Strength of a BW Super T-10 - Chevelle Tech
Transmission & Driveline Transmissions and Differentials

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
post #1 of 28 (permalink) Old Sep 14th, 06, 1:18 AM Thread Starter
Tech Team
Mic
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Gilford, Ontario
Posts: 362
Strength of a BW Super T-10

I have a 2.64 first gear ST-10 in my Malibu.
They trans is basically brand new - 6000 original miles.
How much torque can these things handle?
I will be drag racing about once a month - NO SLICKS.
64CDNSS is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #2 of 28 (permalink) Old Sep 14th, 06, 1:49 AM
Lifetime Premium Member
Kyle
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Puyallup, WA
Posts: 1,794
Send a message via Yahoo to justkyle
Re: Strength of a BW Super T-10

They are pretty tough. As long as you don't really slam the gears. I blew the second gear slider out of my buddies '66/396 last year. It broke the collar off the slider. Im glad he has a sense of humor and I did it in front of his house.

Kyle

70 malibu race car

How to build a proper TFH

justkyle is offline  
post #3 of 28 (permalink) Old Sep 14th, 06, 6:33 AM
Wally
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Re: Strength of a BW Super T-10

Quote:
Originally Posted by 64CDNSS View Post
I have a 2.64 first gear ST-10 in my Malibu.
They trans is basically brand new - 6000 original miles.
How much torque can these things handle?
I will be drag racing about once a month - NO SLICKS.
The Richmond web site has the torque ratings and they are fairly low.

Part No. Description 1st 2nd 3rd 4th Rev. Torque
1304000070 2.43 “S” Ratio 2.43 1.61 1.23 1.00 2.35 375 Ft. Lbs.
1304000069 2.64 “W” Ratio 2.64 1.75 1.34 1.00 2.55 325 Ft. Lbs.
7021090 2.64 “X” Ratio 2.64 1.60 1.23 1.00 2.55 325 Ft. Lbs.
1304000072 2.88 “CC” Ratio 2.88 1.91 1.33 1.00 2.78 300 Ft. Lbs.
1304000062 2.88 “Y” Ratio 2.88 1.74 1.33 1.00 2.78 300 Ft. Lbs.
1304000071 3.42 “Z” Ratio 3.42 2.28 1.46 1.00 3.51 286 Ft. Lbs.
General Specifications
post #4 of 28 (permalink) Old Sep 14th, 06, 7:18 AM
Lifetime Premium Member
Dan
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Somers,CT
Posts: 9,914
Re: Strength of a BW Super T-10

Quote:
Originally Posted by Wally View Post
The Richmond web site has the torque ratings and they are fairly low.

Part No. Description 1st 2nd 3rd 4th Rev. Torque
1304000070 2.43 “S” Ratio 2.43 1.61 1.23 1.00 2.35 375 Ft. Lbs.
1304000069 2.64 “W” Ratio 2.64 1.75 1.34 1.00 2.55 325 Ft. Lbs.
7021090 2.64 “X” Ratio 2.64 1.60 1.23 1.00 2.55 325 Ft. Lbs.
1304000072 2.88 “CC” Ratio 2.88 1.91 1.33 1.00 2.78 300 Ft. Lbs.
1304000062 2.88 “Y” Ratio 2.88 1.74 1.33 1.00 2.78 300 Ft. Lbs.
1304000071 3.42 “Z” Ratio 3.42 2.28 1.46 1.00 3.51 286 Ft. Lbs.

General Specifications
Wally, I thought that the st10 was supposed to be equal to or stronger than an M22? Are the muncies rated for less?

