has anyone swaped in an f40 trans
02-18-2008, 04:15 PM
#1
Senior Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: 12-01-06
Location: Calgary,Canada
Posts: 1,674
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
has anyone swaped in an f40 trans
This is a pretty good price,I wonder how much work it is to swap them out?
http://cgi.ebay.ca/Pontiac-G6-Manual...QQcmdZViewItem
http://cgi.ebay.ca/Pontiac-G6-Manual...QQcmdZViewItem
02-18-2008, 05:12 PM
#4
There are a few of us trying to figure out what cases are what. It might be possible to purchase this trans and the clutch housing (bell housing) side of the case and make it work. It does also seem like new cables would be needed as well. Not sure yet.
02-18-2008, 10:49 PM
#7
But it'd have to be a 2.0L turbo, not a 2.8L turbo from what I can tell. Regardless, I've had the internals and the differential side case numbers ran, and they are the same for all three versions.
02-18-2008, 11:18 PM
#8
the saab version has different gear ratios than the g6 gtp. the front case half is also different, the g6 version has a small gm bolt pattern (used on all 60 and 90 degree v6 gm excluding the 4.3l) and the saab 2.0l turbi is the ecotec pattern, as it uses an ecotec.
i figured out that the stock cobalt axles should work. the saab comes with the f35 or f40 as an option, and there is only one set of axles for the car.
i figured out that the stock cobalt axles should work. the saab comes with the f35 or f40 as an option, and there is only one set of axles for the car.
02-20-2008, 12:54 PM
#11
Senior Member
Join Date: 03-13-06
Location: Michigan
Posts: 1,004
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
this would be a great alternative if it works, rather than quaife's 6 speed swap. Although, you would want to install a quaife LSD in the trans, so you're still looking at $2000 for the swap if you get the trans for a good price. IF it fits that is, can someone give good proof?
02-20-2008, 12:58 PM
#12
this would be a great alternative if it works, rather than quaife's 6 speed swap. Although, you would want to install a quaife LSD in the trans, so you're still looking at $2000 for the swap if you get the trans for a good price. IF it fits that is, can someone give good proof?
06-17-2008, 06:55 PM
#15
The part number for the '08 9-3 2.0L F40 Transmission is 55560476. The '03-07 Saab F40 transmissions have the same gear ratios as the G6 does. I talked to Tom at CED, and because this is a Saab Specific/Saab Only part, he CANNOT order it. I have not had any luck finding a Saab dealer that is not trying to RAPE me on the price (lowest quote was $3350). Anywho, I'm still digging for more info, but thought people would be interested in hearing this, anyway.
06-20-2008, 10:44 PM
#18
Member
Join Date: 05-14-06
Location: Belleville, MI
Posts: 231
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I have looked into this swap. The 9-3 with 2.0L turbo with a six speed f40 will bolt right up to your engine. The stand off for the clutch is different than our f35, so you would need the clutch disc, pressure plate and slave for the SAAB also. Last but not least, you would need the shifter from a SAAB with the likelyhood of needing the cables as well. The gear ratios for the f40 are closer spaced than those for the f35 and the f40 has a taller overdrive which means lower fuel economy. I decided not to do it, not because of the cost, but more so because of the fuel economy aspect and the fact that the durability of the f40 is really no better than that of the f35. GM has one running around and it drives nice, but that is about it.
06-21-2008, 12:38 AM
#19
I have looked into this swap. The 9-3 with 2.0L turbo with a six speed f40 will bolt right up to your engine. The stand off for the clutch is different than our f35, so you would need the clutch disc, pressure plate and slave for the SAAB also. Last but not least, you would need the shifter from a SAAB with the likelyhood of needing the cables as well. The gear ratios for the f40 are closer spaced than those for the f35 and the f40 has a taller overdrive which means lower fuel economy. I decided not to do it, not because of the cost, but more so because of the fuel economy aspect and the fact that the durability of the f40 is really no better than that of the f35. GM has one running around and it drives nice, but that is about it.
A taller overdrive will get your better fuel economy. My concern, is the fact that there is little aftermarket support for the F35, but there is LITERALLY NONE for the F40. The ONLY decent clutch made for the F40 is specifically designed to be used in conjunction with LSX V8 swaps and requires the use of the custom spacer and bellhousing adapter used for such a swap.
From what I've seen of durability of the F40, however, it definately is more durable than the F35. But for the price Saab wants for their specific transmission, and the other parts needed, it's about the same for the Quaife 6-speed transmission, which gets you better gearing overall, although a shorter overdrive.
Short Gears = High RPMs per MPH = worse fuel economy.
Taller Gears are the opposite. The confusion is that short gears have higher numerical values, and tall gears have low ones. People tend to think it should be the other way around at first thought.
06-22-2008, 09:33 PM
#20
Member
Join Date: 05-14-06
Location: Belleville, MI
Posts: 231
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
OK, the overdrive on the F40 has a higher numeric ratio than the f35 has a higher numeric ratio in overdrive which means worse fuel economy. The experience at GM is that the F40 does not give significantly better durability under the conditions that the F35 is experiencing failures.
06-23-2008, 12:53 PM
#21
OK, the overdrive on the F40 has a higher numeric ratio than the f35 has a higher numeric ratio in overdrive which means worse fuel economy. The experience at GM is that the F40 does not give significantly better durability under the conditions that the F35 is experiencing failures.
