Transmission / Overdrive: T-10 Corvette Transmision in my Hawk

[STUDEBAKER BILL]

I have been told by a professional mechanic that my Hawk has 1963 T-10 Corvette Transmission. It has been in it ever since I bought it in 1979. I have run it hard over the years and never have ever had a problem with it. My mechanic says it is a almost indestructable transmission. I can verify that because I have run it hard over the past 40 plus years with no problems what so ever. Does anyone have information on this transmission they can share with me?

[r1lark]

Bill, not knowing exactly what information you are looking for makes it hard. But first, there is quite a long section in the Studebaker '59-'64 Shop Manual on the T10. Also, a simple Google Search for "borg warner t10 transmission" or similar brings up a huge amout of information.

[skyway]

Mebbe meaning GM vs. Ford bolt pattern?

[jetboat]

I also have a gm t10 out of a 63 or 64 studebaker station wagon. My question is, did studebaker use these instead of the regular t10.
it is stamped GM 1961 rite on the case, it is bigger and heavier then the standard t10,I have 2 standard ones to compare to.
The GM one is now in my 56 pickup behind a 259 .

[PackardV8]

I also have a gm t10 out of a 63 or 64 studebaker station wagon. My question is, did studebaker use these instead of the regular t10.
it is stamped GM 1961 rite on the case, it is bigger and heavier then the standard t10,I have 2 standard ones to compare to.
The GM one is now in my 56 pickup behind a 259 .

The 1957-67 Borg-Warner T10 had several variants and was used in Chevrolet, Pontiac, Oldsmobile, Buick, Ford, Mercury, Plymouth, Dodge, AMC, et al.

Wanting a 4-speed all-synchromesh transmission for the 1957 Corvette racing program, Chevrolet participated with Borg-Warner in re-engineering the T85 transmission; thus being granted a four-year exclusive use.

In 1961, Studebaker became the second US automaker to offer the T10, using the same case as Chevrolet, but a different input shaft. Mid-1962, Studebaker switched to the same Ford pattern as had been used on the T85.

While a GM or Ford T10 can be used in a Studebaker with the appropriate bell housing, neither is ideal, as the input shaft is an inch too short, requiring a custom pilot bearing.

There are also four different tailshaft lengths. Some of the Ford tailshafts are too long to be use in Avanti and the Lark converts/wagons.

At a glance, some of the AMC T10s can be mistaken for a Ford. However, the case bolt pattern is reversed and not interchangeable.

My mechanic says it is a almost indestructable transmission. I can verify that because I have run it hard over the past 40 plus years with no problems what so ever.

As to indestructable, only because a Studebaker V8 doesn't make enough horsepower to hurt them without intent from the driver. Very few of the Mopar T10s survived, as they were used behind 383" and 426"s which were drag raced. They failed regularly and resulted in Mopar asking New Process to develope the A833, strong enough to be used behind the 426" Hemi. When Ford developed their 427" engines, they had to have Tremec design a stronger "top loader" transmission, as the T10 wasn't strong enough.

In the late 1960s, to keep their OEM and aftermarket share of the performance transmission, Borg-Warner developed the "Super T10" with a stronger alloy case and stronger gears.

jack vines

[jetboat]

Thank you Jack, mine definitely has a case made of different materials but don't think it is a super t10.

[64studeavanti]

I also have a gm t10 out of a 63 or 64 studebaker station wagon. My question is, did studebaker use these instead of the regular t10.
it is stamped GM 1961 rite on the case, it is bigger and heavier then the standard t10,I have 2 standard ones to compare to.
The GM one is now in my 56 pickup behind a 259 .

Could this be a Muncie that was modified to fit Stude? They are almost identical to T10.

[PackardV8]

While the GM 1961 on the case is not conclusive, if it's a date code, it's not for a Muncie first offered in 1963. If you've ever looked at a Borg-Warner T-10 and a Muncie four-speed and gotten them mixed up, it's because the Muncie is a direct descendant of the T-10. GM's goal with the Muncie four-speed was to produce a stronger transmission with better shift feel by employing larger synchro cones.

jack vines

[pinehurstbob]

I formerly drag raced T10's behind GM small blocks in the late 60,s. At the time we used to dump the clutch at 5000 RPM and hang on. Ran 450 gears and got through 3 gears in a run. I can attest to the strength of these trans. Only damage I ever did was to strip a counter gear years later in street use. They are indeed hard to hurt.
Bob

[Dick Steinkamp]

Here is my old Starliner (now owned by Justin Cole). BW close ratio T10 (2.20 low). Right foot flat on the floor. Power shifting.

[PackardV8]

Agree, for the use for which it was designed, small block V8s, the T10 is perfect.

Once GM, Ford and Mopar began offering high torque 427" and larger big blocks, the T10 could not cope. As previously mentioned all three manufacturers developed different, stronger 4-speeds.

IIRC, Ted Harbit raced the same close-ratio T10 for decades before it finally had some problems.

jack vines

[solar]

I have seen a lot of talk on the 2nd gear issue, which my car has, anyone else heard of this? Thanks

[Hallabutt]

Bill,

If this thread does not go far enough towards answering any question that you may have-use your search box at the top and put in T-10, or some similar description, and you will get all the archival information that the forum has maintained for decades. I did it for a trial run and I believe that I got 23 pages of pertinent information.

[solar]

Thank you.