Identify this trans

[kishy]

Hi folks.
I found an '84 2.0 in a junkyard and am trying to figure out what trans it has.

It looks like a TK trans (very similar to my TK5).
Differing from my trans: it has an external slave, and the shifter only wants to find 4 gears, no 5 or reverse. It has the sloppy plastic shifter tower like a TK5 instead of the metal shift tower of the TK4. The shifting feels very clicky/notchy except for the play that the plastic shifters generally have.

What I want to know is if this is a TK5 possibly with a bent or broken shift fork, hence it being unable to go into 5 or reverse. If it's a TK4 or one of the other trans then I probably don't want it...but the external slave arrangement would be awesome if it can be retrofitted to my TK5.

Pic on Flickr:


Rust-tastic:

 

[adsm08]

It looks like a TK5, but there aren't a ton of differences, visually, between the two that I can find.

The TK4 is 24 inches, the TK5 is a little over 25. TK4 is coded X and TK5 is coded 5, so if the door sticker was still there that might help.

 

[fastpakr]

For what it's worth, the '84 TK5 had a factory external slave. No idea about retrofit though.

 

[adsm08]

For what it's worth, the '84 TK5 had a factory external slave. No idea about retrofit though.

Probably need the bell, and all the hydraulics.

 

[kishy]

Thanks guys, that helps!

Trans code on the door sticker was X. I forgot that I knew that.

I may grab the bellhousing and associated parts to operate the clutch since it seems to me there's a pretty good chance it can be retrofitted.

 

[adsm08]

It probably can. It seems like the TK4 and 5 are almost 100% interchangable.

 

[kishy]

From a quick RockAuto application comparison, it looks like the master cylinder, pressure plate and clutch disc are unchanged (so no fluid or geometric differences to worry about). Looks like what I need from the junkyard is the bellhousing, clutch fork and fluid line, then buy a new slave and throwout bearing and that's that.

My truck has a new slave but it did not have any sort of rubber boot on it so I don't have a whole lot of faith it will last super long. Having the parts in the garage for the external swap would make it a quick and easy fix if/when it fails.

Also probably worth examining if any parts of this can fix my yet-unresolved oil loss around the yoke.

 

[adsm08]

You probably need to sleeve your yoke and put a new seal in.

 

[fastpakr]

Why do you want the external configuration? Other than ease of replacement, it's not an improvement at all.

 

[kishy]

Why do you want the external configuration? Other than ease of replacement, it's not an improvement at all.

Perceived improvement in reliability, perceived easier bleeding, and actual easier replacement.

I would not take out my existing good internal slave to swap it, but I would prefer to swap to the external setup if I ever have to replace it again.

 

[fastpakr]

I think the primary reason for the transition to an internal design was an improvement in reliability and engagement by actuating directly from the center point rather than a rod from one end.

 

[adsm08]

Perceived improvement in reliability, perceived easier bleeding, and actual easier replacement.

Perceived is the only kind of improvement in reliability you are going to get. External slaves have a much higher failure rate, because they are exposed. Most people who have them only tolerate said failure rate because of the ease of replacement.

Easier bleeding will depend on the style. For example I had to help a buddy in college do one on his Jeep. We were able to bench bleed it and go to town. About three years after that I had to do one on an F550. No bleeder screw. That sucked. It actually managed to be worse than the Mustangs with no bleeder screw.

You also have more moving parts to wear out or break, including the pin and fork, which both require trans removal to service.

 

[kishy]

Interesting thoughts.

The external slave in this case is enclosed in a housing bolted to the side of the bellhousing, so I don't think the "exposed" thing is a factor for this specific design. It's not like a T5 where the cylinder is truly just sitting there outside of everything.

Also, the external style slave (while still being "internal" due to enclosure) has a dust boot on the shaft unlike the internal slave which has the seal riding surface exposed to clutch dust and any gear oil that decides to escape the front seal of the trans.

Any type of "thing inside another thing with a seal", like a shock absorber, floor jack piston, clutch slave etc tends to fail quicker if the riding surface of the seal is not protected by a dust boot. It's hard to say for sure that a bellhousing is or isn't a dirty enough place for that to happen.

The fork and pin being addiitonal moving parts isn't really on my radar since I'm imagining they're pretty beefy. But on the other hand the TK5 is not an overall very beefy trans so maybe these parts will be skimpy.

It could go either way I guess. The advantage of it being enclosed but still external seems worth taking into consideration. The added points of failure of more moving parts is also worth considering.

As I said I would not swap a working setup over, but I'd like it to be an option on the table if the internal one starts to leak.

 

[Shran]

Some, probably many, aftermarket slave cylinders now come with dust boots installed.

Whether or not that is a good thing or not is up in the air. The argument can be made that they tend to trap dirt, dust, mud and liquids rather than being open and easily cleaned. I almost always remove the dust boots from shocks for that reason.

 

[kishy]

No slave cylinder offered for an 85 Ranger is equipped with the boot. I have heard that those used on newer Rangers can be found with the boot, but seemingly none that fit the old setup.

Picked up the bellhousing today. The throwout bearing was totally disintegrated. No rollers/balls were left in it, it was just shredded bits of metal. The trans will not actually engage anything other than 1-2, so something inside is damaged as well. Between that and it being a TK4 I don't have a use for the trans itself.

84 used a very different crossmember design than 85+. I was not able to get the crossmember out due to rust on the driver side fastener, so I had to yank the whole trans backwards on top of the crossmember then separate the bellhousing still in the truck.



I appreciate the commentary about internal vs external. As mentioned I'm not doing anything with it right now, I just want it to be an option on the table if my newer current slave cylinder decides to fail prematurely.



Providing an update here, but I don't want to bump the thread so I'm editing it in:
There was a part I overlooked in this thread which is needed to convert from internal to external slave, or vice-versa. That part is the front cover of the transmission.
The front cover for the external slave setup has a snout on it that the throwout bearing slides on. The snout is not present on the internal slave version of the transmission.

I did eventually swap my 85 internal slave TK5 to have an external slave using the following parts:

• Bellhousing, clutch fork, and clutch hydraulic line sourced from junkyard '84 4-cylinder TK4 truck
• Transmission front cover sourced from junkyard '84 V6 TK5 truck (I could have taken it from the same truck as above but I didn't realize I needed it at that time)
• Clutch slave cylinder sourced NOS on eBay (but could have bought it at a parts store too) for an '84 4-cylinder truck
• Throwout bearing sourced new from RockAuto for an '84 4-cylinder truck

I've briefly commented on how it feels since the change in the thread for my truck: https://www.therangerstation.com/forums/index.php?threads/re-introducing-my-85-ranger.200789/