How good is the 5/6 sp swap - Page 2

#16 06-11-2005, 07:27 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by black beast

I hate the idea of having to get my tranny rebuilt (give or take) every two years ( I have heard)

Wow. That's awfully pessimistic. My 95 has the original tranny with 160,000 miles on it. Only the 92's had bad tranny problems. They got much better after that.

Dave

svxhunter · #17 06-11-2005, 07:31 AM

I agree it's pessimistic.

However, I am completely unaware of any difference whatsoever in the '92 tranny vs. any other model year.

SomethingElse · #18 06-11-2005, 09:59 AM

I just got my 92 almost 2 weeks ago. I love it...except of course the automatic. Im researching the 5 speed swap but I also want the gears to go with it. I read somewhere that the car to go with would be a 97 or 98 outback legacy? Does anyone know if i can use the trans and both diffs as a direct bolt in? Any advice would be helpful...thanks

AvPPoW · #19 06-11-2005, 10:34 AM

*decides* Time to start saving up. Looks like I'll be biking to work this summer

#20 06-11-2005, 10:42 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by svxhunter

I agree it's pessimistic.

However, I am completely unaware of any difference whatsoever in the '92 tranny vs. any other model year.

Then you haven't done your homework

Many of the internals were eventually modified by Subaru to prevent premature failure.

Dave

svxhunter · #21 06-11-2005, 12:12 PM

Au contraire. I've done hundreds of hours of homework on this issue.

The 4eat was a fine tranny out of the box. It's only real issue was the fluid cooling in the SVX application. Airflow around it is decreased, so heat is increased. Additionally, the car is driven significantly harder than many of it's counterparts wearing the same tranny, so the overheating issue is compounded. Also, because of the AWD, there is a much higher percentage of Subies in mountain mountain regions, which also is a strain on the tranny.

Thermal breakdown of ATF occurs earlier when overheated- life expectancy is drastically reduced. A trans cooler or frequent fluid changes would solve this problem.

The built up trannys offfered by companies like Level 10 are mostly increases in fluid flow and cooling. This trans has been used in an 8 second WRX.

I'm aware of an awful lot of bad trannies in SVXi other than '92's. I am also aware of plenty of '92's running strong- including one of mine, the SVreX, a racer with 160,000 miles on it.

I am no authority, but I'd be real interested in any real data on actual internal changes in the tranny after MY 1992. I see, Dave, that you are an assistant parts manager. Do you have any info on such changes?

Sorry, didn't mean to hijack!

benebob · #22 06-11-2005, 12:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by svxhunter

I am no authority, but I'd be real interested in any real data on actual internal changes in the tranny after MY 1992. I see, Dave, that you are an assistant parts manager. Do you have any info on such changes?

Sorry, didn't mean to hijack!

I know that my 95 needed to be rebuilt rather than having a reman put in it. Waited 4 months while the reman 95 tranny was on back order with Subaru. At least it must have been worth the wait. Subafreak tells me it is the best SVX tranny shifting that he's driven and that is 6 years later and 44k on it.

mbtoloczko · #23 06-11-2005, 01:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by svxhunter

...

I am no authority, but I'd be real interested in any real data on actual internal changes in the tranny after MY 1992. I see, Dave, that you are an assistant parts manager. Do you have any info on such changes?

This page has some good info:

http://www.subarusvx.com/faq/transmission.html

svxhunter · #24 06-11-2005, 01:36 PM

Thanks, MB.

I've seen that series of articles. The sentence that kind of summarizes it for me, though, is:

Quote:

Most of these improvements were made between 1992 and 1994 1/2. The newer your SVX, the more improved your transmission but all of these transmissions suffer, to some extent, from the same problems.

Though it does detail some improvements, it never says the improvements solved all the problems. It also does not seem to be saying the '92's were the only problematic ones.

svxhunter · #25 06-11-2005, 03:45 PM

Didn't have anything else to say, just had to change my post count!

#26 06-11-2005, 06:29 PM

I've been driving on my 5-speed tranny for a coulpe weeks. So I can't report on longevity. I used my 98 Forester for the donor 5-speed and 4:11 diffs. It had about 120,000 on the tranny before going into my SVX. I love the performance of 5-speed. I spent about $2000 on the conversion. Most of that was labor and the useless smallcar basic kit. I don't recommend getting the small car kit. It is better to find someone who can fabricate a good tranny cross member and other components needed for conversion. I think the ideal 5 speed tranny would be one from a wrx or turbo Forester XT with 4:11 diffs. I hear they are stronger than a standard 5-speed. But I haven't seen any proof of this. I also recently put in a driveline from a 95 Legacy and am real happy with that. the 95-99 Legacy/outback 5-speed drivelines are for the most part a direct bolt-in with very little modifications.

SomethingElse · #27 06-12-2005, 06:51 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SilVerXtc

I spent about $2000 on the conversion. Most of that was labor and the useless smallcar basic kit. I don't recommend getting the small car kit.

Doesnt the small car kit come with directions on how to modify the trans cross memeber and brackets for the clutch assembely, driveshaft spacers? Were the differentials from the 98 forester a direct bolt in or did you have to swap gears over.

mbtoloczko · #28 06-12-2005, 08:03 AM

I bought the small car kit too, and didn't use many of the pieces. A few pieces I didn't use because someone forgot to put them in the kit. :-/ Most of the brackets included in the Small Car kit are not so great, and the spacer for the driveline is not a great way to compensate for the 5MT being shorter in length. Better to just by the '97-'99 Legacy Outback driveshaft.

svxhunter · #29 06-12-2005, 01:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kulaid

Doesnt the small car kit come with directions on how to modify the trans cross memeber and brackets for the clutch assembely, driveshaft spacers? Were the differentials from the 98 forester a direct bolt in or did you have to swap gears over.

I had an imitation small car kit- didn't use a single piece. It all looked pretty worthless to me. I think the small car kit actually suggests small angle brackets to bolt the tranny in- uggh!

The issue for "direct bolt in" rear diff is that the external mounting locations, etc. don't line up with the SVX. The inside of the cases are identical so the gears can be swapped easily, but the external bolt holes, etc. are different. I'm not aware of a rear diff which will bolt directly into the SVX, but swapping the gears was really easy (I'd never done it before).

#30 06-13-2005, 06:53 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by svxhunter

Though it does detail some improvements, it never says the improvements solved all the problems. It also does not seem to be saying the '92's were the only problematic ones.

The 92's were not the only problematic trannys, but they were the most problematic. It is far more common to see a 94+ SVX go more than 100k on the original tranny than it is to see a 92 do it. If your SVX really does have 160K on the original tranny (and I suspect it was rebuilt at some point) then consider yourself very lucky. A lot of 92's went through several transmissions while they were still under warranty, and some continued to need them even after because the early rebuilts were no better than the original.

Dave