How long before we see some specs & prices?

[Thed]

I agree.

• S550 just an evolution of the S197
• The LT4 being better than what the Trinity could ever be
• The V8 option is a perception and education problem
• MT82 low torque rating

A few other little things here and there.

To touch on the LT4 being better than what the Trinity could ever be, a few issues:

• Even the LSA with it's 1.9l Eaton blower was suffering from heatsoak due to the blower RPM's and undersized heat exchanger. Upgrading the HE could only do so much with the tiny blower spinning too fast
• The LT4 gets an even smaller 1.7l Eaton which means even more RPM's to produce the same amount of boost.
• Terry Fair from Vorshlag noted a competitor with a ZR-1(LS9 with 2.3l TVS) was having major major heat soak issues when running 700hp on a road course(source: Vorshlag auto-x Mustang build blog)

Yet again, Grim comes through with the facts.

Sponsored

 

[Thed]

Isn't the MT-82 certified to just over 600 ft-lbs? That is more than enough for the Coyote IMO.

 

[Grimace427]

Yet again, Grim comes through with the facts.

Still mostly opinions. I'm sure there is a reason for the tiny blowers(que inevitible jokes) on the LSA and the LT4(or whatever Chevy calls the blown DI 6.2l) but it doesn't make sense to me at the moment. The rest of the article seems out-dated and biased, too much to take seriously. There were many good points however, regarding the changes in suspension geometry and ultimate improvements to refinement in the new car.

 

[Grimace427]

Isn't the MT-82 certified to just over 600 ft-lbs? That is more than enough for the Coyote IMO.

It's 'rating' is 369ft-lbs # ~10,000GVWR, essentially a truck transmission. Plenty strong for whatever the Mustang can dish at it in OEM form. The problem with ratings is that they are easily misinterpreted and aren't exactly the point at which the transmission fails. The overwhelming majority of MT-82 failures are increased cold-shift effort and noise from bad bearings. The few failures at racetracks weren't due to torque but rather synchronizers, shift linkages, and shift forks. I've only heard of 2-3 input shaft failures(Kenne Bell 700rwhp blown Boss 302 on slicks and JPC's racecar that is now doing 7's with a Powerglide). I've never heard of an output shaft failure, or sheared gears/mainshaft which would indicate the torque rating of the transmission was insufficient for the power applied by the engine.

 

[Holyfenix]

It's 'rating' is 369ft-lbs # ~10,000GVWR, essentially a truck transmission. Plenty strong for whatever the Mustang can dish at it in OEM form. The problem with ratings is that they are easily misinterpreted and aren't exactly the point at which the transmission fails. The overwhelming majority of MT-82 failures are increased cold-shift effort and noise from bad bearings. The few failures at racetracks weren't due to torque but rather synchronizers, shift linkages, and shift forks. I've only heard of 2-3 input shaft failures(Kenne Bell 700rwhp blown Boss 302 on slicks and JPC's racecar that is now doing 7's with a Powerglide). I've never heard of an output shaft failure, or sheared gears/mainshaft which would indicate the torque rating of the transmission was insufficient for the power applied by the engine.

What's the conversion on the transmission rating. I know I will want a manual and I also know the car will stay forced induction free for maybe here. Final goal would be between 550 and 600 rwhp.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Grimace427]

What's the conversion on the transmission rating. I know I will want a manual and I also know the car will stay forced induction free for maybe here. Final goal would be between 550 and 600 rwhp.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I could speculate on a conversion but it won't do you any good. At 600rwhp the MT-82 is fine for everything other than 100% drag racing duty. At some point everything will break when you are racing, but if the car lives most of it's time on the street the MT-82 is perfectly fine even at 600rwhp.

 

[S550Boss]

Along with a stamped shift fork and various plastic internals. This isn't a transmission that can be fixed with a new shifter and different fluid. Everything done to it to date has been a bandaid.
What exactly changed for 2015 is yet to be revealed. We know it has a revised shifter... I'm looking to learn about internals.

Ford's product planning heart was in the right place with this transmission... the Coyote needs a close-ratio gearset and the TR6060 would have been a detriment to the engine. The ratios in the TR6060 are all wrong, the two overdrives aren't necessary (except here in Texas, where our 85 MPH speed limit takes several MPG off the mileage). Why they choose this particular unit versus so many others at Getrag is a mystery.

And the testing was apparently poor because the problems started immediately. Testing rules, it's the bottom line, and GM's response was perfect [] and something Ford never responded to. Actions speak louder than words. Ford's response to it's customers was just s**tty.

