Older Richmond 5-Speed in My 1969 Firebird

[andrewb70]

I have the Richmond 6spd in my car and its a decent trans. Many times the shifting problems that people experience are self inflicted. This can also be said about the TKO-600 that many people complain about with shifting into 3rd gear. The Richmond uses an older style synchro design that needs lube with MORE friction. I initially was running GL5 spec synthetic and the transmission shifted very poorly. I later switched to some GL4 conventional fluid and the shifting improved tremendously. The Long shifter is very precise when it is adjusted correctly.

As for the gear ratio issue, the Richmond has better ratios by far. I would run a 2.56 gear in a Pontiac with the Richmond 5spd. This will give you great highway cruising RPM and have enough gear to get you out of the hole, given the 3.28 first gear. One thing that many people don't consider is driveshaft speed. Using a trans with a 1:1 first gear and a higher rear end ratio (low number) will reduce the driveshaft speed compared to a lower rear end ratio (higher number) and an overdrive transmission. Food for thought.

Andrew

[GregWeld]

Well Flash - we have one of the two votes you predicted!!!

[andrewb70]

Originally Posted by GregWeld

Well Flash - we have one of the two votes you predicted!!!

I did not vote for anything. I just pointed out an angle that no one has mentioned. There are many things to consider when choosing a transmission. Driveshaft speed is a very legitimate concern. There is a reason why Pontiac chose different gear ratios for the 2004-2006 GTO. There is also a reason why 4th gen f-bodies were never offered with any ratio above 3.42.

Andrew

[GregWeld]

Pontiac Firebird -- in this year (1969) used a GM - BOP rear end - the lowest gear set I found at Randy's Ring and Pinion was a 3:36

The gear set you used (2:56) is offered - as long as he has a completely different rear end - and was used from 1970... so not compatible with the carrier in his (assuming he has stock rear end) car.

Using the Richmond he was asking about - would have him turning 3000 rpm's at a whopping 69 mph - using an assumed tire diameter of 26 inches.

Plain and simple - there's no compelling argument one could make for using this transmission given his intended use. We weren't discussing a Richmond 6 speed - only the Richmond 5 speed - typically called a 4 + 1. Since he's starting off with a fresh build - "we" (most of the respondents here) were advising to go with an OVERDRIVE transmission for best all around drivability - gas milage - and fun factor.

[andrewb70]

Originally Posted by GregWeld

Pontiac Firebird -- in this year (1969) used a GM - BOP rear end - the lowest gear set I found at Randy's Ring and Pinion was a 3:36

The gear set you used (2:56) is offered - as long as he has a completely different rear end - and was used from 1970... so not compatible with the carrier in his (assuming he has stock rear end) car.

Using the Richmond he was asking about - would have him turning 3000 rpm's at a whopping 69 mph - using an assumed tire diameter of 26 inches.

Plain and simple - there's no compelling argument one could make for using this transmission given his intended use. We weren't discussing a Richmond 6 speed - only the Richmond 5 speed - typically called a 4 + 1. Since he's starting off with a fresh build - "we" (most of the respondents here) were advising to go with an OVERDRIVE transmission for best all around drivability - gas milage - and fun factor.

You sure can talk, but you don't listen at all, do you?

Andrew

[GregWeld]

I listened -- read your post TWICE -- your facts just don't hold much water. You are recommending a gear ratio that doesn't exist for his application... so your facts are based on erroneous data.

As for driveline critical speed... a typical 3.5" mild steel driveline of 50" length has a critical speed exceeding 9000 rpms...

So if you crank in your hypothetical 2:56 gear set - and a 1:1 final drive - using a 26" diameter tire... He'd have to exceed 300 MPH. Pretty impressive - but hardly worth discussing.

Using an overdrive trans - as above with a 3:73 -- he'd only have to exceed 150 MPH to achieve the magic critical speed number... again - I'm thinking he's not going to be running the car that much at these speeds. If he is - he can order a driveline that will handle it with ease.

[GregWeld]

Originally Posted by andrewb70

I did not vote for anything. I just pointed out an angle that no one has mentioned. There are many things to consider when choosing a transmission. Driveshaft speed is a very legitimate concern. There is a reason why Pontiac chose different gear ratios for the 2004-2006 GTO. There is also a reason why 4th gen f-bodies were never offered with any ratio above 3.42.

