TKO 500 in a classic

[Route666]

I thought that the TKO fitment issues were limited to 1964 1/2 through 1968 stangs with tunnel surgery being necessary for those years but not for 1969 on up.

I'm sure it's better but I remember something about it still being not quite enough room. I hope to put a TKO in a 69 one day (hopefully petrol still exists by then) and use TCP mounts. Since I'm a cad tech for a laser cutter I'll make some new chassis mounts that lower the engine. (Probably from stainless so I can polish it!) You could probably only lower the engine an inch or so but an inch at the engine should be enough, hopefully.

EDIT: The problem will be slightly worse too if you've lowered the car.

 

[jerry S]

I'm sure it's better but I remember something about it still being not quite enough room. I hope to put a TKO in a 69 one day (hopefully petrol still exists by then) and use TCP mounts. Since I'm a cad tech for a laser cutter I'll make some new chassis mounts that lower the engine. (Probably from stainless so I can polish it!) You could probably only lower the engine an inch or so but an inch at the engine should be enough, hopefully.

EDIT: The problem will be slightly worse too if you've lowered the car.

lowering the engine with speical motor mounts should not be necessary in a 69. 4musclemachines steered me to Modern Driveline's FAQ section and I did some more digging and found this: http://www.moderndriveline.com/md_faqs/tremec_1.shtml#02136586


Can I install a Tremec 3550 into a 65-66 Mustang without cutting the floor to get the proper drive angle?

No, the Tremec 3550 and TKO are much too tall in the main case and needs more room to achieve the correct drive angle. If the transmission is allowed to hang down, the case is exposed to road clearance hazards and will cause vibration, especially when decelerating. To properly install a Tremec 3550 or TKO into a 65-66 mustang, the floor trans tunnel should be raised about 1.5”.

So as you can see, the TKO fits the 67 on up mustang without any tunnel modifications being necessary.

 

[Jester67]

lowering the engine with speical motor mounts should not be necessary in a 69. 4musclemachines steered me to Modern Driveline's FAQ section and I did some more digging and found this: http://www.moderndriveline.com/md_faqs/tremec_1.shtml#02136586


Can I install a Tremec 3550 into a 65-66 Mustang without cutting the floor to get the proper drive angle?

No, the Tremec 3550 and TKO are much too tall in the main case and needs more room to achieve the correct drive angle. If the transmission is allowed to hang down, the case is exposed to road clearance hazards and will cause vibration, especially when decelerating. To properly install a Tremec 3550 or TKO into a 65-66 mustang, the floor trans tunnel should be raised about 1.5”.

So as you can see, the TKO fits the 67 on up mustang without any tunnel modifications being necessary.

Well I know for a fact that the 64.5-68 has the same trans tunnel that is why the one-piece floor will work for any of these cars. I have no experience with the 69 up cars but it is my understanding that it will still have clearance issues.

 

[Route666]

lowering the engine with speical motor mounts should not be necessary in a 69. 4musclemachines steered me to Modern Driveline's FAQ section and I did some more digging and found this: http://www.moderndriveline.com/md_faqs/tremec_1.shtml#02136586


Can I install a Tremec 3550 into a 65-66 Mustang without cutting the floor to get the proper drive angle?

No, the Tremec 3550 and TKO are much too tall in the main case and needs more room to achieve the correct drive angle. If the transmission is allowed to hang down, the case is exposed to road clearance hazards and will cause vibration, especially when decelerating. To properly install a Tremec 3550 or TKO into a 65-66 mustang, the floor trans tunnel should be raised about 1.5”.

So as you can see, the TKO fits the 67 on up mustang without any tunnel modifications being necessary.

How much difference is there in the trans tunnels? I also wouldn't specifically say that the above paragraph means that it WILL fit in 67 and up, it just doesn't say it WON'T fit.

 

[atomicpunk]

I've emailed them, as I'm very curious myself. I'd love to have a 500 or 600 if it was possible to do without cutting anything up. Otherwise, I think I'm headed for a very expensive G-force and a less than optimal shifter. I'll post any results I get.

 

[jerry S]

according to one 69 Mach 1 owner, no tunnel surgery is needed

I had seen this guy's page before when I was looking for information on installing Autometer gauges in a Mach 1. It turns out he also has a TKO 500 installed.

http://www.geocities.com/kvinkler/

He confirmed for me that there were no fitment issues with a TKO 500 in a 69 Mach 1 whatsoever.

 

[65up2d8]

I had seen this guy's page before when I was looking for information on installing Autometer gauges in a Mach 1. It turns out he also has a TKO 500 installed.

http://www.geocities.com/kvinkler/

He confirmed for me that there were no fitment issues with a TKO 500 in a 69 Mach 1 whatsoever.

