Ford Muscle Cars Tech Forum banner

1 - 20 of 22 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
35 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
Anyone have experience with this transmission? They originally came in '88-'96 F150s, among others.

I ask because they're cheap and the shifter is in the perfect location for my roadster (unlike a T5, which ends up underneath the bench seat).
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
35 Posts
Discussion Starter #3
I believe you're right, the M5R2s were sourced from Mazda. They came in V8-powered Ford 1.5 ton trucks though, so it seems like they should be able to handle some torque...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
267 Posts
what does the torque for that mean? can a car with like 400lb/ft torque at the wheels run something like that? is the torque rating take at the flywheel...i'm lost...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
14,758 Posts
In a word, "no". These are flywheel torque #'s which is what the tranny experiences. The Mazda spec tranny was designed for the lower torque V6 trucks.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
14,758 Posts
Maybe I'm wrong here, but they didn't come in heavy duty F250/350 trucks. They came in V6 powered F150's. They weigh no where near 3 tons... I'm not saying they were bad tranny's, just not for heavy duty use.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
35 Posts
Discussion Starter #9
The M5R2 came in F150s and F250s with 302 V8s from '88-'96. Some also came packaged with 300 ci six cylinder engines.

There was also a M5R1 transmission that was a lighter duty model that I think only came with sixes and fours...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
35 Posts
Discussion Starter #10
I don't know that anyone cares about this transmission--heck, I don't think I do anymore either--but in case it helps anyone here's what I found by poking around the web and asking some questions at http://www.ford-trucks.com...

The M5R2 transmission seems to have two main problems:

1) They leak from some badly-designed rear seals--that can be replaced with better ones--causing the transmision to become extremely distraught when the lubricant drains out

2) Most guys who use them say they just don't shift very well, and that it's a very unsatisfying transmission for those of us who enjoy rowing through the gears

So, no M5R2 for me. That leaves me with a choice between a T5 modified for a forward-mounted shifter, or a Tremec 3550 set up for the same.

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: zonkola on 3/21/03 4:40am ]</font>
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1 Posts
Very old post I know but......the M5R2 tranny also came in the Thunderbird Super Coupe (89-95 3.8 L Supercharged engines) and certainly had a higher torque rating than what has been quoted here....heck the Super Coupes had 315 ft/lbs of torque stock (or more in the 94-95) the the tranny had to be able to handle it. The SC version was similar to the truck versions but had the shifter mounted at the rear of the tailshaft housing using internal shifter rods to couple to the shifter forks.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2 Posts
I have a '95 F-150 with the 4.9L I-6 engine. I believe what these other good folks are talking about when it comes to torque ratings is that these bigger sixes and the small eights produce more torque than the tranny can handle over extended periods of time. I called a guy about rebuilding the tranny and from what he and my college instructor (I'm in an auto program at the college here) said, a common problem is that the engines will tend to warp the transmission case over time due to the fact that it's made out of alluminum and can't handle excessive torque. I don't know why they would design a tranny out of aluminum other than to reduce sprung weight and increase fuel efficiency. In any case, you'd have to find a shop with a very specific machine that heats up the case so that they can re form it and then rebuild your tranny. I'm currently looking into seeing what a new one costs. Anyone know of any good replacements that will work in my pickup? My instructor tells me it takes as few as sixty or eighty thousand miles to produce this problem in the tranny.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,604 Posts
I don't know why they would design a tranny out of aluminum other than to reduce sprung weight and increase fuel efficiency.
Are you aware of how many trannys have aluminum cases?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,865 Posts
I don't know about the case warping under load on these transmissions, but my 88 F150 S/C 4X4 w/ 5.0 has 275,000 km (170,000 mi.) and the trans is still shifting good. I bought it with 254,000 km on it and the previous owner used to tow a travel trailer with it every weekend in the summer. This summer I replaced the shifter seat after the old ones disintegrated . The shifter is now nice and wobble free and it does seem to shift better than before, less notice of worn syncros.

The one thing that I was told to look for when I was testing it before buying was that there was a weakness in the overdrive gear in these early years. If the trans jumps out of 5th then there was something broken, or worn. At that time the update kit for the trans was almost as much as I paid for the truck (parts and labour), but there was a kit to address that particular problem. I haven't experienced that problem and the PO said he even towed in 5th gear, so I've been lucky.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2 Posts
Quite a few undoubtedly. And what reason would their be for that other than increased fuel efficiency due to decreased sprung weight?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,865 Posts
It would be for weight, but I doubt the motivation was for fuel economy. A lighter weight unit is easier on the chassis and suspension and can reduce maintenance and repair costs to related components.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,604 Posts
Not to mention ease of manufacture. Aluminum is alot easier to machine than cast iron
Exactly why most aftermaket heads are aluminum. Aluminum is more expensive than cast iron but the tooling lasts much longer.
 
1 - 20 of 22 Posts
Top