Anybody Using a Saginaw 3 Speed Manual?

[74 Camaro]

Hello all,

I have the 3 speed Saginaw for a 6 cylinder engine sitting behind an Edelbrock 350 crate engine making north of 300 (possibly 350) horsepower. I bought the car with this setup and didn't know what I was getting into. Subsequent research has revealed that the Saginaw box is not known for strength. I also don't know if the gears are good for autocross. Nasty Z-28 has the gear ratios listed as follows:




1st 2.85:1
2nd 1.68:1
3rd 1.0:1
rear axle 3.08:1

I'm doing a budget build and considering a four speed because it will fit easily and is about $1000 cheaper than a 5 speed, which is about $1000 cheaper than a six speed. The thing is, I won't gain any overdrive, since all but a few rare 4 speeds were 1.0:1 final, just like my 3 speed. I also won't gain on the low end since 4 speeds start with a 2.52 or 2.54 first gear, compared to my 2.85. But this means that my gears are VERY wide. My engine isn't exactly a power monster, though it does seem to rev surprisingly well. Maybe that's just because I'm used to truck engines. If I could gain on the low end then I could justify a taller rear gear to maintain decent highway mileage, while still having decent grunt off the line.

I found an interesting article on 4, 5, and 6 speeds:

http://www.badasscars.com/index.cfm/...rod/prd442.htm

I like the idea of the fast shifting transmissions, besides the fact that the 4 speeds are less trouble and money to install. What I don't know is how a 3 speed shifts in comparison, and if the gears are any good for spirited driving/ autocross. I'm really into nice shifting transmissions. For reference, I have a 94 Miata that is a blast to row through the gears.

Does anyone have experience with either/ both 3 speeds and 4 speeds? Driving impressions? Suggestions?

Many thanks in advance!

[74 Camaro]

Oh, one more thing that has puzzled me for a long time. Despite the low first gear, my Camaro is easier to stall off the line than my Dad's old Kia Spectra. I don't know if that has something to do with the clutch or what, but I felt like I had to rev the relative snot out of that v8 just to move on from a stop sign without stalling out and embarrassing myself. Granted, at the time I wasn't very good at driving stick, but like I said, my Dad's Spectra was easier to drive, and I borrowed it several times around the same time I was driving the Camaro. (The Camaro has since been dismantled for repairs, and hasn't been driven in years. I'm aiming to fix that soon!) Anyone have an idea what I'm dealing with, and if there is a fix for that? Thanks again!

[TheJDMan]

I had a three speed in my 56 Chevy 210 that I drove in high school which got replaced with a four speed M22. I can't imagine any scenario I would ever go back to a three speed. Hell I can't even imagine ever going back to a four speed. Save your money and buy a TKO600 5 speed or T56 6 speed!

[1985olds]

I dont want to speak ill of someone else's article, but it bothers me when people give misleading opinions and preach it as end all be all truth. So I'm going to call bull on that article. I have a 6 speed and about 400 whp in my 85 olds and I cruise in 6th at 60-70 mph all the time. I don't need to be doing "100 plus" like the article says. 6 speeds are fine on the street and I do have to say the best part of my 6 speed is the shift feel. It shifts like a smooth bolt action rifle. Also the article says you can't speed shift 5 and 6 speeds and that is bull as well. Having run both 5 and 6 speeds in my car, I would say you will be happy with either. Both will drastically improve the overall usage and driving experience of the car.

[74 Camaro]

TheJDMan and 1985olds,

Thanks for the input! I guess it is dangerous to get all your info from one person- even one claiming to have lots of experience. I thought his article was eye-opening, as I had never heard anyone say anything negative about going to a five or six speed. I thought I had found nuggets of wisdom from someone in the know who wasn't afraid to contradict the masses. But then sometimes the common wisdom is the best.

I would love to hear more opinions on this topic! Do you agree/ disagree with the article?

[Kenova]

Late '70s F-bodies used Borg Warner ST10 transmissions with first gears in the 2.8:1 range. Because the shift levers point up you can run into tunnel clearance problems with some early models.

Ken

[BonzoHansen]

I dunno. I went from a st10 to a t56 as shift quality was night and day.

I use 6th all the time for cruising. 3.90s out back

[74 Camaro]

Late '70s F-bodies used Borg Warner ST10 transmissions with first gears in the 2.8:1 range. Because the shift levers point up you can run into tunnel clearance problems with some early models.