72 ss 454 "W" code,w/cowl induction (how many left?)
matching # LS5 454+.060" 9.2 :1, 2.19/1.88 valves,Comp HR cam 289/295 234/240 .613/.613 110* (dyno'd @ 557hp @ 5400 & 583tq @ 4100)
matching # M22 w/CF dual friction clutch.
Holley 750 HPs dp(82751) on Weiand Stealth & MSD Pro billet HEI
Hedman Elite headers/Flowmaster exh. (w/super 40s)
TC#3095
Garage find parked from 1978-2004

http://macswebs.com/ls5registry/bal/bal.htm
http://www.chevelles.com/showroom/sh...0&ppuser=25834
http://ssregistry.macswebs.com/1972/1d37w2b_reis.htm
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YqZkVw6xMkM
dreis454 is offline  
post #5 of 28 (permalink) Old Sep 14th, 06, 9:38 AM
Lifetime Premium Member
Keith
 
Join Date: Sep 1998
Location: Ontario, Canada
Posts: 7,881
Garage
Re: Strength of a BW Super T-10

For what it's worth, we have a 2.64-1 aluminum Super T-10 behind the 360 hp 455 in our Lemans Sport. This engine is factory rated at 500 ft/lb of torque. Probably a little high. This car is considerably quicker than our L78 Chevelle, making some decent power. The transmission has stood up to 10K miles of street tire abuse. Slicks will find the weak spots pretty quickly, if they are there. The steel mid plate and cast iron case add strength as well but not all T-10s have them. I've heard about GM going to the iron case due to warranty problems. The aluminum transmission would have to be pretty weak if the late '80s cars could hurt it. They weren't making much power back then. Perhaps I have been just lucky.

Last edited by Keith Tedford; Sep 14th, 06 at 7:26 PM.
Keith Tedford is offline  
post #6 of 28 (permalink) Old Sep 14th, 06, 10:54 AM
Wally
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Re: Strength of a BW Super T-10

Quote:
Originally Posted by dreis454 View Post
Wally, I thought that the st10 was supposed to be equal to or stronger than an M22? Are the muncies rated for less?
I'm glad Richmond post real life torque ratings. I think they are playing it safe. As for the Muncie, GM did not play the HP and torque game that other vendors seem to like.

They put Muncies in some real torque monsters, the 455 SD Pontiac, 455 Olds motors, 454 Chevelles and some nasty vette combos and thy seem to live
post #7 of 28 (permalink) Old Sep 14th, 06, 3:11 PM
Lifetime Premium Member
Jason
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: soon to be Wausau, WI!!!!
Posts: 4,988
Send a message via Yahoo to 136679ss
Re: Strength of a BW Super T-10

Alright then what's a real world value of a 1304065903, unknown if it has nickel gears or the like but assuming it doesn't what's it worth? More than same as or less than a muncie?

TC#2693
Aces# 7467
Heart of Dixie CC
136679ss is offline  
post #8 of 28 (permalink) Old Sep 14th, 06, 3:27 PM
Wally
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Re: Strength of a BW Super T-10

Quote:
Originally Posted by 136679ss View Post
Alright then what's a real world value of a 1304065903, unknown if it has nickel gears or the like but assuming it doesn't what's it worth? More than same as or less than a muncie?
Good question. That is the aluminum version and all the info on the site is the iron case stuff.

It is weaker the the 904 trans.
post #9 of 28 (permalink) Old Sep 14th, 06, 4:28 PM
Tech Team
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Wilmington,NC
Posts: 906
Re: Strength of a BW Super T-10

Quote:
Originally Posted by Wally View Post
Good question. That is the aluminum version and all the info on the site is the iron case stuff.

It is weaker the the 904 trans.
Maybe I'm misunderstanding what you're saying, but Richmond never made an St-10 with the Iron case/midplate. Those torque figures you posted above are all for the aluminum case/midplate trans with standard gears(non nickel). Borg Warner made very few of the 904 case trans compared to the aluminum case version, I have yet to see any torque figures posted on the iron case trans.

I'm running a 2.43 first 904 iron case/midplate ST-10 in my 66. Check out the track video in my sig, that's a 4200rpm launch off the two step on slicks. It seems to be holding up well, I know the Muncie I took out wouldn't hold up to that abuse, then again it is 30+ years old.

Although the car did spin on that run, I have put the trans though some abuse both on the track and on the street. I have yet to have any problems with it.

