great thread

How cool is that. I was only trying to get this into my favorites and now I get to own page 6.

[This message has been edited by stalen88GT (edited 10-09-2005).]

two things first, does anybody know what the dual flywheel does whats the advantage? and also how long does archie usually take to go from start to finish on something like this. ive got time untill ill need a transmission just trying to figure out how long ill have to wait befor its available.

so I take it you are selling the 3.9 archie? how much?

What is the total length of the 3.9's tranny. Or did i miss this in here. I know there was a measurement for the Saab unit (352mm), but does the bellhousing for the v6 unit change the total length +/- the 352mm length of the saab's unit?

[This message has been edited by FieroMonkey (edited 10-10-2005).]

quote Originally posted by crash1369: two things first, does anybody know what the dual flywheel does whats the advantage?

From what I can make out after a bit of Googlilng, loosely speaking it's the marriage of a harmonic balancer & a flywheel in an attempt to reduce torque spikes transmitted to the transmission. Particularly popular in OEM-equipped diesels.

Someone please correct me if I'm wrong!

This may not be good for those expecting a good deal more durability from this tranny torque wise. If the report on the torque loads this tranny can handle were including the load reducing factors of the Dual-Mass Flywheel, then this is bad. Because unless you are incorperating the DM Flywheel with your V8 swap, or built-up 3800 swap, you can expect less durability on this tranny when using bigger torque throwing motors.

I guess a good question might be, weather or not the projected torque loads of the tranny included the reduction of load from the Flywheel, and if it did, just how much reduction there is in the torque the tranny can withstand, should you swap a motor on without a Dual-Mass Flywheel.

[This message has been edited by FieroMonkey (edited 10-11-2005).]

quote Originally posted by FieroMonkey: This may not be good for those expecting a good deal more durability from this tranny torque wise. If the report on the torque loads this tranny can handle were including the load reducing factors of the Dual-Mass Flywheel, then this is bad. Because unless you are incorperating the DM Flywheel with your V8 swap, or built-up 3800 swap, you can expect less durability on this tranny when using bigger torque throwing motors. I guess a good question might be, weather or not the projected torque loads of the tranny included the reduction of load from the Flywheel, and if it did, just how much reduction there is in the torque the tranny can withstand, should you swap a motor on without a Dual-Mass Flywheel.

Why would incorporating the DM flywheel be a problem? The bell housing is nice and deep to accomodate it anyway. The more you can protect the tranny from the occasional 5k rpm clutch drop the better, I say. Granted, I don't know how the whole DM flywheel thing works exactly, but if the tranny is set up to use it, why not use it?

As many know, I have the complete 3.9 L 6 speed driveline out of the new G6 Pontiac. Speculation is that because I don't do V-6 Fieros I'm planning to make the 6 speed F40 transmission fit into V-8 Fieros.

That is partially true. I don't intend to begin doing V-6 engines because we stay plenty busy doing V-8 swap parts & V-8 swaps themselves. BTW, when I say "V-8 swaps" I mean Chevy V-8 swaps.

I know that a lot of people are also interested in mounting this transmission into stick shift Fieros that have 2.8, 3.1, 3.4, 3.8 & various Caddy engines in them. Also many are interested in retrofitting this transmission into their Chevy V-8 powered Fieros. As you'll see later in this post there are several issues to be resolved that would need to be addressed no matter what engine you want to fit the 6 speed to. So even though I had planned to do this for the benifit of the V-8 guys, there will also be a lot of benifit to those with other engines in their Fieros.

This post is ment to be a "Statement of Purpose" & a "List of issues to be resolved", so let me get on with it.

Statement of Purpose.............

I plan to develop several kits or parts packages to do the following items:

1) Develop the parts necessary to mount the LSx series engines with this 6 speed into Fieros for my customers.

2) Develop the parts necessary to mount "normal" engines with this 6 speed into Fieros.

3) Develop the parts necessary to retrofit the 6 speed into Fieros that already have SBC engines in them.

Since much of the work to do the above 3 items will also be necessary with other engine packages, I also intend to..............

4) Develop the parts necessary to mount &/ or retrofit the 6 speed into Fieros that have various other kinds of engines in them to include 2.8, 3.1, 3.4, 3.8 & various Caddy engines. I plan to make these parts available as kits.