Ken

I didn't think of checking those out. I looked it up and see that there were the following gear offerings:

1st 2.43, 1.61, 1.23, 1.00
2nd 2.64, 1.75, 1.33, 1.00
3rd 2.88, 1.91, 1.33, 1.00
4th 3.42, 2.28, 1.46, 1.00

I guess one could go with the widest ratio version and a taller rear gear. This would give decent performance off the line and still permit better highway mileage, but 2nd and 3rd might be a bit wide.

The clearance issues, would a simple cut-out clear the linkage, or would the whole tunnel need to be raised?

[74 Camaro]

I dunno. I went from a st10 to a t56 as shift quality was night and day.

I use 6th all the time for cruising. 3.90s out back

Good to hear! Ultimately, I would love to get a t56. Just need to make sure I have the budget for it...

[cornfedbill]

Oh, one more thing that has puzzled me for a long time. Despite the low first gear, my Camaro is easier to stall off the line than my Dad's old Kia Spectra. I don't know if that has something to do with the clutch or what, but I felt like I had to rev the relative snot out of that v8 just to move on from a stop sign without stalling out and embarrassing myself. Granted, at the time I wasn't very good at driving stick, but like I said, my Dad's Spectra was easier to drive, and I borrowed it several times around the same time I was driving the Camaro. (The Camaro has since been dismantled for repairs, and hasn't been driven in years. I'm aiming to fix that soon!) Anyone have an idea what I'm dealing with, and if there is a fix for that? Thanks again!

First: The Kia has a stall save algorithm that opens the throttle. It likely has a deeper overall first gear. My Saturn daily drivers are the same. Carbureted cars don't have that advantage.

Second: I am running a Muncie M22 with a wide ratio gear set. It is small, light, durable and fits the old school motif of my car.

Third: GM pickups, both S10 and Full size that were powered by the 4.3L V6, 305 or 350 small blocks had optional 5-speeds. The later models used an NV3500. We picked one up at the local boneyard for $375. It bolts right to the small block. It is a lot larger than the Saginaw or Muncie 3 and 4 speeds.

Just food for thought.

[AU Doc]

I read the article you linked a couple days ago, and it's been bothering me ever since. Mostly because it's really just an opinion piece that's presented as fact. For example, rather than just stating that the old four speeds shift smoother and faster than the new five and six speeds, it would be really helpful to explain why (if it's actually true).The old muncies are synchronized transmissions just like the newer five and six speeds. Sure the synchro design has changed, but the fundamental operation is the same. So the "click....click" the author feels is so time consuming must be somewhere else. That pretty well leaves the shifting mechanism. It makes me wonder if the "click...click" is there in the muncies, but you don't feel it because of the linkages and bushings that aren't present in the internal rail transmissions.


There are plenty of other issues with that article, but there's no point beating a dead horse.

[TheJDMan]

I don't know if I have talked about it much because frankly I have run various Muncie and BorgWarner four speeds since the early 70s generally with Hurst shifters. So much so that four speeds are just normal to me. When properly adjusted these things do shift like greased lightening. I removed a very nice freshly rebuilt BW Super T10 with a very nice Hurst super shifter to install my T56 Magnum in Dust Off. The first drive with the T56 made me question the wisdom of the swap due to how poorly it shifted out of the box but everyone said the shifting improves with miles which has turned out to be exactly correct. The T56 still does not shift like my ST10 did but it also only has about 5000 miles on it. I also currently have the factory Tremec shifter and have been less than impressed with it so a new shifter is in the plans for the future.

All that said, I would not even consider going back to the four speed since the overall driving experience is much better with the T56. I'm running a 3.89:1 rear end gear with a 26" tall rear tire. In fourth gear which is 1:1 I cruise 45mph at 2300 rpm but on the open freeway I can cruise 70 in sixth gear at the same 2300 rpm. My engine red line is set at 6000 so looking at the gear calculator that translates to 189 mph (which will never happen by the way). My point is that the T56 makes the entire driving experience more pleasurable. It allows you to optimize the rear end gear for acceleration rather than forcing you to compromise for the sake of highway cruising. If all you do is drag racing a four speed will be a good choice, but if you drive on the road at all you will not regret changing to a 5 or 6 speed. BTW, just so you can play what if, here is the Tremec gear ratio calculator so you can see exactly what you would be missing with a four speed.

http://tremec.com/calculadora.php

[74 Camaro]

First: The Kia has a stall save algorithm that opens the throttle. It likely has a deeper overall first gear. My Saturn daily drivers are the same. Carbureted cars don't have that advantage.

Second: I am running a Muncie M22 with a wide ratio gear set. It is small, light, durable and fits the old school motif of my car.