Based on my experiences so far, I wouldn't hesitate to use a St-10.

Brandon

1966 SS396 Chevelle
427 11:1 rect.heads
4 speed 3.90 posi
1967 Chevy Biscayne 2 dr.
350 th-350
3.55 posi

videos

RatONaStick at idle

RatONaStick on the road

RatONaStick at the track
RatONaStick is offline  
post #10 of 28 (permalink) Old Sep 14th, 06, 4:34 PM
Tech Team
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Wilmington,NC
Posts: 906
Re: Strength of a BW Super T-10

Quote:
Originally Posted by justkyle View Post
They are pretty tough. As long as you don't really slam the gears. I blew the second gear slider out of my buddies '66/396 last year. It broke the collar off the slider. Im glad he has a sense of humor and I did it in front of his house.
The St-10 and Muncie share the same syncros and sliders. One hub is the same, the other hub(I forget which) is the same except for the inner part where it goes on the main shaft.

The Muncie is no stronger in this area than the St-10.
RatONaStick is offline  
post #11 of 28 (permalink) Old Sep 14th, 06, 4:50 PM
Lifetime Premium Member
Jason
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: soon to be Wausau, WI!!!!
Posts: 4,988
Send a message via Yahoo to 136679ss
Re: Strength of a BW Super T-10

Quote:
Originally Posted by Wally View Post
Good question. That is the aluminum version and all the info on the site is the iron case stuff.

It is weaker the the 904 trans.
My understanding was the majority of the st10's were aluminum and warranty issues with performance cars such as the TA and z28 were the reason they even started using the cast iron, ironically most vettes still retained the aluminum case.

TC#2693
Aces# 7467
Heart of Dixie CC
136679ss is offline  
post #12 of 28 (permalink) Old Sep 14th, 06, 5:05 PM
Tech Team
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Wilmington,NC
Posts: 906
Re: Strength of a BW Super T-10

Quote:
Originally Posted by 136679ss View Post
My understanding was the majority of the st10's were aluminum and warranty issues with performance cars such as the TA and z28 were the reason they even started using the cast iron, ironically most vettes still retained the aluminum case.
I've read something similar. From what I understand the 3.42 first transmissions were having durability issues and BW started to use the iron case/midplate on these units to help strengthen them. I know that my 904 case/iron midplate were from a 3.42 first trans, strange though I was told it was out of a Vette.

The durability issues have to do with the 3.42 gearset, you'll notice that the 3.42 first trans is the weakest of the bunch. If you've ever seen a 3.42 input shaft, the gear itself is tiny. There just isn't a whole lot of material there.
RatONaStick is offline  
post #13 of 28 (permalink) Old Sep 14th, 06, 6:04 PM
Lifetime Premium Member
Jason
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: soon to be Wausau, WI!!!!
Posts: 4,988
Send a message via Yahoo to 136679ss
Re: Strength of a BW Super T-10

That's because corvettes would never have had a factory 3.42 gearset only 2.34 -2.88.
I've found a great homepage that details a lot of good information on the ST10
http://fiedlerh.home.att.net/BW.htm

TC#2693
Aces# 7467
Heart of Dixie CC
136679ss is offline  
post #14 of 28 (permalink) Old Sep 14th, 06, 6:17 PM
Wally
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Re: Strength of a BW Super T-10

Quote:
Originally Posted by RatONaStick View Post
Maybe I'm misunderstanding what you're saying, but Richmond never made an St-10 with the Iron case/midplate. Those torque figures you posted above are all for the aluminum case/midplate trans with standard gears(non nickel). Borg Warner made very few of the 904 case trans compared to the aluminum case version, I have yet to see any torque figures posted on the iron case trans.

I'm running a 2.43 first 904 iron case/midplate ST-10 in my 66. Check out the track video in my sig, that's a 4200rpm launch off the two step on slicks. It seems to be holding up well, I know the Muncie I took out wouldn't hold up to that abuse, then again it is 30+ years old.