5) Develop the parts necessary to mount the 3.9 engine into Fieros that have stock stick shift transmissions in them. Please note that I will only be doing the mechanical end of mounting & will not be doing wire harnesses that would be necessary to make it all run.

6) Develop the parts necessary to mount the 3.9 engine With the 6 speed transmission into Fieros. Please note that I will only be doing the mechanical end of mounting & will not be doing wire harnesses that would be necessary to make it all run.
..........................................................................................................................

The work of developing parts for mounting of this 6 speed transmission into any Fiero is much more complicated than even I had anticipated. The G6 driveline has many issues that need to be addressed to accomplish my goals. Thus I have developed a "List of issues to be resolved" I'll briefly list those issues below. I've already figured out how I'm going to resolve most of them & I'm working on the others. Sometimes when you resolve one issue, it makes another issue harder to resolve. So my goal would be to resolve all the issues in the most appropriate way. More than half of these issues will have to be addressed no matter what Fiero application you may be interested in.

In no particular order, My List of issues to be resolved...........

1) Axles......... No one expected this or who 'da guessed it. The axles & tri-pots used on the 6 speed are freekin' huge. The inboard Tpi-pot for example has a spline on it that is bigger than any other GM unit I've ever seen. This will have to be resolved to make ANY use of this trans. in a Fiero work.

2) Clutch Hyd. Line........ The G6 has a unique fitting (not like the one you saw earlier in this thread) that has to be adapted to the Fiero line. We also have to test line pressure to make sure the Fiero Master Cylinder can correctly operate the Hyd. T.O.B. the 6 speed uses.

3) Shift Linkage............ A Fiero shifter will have to be modified, shift cables found, brackets & levers designed & made. Then someone will have to make it all work together.

4) Trans. Mounts......... Yes transmission mounts will have to be designed that work with the 84-87 cradle & the 88 cradle.

5) Odometer Drive........ Just as it says. For an aftermarket speedo this will be easy, stock Speedo will be harder.

6) Clutch........... Guess what, the G6 transmission uses an Input shaft that has a different spline than any other GM car I've seen. So all applications of this transmission (except the 3.9) will require some clutch change. Also see #7 below.

7) Flywheel......... Remember the dual mass clutch I showed you earlier? Well because it is taller than a stock Fiero clutch it moves the spline on the trans input shaft farther away from the Flywheel. This will have to be addressed with a thicker flywheel. This will be easy to address on my V-8 swaps but much more difficult to address on the various other engines. But I have a plan.

There are a few other issues that need to be addressed if someone wanted to use the 3.9 with the stock Fiero transmission or use it with the 6 speed but those can be addressed.

That's about all I have for now, but I'd like to answer a few of the questions I've seen so far.

Transmission length of the 6 speed is just a hair (.250") longer than the Getrag.

The inside Diameter of the 6 speed bellhousing is the same as the Getrag & so the bolt pattern is the same.

On V-8 swaps the depth issue cannot be addressed by a thinner adapter plate because the SBC F/W will not fit inside the 6 speed bellhousing. I also don't want my past customers who want to upgrade to this trans. to have to buy all new parts.

I plan to get this done ASAP. I have a bunch of $$$ already invested in this & many customers who want this setup.

The business end of the 3.9 as far as dinensions etc. is almost the same as the 2.8.

You cannot redrill the dual mass F/W & no pilot bushing is used.

There is more room in the 6 speed bellhousing because there are no internal ribs for things to hit the clutch. But most of the depth is used up when you have to move the clutch farther away from the F/W.

Sorry for the length of this post. It has taken me nearly 90 minutes to write it, so I gotta get back to work.

I have 3 questions for those that might know the correct answers........

1) Is the 3.9 internally or externally balanced?

2) On stock Fiero 2.8's which years had internally & externally balanced Flywheels? & Were the bolt patterns for those F/W's the same?

3) Anyone know any other GM transaxles that used HUGE inboard splines? Note these are bigger than the Caddy units.

