legacycentral bbs

SubaruNation wrote:

douglas vincent wrote:Why the hell do you want to spend the 5-7k on a fucking swap?

^^^^ kinda angry we are all speaking hypothetically and informally here, but ok!

+ 1

smh0101 wrote: not to mention the 5mt was never meant to handle that much power to begin with... So then, as mechanical things wear, when it gets to be this old and you ask it to handle more than it was designed to in the first place, you are very likely to run into probs...

Dude, you really don't know what you are talking about.

The first comment, about the 5mt never meant to handle that power is BS...

Do you think that the earlier STis had much less than 300hp?!?! No...and guess what transaxle they had?!?! The 4.11 Subaru 5 speed. And that whole thing about RA gears and whatnot being stronger is BS. As I said...I have made a shitton of power out of my 22t and I am still on my first 4.11 tranny...and my 3.90 died of a bad bearing, not broken gear.


btw...I know Davie at Rallitek quite well, and he and I have had the tranny discussion a few times...and the reason he keeps breaking trannies is because he puts in crazy high mileage NA trannies, and then puts 350whp through them and drives like a bat out of hell...

Still with the body flex. Lots of reinforcement can be made just like a STi had be reinforced with many braces.

555BCTurbo wrote:

smh0101 wrote: not to mention the 5mt was never meant to handle that much power to begin with... So then, as mechanical things wear, when it gets to be this old and you ask it to handle more than it was designed to in the first place, you are very likely to run into probs...

Dude, you really don't know what you are talking about.

The first comment, about the 5mt never meant to handle that power is BS...

Do you think that the earlier STis had much less than 300hp?!?! No...and guess what transaxle they had?!?! The 4.11 Subaru 5 speed. And that whole thing about RA gears and whatnot being stronger is BS. As I said...I have made a shitton of power out of my 22t and I am still on my first 4.11 tranny...and my 3.90 died of a bad bearing, not broken gear.


btw...I know Davie at Rallitek quite well, and he and I have had the tranny discussion a few times...and the reason he keeps breaking trannies is because he puts in crazy high mileage NA trannies, and then puts 350whp through them and drives like a bat out of hell...

Exactly my point ( not the one about me not knowing what I am talking about).

It had the 4.11 5mt... NOT THE 3.90...

And why would the RA gears not be stronger? If there not, prove it.

All logic points to the contrary. They had more power and were built to race. Why wouldnt Subaru put better gears in them?

And yea I figured he drives like a bat outta hell, but if your car had more than STi power wouldnt you? And I figured they were NA trannies since he gets them for like $175....

Oh and the 1st gen STis had 276hp not 300... ( Via Wiki and ps to hp converter)

ericm wrote:Still with the body flex. Lots of reinforcement can be made just like a STi had be reinforced with many braces.

Maybe, plus there goes any other weight advantage...

And Nick, the link in your sig no longer works, What up with that?

RA gears are definitely wider and stronger. The new LGT apparently has them or something very similar.

The problem, however, is not weak gears or case flex. It's part driver error and part flex of the input/output shafts themselves.

smh0101 wrote:Oh and the 1st gen STis had 276hp not 300... ( Via Wiki and ps to hp converter)

So did all the other powerful Japanese cars until very recently. The gentleman's agreement between manufacturers was to advertise 276.

jamal wrote:RA gears are definitely wider and stronger. The new LGT apparently has them or something very similar.

The problem, however, is not weak gears or case flex. It's part driver error and part flex of the input/output shafts themselves.

smh0101 wrote:Oh and the 1st gen STis had 276hp not 300... ( Via Wiki and ps to hp converter)

So did all the other powerful Japanese cars until very recently. The gentleman's agreement between manufacturers was to advertise 276.

Touche!

I thought the limit was 286? Just curious...

They say 276, but various individuals have told me that the car will actually dyno out much higher...

As far as the RA gears...they are predominately a different ratio, and are only 1mm wider, which is not going to make shit for difference. The steel they are made out of is no stronger, nor are they put through any type of additional tempering process. Ask Phil, he will confirm that.

Factory turbo gears are case hardened and shot peened, which gives them a bit of strength over the NA gears.


And the difference between 3.90 trannies and 4.11 trannies is the diff, that's it...so don't try to pass that off as a reason that the gears would be stronger in one and not in the other.


and the link not working in my signature is because I didn't renew the domain, since the team kinda disbanded.

okay well we're a little off topic...

anyway good tech write up:

http://forums.nasioc.com/forums/showthread.php?t=986710

rallispec wrote:We found that at only 275lb-ft of input torque the gear tooth separation exceeded the recommended engineering limit for a helical gear profile.

