Transmission / Overdrive: Long Tail T85, OD Transmission Interchange

[JoeHall]

Looks like the long tail T85 used in 1958 Golden Hawks was also used in some 1955-56 Mercurys, and some 1956 T'Birds. I recently watched two on ebay. One was listed for $750 OBO, and sold for $500. The other is still listed for $999.
For a serious driver, the long tail T85 is pretty much a bolt in to replace a T86. While the T86 is wimpy, and must be handled with kid gloves, the T85 is probably the last tranny a perdson would ever need. The T85 is built as rugged as a T10; the synchronizers are even interchangable. Lester Schmidt ran a T85 in his million mile truck, and never had to swap it out. After wrecking his truck and totaling it, he offered the T85 out of it for sale as, "used"

[SN-60]

To: Joe Hall,-------- I'm with You on going the Ford route in trying to locate a 'long tail' T-85, but the input shaft would probably have to be changed out for the Studebaker version. Is that correct? Thanks

[JoeHall]

Ed,
You're right about the input shaft. Looking at a close-up pic I saved of the one that just went off ebay, it appears about 1" shorter. The splines are also different, but that would not be an issue, just get a Ford type clutch disc. The tip for the pilot bushing appears to be the same diameter (.750"?), but a little shorter also. Might be able to make an extension/adapter of some sort, instead of having to go inside the tranny, not to mention looking for a Stude T85 input shaft. It may be worth the effort for someone wanting a serious driver, while keeping as near "correct" Studebaker, or at least as near "era correct" as possible.
Joe

[bezhawk]

Couldn't you take the input shaft/gear from a T-10 to install in a T-85?
I believe they are the same.

[r1lark]

Couldn't you take the input shaft/gear from a T-10 to install in a T-85?
I believe they are the same.

Interesting question, this sent me to my Hollander manual. According to Hollander, they do not interchange.

DISCLAIMER: just reporting what the Hollander says. I make no claim to the accuracy of this information.

[bezhawk]

Interesting question, this sent me to my Hollander manual. According to Hollander, they do not interchange.

Hmmmm. that's interesting.....I guess when I put a T85 input shaft into a T10 in a 56J, I thought the reverse would also work!
I must have done something wrong, because it can't be done

[jrlemke]

The Hollander said it wouldn't work because the clutch end is different. The gear end could be the same. -Jim

[SN-60]

OK,------Are we talking about the fact that a T-85 input shaft for a '56 Golden would have a different pilot end than one for say...a '57 or '58 Golden or Stude truck? (which are probably the same as a T-10 shaft)

[r1lark]

Hmmmm. that's interesting.....I guess when I put a T85 input shaft into a T10 in a 56J, I thought the reverse would also work!
I must have done something wrong, because it can't be done

Disclaimer: just reporting what the Hollander says. I make no claim as to the accuracy of this information.

[JoeHall]

I am thinking the Hollander is correct, in that the two shafts are different and not interchangable, IF the intended use is for original application, i.e. back into the Merc or T'Bird.

[JoeHall]

The 1959-64 Stude Shop Manual lists two different input shafts for four speed, early v. late. The difference given in the footnote is tooth count. If I weren't so lazy, I'd pop a sidecover on a T85 out in the shed and count teeth. If Bez did it before (and I believe him), it seems a question of which T10 shaft he used, early or late.

[studebakerkid]

The length differnce could be accounted for by machining a longer pilot bushing I am thinking.

[bezhawk]

The 56J had the T85, and the T10 was from a Ford. The pilot bearing was also from a Ford, and was a ball bearing type.....Sorry, didn't write part #s down....but I think the pilot was from a truck. Much larger than the bushing type used on Studebaker engines....but , we're talking about a Packard V8 in this case.

[PackardV8]

The T85/T89 was manufactured for about fifteen years. I have a mid-60s T85 from a Ford F150. It is quite a bit different than the '58 Stude version. Different input shaft, different gear ratios, different angle on the low-reverse slider gear, different positioning of the governor and solenoid.

Even with all the differences, it could be made to fit a Stude or a Packard, which is why I've hung on to it.

jack vines

[SN-60]

To: bezhawk,------ Joe Hall was referring to a long-tail T-85 as used in the '58 Golden Hawk. We've agreed that certain FoMoCo models used the long-tail T-85, and with a change of input shaft, it should bolt into
a Studebaker in place of a T-86. The question becomes 'If a Studebaker T-85 input shaft can't be located, would an input shaft made for a Studebaker version T-10 interchage?' It confuses the issue when You mention installation
of a T-10 in a 56J, because, as You know, the 56J input shaft is unique, and definitely would not work behind a Studebaker engine. r1lark's Hollander information is correct. A T-10 input shaft will not
interchange with a T-85 input shaft, IF that T-85 is going into a 56J, because the factory never made a T-10 specifc input shaft for the Packard engine. I know You get all of this, but some folks might not.