Andrew

Using this same logic - ya think there's a reason that Pontiac didn't use a RICHMOND?

[andrewb70]

Originally Posted by GregWeld

Using this same logic - ya think there's a reason that Pontiac didn't use a RICHMOND?

I see you are still trying to pick a fight, and that's OK. You obviously had a bad experience with the Richmond transmission and now you are on a mission to enlighten the masses. Kudos to you.

Shifting quality can be effected by any number of things. Certainly the design of the transmission internals is important, as is the design and adjustment of the shifter. The other factors that are often overlooked are fluid type and clutch adjustment. I mentioned before that the Richmond requires a lubricant with MORE friction. This allows the synchros to have more "bite" which improves the shift quality tremendously. It is also vital that the air gap on the clutch is properly set. Any drag on the clutch disk during a shift will make the shifting feel "hard."

Every transmission has pros and cons. The weight of each pro and con is very subjective. Some people want ultimate strength. Others want shift quality. For others, a quiet transmission is most important. We are blessed to have such a great number of available transmission options on the market today. 25 years ago it was simple. Do you want a wide ratio Muncie or a close ratio Muncie? If strength was more important, then the M22 was king, but you were stuck with a 2.20 first gear.

Here are a list of pros and cons regarding the Richmond.

Pros.

Great gear selection http://www.richmondgear.com/07pdfs/RG24.pdf
No major transmission tunnel surgery required (big issue for a-bodies)
Easy to service
Great parts availability (most parts stocked by Jegs and Summit)
Relatively light weight (especially compared to T56)

Cons
Ultimate strength (although I have yet to see a documented case of major carnage)
Shift quality (much of this is user induced due to poor lubricant selection and clutch adjustment)
Price
External shifter design (although this can be a pro when you consider the ease of adjustability compared to an internal rail design)

My point is that every product has pros and cons that must be examined in the context of the application. To make blanket statements like "All Richmond transmissions are junk," is just immature and naive.

Andrew

[camcojb]

I'll stop short of calling the Richmond "crap", but after owning two of them and driving several of their 5 and 6 speed trannies, I'd never buy another. I just think the TKO's and T56's are better in pretty much every way, and can be found used for the same or less than this particular used Richmond.

Jody

[GregWeld]

Andrew -

I was not trying to pick any fight... and I have 1100 posts on this board that would prove that fact. My "fight" is with facts that don't jive...

I understand what you're saying about the Richmond transmissions - adjustment - and gear oil (same holds true for posi rear ends BTW). But I'll return to the original post - which was "should he buy a Richmond 5 speed". And the overwhelming advice - from people who know - was ABSOLUTELY NOT.

Your post was defending your choice of a Richmond 6 speed... a completely different transmission... Yes - the argument that Richmond has some nice choices for gear spread can be made. But that is really kind of a mute point for a street cruiser unless there was a reason for needing the tighter gearing for less rpm drop. Your defense of using the Richmond 5 speed was based on a gear ratio that doesn't exist as a choice... and then you sprinkled in critical speed of the driveline... Which is also useless info, unless it was based on some facts that would support the reason for tossing it in. In other words - if he should choose to use the 2:56 gear, and was going to spin his motor to 7000 rpms, and is trying to set the land speed record at Bonneville... Then, yes, he should watch out for driveline critical speed problems which would occur at 6000 rpms with 26" tires and 300 mph. I was merely showing that those issues aren't supported by the facts - so are really not part of the discussion. There is support of the fact that the Richmond 5 speed is a notchy shifting transmission. Anyone that has shifted one would not argue that point. Are they road worthy and beefy... sure.

I am not arguing your choice of a Richmond 6 speed either. Nor would I argue whether or not it can/could be a good choice... Just be FACTUAL. If not, then expect to get your azz handed to you. These forums need to be factual - and informed - otherwise we get a bunch of yahoos on here espousing useless rumor and speculation about what could be because their buddy once was going to do it... So lets kiss and make up. We all want to learn things - I just don't want to lean things that aren't factual/useful.