SVTPerformance MGW Omnibus : MGW MT-82 Shifter Preview, Install, and Review
- Thread starter SID297
- Start date
Thanks:beer:
I wondered about this also watching the videos.What a piece of junk the OEM box is!Zip ties?Seriously??
I would love to get one of these but my only concern would be warranty.If by chance i ever did have a tranny problem and took it in,they would point out the shifter immediately and void the warranty.Could reinstall old but it would be pretty obvious that something had been done to the shifter.
It would be worth the warranty risk to me.
here is another really cool optional accessory we will have for our shifter!!!!
this is a high temp heat / sound shield designed for the boss 302 mustang and racing applications where VERY high track and engine temps as well as stright pip[e exhaust systems can put a tremendous amount of heat in the shifter box area.
this is a punch formed stainless shroud that extends for and aft of the shift box and seals the left and right side. the backing is 1/4 inch thick pyrogel pad that is a ceramic based heat barrier . it works awesome and is water proof.
i will not be including this in the base price of the shifter because frankly it is not NEEDED but damned if it wont make the shifter even quieter and cooler and i think the price will come in well under 10 bucks!!!:beer:
this is a high temp heat / sound shield designed for the boss 302 mustang and racing applications where VERY high track and engine temps as well as stright pip[e exhaust systems can put a tremendous amount of heat in the shifter box area.
this is a punch formed stainless shroud that extends for and aft of the shift box and seals the left and right side. the backing is 1/4 inch thick pyrogel pad that is a ceramic based heat barrier . it works awesome and is water proof.
i will not be including this in the base price of the shifter because frankly it is not NEEDED but damned if it wont make the shifter even quieter and cooler and i think the price will come in well under 10 bucks!!!:beer:
Last edited:
I like it. Can't wait to try out the new shield.
I had my money down on a new Hurst shifter. I ordered it on 4/2/2011. On 8/26/2011, I saw some reviews on American Muscle and they didn't sound to promising to me. When I saw that there was an led light to signal that you were in reverse, I called about one second later and cancelled the shifter. I figured, when sitting at a stoplight, when it turns green, I want to know I'm going forward and it isn't manditory to look for an led light to tell me that I'm not in reverse. THANK YOU, AMERICAN MUSCLE!!!!!!!!!!! I called MGW, and inquired about what they were doing with the MT-82, and George told me about the videos. This was on Friday the 26th of August. Monday, the 29th, I had my order in with Julie at about 8:10 AM. This MGW unit looks GREAT!!!! I know I would have been a "little" upset with myself if I got sucked into the Hurst history trap. There previous units have always been good. From the looks of things they really got lazy and MGW, in my book anyway, is now #1 in the performance shifter category, that is if they already weren't there. Well, happy shiftin' everybody, and I can't wait till my unit shows up in about 3 or 4 weeks. Have a Great Holiday Weekend everyone. Later, mouser!!!!
Quick message, I ordered a Hurst on April 2nd. By August 26th I hadn't received it and I saw a couple of write-ups on American Muscle about the Hurst. Not good!!!! No space in the gates and an led light to notify you when you are in reverse!!!!! I don't think so!!!!!! I called and cancelled the Hurst immediately!!!! I called MGW and spoke with George and he clued me in about the videos on Friday the 26th of August. On the 29th Julie, helped me place my order!!! This unit really looks bulletproof!!! Thank you MGW for building something worth buying!!!!!!
We should be installing the new heat shield upgrade in the next week or so. Stay tuned for an update.
For you guys that have installed the MGW, and previously had the 1->2 shift "nibble" did this eliminate that? I have the annoying nibble/crunch when shifting 1->2, which I've been working around by double clutching the 1->2 shift. If I don't double clutch and I'm driving from a cold start, it will feel like there's something catching when engaging 2nd gear. I've heard others describe this as clutch engagement/disengagement or synchro issues, but nothing definitive.
Good question...
I no longer have the "nibble" you mentioned. I think a lot of that is due to the soft rubber bushings in the stock shifter.
The shifter looks nice and well thought out. I have one question. The weak stock bracket looks like it is designed for some side to side motion and way too much of it, (with that bracket there might as well not be one) the MGW essentially takes that to zero. My question is with regards to any side-to-side motion.
Because the bracket is attached to the body, what does any lateral movement do up at the support arm connection? I looks like there is articulation in the stock shift rod that could absorb some.