And they were real problems, I've seen and heard them, and the only people denying them are "super fans" who would apparently stick up for and excuse anything. This type of problem, and the crappy response to it by Ford Service out in the dealers and regions, is something that has cropped up every few years and has ruined the Mustang experience for many people (and these forums were always full of people in denial, most of them not owners). One of the worst problems was the godawful quality of the Terminator engines... so bad that at my local dealer (as a statistical example), there were three red Terminators lined up next to each other waiting for engines - and my Redfire was the 4th. That engine's service cost (and the GT40 disaster) probably led to the departure of Coletti since that's where the buck stopped (but I will thank him personally since he over-rode the miserable regional service rep and sent me a new engine). Another earlier problem (and one that he missed getting hit for) was the '96 overheating and synchro issues.

Every time there is a major change, there are major issues. Historically. Ford's procedures are much better now... we hope? Look at the launch problem with the 1.6EB.
And still, a couple of years later, that MT82 cloud still hangs over the early Coyote cars in their resale value. Buy one of those and you have no idea of what you will get or how long it will last. And for some people these transmissions have failed multiple times, thru multiple replacements. Finding a 2011 with a replacement transmission doesn't guarantee very much.

The other thing that bothers a lot of us is the racial prejudice and ignorance shown by some people who claim the problem is that the transmission is built in China. Don't forget it was designed in Germany (for a truck), and what (minimal and rushed testing) that was done was done in the United States.

What else is wrong that testing should have shown? That two-piece driveshaft is a problem, for mine the bearings have failed. And the fat rubber bushing underneath the transmission interferes with shifting on my own track when I try to go from 4th to 5th. It needs a replacement, Whiteline has one, but increased NVH is then the issue.

But I'm going to hold off further critique of the 2015 MT82 until we learn exactly what's happened inside this tranny. Actions - showing the parts and the testing - speak louder than words.

 

[DHG1078]

Why the MT82? I would be willing to bet it came down to cost. Getrag probably gave them a deal Ford bean counters couldn't pass up.

 

[imatur]

Isn't the MT-82 certified to just over 600 ft-lbs? That is more than enough for the Coyote IMO.

Still would not make up for the fact that the MT82 sucks

 

[S550Boss]

I don't believe that 600 number... that came out of fanboys and not from Ford.

 

[Holyfenix]

I could speculate on a conversion but it won't do you any good. At 600rwhp the MT-82 is fine for everything other than 100% drag racing duty. At some point everything will break when you are racing, but if the car lives most of it's time on the street the MT-82 is perfectly fine even at 600rwhp.

Thanks for the response. Its going to be a DD and see the track maybe twice a year if that. The high HP is more for my own amusement then to see how fast I can make the car.

 

[stable68]

I don't believe that 600 number... that came out of fanboys and not from Ford.

If you choose not to believe it then fine, thats your opinion. Also, the problems that you stated were completely over-exaggerated. If i remember correctly there were only 32 official cases and less than 300 unofficial cases ever reported. It was NOT a major problem. That is a very small percent of s197's and honestly, these types of problems are to be expected in small amounts when companies use new components.

 

[scottpe]

I don't believe that 600 number... that came out of fanboys and not from Ford.

Sure, none of this is scientific, but to imply it's just a bunch of made up fanboy crap is not fair or accurate.

It's already been said that this is basically a truck transmission. The manufacturer torque rating has therefore been presented in that context (hence the high GVWR).

I doubt any of us are qualified to say exactly how that rating translates to the Mustang application, so all we can do is make educated guesses based on the known facts. The facts imply that in this application -- a much lighter vehicle weight than rated -- the tranny should have a significantly higher power/TQ capacity than the ~375lb/ft rating that is all too often taken at its face value, simply out of ignorance.

Yes, it's possible that 600 is too high, but considering the Mustang weighs less than half the rated weight, it's also entirely possible that 600 is a low figure.

You can obviously believe whatever you want, but I'd certainly like to know how YOU interpret the specifications?

 

[Grimace427]

I'm still hoping Ford's 'improved shift linkage' resembles the Getrag V-160 used in the Toyota Supra twin turbo. It's a semi-remote shifter instead of the full remote used in the S197. A bracket bolts to the rear of the transmission and completely supports the shifter assembly, so as you accelerate the car torque from the engine is transferred directly through the drivetrain instead of causing a differential between the drivetrain and body like in a remote shifter.

 

[Five Oh Brian]

MT-82 was rated by Ford to handle 380 lb ft torque at introduction in 2010 on the '11 MY Mustang. Ironic, considering the 5.0L was rated by at 390 lb ft torque.

My own '11 5.0L was a Brembo car with 3.73 gears and the MT-82. I had plenty of troubles with the MT-82 in my own car. Sure, I did the fluid TSB and swapped in the MGW Ltd shifter assembly, but still had issues. Horrible transmission, IMHO, and the main reason I bought my '14 GT with the 6R80 automatic. Oh, and the MT-82 was the sixth manual trans Mustang I had owned, yet the only one with issues, so I am in no way an inexperienced driver with a manual. I absolutely love the 6R80. It's the best automatic I've ever experienced. And, with tuning by Mike Rousch at Mid-Atlantic Performance, the trans behaves & performs way better than a manual ever could.

Sponsored