Although the car did spin on that run, I have put the trans though some abuse both on the track and on the street. I have yet to have any problems with it.

Based on my experiences so far, I wouldn't hesitate to use a St-10.
I don't believe I said the trans was not up to the task, just that they have a pulished low torque rating for current production units.

The best ST-10 units were never put in production cars, the iron case units you could buy from speed shops. They are the ones available with high nickel gears and ratios no higher than 2.88 low gear. All the other stuff came later when GM starting using the trans and when Richmond took over production.

The corvette used a iron case ST-10, some time after the end of the Muncie run and I think in some of the Z cars, not sure of the years.

If there is a weak part of the ST-10 its on the front of the main shaft, that little spud that sits in the roller bearings in the back of the input. I've seen a number of those break in race car applications and high HP heavy street cars that hook.

Most of you missed the point I was trying to make, that torque and HP ratings don't mean jack
post #15 of 28 (permalink) Old Sep 14th, 06, 7:29 PM
Tech Team
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Wilmington,NC
Posts: 906
Re: Strength of a BW Super T-10

Quote:
Originally Posted by Wally View Post
I don't believe I said the trans was not up to the task, just that they have a pulished low torque rating for current production units.

The best ST-10 units were never put in production cars, the iron case units you could buy from speed shops. They are the ones available with high nickel gears and ratios no higher than 2.88 low gear. All the other stuff came later when GM starting using the trans and when Richmond took over production.

The corvette used a iron case ST-10, some time after the end of the Muncie run and I think in some of the Z cars, not sure of the years.

If there is a weak part of the ST-10 its on the front of the main shaft, that little spud that sits in the roller bearings in the back of the input. I've seen a number of those break in race car applications and high HP heavy street cars that hook.

Most of you missed the point I was trying to make, that torque and HP ratings don't mean jack
Wally

I know you werent saying they weren't up to the task, that first paragraph was directed to you, the rest was intended for the original poster. I probably should have made myself more clear.

It seemed that you were implying that those torque ratings were for the iron case versions, evidently I misunderstood you. Although it would be interesting to know how much the iron case adds to the strength of the transmissions. I can tell you one thing, the iron case/midplate sure adds some weight to the trans!

I remember you mentioning the mainshaft spud before. While I agree it may be a weak point, I tend to think that if a Super T10 will break in those situations you mentioned, so will a Muncie. Wouldn't you agree??

I know that if I were going to build a race car or a heavy high hp(we're talking mucho torque) street car, I wouldn't use either trans.

Brandon

1966 SS396 Chevelle
427 11:1 rect.heads
4 speed 3.90 posi
1967 Chevy Biscayne 2 dr.
350 th-350
3.55 posi

videos

RatONaStick at idle

RatONaStick on the road

RatONaStick at the track
RatONaStick is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Reply

Quick Reply
Message:
Options

Register Now



In order to be able to post messages on the Chevelle Tech forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.

User Name:
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.

Password:


Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address. Note, you will be sent a confirmation request to this address.

Email Address:
OR

Log-in









Human Verification

In order to verify that you are a human and not a spam bot, please enter the answer into the following box below based on the instructions contained in the graphic.



Thread Tools Search this Thread
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes
Linear Mode Linear Mode



Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
super T10 in 70 chevelle chev-man Transmission & Driveline 3 Aug 29th, 06 8:34 PM
502/450hp crate motor: How much will 2.0" Hooker Super Comp hurt power over 1.875"? ss502 Performance 8 Nov 1st, 05 9:02 PM
Super Charging and power brakes? mike69ss Chevelle Tech 13 Sep 4th, 05 2:41 PM
Sold the T350, in goes the Super T-10 Surfin' 66 Transmission & Driveline 1 Jun 19th, 05 5:19 PM
Updates on all Chevelle cruise? notstock71 Team Chevelle Cruiz-ins 6 May 3rd, 05 11:21 PM

Posting Rules  
You may post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On

 
For the best viewing experience please update your browser to Google Chrome