4bangerjp.com

General Forums => The Mess Hall => Topic started by: enginethatcould on April 26, 2008, 03:52:34 PM

Title: transmissions
Post by: enginethatcould on April 26, 2008, 03:52:34 PM

My buddy has a '92 yj 4 banger. His ax-5 just went out on him and he was considering doing the ax-15 swap but we are both having trouble finding a bellhousing from a 96-98 dodge dakota 4cly. What other transmission (manuel or automatic) can you bolt to the 4 banger with out to much modification?

Title: Re: transmissions
Post by: Jeffy on April 26, 2008, 04:27:21 PM

None.  Everything requires some adaption of some sort.  Even the Dakota isn't a drop in since you can't use the transmission.  There have been NV4500, SM420, SM465, and NP435 swaps done in the past.  If you wanted to to auto, there are a few choices there as well.

Title: Re: transmissions
Post by: enginethatcould on April 26, 2008, 04:31:14 PM

Quote from: Jeffy on April 26, 2008, 04:27:21 PM

None.  Everything requires some adaption of some sort.  Even the Dakota isn't a drop in since you can't use the transmission.  There have been NV4500, SM420, SM465, and NP435 swaps done in the past.  If you wanted to to auto, there are a few choices there as well.

What would be the easist as for as parts, time, money? He's more worried about commonality.

Title: Re: transmissions
Post by: Jeffy on April 26, 2008, 04:35:48 PM

Quote from: enginethatcould on April 26, 2008, 04:31:14 PM

What would be the easist as for as parts, time, money? He's more worried about commonality.

An AX-5.

Title: Re: transmissions
Post by: enginethatcould on April 26, 2008, 05:12:07 PM

 :stfu: Is the auto a little stonger than the ax5?

Title: Re: transmissions
Post by: Jeffy on April 26, 2008, 06:08:19 PM

Quote from: enginethatcould on April 26, 2008, 05:12:07 PM

:stfu: Is the auto a little stonger than the ax5?

Look, if he's not wanting to spend a lot nor have a long down time then the AX-5 would be the best option.  It's the only direct fit.

Swapping to an auto would be OK but he's be losing 5th, if that matters.  You'll lose some power because of the torque converter but you'll game some torque multiplication at low RPM's.  Might as well just suck it up and do a SM or NP though.

Title: Re: transmissions
Post by: Rob the plumber on April 28, 2008, 03:11:15 AM

The auto (904/909) is much stronger than the AX5. The AX15 too for that matter.

Title: Re: transmissions
Post by: Clem on April 28, 2008, 08:29:38 AM

Just to throw a monkey wrench in the works...

Wasn't there a 700R4 that had the GM 60* bell housing pattern? I am thinking it was behind the 2.8's... That would have any of the three speed Chrysler trannies beat.

 :whistle:

Title: Re: transmissions
Post by: Jeffy on April 28, 2008, 11:40:54 AM

Quote from: Clem on April 28, 2008, 08:29:38 AM

Just to throw a monkey wrench in the works...

Wasn't there a 700R4 that had the GM 60* bell housing pattern? I am thinking it was behind the 2.8's... That would have any of the three speed Chrysler trannies beat.

 :whistle:

You'd probably have to adapt the torque convert to to fit the 2.5L though.

Title: Re: transmissions
Post by: Clem on April 28, 2008, 10:02:21 PM

I am kind of surprised that no one has tried this yet. Yeah, I know, four cylinder and automatic aren't the best combination in the world...

Title: Re: transmissions
Post by: aw12345 on April 28, 2008, 10:23:08 PM

I always liked the chrysler727 transmissions the 904 is a later version but the 727 and the ford c6 where pretty much bomb proof better than anything made by GM