Home
What's new
Latest activity
Authors
Store
Latest reviews
Search products
Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New listings
New products
New profile posts
Latest activity
Members
Current visitors
New profile posts
Search profile posts
Log in
Register
Cart
Cart
Loading…
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Search titles only
By:
Menu
Log in
Register
Navigation
Install the app
Install
More options
Change style
Contact us
Close Menu
Forums
Cobra Forums
2015+ Shelby GT350 Mustang
Voodoo Child
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Tob" data-source="post: 14878825" data-attributes="member: 83412"><p>Thanks.</p><p></p><p>I'm still going through some of the photos but a couple a couple of things caught my eye so I did some quick side by side shots with respect to the new transmission, the TR3160, and the MT82 as used behind the 5.0 Coyote engine.</p><p></p><p>Similar bolt patterns and CSC hardware (visually anyway). But the TR3160 clearly uses more cast-in bracing that also appears to be thicker than that of the MT82. Note the "arc" near the top of the bell on the TR3160 too. For those that don't know, the inverted 'V' boss under the CSC is for the internal pump.</p><p></p><p><img src="http://www.svtperformance.com/articles/2015/GT350%20reveal%20updated%20photos/MT82_TR3160_Comparison.jpg" alt="" class="fr-fic fr-dii fr-draggable " style="" /></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>A couple of other things in the next photo. Ford chose to keep the single arm shifter arrangement, still retained by a bolt fed in from the same side. The shifter output shaft has a near identical contour between the two as well. But look closely at the fixed flange (it will eventually sandwich a guibo joint between it and the u-joint flange on the driveshaft) - it is still scalloped but looks a bit thicker where it will fasten to the driveshaft. In addition, it looks as though Ford is pulling that flange as far forward as possible whereas the flange on the MT82 actually extended rearward quite a bit.</p><p></p><p><img src="http://www.svtperformance.com/articles/2015/GT350%20reveal%20updated%20photos/MT82_TR3160_Comparison1.jpg" alt="" class="fr-fic fr-dii fr-draggable " style="" /></p><p></p><p></p><p>Given Jamal and Kerry's comments on carbon fiber not being stiff enough for driveshaft use on this car, I'm now wondering how well the aftermarket will handle addressing these critical frequencies when attempting to develop a one piece steel or aluminum shaft replacement.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Tob, post: 14878825, member: 83412"] Thanks. I'm still going through some of the photos but a couple a couple of things caught my eye so I did some quick side by side shots with respect to the new transmission, the TR3160, and the MT82 as used behind the 5.0 Coyote engine. Similar bolt patterns and CSC hardware (visually anyway). But the TR3160 clearly uses more cast-in bracing that also appears to be thicker than that of the MT82. Note the "arc" near the top of the bell on the TR3160 too. For those that don't know, the inverted 'V' boss under the CSC is for the internal pump. [IMG]http://www.svtperformance.com/articles/2015/GT350%20reveal%20updated%20photos/MT82_TR3160_Comparison.jpg[/IMG] A couple of other things in the next photo. Ford chose to keep the single arm shifter arrangement, still retained by a bolt fed in from the same side. The shifter output shaft has a near identical contour between the two as well. But look closely at the fixed flange (it will eventually sandwich a guibo joint between it and the u-joint flange on the driveshaft) - it is still scalloped but looks a bit thicker where it will fasten to the driveshaft. In addition, it looks as though Ford is pulling that flange as far forward as possible whereas the flange on the MT82 actually extended rearward quite a bit. [img]http://www.svtperformance.com/articles/2015/GT350%20reveal%20updated%20photos/MT82_TR3160_Comparison1.jpg[/img] Given Jamal and Kerry's comments on carbon fiber not being stiff enough for driveshaft use on this car, I'm now wondering how well the aftermarket will handle addressing these critical frequencies when attempting to develop a one piece steel or aluminum shaft replacement. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Cobra Forums
2015+ Shelby GT350 Mustang
Voodoo Child
Top