F40 6th Gear - .707
F35 5th Gear - .700
Difference in Overdrive gearing is insignificant.
F40 Final Drive - 3.55
Tallest & Best Economy Gearing in F35 (only in new SS/SC) 3.82
Thus, overall, the F40 has better gearing for fuel economy at highway speeds.
From what I've seen, and the data I've been able to dig up, the vast majority of failures in F35 transmissions is do to the wheel hop condition the SS/SC's suspension allowed when launched hard. So, I can't say I disagree with your analysis there, but, I don't have any similiar failures on the Saab forums, either.
Archie still hasn't had many problems with the F40 transmissions in the mid-engine RWD, application, but he certainly has had similiar half-shaft failures.
If you've got an inside scoop on what GM is testing, maybe you can shed some light on what is different in the SS/TC's F35 casting, or if GM is just expected better durability from the revised suspension and turbo setup's slightly higher powerband.
06-23-2008, 01:00 PM
#22
Senior Member
Join Date: 10-01-06
Location: Maidstone, SK
Posts: 5,134
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
F40 - 4 different models made by GM... only one works with the Ecotec's... hard to find... expensive.
F40 is not necessarily better than the F35, as they have major grinding problems (check out the Saab forums for more info).
If you're looking for a different drive ratio, check out an SS/TC F35, as they have a different final drive than the SS/SC's.
F40 is not necessarily better than the F35, as they have major grinding problems (check out the Saab forums for more info).
If you're looking for a different drive ratio, check out an SS/TC F35, as they have a different final drive than the SS/SC's.
06-23-2008, 01:12 PM
#23
Senior Member
What numbers are you compairing?!?
F40 6th Gear - .707
F35 5th Gear - .700
Difference in Overdrive gearing is insignificant.
F40 Final Drive - 3.55
Tallest & Best Economy Gearing in F35 (only in new SS/SC) 3.82
Thus, overall, the F40 has better gearing for fuel economy at highway speeds.
From what I've seen, and the data I've been able to dig up, the vast majority of failures in F35 transmissions is do to the wheel hop condition the SS/SC's suspension allowed when launched hard. So, I can't say I disagree with your analysis there, but, I don't have any similiar failures on the Saab forums, either.
Archie still hasn't had many problems with the F40 transmissions in the mid-engine RWD, application, but he certainly has had similiar half-shaft failures.
If you've got an inside scoop on what GM is testing, maybe you can shed some light on what is different in the SS/TC's F35 casting, or if GM is just expected better durability from the revised suspension and turbo setup's slightly higher powerband.
F40 6th Gear - .707
F35 5th Gear - .700
Difference in Overdrive gearing is insignificant.
F40 Final Drive - 3.55
Tallest & Best Economy Gearing in F35 (only in new SS/SC) 3.82
Thus, overall, the F40 has better gearing for fuel economy at highway speeds.
From what I've seen, and the data I've been able to dig up, the vast majority of failures in F35 transmissions is do to the wheel hop condition the SS/SC's suspension allowed when launched hard. So, I can't say I disagree with your analysis there, but, I don't have any similiar failures on the Saab forums, either.
Archie still hasn't had many problems with the F40 transmissions in the mid-engine RWD, application, but he certainly has had similiar half-shaft failures.
If you've got an inside scoop on what GM is testing, maybe you can shed some light on what is different in the SS/TC's F35 casting, or if GM is just expected better durability from the revised suspension and turbo setup's slightly higher powerband.
06-23-2008, 06:38 PM
#24
F40 - 4 different models made by GM... only one works with the Ecotec's... hard to find... expensive.
F40 is not necessarily better than the F35, as they have major grinding problems (check out the Saab forums for more info).
If you're looking for a different drive ratio, check out an SS/TC F35, as they have a different final drive than the SS/SC's.
F40 is not necessarily better than the F35, as they have major grinding problems (check out the Saab forums for more info).
If you're looking for a different drive ratio, check out an SS/TC F35, as they have a different final drive than the SS/SC's.
These GM engineers are really smart. No lift shift, torque management = no power hop even though the root cause is not fixed, the ecu takes care of business. Tip: assymetrically stiffer axles help. i.e only buy one aftermarket axle...and rotate motor. The axle shafdts really need to run straight...and as for changing the transmission to the F40, its clear as you say, why bother? Follks that break transmissions because they choose to stay in power hop deserve all the aggravation they get....
The new version of the F35 used in the SS/TC seems to address the majority of the issues people have. Still haven't seen one for sale, though.
06-23-2008, 08:00 PM
#25
Member
Join Date: 05-14-06
Location: Belleville, MI
Posts: 231
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I have driven the new SS/TC and as far as power available at the punch of the throttle, you can have it. The SC has more seat of the pants grunt than the TC. Period. Now people are talking about different F35 ratios in the TC. I don't know, so I won't discuss. What I do know is that the TC has much stiffer axle shafts than the SC and those axle shafts will fit directly on a SC car. I do know that the Brembo brakes on the TC are sweet and by the way, they stop the car faster. I do not know if the SS/TC is in the dealerships yet, but I do know that GM is building them. If you are in the neighborhood, stop by the Lordstown Ohio plant and beg them for a tour. They are running down the line. And no, I do not work at Lordstown.