At 05:17 PM 6/21/97 UT, you wrote:
>
>>Does anyone who's familiar with both know wether a 4-synchro MGB >trans is=20
>>stronger than a 3-synchro trans? If so, what is it about their design
>>that=20
>>makes them stronger? How long can either transmission be expected >to last=20
>>with good care? Do vintage races prefer one over the other?
>
>The four synch is miles ahead stronger because the load bearing layshaft is
>bigger and unlike in the three synchro, the four synchro does not expect a
>small amount of metal to do twice the amount of work ie first gear and reverse
>gear. Larger bearings in the four synchro.
>
>The 4 synch seems to last forever and when it does wear out its usually only
>bearings and synchro worn whereas when the three sync goes it requires the
>replacement of all the major expensive gears usually.
>
>john
I haven't a clue as to which is stronger, but I can attest to the fact
that the 3 syncro should be strong enough to last MANY miles. And, IMHO the
3 syncro is miles ahead in character and feel. That said, the character
would be lost in a later plastic and stuff B. Metal dash and meat-grinder
first for me.
Michael, New Bern, NC
67 MGB that'll never see one of them sissy 4 syncro trannies.
Jensen Interceptor AUTOMATIC!
Series III Land-Rover, uhmmm, 4 syncro 'cause the series I & IIs had only 2
syncros and that is way too much double clutching for me. . .I'm so ashamed :-)
|