Archie

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

The New Home of V-8 Archie

[This message has been edited by Archie (edited 10-11-2005).]

quote Originally posted by FieroMonkey: This may not be good for those expecting a good deal more durability from this tranny torque wise. If the report on the torque loads this tranny can handle were including the load reducing factors of the Dual-Mass Flywheel, then this is bad. Because unless you are incorperating the DM Flywheel with your V8 swap, or built-up 3800 swap, you can expect less durability on this tranny when using bigger torque throwing motors. I guess a good question might be, weather or not the projected torque loads of the tranny included the reduction of load from the Flywheel, and if it did, just how much reduction there is in the torque the tranny can withstand, should you swap a motor on without a Dual-Mass Flywheel.

If it is that big of a deal breaker for you to use this tranny on a V8, then just hold off till GM comes out with the LS4 5.3 version of this tranny?
People like me who just want this tranny for our V6's will be HAPPY with it. I don't know the changes GM will make for the V8 version but it is on the way and if it is the same exact tranny as the 3.9 V6 tranny, then it is WAY under rated, on paper.
I don't want to be the one to keep beating a dead horse but this tranny is way stronger than a Fiero tranny. So why are people complaining about "how this tranny is not strong enough"? Good Getrag's are going for $500-$800 on Ebay. This tranny may/will be more expensive but it is "new" and has an extra gear and is stronger. So if you ask me, this tranny is a good option.

the minimal .25" length increase is great news.. as is the bolt pattern..

for us v6 guys that means we need:
a custom clutch hub (spec should be able to handle this for us)
custom axles (between a machine shop and an axle rebuilder we should be able to put them together)
custom shift cables (california push-pull should be able to take care of those)

oh yeah an anyone with a 4speed would need a 5speed shifter assembly (to remove the spring loaded lockout)

quote Originally posted by Archie: I have 3 questions for those that might know the correct answers........ 1) Is the 3.8 internally or externally balanced? The flywheel has a counter balance on the back side. You can shave off "massive" amounts of surface aria from the clutch side, but the back needs to stay stock. Not like you have a reason to machine it any way on the back? So the 3800 is externally balanced. 2) On stock Fiero 2.8's which years had internally & externally balanced Flywheels? & Were the bolt patterns for those F/W's the same? Pre 87's are externally balanced. 87and newer 60* V6's are internally balanced, they have a neutrally balanced flywheel. All of them. Even the Front wheel drive V6's of larger displacements. Yes the bolt patterns are the same. So it is possible to put an externally balanced flywheel on an internally balanced engine. This would be a VERRY rough running engine, so you would definitely know if you put the wrong flywheel on it. 3) Anyone know any other GM trans axles that used HUGE inboard splines? Note these are bigger than the Caddy units. None. The reason for the larger axles is a DIRECT reflection of the increased torque that can be exerted from the stronger manual tranny. For example an auto like in the 4T80E used on the N* has the same size as the Manual Fiero trannies because of the higher forces from the manual trannies is about the same force on the axles as the V8 auto. So if you increase the Torque load from the tranny you need to increase the axle size too. The manuals are larger axles because of the more raw brutal nature of the direct shifts. (clutch dumps at high RPM) Autos don't generally deal with such high instant torque loads. So since this is a "high out put" manual tranny, the axles need to be substantially beefed up over the stock Fiero stuff. Archie

[This message has been edited by Rickady88GT (edited 10-11-2005).]

- The '88 V6 was the only one that whose flywheel did not have a balance weight, i.e. the engine was internally balanced.

- The splines on the 284 are pretty freakin' huge.

Dave

[This message has been edited by crazyd (edited 10-11-2005).]

Second what Dave said.
85-87 Fiero V6s were externally balanced. Only the 88 was neutrally balanced. All V6 flywheels/flexplates share the same bolt pattern.

It's possible that the FWD 2.8 got internal balancing earlier, though. Pretty safe to say that if it was a DIS motor, it was internally balanced, since the trigger wheel cast into the crank is what made the difference.

I won't venture a guess regarding the 3.9, however.

I talked with Ed Parks wayyyy back and I could have sworn he told me that some of the late 87's came from the factory with internally balanced Engines as well. Please don't shoot me if I am wrong.

Sounds like Archie has grabbed this Sh!t by the horns. Must really love his job, looking at that laundrey list of issues to tackle would have me running to my doctor for a Xanax prescription.

