Team Chevelle banner

1980 Borg Warner 4 Speed Strenght?

15K views 16 replies 13 participants last post by  5speeds 
#1 ·
In the local paper is a "Borg Warner 4 Speed from a 1980 Z28"... I'm assuming that it's a 'T-10'?? Will it hold up in my 1970 chevelle 454, 425'ish hp.. 3.55 rear gear? Won't be babied,,

thanks,
 
#2 ·
What was the torque of a 80-Z. G.M. built the M-22 because of the TORQUE factor. If a B.W. would have done the job, They would have used the Borg-Warner and not built the M-22. I beleive a 60s cast iron 4 speed would work, Providing you dont floor it or hook/up real well.
I would suggest at least a M-21, For a big torque engine.
My M-22 is the same tranny in my 70 454, Replaced some parts, syncros and small parts. I yanked 1st gear in my 70 in April of 1970 and its the same tranny. I would get some info from other folks about the B.W.
Bob
 
#3 ·
Probably is a Super T10. Strength varies on what gear ratios it has. A lot of the early 80's are the 3.42 gear first; which is the weakest of the ST-10's, but I always take these claims with a grain of salt. Everyone's combos are different, traction varies, tire compound varies, wheel hop is a huge factor and is different with different cars, and people drive differently.

I would probably be looking muncie or aftermarket for a BBC. If the ST-10 is a 2.64-ish gear I would think it would stand up ok depending on your driving habits.
 
#4 ·
:confused:torque rating of the trans is lower than muncie, maybe 325-350.lb/ft
your 454 would have 400-520.lb/ft.
could live for awhile with-out being babied, but then again too much traction and torque at the same time causes parts breakage from shock load.........:(
 
#5 ·
ok, thanks for the good advice,,, I'll pass on this one.
 
#6 ·
If it was one of the rare cast iron cased ST-10's, it would live a while longer than an Aluminum case ST-10. Not a real HP BBC piece...
 
#15 ·
Not really true. About the 1980 and 81 F body cars.... What most people simply don't get is that transmissions are designed and rated for their intended use. Not for what we decide to transplant them in 30 years later. Having said that, do your research as to what these 80's cars had in regards to Horsepower and Torque. The reason I say "not really true", is simply because the Iron boxes got the crap gear sets. So an alloy 2.64 box is a much better performer and stronger that that ultra wide 3.42 slug.

The ST10 failed quite often in these factory applications. I handled a great deal of warranty work for dealers back then. Most had the ultra wide 3.42 first gear. When the breakage started to happen about mid year they were replaced with Iron caes and in 1981 Iron mid plates. To help the issue, which it did not. The Vettes during the same year never got that, and neither did the 81 Trans am. When I was an AC Delco dealer we were able to purchase the iron mid plates for retro fit into other applications.... very cool.. So your factory Iron boxes are all 3.42 ratio transmissions. Only the aftermarket ones, which really are rare.. are the gems simply because they have the better 2.42 and 2.64 gearing and some even optioned with 9310 gears.
 
#7 ·
Hey, you could always run it without gear oil for a while and make it sound like an M22. :D

That's what I found out happened to mine. It works, but it makes a lot of noise.
 
#8 ·
I've had good luck with them,depends how they are treated.Just put an iron ST-10 Power Brute in my Elky yesterday.IF your going to run a 4 speed and be hard on it,you absolutely have to make sure you have NO WHEELHOP.This will kill them faster than anything.:yes:
 
#10 ·
The last year for Muncies to be installed in PRODUCTION GM cars was 1974.
In the 75-later GM models, the 4sp was a Borg-Warner which was based on the 57-63 B-W T-10. The 75-later T-10s were beefier, had thicker gears and a higher nickel content. They had the 26spline input shaft and the larger 32spline tailshaft. So, beginning with the 75 T-10 versions, they became known as SUPER T-10s. As a result, the Super T-10s were nearly equivalent in strength as the earlier Muncies. Thus, a Super T-10 in good, or properly rebuilt, condition is an excellent tranny.
Sometime in the LATE 80s or EARLY 90s, Richmond bought the B-W T-10 design and now the Richmond Super T-10 is simply the old B-W ST-10 tranny.
Sooooooooooo, how do you tell if a Super T-10 is a B-W or Richmond built tranny. You gotta look at the raised casting logos on the case. :thumbsup:

Also, does someone here know the exact date, or close approximate date, when the Super T-10 changed from B-W manufacture to Richmond manufacture? As I understand it, the change occured at about the same time the Doug-Nash 5sp was bought out by Richmond and became the Richmond 5sp.
 
#17 ·
The Super T10 rights were sold to Doug Nash Engineering by 1982. They developed the 4+3 OD with the ST10 front end for the 1984 to 1988 Corvette. Remember there was no 1983 Corvette because the transmission wasn't finished and they needed to sell a car without "gas guzzler" taxes. I have the dated 1982 nash prototypes. The cases had the DNE logo on them. You'll notice the upper center mounting boss and added material to the later ST10 case was used to support the weight of the OD unit. Nash sold lots of ST10's with their branding on them. By 1989 Richmond purchased Nash. They recast the cases by the early 1990's with their logo. In 2011 Richmond Gear was sold to Midwest Truck. All US manufacturing was halted and all parts including cases are now made in Midwest's China facility. Midwest seems to have done a great job correcting casting and machining issues and every gear's fit and finish is to the original print.

In regards to strength, the new Autogear stuff is really extreme but not as cheap as the Richmond ST10 and their really is no comparison between the new stuff ad older used Muncies. Look at the vids posted on my facebook page. Those Grand Sport Corvettes are running full synchro Muncies.
 
#11 ·
The factory installed Super T-10's have aluminum cases. The aftermarket Super T-10's have cast iron cases with aluminum tail shaft housings. They aren't rare, just not factory installed and aluminum cases were sold separately. The factory torque rating of the Super T-10 is 375 lb/ft. I don't know how they get this rating. It seems a bit low compared to engine torque used with them.
 
#16 ·
In Canada you could get a 200hp 350 with the power brute richmond/borgwarner super t-10 4spd still in 1981 i have a numbers matching car , its a cast iron case.

I am a transmission tech and from my 15 years building hot roads i have seen more muncies detonate because of weak aluminum cases and small counter gear bearings. The saginaw and st10 from 1974 -up have larger bearings and cast cases (all saginaw were cast, rare st10 were) these were much stronger then any m22 muncie or rock crusher on the market.
So if you can get a cast iron case st10 from a 1980 camaro crab it even if your not going to use it its worth alot of money.( if in good shap.
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top