bummer...discovered the T5 is a 4 cylinder version

[Mooseburger2nite]

Well this sux...discovered tonight that my A-code 65 GT was given a E7ZR-7003-AA REP-AP 13-52-162 four cylinder T-5/E6ZR-6394-AA bellhousing by one of the PO...we'd be eating POburger2nite if I knew where the dummie was right now. OK...enough with the past...my car was born on 7/15/65 with a code "5" 4-speed...I assume a Ford Toploader. What are my options? Am I better off financially trashing this 240 ft/lb rated set-up and going back to the Toploader? I've found tables indicating the T-5 was manufactured in V8 versions capable of 310 ft/lbs...seems like an underrated piece of weak-link. What was the Toploader rated for? Where would a guy located the Toploader/original bellhousing/clutch linkage/shifter to take this car back to its original configuration? Is there something better I can bolt to the E6ZR-6394-AA bellhousing and pull this off? I need help boys...my wife may kick my butt on this one...I need to keep the budget queen happy. HELP PLEASE

[putz]

I am and four other guys by me are running four banger t5 never had one fail they are just fine if you don't drag race it or speed shift. Two of the guys pound them pretty hard behind 351c with trac locks.

[TheDude]

Does the car run and drive now? Check the classifieds on this site and browse Craigslist. I found a rebuilt Toploader with a scattershield for $600 after searching for a while. That was a pretty good deal. You'll see a lot of Toploaders that need to be rebuilt for $400 and up.

[Huskinhano]

On another forum I hung out on a guy had a Cobra kit car running a built 408W and a 4 cyl T5. He said he had a Z spec T5 waiting to go in when the 4 cyl T5 failed. But he said the 4 cyl T5 was holding up just fine despite smokey burn outs with it.

289s in stock for weren't terribly powerfull in stock form and Mustangs aren't known for their traction either. As long as your not running sticky tire, dumping the clutch or powershifting, I wouldn't worry aboiut it personally. Oh yeah, Toploaders are very strong!

[Mooseburger2nite]

Thanks guys...I'm off suicide watch for now. The car runs great as-is, but as a kid I had a 429CJ Torino GT...I went thru many pressure plates with that car so you see I have a jerk in my left leg...I've never outgrown this "genetic defect".

I don't know what type of horsepower/torque this new car has...the A-code is a strong rebuild with pistons, a cam, alum intake/Holley carb, long tube headers, and electronic spark...my gut said somewhere around 300 horsepower...this is just a guess. The stock engine was rated 225 horsepower 305 ft/lbs of torque. Axle wise the 8" rear end does have traction lock...both tires spin the same direction when it's in the air.

I'm hoping the folks at Borg-Warner built-in a 1.5 service factor to the -162's 240 ft/lb rating...I could live with a transmission rated for 360 ft/lbs. For now I'm looking for a V8 T-5 or a toploader if anyones got one under the bench.

[Zimbo]

I've seen those 4cyl T5's hold up to like 450ft lbs of torque stock... and if it's built up probably around 600

[anotherhassel]

Yo can remove it and send it to me... My straight six will love it! LOL

[GT289]

No slicks, no speed shifting..... no problem. If it's a stock A-code it's
"rated" for 225 hp and 305 ft lbs. It's going to be less than that in
the real world because the old ratings are without accessories of any
kind. Unless you're bent on destroying your 4 cyl T-5 it should be fine.

AFA toploaders go, the 25 spline one was super wimpy, the 28 spline
was rated North of 300 ft lbs and the BB Nascar one I've never seen
specs on.

[ynned]

Isn't the 3.97 first gear pretty low? I used a Non WC with the 2.95 and thought it was low even with the original 2.70 (IIRC) rear. When I put a 3.80 rear in, first seemed almost useless. I can't imagine what the 3.97 would be like. I'd be in third before I got out of the garage.

[gjz30075]

Originally Posted by ynned

Isn't the 3.97 first gear pretty low? I used a Non WC with the 2.95 and thought it was low even with the original 2.70 (IIRC) rear. When I put a 3.80 rear in, first seemed almost useless. I can't imagine what the 3.95 would be like. I'd be in third before I got out of the garage.

+1 to this. What everyone else says may be true but you may not like first gear, although the spacing from 1 to 4 is reasonable.