Little Short 6" JEEP Bare Extension Housing.




In this Last Picture, you can see how much of the Center Box Section we were able to retain, allowing easy and substantial Wishbone retention. The S-10 Rear Housing would have made most of what you see MUCH more involved.




Don't forget to click the link toward the beginning of this post to see our complete project with many more pictures. OR, just click on the " T5 W/TORQUE TUBE " below, left! DD
………..

[Ol' Ron]

This is a similar method I used to install the T-5 in the roadster, The reason was the ability to go from early 59 blocks to 8BA style blocks and the hogs head makes this an easy to do this as the cluch linkeg and other parts remain the same, Also I use the Ford 8BA style water pumps with narrow belts and common pulleys so I only have to run one belt and an 8BA style distribtor on both engines. My biggest problen is te lack of money, so we do allot of scronging , I;ve just loooked at the cost of speed equipment like intakes and heads. I have a rare set id 49 Offy heads with the angled thermostat housongs. I even have the special housings. Maby I couls trad them for a new truck

[1oldtimer]

Gotcha, now that I see them together the S10 might as well be a full size T5. It might be ok in a hot rod application with a very open center section.

[JSeery]

V8coopman, the HAMB reference was to using the S10 4X4 unit if you had a mind to. I wouldn't and didn't thing you would because of the increased modification required to the frame etc. BUT, if you wanted to go that way, there are several threads on the HAMB covering it.

[V8COOPMAN]

Originally Posted by JSeery

V8coopman, the HAMB reference was to using the S10 4X4 unit if you had a mind to. I wouldn't and didn't thing you would because of the increased modification required to the frame etc. BUT, if you wanted to go that way, there are several threads on the HAMB covering it.

As usual, JSeery is absolutely correct! DD

[aandkt]

What Speedo cable did you use to connect the T5 to the Ford Speedometer. Do you know the tread size on each end of the speedo cable?

[V8COOPMAN]

Originally Posted by aandkt

What Speedo cable did you use to connect the T5 to the Ford Speedometer. Do you know the tread size on each end of the speedo cable?

Our '35 speedometer cable threaded right up 'as-is' on both ends. Most folks find this to be the case. There was another thread about this very subject within the past week or two here on the 'Barn.

Do you have a project about ready to go? If so, any details, feedback, or pictures? DD

[American Iron]

It seems to me a lot easier to go with an open drive conversion. We've done about twenty of them at American Iron and they work well. I do give credit to the torque tube project that's a great engineering feat.

[outsider347]

Subscribed
Well done Gents!!!

[V8COOPMAN]

Originally Posted by American Iron

It seems to me a lot easier to go with an open drive conversion. We've done about twenty of them at American Iron and they work well. I do give credit to the torque tube project that's a great engineering feat.

I sincerely appreciate the kudos on the torque tube adaptation. Quite a few folks express similar opinions about going open drive. Admittedly, the banjo rear can be a little weak, or fragile, but that can be overcome with a later Ford splined axle re-do. Once you really take the time to realize what a genius engineering concept the banjo rear really is with it's torque tube and radius rods and attached spring pack, it's a design that I prefer to work with when at all possible. When a banjo rear is installed with all of it's original appendages intact, it is just amazing how that suspension articulates in the chassis. DD

.

[32coupe]

Hard to believe no one has dug this thread up since 2021. This is the first time I have seen it. As others have already said Great work by Heard and v8coopman. The t5 is a flatheads best friend IMO. And I agree with V8coopman 100% about the design of the Banjo/Torque tube rearend. Once you really study the way the suspension works and works well on a early ford torque tube setup. It's hard to beat it IMO.

[Tim Ayers]

Originally Posted by 32coupe

Hard to believe no one has dug this thread up since 2021. This is the first time I have seen it. As others have already said Great work by Heard and v8coopman. The t5 is a flatheads best friend IMO. And I agree with V8coopman 100% about the design of the Banjo/Torque tube rearend. Once you really study the way the suspension works and works well on a early ford torque tube setup. It's hard to beat it IMO.

Funny, I just brought it back up for my info last night. After searching for a while, finally located a Jeep T5 for a reasonable price. Now the fun begins and a lot of reading to make this a suitable transplant.