Essentially the shifter acts as a transmission mount of sorts. The stock design just sort of floats there in the rubber... that mount offers little support and little resistance to movement. By firming it up I am concerned it might cause problems because of restricted lateral movement of the transmission. Or is there just not enough side to side motion of the trans for it to be a concern? I suppose it's no worse than the connections of a shifter in a front wheel drive car or an old three-on the tree design.
Because the bracket is attached to the body, what does any lateral movement do up at the support arm connection? I looks like there is articulation in the stock shift rod that could absorb some.
Essentially the shifter acts as a transmission mount of sorts. The stock design just sort of floats there in the rubber... that mount offers little support and little resistance to movement. By firming it up I am concerned it might cause problems because of restricted lateral movement of the transmission. Or is there just not enough side to side motion of the trans for it to be a concern? I suppose it's no worse than the connections of a shifter in a front wheel drive car or an old three-on the tree design.
The tranny will torque a little with the engine, but it's not that much. I don't think it's much of a concern, but I do like your thought process.
Welcome to SVTP.:beer:
Thanks, I may write scattered at times as I think things through as it's kind of my nature
. I've been doing product development engineering for many years now and that ford bracket screams "cheap fix" at me.I've done some looking at the 2005-2009 design. I am thinking that this 2011 piece was a cost-reduction gone wrong. rather than a last minute add in or having so much play for some other reason. It's just cheap. The keying didn't work so they added the zip ties. (they removed the through holes and the rubber tabs, probably a couple cents of labor which they re-added with the zip ties) The 2005-2009 bracket looks the way I would expect it to look.
I still don't like that it's half mounted to the trans and half to the body, but it seems that this is the way things have been for some time now. but it is probably only for noise dampening rather than lateral movement now that I see the earlier piece, which would have been the design starting point for 2011.
VERY good observation and it does warrant a response. we actually took this into account early on in developing the shifter for the 2005-2010 mustangs and 2010 + camaro as well. we knew there was going to be SOME torsional movment and we wanted to make sure that any major force from the motor will be able to transfer to the shifter body.
this is one of the main reasons we chose an epdm and viton rubber blend for the bushings.
they APPEAR to offer zero movement but thats not the case. they are meant to keep the shifter inline during hard shifts but they still will not overcome the torque of a motor. it WILL move some but not enough to hurt the precision of the shifter.
this is why we chose NOT to go with polyurethane bushings .they do not give enough and are noisy.
george
Has anyone installed this on a 401a car? I'm curious about how this shifter mates up to the leather/pleather/vinyl shifter boot. Also can you use the stock shifter knob?
It fits just fine. I believe you can order a shift lever with the correct thread to use the stock knob.
Thank you sir!
Hey all, first post/reply on the forums here.
I have a rather obscure question/ statement to make, and I am rather curious of the answers.
Alright, so I have driven the new mustang with the barton short throw, loved the thing.
Was tempted to buy one myself, until i saw this. This shifter with the full set bottom housing has got me sold. only ONE thing about it is holding me up.
The shift reduction in a barton is ~40%
The MGW ~25%
barton being give or take a little, half the throw length of the MGW. Now, 25% is a nice upgrade to an already decently short shifter (OEM) BUT, and here is my curiosity:
is there a way to reduce the shift length in the MGW to closer to barton lengths?
I thought at first, eh combine the MGW bottom with the barton top then i realized that im an idiot for thinking that would work give the MGW is a more or less billet machined case and the barton wouldn't fit.
SO
can i reduce the MGW?
or do i just live with the slightly longer, more solid shifting that it would produce?
I have a rather obscure question/ statement to make, and I am rather curious of the answers.
Alright, so I have driven the new mustang with the barton short throw, loved the thing.
Was tempted to buy one myself, until i saw this. This shifter with the full set bottom housing has got me sold. only ONE thing about it is holding me up.
The shift reduction in a barton is ~40%
The MGW ~25%
barton being give or take a little, half the throw length of the MGW. Now, 25% is a nice upgrade to an already decently short shifter (OEM) BUT, and here is my curiosity:
is there a way to reduce the shift length in the MGW to closer to barton lengths?
I thought at first, eh combine the MGW bottom with the barton top then i realized that im an idiot for thinking that would work give the MGW is a more or less billet machined case and the barton wouldn't fit.
SO
can i reduce the MGW?
or do i just live with the slightly longer, more solid shifting that it would produce?
Users who are viewing this thread