This is the start of a really exciting new revitalization for Fieros. Kudos Archie

All Ive got to say is WOW. Archie has got his SH*T together! He might beat me on my swap, Im a procrastinator though(that explains it)
This thread gets a bump and a plus for Archie+

------------------
Soon to be custom port fuel injected with Megasquirt! 4.5l and th-440 And Im only 18. think about when Im 30!!

quote Originally posted by FieroMonkey: I talked with Ed Parks wayyyy back and I could have sworn he told me that some of the late 87's came from the factory with internally balanced Engines as well. Please don't shoot me if I am wrong.

Hmmm... *That* may be a possibility. Didn't even think about that.

I'll be damned if I'm not one of the first 3.4's to get that tranny.
I may have to get that before my Finale front/Fine rear conversion...

Hello,

I was checking out this thread and can't help but notice this trans has some similarities to the trans in my SVT Focus (used in the Mini Cooper S also). It is a 6 speed trans but uses dual lay shafts. What this means is the SVTF has two final drives. 1st 2nd 5th and 6th all have a Differential Ratio of 2.88 while 3rd 4th and reverse have a 4.25 ratio. Has anyone checked if this transmission is the same?

It also uses a dual mass flywheel. I believe the main reason for the DM is for Noise and Vibration.

quote Originally posted by Rickady88GT: If it is that big of a deal breaker for you to use this tranny on a V8, then just hold off till GM comes out with the LS4 5.3 version of this tranny? People like me who just want this tranny for our V6's will be HAPPY with it. I don't know the changes GM will make for the V8 version but it is on the way and if it is the same exact tranny as the 3.9 V6 tranny, then it is WAY under rated, on paper. I don't want to be the one to keep beating a dead horse but this tranny is way stronger than a Fiero tranny. So why are people complaining about "how this tranny is not strong enough"? Good Getrag's are going for $500-$800 on Ebay. This tranny may/will be more expensive but it is "new" and has an extra gear and is stronger. So if you ask me, this tranny is a good option.

That's what I'm thinking. As much as I love the LS1, 2 and 6, the LS4 may be a much easier swap if it comes out with the 6-speed from the factory. It's shorter length compared to the regular LSx should make fitment much easier, too.

I'm definitely looking forward to seeing how this all develops. Every plan I've had for a swap for my car has been tossed until I can see what new ideas Archie has come up with. By the time I'm ready for a swap (i.e. have a garage) it may be a whole new ballgame.

Thanks for the update, Archie! Keep us posted!

What are the chances of GM coming out with the LS4 and a 6 speed? Any idea what the application would be?

Archie ,let us see the spline pattern an how many teeth ARE on the clutch disc CENTER
look at the GM mini vans , the pontiac 6000 an the old sabb 900 for inboard
show the CV AXLES both ends
the flywheel i have made for the northstar weight 17 lbs 2oz an are for a 5 speed getrag may be able to change the bolt pattern for your engines it is stepped of the back of the engine about 5/16 of an inch
the ring gear is welded on the tooth pattern is z34 v6
i am very interested in the 6 speed tranny set up also
THESE PICTURES WILL GIVE YOU MORE EYES IN THE FIELD LOOKING
I will check tomorrow to see if the 93 silverado 5- speed master & slave cyclinder will bolt on the fiero ,i know it work on the 350 i have in my truck some one on here changed a mini van axle over to the smaller CV END AN TRY OLD S10 4 BY 4 FRONT AXLES
TRYING MY BEST TO HELP

Check this link a DMF REPLACEMENT

http://www.carolinaclutch.com/C4%20Performance.htm

http://www.carolinaclutch.com/Corvette%20Hyd.htm

[This message has been edited by CETICARS (edited 10-12-2005).]

quote Originally posted by ferraro: What are the chances of GM coming out with the LS4 and a 6 speed? Any idea what the application would be?

At the LA Auto show GM had two of the V8 6 speed cars. They were both 5.3 LS4's with DOD. They were both Black inside and out and both were "SS" trim level. One was an Impala and one was a Monti Carlo.

