Questions on T-98 tranny...

I have finally gotten to the point I can sit in the driver's seat and with the Jeep on 4 jack stands, pretend I am driving. I have the odometer hooked up so I can see what it will do, and it works as it should. I am still awaiting brake lines, so I can't put it on the ground yet.

My questions are: Does the T-98 have synchromesh in first gear? If so, I have a problem. I have to double-clutch it to downshift, and there is such a large difference between the first and second gear ratios that I haven't gotten used to how high I have to rev the engine to make that a smooth transition. I am practicing, however.

The second question is that apparently the new rubber boot I got was made for a tranny with a much shorter throw on the shifter. After a couple of down shifts, going from second to first gear, the boot tore at the opening around the shifter shaft. Do I need a different boot? Believe me, there is plenty of travel on this shifter. You wouldn't want to be in a close race with this shifter.

Thanks in advance for the help...

 

LOW gear is not synchronized.
LOW gear normally is not used.
It is used only for extreme loads and for slow speeds.
Yes the T98 requires a larger shift cane boot.

 

As mentioned above, the T98 granny low is not syncronized. This gearbox should be normally driven on the street as a 3 speed, starting out in second, then third and forth. First is only used when starting with a heavy load or offroad when you don't need to go anywhere in a hurry. Depending on which version you have, there is usually a big gap in the ratios between first and second.
-Donny

 

The various versions of the T98 had different gear ratios IIRC.

But one example is

6.40:1, 3:09, 1:69, 1:00.

First is not synchronized in anyway. Most choose to drive it in 2, 3, 4 unless pulling a heavy load or off road (essentially the purpose of the first gear in the T98.)

 

The "LOW" geared truck type transmissions have just that.... an extra " LOW" gear.
These transmissions were originally designed for trucks with big loads like 2 ton dump trucks.
The extra "LOW" gear would be used to get the load rolling if truck was stopped on an incline.
Otherwise the extra "LOW" gear is not normally used.
It is normally used as a 3 speed.
I much prefer to identify the gearing as Low, First, Second and Third.

By the way a two ton dump will haul 16 tons so go figure that one out. Ha !

 

They don't call it "granny" for nothing, LOL.

 

Now that is a funny statement, but I have found that out. There seems to be a huge difference in ratio between 1st and 2nd gear in that tranny. The final crawl ratio in this Jeep in low and low is amazing. I am looking forward to getting it off the jackstands. Thanks for the input...

 

Thanks for the information. I will make sure I start out in second. I once built up a VW Karmann Ghia engine to the point it had so much power to weight ratio, that I never used first gear. I would hit redline faster than I could shift. The gearing was the only thing that kept it from being a Porsche. But when I did it, transaxles with taller gears were rare to non-existent. By the way, it is good to know that the tranny is so overbuilt. In know the Dana 18 is probably good for 400 hp, so the tranny should be good for it too, should I decide to put a potent V-6 in it at a later date. The biggest issue is the structure of the tranny, from what I understand, with its very short input shaft. I have been advised by adapter manufacturers that they are available, however. I just need to get this thing on the road before I make any wild plans. Take care...

 

Thanks for the info. I am kind of a Jeep neophyte, but I learn fast. I appreciate all and any information I can get. By the way, what do you want for that Cougar? I always liked that car until they put the fold away lights in it in 1969, I believe it was. It still looked good, but after a while, it seems like all those light pods started sagging, or got otherwise misaligned and it made the grille look trashy. I had fun racing them in my '67 GTO. Wish I had that car back and not my first wife...

Later..

 

Yeah, there is a huge gap. Low and low is so slow, it will make crawling a pleasant experience, especially with the F-134 and the low end torque paired with all that gearing. Thanks for the input...

 

Ohh that Cougar's been in this family since '75.
Engine swap for the mildly built 302 it has now in the late 70s.
Needs a resto now, paint, interior.
Its not going anywhere for a while, I'm getting to it after my Jeep.

But that Cougars had the hidden headlights from the start in 1967.

 

My bad. I thought they started them in 69, but you would know better than I did. I always thought they looked much better than the Mustang. I know I will get some arguments on this, but to each his own. Were there any other engine options for the Cougar in the late '60's other than the 289? Did they ever build them with 390's in them? That would have been a wild car!!!

 

I'd be more than happy to talk cars in another thread so we don't derail too far! But there were pretty much as many choices for engines as the Mustang.