I'm certainly no expert on this subject, but from what I've been able to ascertain about this issue, its not that the TKO 500 or 600 won't fit in the transmission tunnel of a '65 or '66 just fine. The issue is how the transmission fits with respect to the driveline angle necessitated by the way the transmission fits in the tunnel. You more than likely won't notice a problem with driveline angle except at extreme speeds and/or unless you measure it at installation, but that does not mean it is not hard on the driveline. I've heard of people who installed a TKO 600 in a '65 or '66 and thought it was fine. However, bad drive line angles are extremely hard on the drive train and more than likely will result in some sort of catastrophic failure at some point, which will probably be the most inopportune time. (for those who live on Mars and are picking up this forum over highly advanced surveillance equipment, this is called Murphy's law )
Don't take one person's off the cuff comment that "it fits fine" as gospel. I troll this forum almost constantly, and I certainly don't mean any offense by this comment, but I think you've gotten your cart in front of your horse on more than one occasion in the past, and each time you were upset over the costs of your mistakes. Do your homework on this one or I'm afraid you'll be sorry once again. :SNSign:

 

[Jester67]

I'm certainly no expert on this subject, but from what I've been able to ascertain about this issue, its not that the TKO 500 or 600 won't fit in the transmission tunnel of a '65 or '66 just fine. The issue is how the transmission fits with respect to the driveline angle necessitated by the way the transmission fits in the tunnel. You more than likely won't notice a problem with driveline angle except at extreme speeds and/or unless you measure it at installation, but that does not mean it is not hard on the driveline. I've heard of people who installed a TKO 600 in a '65 or '66 and thought it was fine. However, bad drive line angles are extremely hard on the drive train and more than likely will result in some sort of catastrophic failure at some point, which will probably be the most inopportune time. (for those who live on Mars and are picking up this forum over highly advanced surveillance equipment, this is called Murphy's law )
Don't take one person's off the cuff comment that "it fits fine" as gospel. I troll this forum almost constantly, and I certainly don't mean any offense by this comment, but I think you've gotten your cart in front of your horse on more than one occasion in the past, and each time you were upset over the costs of your mistakes. Do your homework on this one or I'm afraid you'll be sorry once again. :SNSign:

I agree I have seen post where someone has stated that the TKO fist just fine in a 65 only to find out they have a drive line angle that is the source of there many “ unexplained problems” .

 

[fvike]

I'm certainly no expert on this subject, but from what I've been able to ascertain about this issue, its not that the TKO 500 or 600 won't fit in the transmission tunnel of a '65 or '66 just fine. The issue is how the transmission fits with respect to the driveline angle necessitated by the way the transmission fits in the tunnel. You more than likely won't notice a problem with driveline angle except at extreme speeds and/or unless you measure it at installation, but that does not mean it is not hard on the driveline. I've heard of people who installed a TKO 600 in a '65 or '66 and thought it was fine. However, bad drive line angles are extremely hard on the drive train and more than likely will result in some sort of catastrophic failure at some point, which will probably be the most inopportune time. (for those who live on Mars and are picking up this forum over highly advanced surveillance equipment, this is called Murphy's law )
Don't take one person's off the cuff comment that "it fits fine" as gospel. I troll this forum almost constantly, and I certainly don't mean any offense by this comment, but I think you've gotten your cart in front of your horse on more than one occasion in the past, and each time you were upset over the costs of your mistakes. Do your homework on this one or I'm afraid you'll be sorry once again. :SNSign:

I've read this to someplace too. The answer to the problem is either heighten the transmission, or lower the engine. Or go for the TKO 500 instead of the 600.

 

[atomicpunk]

From Bruce Couture @ Modern Driveline, reposted with permission:

65-66 mustang have smaller transmission tunnels then the later mustangs. With that said, you can only install a T-5 into a 65-66 without cutting the car up. Yes a 3550/TKOs can be install if you are willing to remove the floor support cut it to fit at the top and moved it back. It is still a very tight fit. We don’t recommend them as move don’t need that much transmission in a light car. If a person is over 450hp, than we recommend a G-Force T-5. It shift smoother then a Tremec, weights less and uses less power.


67-68 Mustang can install a Tremec 3550/TKO with a slight tilt to the driveline. Not a problem unless there is a hood scope involved.


Here how we choose the right transmission each car.

69-73 mustang, fits right in as this these cars had larger tunnels due to the C6 that were found in them.


Any year mustang

Under 300hp any Ford T-5 will work.

Under 375hp any 90-93 WC V8 will work.

Under 450hp T-5z Ford motor sport

Over 450hp up to 550hp a G-Force T-5

3550 can be used up to 450hp

TKOs 550hp

TKO500 650hp

TKO600 650-800hp


Hope that helps and let us know if we can answer any other questions.



Regards, Bruce

Modern Driveline.com
408-265-0741

Your five/six speed conversion source

 

[Route666]

I'm convinced - testimonial from an expert in the field is pretty good testimonial.