What are the chances of GM coming out with the LS4 and a 6 speed? Any idea what the application would be?

very good since its listed in the clutch package add above

quote Originally posted by CETICARS: What are the chances of GM coming out with the LS4 and a 6 speed? Any idea what the application would be? very good since its listed in the clutch package add above

I did not see the clutch for the LS4 in that add?

quote Originally posted by CETICARS: very good since its listed in the clutch package add above

That ad talks about the LT4 not the LS4.

Archie

quote Originally posted by CETICARS: What are the chances of GM coming out with the LS4 and a 6 speed? Any idea what the application would be? very good since its listed in the clutch package add above

I saw an Impala SS (the car was Black) commercial the other day and when it took of it sounded like a V8 Standard, I was impressed that the new Impala SS looked good also.

does anyone know how much lighter the ls4 is than a regular iron sbc?

Don't expect it to be much lighter. We've gotten into this debate before many times, and everybody should know by now that the reason the LS engine blocks were cast in aluminum wasn't to make the whole engine lighter, but rather to offset the weight of the stronger, heavier internal parts like the six-bolt mains and massive crankshaft.

Dave

quote Originally posted by crazyd: Don't expect it to be much lighter. We've gotten into this debate before many times, and everybody should know by now that the reason the LS engine blocks were cast in aluminum wasn't to make the whole engine lighter, but rather to offset the weight of the stronger, heavier internal parts like the six-bolt mains and massive crankshaft. Dave

? are trying to say the LSx has a crank and rods that are 75 pounds heavier than the Iron block SBC's?
I disagree. The reason for the aluminum was purely for a lighter engine. How much lighter? I am not sure but I will bet It aint got nuthn to do with the "heavy" crank.

quote Originally posted by Rickady88GT: ? are trying to say the LSx has a crank and rods that are 75 pounds heavier than the Iron block SBC's? I disagree. The reason for the aluminum was purely for a lighter engine. How much lighter? I am not sure but I will bet It aint got nuthn to do with the "heavy" crank.

I have seen two numbers posted on LS1 vs iron head SBC, with the LS1 being lighter.... It is either 65 or 110 pounds..Forgot which it was in the LS1 development book I have....

Loyde

[This message has been edited by FastFieros (edited 10-13-2005).]

Thanks Loyde. I know the aluminum heads on a SBC will cut off about 50-75 pounds on an iron block SBC. But I was not sure exactly how much an aluminum block will be lighter than an iron block engine. It just seems kind of funny to me that GM made an all aluminum engine just to off set the extra wieght of a rotating mass?

I thought this thread was about the G6 transmission not v8 part weights

[This message has been edited by Kohburn (edited 10-14-2005).]

ok real quick

525 lbs. total weight for the stock LT-1 (including ALL accessories and cast iron exhaust manifolds).
From what I have iron heads weigh about 25 lbs a piece more than aluminum heads, so the weight of a sbc 350 with iron should be around
575 lbs.

460 lbs. total weight for the stock LS-1 (including ALL accessories and stock exhaust manifolds).
I am assuming the LS-4 will be pretting close to the same weight.

sorry for the interuption, now back to the g6 tranny talk.

quote Originally posted by Kohburn: I thought this thread was about the G6 transmission not v8 part weights

I like to stay on topic too. But if I see something that looks off base, I will say something no matter what the topic. In fact the weight of the engine is not even that far off topic anyway.

I went to the dealer yesterday for a quote
G6 6 speed tranny $2,250.00
pressure plate and disk $204.41
Hydralic throw out bearing $106.37
Flywheel $514.80

total parts $3,075.58
after tax $3,298.56

This with out the axles and shift cables. Archie, it looks like you got a good deal. Do you have any thing new to report?

[This message has been edited by Rickady88GT (edited 10-14-2005).]

FYI, I don't know about comparison to a regular SBC, but the aluminum LS1 is about 100lbs lighter than the cast iron truck version of the Vortec 5.3 and 6.0.

The dealer cost on this transmission is $1525.00.
I just ordered and received one for a upcomoing LS1 project.
Delivered it to Archie's last Thursday.

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

88 Formula T-Top 5-speed V8. More pics@www.xnet.com/~paulv

Aren't wasting any time are we?

Keep us posted on the progress and such!

The 2006 Impala does have the 5.3 engine in it. I was looking at the Govnt. Web site and they have the gas mileage ratting on it also. But they do not show it having a six speed.