Third: GM pickups, both S10 and Full size that were powered by the 4.3L V6, 305 or 350 small blocks had optional 5-speeds. The later models used an NV3500. We picked one up at the local boneyard for $375. It bolts right to the small block. It is a lot larger than the Saginaw or Muncie 3 and 4 speeds.

Just food for thought.

That makes sense about the Kia. Just looked into the nv3500. A quick google search indicates that it may not be the best for "power shifting", but is durable otherwise. Also, having to cut the floor out will be time consuming, and as much as I have to budget my money, I have to budget my time even more. I will have a certain time frame to get this build done, so I'm looking for what will be relatively simple. That makes the m22 seem appealing. If you don't mind, what kind of rpm's do you run on the hwy, at what speed, and what rear gear? Thanks!

[74 Camaro]

I don't know if I have talked about it much because frankly I have run various Muncie and BorgWarner four speeds since the early 70s generally with Hurst shifters. So much so that four speeds are just normal to me. When properly adjusted these things do shift like greased lightening. I removed a very nice freshly rebuilt BW Super T10 with a very nice Hurst super shifter to install my T56 Magnum in Dust Off. The first drive with the T56 made me question the wisdom of the swap due to how poorly it shifted out of the box but everyone said the shifting improves with miles which has turned out to be exactly correct. The T56 still does not shift like my ST10 did but it also only has about 5000 miles on it. I also currently have the factory Tremec shifter and have been less than impressed with it so a new shifter is in the plans for the future.

All that said, I would not even consider going back to the four speed since the overall driving experience is much better with the T56. I'm running a 3.89:1 rear end gear with a 26" tall rear tire. In fourth gear which is 1:1 I cruise 45mph at 2300 rpm but on the open freeway I can cruise 70 in sixth gear at the same 2300 rpm. My engine red line is set at 6000 so looking at the gear calculator that translates to 189 mph (which will never happen by the way). My point is that the T56 makes the entire driving experience more pleasurable. It allows you to optimize the rear end gear for acceleration rather than forcing you to compromise for the sake of highway cruising. If all you do is drag racing a four speed will be a good choice, but if you drive on the road at all you will not regret changing to a 5 or 6 speed. BTW, just so you can play what if, here is the Tremec gear ratio calculator so you can see exactly what you would be missing with a four speed.

http://tremec.com/calculadora.php

Played "what if". Dammit, that really makes me want a 5 speed! To see what could be done with a four, I plugged in the numbers for a 1:1 4th and 2.41 rear. Came up with 72 mph at 2300 rpm. The later st10's came with a 3.42 first gear, which might make the tall rear ok to live with. Of course, 2nd and 3rd would be pretty wide. Not sure if that would be good for performance driving. What do you think?

[1985olds]

At the power level you are at you could even run a t5. Not the best trans, but can hold the power you are making and will fit in smaller trans tunnels.

[Kenova]

The clearance issues, would a simple cut-out clear the linkage, or would the whole tunnel need to be raised?

I solved the clearance problem in my Nova by moving the shift rod to the inside of the forward shift lever.
I mounted a bell housing on an engine stand and mounted the trans to the bell so it was easy to work on. The rod had to be cut, welded, and re-bent but it was a pretty easy job.

Ken

[1985olds]

https://www.pro-touring.com/threads/...ntington-beach

I dont know what your budget is but here is a deal in the for sale section

[cornfedbill]

That makes sense about the Kia. Just looked into the nv3500. A quick google search indicates that it may not be the best for "power shifting", but is durable otherwise. Also, having to cut the floor out will be time consuming, and as much as I have to budget my money, I have to budget my time even more. I will have a certain time frame to get this build done, so I'm looking for what will be relatively simple. That makes the m22 seem appealing. If you don't mind, what kind of rpm's do you run on the hwy, at what speed, and what rear gear? Thanks!

3000 rpm at 75 mph in 4th with a 3.08. Not designed for fuel economy.

It has a theoretical top speed at red line of about 170 mph. The goal is 160 mph. I won't be able to test it until this summer at the Sandhills Open Road Challenge. I am not going to test the top speed on a public road.

[74 Camaro]

https://www.pro-touring.com/threads/...ntington-beach

I dont know what your budget is but here is a deal in the for sale section

That was a good deal. Looks like it got grabbed up pretty fast!

[74 Camaro]

3000 rpm at 75 mph in 4th with a 3.08. Not designed for fuel economy.

It has a theoretical top speed at red line of about 170 mph. The goal is 160 mph. I won't be able to test it until this summer at the Sandhills Open Road Challenge. I am not going to test the top speed on a public road.

It's starting to look like the extra money for a 5 or 6 speed might be worth it for hwy use. I do intend to do road trips in the car.