555BCTurbo wrote:And the difference between 3.90 trannies and 4.11 trannies is the diff, that's it...so don't try to pass that off as a reason that the gears would be stronger in one and not in the other.

what about the fact that people have been running cable clutch, 4.11 diff, $150 transmissions out of high mileage ej22e cars with way more power than stock and really beating on them with good success for the better part of a decade?

The lower gearing will be easier on the transmission as well since the power is more easily delivered to the tires rather than stressing the internals of the gearbox. This is a concern for the car I'm designing/engineeering/eventually building as I'm changing the final drive of the Honda S2000 from 4.10 to 2.83 (from a weaker-engined, far lighter weight Goldwing) and a larger wheel/tire combo. However, I am reducing weight by nearly half over the S2000 (though still over 150% heavier than the Goldwing). I'm interested to see if the happy day of me driving it for the first time ends in me swearing at a shattered rear end and trying to explain to the tow truck company exactly what the hell the 3-wheel 'car' actually is.

Seam welding adds almost no weight to the vehicle, but strengthens it substantially. The STI's chassis (pre-08) is directly descended from the Legacy.

meh

Sweet! A dick swinging competition! I always love those over the interwebs.

I honestlly feel the whole 5mt 6mt has been beaten to death.
The 6mt is stronger, but costs a lot, like really a lot and the swap is a pain in the ass. I know, cause Ive done about 10 of them! Plus, I find them exhausting to drive. I'd prefer a 4 speed myself.

Nick, your car is not 300hp, unless youve been running it on the dyno at myheadisupmyassville.

Davey breaks his gearboxes because he gets his hands on them cheap. Like boxes with many many miles on them, and have probablly been replaced for a reason. Most of the 5mt gears Ive seen stripped, were from driver error or abuse.

Sure my original 5mt went out, but thats because it had 250xXX MILES ON THE DAMN THING!

Toyota trannies wont last that long, and its the same damn design as the 6mt!

Also, Ive been drinking a lot, and I think your all a bunch of pussies.

Kelly wrote:Sweet! A dick swinging competition! I always love those over the interwebs.

Also, Ive been drinking a lot, and I think your all a bunch of pussies.

those were by far some of the best sentences ever posted.

evolutionmovement wrote:The lower gearing will be easier on the transmission as well since the power is more easily delivered to the tires rather than stressing the internals of the gearbox.

Exactly!!

And how did we get from a monster Spec-B to telling each other we have no effin clue about anything?

Anyways it is common knowledge that the 6mt is stronger than the 5mt.

There is a reason that Subaru put it the STi instead of the 6mt.

So for all practical purposes, and solving a problem before it gets really big, a 6mt swap into a Legacy when beefin it up to + STi power, would be suggested.

Even Dave at Rallitek said that... The only reason he said he hasnt is because it is a lot of money...

So there are five routes that I can think of:

1) 6mt Swap
2) Blow through 5mt quickly and replace'em cheaply
3) Buy a Dog-Box
4) Beef up the 5mt with better internals ( I dont even know if you really could do this)
5) Swap a newer 5mt from a WRX or LGT - BUT this could be almost as expensive as a 6mt due to the necesity of new axles, diffs, and whatever else is needed ( I am tired, cant think of what else is needed)


There are probably more options but this is all I can think of right now.

smh0101 wrote:
Anyways it is common knowledge that the 6mt is stronger than the 5mt.

Most definately...I never disputed that...

But you said that there is no possible way to put 300hp through a 5mt and have it survive...which is complete BS...

Phil builds 5MTs with syncros that will take over 500 HP and racing abuse. The dog boxes are even stronger.

555BCTurbo wrote:

smh0101 wrote:
Anyways it is common knowledge that the 6mt is stronger than the 5mt.

Most definately...I never disputed that...

But you said that there is no possible way to put 300hp through a 5mt and have it survive...which is complete BS...

Hold the phones!!!

I never said that there was no possible way to put that much power through a 5mt!

Of course you can... With dogboxes and the like...

But a STOCK 5mt with 1XX,XXX miles MOST LIKELY will not last long...

My post said " for more than like 5 sec..."

Um I dunno but do you have a problem understanding sarcasm?

It will most definitly last 5 sec. Maybe not 20...

One of the first things you do no matter who you are, it is inevitable, is take the car out and drive it a little on the hard side, its human nature.

So can you use a STOCK 5mt for a little bit while babying it? yes. For very long? no.

Maybe if you use some really good gear oil it can last forever syntheic technology is taking over the globe!!?! hehe.

I often hear guys are not stripping gears when they have alot of power. Its the clutch first................ then the gears

Yeah but the synchros in these trannys dont like synthetic, its to slippery. My fluid is a little slick for the summer, for winter its fine but during the last summer 2nd gear synchro wasnt to happy.

ok so since i started this, thank you everybody

oh, and kelly +10 for the awesome burns, all the time.

you're my hero

and thanks for the sti swap info smh101, i'll keep dreaming