5-speed swap...a rumor I once heard

[tornado_735]

A few years back I entertained the idea of swapping the automatic out for a 5-speed on my late '91 CS. I can't remember who told me this, but someone told me that putting a 5-speed into a car with an engine that has only been mated to an automatic would likely cause the engine to blow up since the engine was broken in with an automatic. I remember thinking at the time that the guy might have been full of it, but I didn't know any better.

 

I was contemplating a 5-speed swap in my GP tonight, and that story came to mind.

 

Does it have any bit of truth to it?

[jake91]

the story probably comes from being able to rev the engine higher with a 5 speed. the swap has been done many times before you should be fine

[Addicted To Boost]

There is no truth whatsoever in that statement.

[RobertISaar]

that statement was made by someone with little/no knowledge of how engines/transmissions work

[White93z34]

I blew up my 3.4 about 10-15k after a 5 speed swap, but I think that mad more to do with 193,000 miles then it did anything else.

[Pontiac6KSTEAWD]

I think I heard this rumor too. But I remember it being something about a pilot bearing, or something like that. Dont remember thou..

[White93z34]

Our cars don't use a pilot bearing.

[Sagitarii]

If you start revving an engine in a higher range than it was normally run at you can break the top rings.

 

The pistons are used to stopping at a certain place, higher revs will push them out a little farther.

 

Happened to my first mustang, had to use a ridge reamer.

 

[tornado_735]

If you start revving an engine in a higher range than it was normally run at you can break the top rings.

 

The pistons are used to stopping at a certain place, higher revs will push them out a little farther.

 

I seem to recall this being part of what the problem was. It's been about 7 years since then

[89SupremeCutty]

If you start revving an engine in a higher range than it was normally run at you can break the top rings.

 

The pistons are used to stopping at a certain place, higher revs will push them out a little farther.

 

I seem to recall this being part of what the problem was. It's been about 7 years since then

 

i doubt that can happen unless the engine gets over revved, like past 6k or so.

[mra32]

If you start revving an engine in a higher range than it was normally run at you can break the top rings.

 

The pistons are used to stopping at a certain place, higher revs will push them out a little farther.

 

I seem to recall this being part of what the problem was. It's been about 7 years since then

 

i doubt that can happen unless the engine gets over revved, like past 6k or so.

 

wouldnt this mean that the bearings and connecting rods are stretching a measurable amount if the pistons are going farther up the cylinder walls?

[Crazy K]

yeah.... that makes little sense.... the travel range would be the same.....

[89SupremeCutty]

If you start revving an engine in a higher range than it was normally run at you can break the top rings.

 

The pistons are used to stopping at a certain place, higher revs will push them out a little farther.

 

I seem to recall this being part of what the problem was. It's been about 7 years since then

 

i doubt that can happen unless the engine gets over revved, like past 6k or so.

 

wouldnt this mean that the bearings and connecting rods are stretching a measurable amount if the pistons are going farther up the cylinder walls?

 

that's what i would think. and if that happens wouldn't the piston end up doing a valve dance?

[GP1138]

I would imagine it would matter how the car was driven. With an automatic, it's easy enough to baby the car, and never touch 4500RPM but once in awhile. Me personally, I visit my good friend 6500RPM every time I drive the 3.4L vert I own, but that's just me.

 

I guess the rationale is that you're more likely to rev the engine higher with a manual because of the lack of the low auto shift points.

 

Also, I can't imagine the pistons travelling all that much farther if the engine is revved higher. Wouldn't having everything tightened down negate this?

 

This sounds to me like the myth that you can't switch grades of gasoline once you've picked one. Someone told me this when I first started putting 93 in my car when I started driving, just to see what it'd do.

[tornado_735]

Me personally, I visit my good friend 6500RPM every time I drive the 3.4L vert I own...

 

Off topic, but I found the rev limiter for the first time in my GP today...

[ss427]

I just put a 94 auto 3.4 into my 92 stick lumina. 900 miles and no problems with it so far.

[RobertISaar]

the whole basis of this thread is pointless.

 

from swapping to manual ALONE: it makes no difference to the motor what kind of tranny its pushing. if you're going to be a dumbass and rev the living shit out of it: yes the rods will likely stretch more, causing some interesting valve-to-piston contact if it goes on long enough, but the same thing will happen regardless if its an auto or manual at the same RPM.

 

essentially: driver stupidity is at fault if switching to a manual causes engine damage.

[Andrew]

i hate unfounded rumors from uneducated idiots.

[RobertISaar]

i hate unfounded rumors from uneducated idiots.

 

X10 from me

[jake91]

X58752150595 from me

[xtremerevolution]

I want a 5speed swap, but it sounds much too involved. how long should something like this take someone to do?

[RobertISaar]

considering regals didn't come with 5 speeds, about as long as its going to take me with the monte.

 

current ETA: never...

[jake91]

but it sounds much too involved

says the guy rebuilding a jag v-12

[Andrew]

the main thing that would scare me away Andrei, is that you are OBD 1.5.

[jake91]

though kuntzie did one in an obd 2 car