 

[justinhip]

I am just about to do a tko 600 in my car in the next week or so. I just did a mustang II front end. I gotta get my cleveland mounted up first and plan to use my toploader and stock mount to get the engine right. Then I figured I would just cut the tunnel where the two access covers are on the Tremec. Someone here had a pic of two neat holes where those covers were. It appeared that the shifter came through the stock hole. From there I intend to modify the stock bracket to work. I have a few different ideas but until I get to it, I'll have to see what will work. After I have it mounted, I planned on replacing the factory tunnel support but add sections to it as if chopping a streetrod and replace the sheetmetal. And lastly, I was hoping a 1970 coupe carpet will give me the extra that I need.

 

[MitchGT]

I know the Tko will fit in a 68, but it does have a bit more angle than I would like. My ideal solution would have been to lower the engine (better handling!), but I bought long tube headers that have minor ground clearance issues now, and even a little worse as soon as I get done lowering the car. The good news is the shifter goes right in the stock hole. The shifting is a little notchy, but strangely enough it feels smoother the faster I shift it. Fifth gear is a little far right and up, so I offset the shifter left about a half inch, and angled it back about 30 degrees. Feels good now. The biggest reason I bought the TKO is it is a stronger tranny than I will probably ever need, so I shouldn't worry about breaking it. Peace of mind is sometimes worth the extra cash, and is usually cheaper than doing it twice....

 

[Bullitt]

I've got a TKO in my '67 and for proper driveline angle you need a 3/4" spacer (with the Darkhorse crossmember) and have to slot the sides of the tranny tunnel and bend them up flat. Not a major change, but a change. The driveline angle still isn't perfect, but it'll work with the standard Z-bar setup.

 

[Markus]

Hi,

i cut a "little" hole in my tranny tunnel to get
the right driveline angle. Not a big deal. But a
pain in my heart

Markus

 

[geostang351]

Hi,

i cut a "little" hole in my tranny tunnel to get
the right driveline angle. Not a big deal. But a
pain in my heart

Markus

OUCH

 

[67GTFB]

from what I've been able to understand from a lot of research is that for 64.5 thru 68, TKO's require sheet metal work to accomodate (under stock motor mounting and pinion angles) any TKO unit -- just as noted above ... yes, one can fudge - sometimes successfully .... but only a T-5 fits without mods (excpet for a slight filing of the shifter hole) .... later cars are another story and I cannot comment on those ....

 

[Route666]

I've heard several people say that it is slightly better with later models but to truly get the correct angle cutting is require, or lowering of the engine slightly. I think lowering would work on earlier models, but it'll have to be more extreme lowering, requiring a split sump with a hose for a crossover.

 

[SNAKEPILOT]

This is from Unique Performance:

"This custom manufactured transmission crossmember which was originally designed for 1967-68 Shelby G.T.500E, fits all 1965-70 Mustangs. Not only does this crossmember provide for the maximum amount of exhaust clearance possible for the classic Mustang, but when used in conjunction with our nearly solid motor mounts, there is absolutely no cutting required on the 1965-66, 1967-68, or 1969-70 Mustang when using the Tremec TKO transmission."

I don't think it is "custom", it looks like a Cal-Mustang crossmember (there is a photo on their site). Not sure if the solid motor mounts (which look like TCP) lower the engine. Bottom line, they are selling 100K+ cars. I am guessing there is at least a limited warranty and or a high level of customer satisfaction with their cars.

I was getting ready to "Lizard Skin" my interior prior to exterior paint. I don't have a problem with cutting the tunnel (other than already being behind schedule and over budget) but would prefer not to.

Hopefully the TCP mounts do lower the engine some. Note, the bullit.stangnet site said there were two different height motor mounts for the 1967 model year.

Still looking for feedback on cut vs no cut especially if anyone is running an FE.

 

[dennis112]

This is from Unique Performance:

"This custom manufactured transmission crossmember which was originally designed for 1967-68 Shelby G.T.500E, fits all 1965-70 Mustangs. Not only does this crossmember provide for the maximum amount of exhaust clearance possible for the classic Mustang, but when used in conjunction with our nearly solid motor mounts, there is absolutely no cutting required on the 1965-66, 1967-68, or 1969-70 Mustang when using the Tremec TKO transmission."

I don't think it is "custom", it looks like a Cal-Mustang crossmember (there is a photo on their site). Not sure if the solid motor mounts (which look like TCP) lower the engine. Bottom line, they are selling 100K+ cars. I am guessing there is at least a limited warranty and or a high level of customer satisfaction with their cars.

I was getting ready to "Lizard Skin" my interior prior to exterior paint. I don't have a problem with cutting the tunnel (other than already being behind schedule and over budget) but would prefer not to.

Hopefully the TCP mounts do lower the engine some. Note, the bullit.stangnet site said there were two different height motor mounts for the 1967 model year.

Still looking for feedback on cut vs no cut especially if anyone is running an FE.

When you lower the engine it is the suspension you need to worry about. The cross member is not really an issue in an early Mustang with a stock type steering arrangement.

The oil pan is one place for interference. The second location that I had problems with was that the steering crosslink and the inner tie rod end would hit the starter during a RH turn.