SANTA BROGHT ME A NEW WARFORD TRANS. Instructions how it is operated, and does it need supported to the frame.
I ment it didn`t come with instructions on how to operate it.
Rick - I'm interested in the response you'll hopefully get on your question ref. "support" for the Warford:
I recently bought what I think is a very nice "driver grade" '26 touring that has a Ruckstell "and" an iron Warford. (Don't ask me why, and I'm not even sure that combo is a good idea, but that's what it has.)
The car runs and drives just fine, and as you can imagine, has an overall gear ratio that ranges from "tractor" to pretty high speed "cruising".
The interesting thing is that the Warford has no extra support of any kind and works just fine. I personally think that this is just asking for a broken crankshaft, and as I said, I'm interested in whatever response you get to your post.
My own personal feeling is that the Warford absolutely needs some extra support, but I feel just as strongly that said "support" needs to be "flexible", due to the amount of "flex" designed into the Model "T" chassis. FWIW,.......harold
P.S. By the way, Paul Vitko has done a lot of testing and research, which he has posted extensively on the forum a year or two ago, that is probably responsible for my opinion that extra support is definitely necessary.
Rick - You said "new Warford trans.). That must mean the new K.C.Warford built by Layne Machine Works? I would think that they (Layne) would have all kinds of advice for proper installation,.....after all, they certainly don't your installation to fail, right?
Please tell us what kind of Warford you got:
- New Layne
- Original aluminum case
- Original cast iron case
They all require something different.
I built a support from a couple of threaded rods over the frame to a saddle with a wood cushion between the metal and the alum case. I've heard some guys install a spring on the end where it attaches. Might be a good idea but I've not had any problems in many years and miles.
Have heard many variations of how to shift. Most important is to have outside/aux. brakes first.
I just easy up the gas and shift when engine speed matches. It takes a bit of practice to mesh the rpm's with the original Warfords to not grind the gears but the original ones are pretty much indestructible in my experience.
I'm sure you'll enjoy it! Nice Christmas Present
It is the New Layne trans,
They don't say how to use it.
I have one in my 26 Tudor. The shift pattern is 1, 2, and 3 as the supplied knob indicates. It also provides a true Neutral. The 1 is an under drive, 2 is direct drive (no change from standard Ford gearing) and 3 is an overdrive. To make Warford shifts, the drive train must be unloaded. This allows for smooth gear changes. You may unload the drive train by "clutching" or using the throttle. It is much like shifting a two speed axle in a truck. There are several posts in last years forum that should help[ you. Also Snyder's sells a support which I would recommend using. http://www.snydersantiqueauto.com/5424
As you use it you will learn when to be in under drive, direct, or overdrive. Be sure to have auxiliary brakes, either Rocky Mountain or hydraulic. If you miss a shift you would have no Ford brake. Also to install the drive shaft must be shortened 12 inches. Layne can do this for you. When you re-install the drive shaft, install it upside down so you can get to the grease fittings which I would also recommend installing. If you install a Fun Projects brake switch PM me. I have some pictures to modify the bracket that will save you some time.
I new I could count on you all to help me through this new project,thank you!!!
Rick, keep the rear end gearing stock. After you learn the "how's" in shifting your "gonna luv" the new Warford. I have 2 and they work very well. Jerry......
The Layne Warford is expensive but is one of the best investments for a T that you are going to dive a lot. I bought mine from Texas T Parts and IIRC they supplied (for a nominal cost) the shortened drive shaft. I had to shorten the housing. I have it in a 26 Coupe and have a 4 to 1 rear end since I live a mile high in slightly hilly Denver. On the first tour after installing it the guy behind me on the tour asked if I had a Model A engine in my T.
Define "expensive", please.
OK, I just looked at Lang's web site and one will set you back about 3.5k. IMHO worth every penny. YMMV. FWIIW I am glad I bought 2 of them when they were about 2.5k!
I supported my KC Warford with two heavy bungees. I drilled holes in what was left of the running board supports and ran two strands of the heavy bungee under the transmission . My Warford leaks so I'm watching the bungees for deterioration from the oil. When I installed the Warford I was told it didn't need to be supported. I didn't agree.
Here's one I built from 2" x 1" channel.
I used a short piece of 2" x 2" aluminum angle bolted to the rear of the tranny to get a flat bearing surface. And I used a rubber donut from a 50's Chevy motor mount as a cushion. I added fender washers to fit, so that the tranny bears just slightly on the crossmember. It is not bolted to it; it just rests on it so it can move when the frame flexes.
Mike and Hal - Thanks for the explanations and the picture. Your Warford support is similar to the one available from our normal parts suppliers Mike, except yours is better built and I'll bet didn't cost three hundred bucks plus shipping!
It's interesting, the two different "approaches" to the support issue. On one hand, I like the way you built yours Mike, and on the other hand, your "bungees" accomplish exactly what I personally think is all that is needed Hal, and that is, just enough constant support to offset the extra weight that is hanging way back behind the only otherwise support, the two engine mounts.
Without the extra support, I'm not sure exactly what conditions of chassis "flex" and such would cause added strain on the crankshaft, but I'm sure that any sort of "CONSTANT" uplifting support to offset the weight of the Warford would help.
Also, when thinking about the extra weight of any auxiliary transmission hanging off of the end of the hogs head, Les Schubert's flexible transmission shaft comes to mind.
Gene Carrothers - I like your idea too Gene,....you wouldn't happen to have any photos of your "threaded rod/wood saddle" type of auxiliary transmission support would you?
Mike Walker did it right, although you can just let it hang without support.
Frame twisting could cause the Warford to move sideways at the very rear which would cause stress to the unit. if it were bolted to the center.
The original Warfords were aluminum, and had no support.
Later ones were cast iron, with support and a U-joint in front where it connected to the T transmission.
The new Layne Warfords are a copy of the aluminum ones, but with all synchro gearing and a slightly smaller jump from direct drive to overdrive.
When i purchased mine, i called Layne and was told that if they thought it needed a support they would have provided one.
I really have to think you got "a fast answer" from somebody that really did not care Rick. Consider this.....
Henry and his engineers saw fit to make many "improvements" in the '26 - '27 Model "T". One of those improvements was that they saw the need to bolt the top of the hogshead to the back of the engine block, and it seems obvious to me that this is because they saw the need to more or less "stiffen up" the entire engine/transmission powerplant.
I would have thought that Layne would have at least asked you if you were installing their K.C. Warford in a '26/'27 Model "T" or in an earlier "T" that did not have the hogshead bolted to the rear of the engine block.
I still think added support is a good idea,.....perhaps not necessary on the '26/'27, but certainly on a '25 or earlier. Not that I know much, except that Ford realized that the whole engine/transmission unit was only as stiff and rigid as the degree of rigidity that a stamped sheet metal pan could offer. And of course I don't suppose Layne cares whether you're using a 3 or 4 dip pan either! Well anyway, for what it's worth Rick,....a bit of added support sure couldn't hurt though, right? To each his own I guess,........harold
Just re-red what I just wrote Rick, and it sounds like I'm being a bit "argumentive", but didn't really mean to sound that way! I guess I've just heard so much on the forum about "it's not IF you suffer a broken crankshaft,....it's WHEN!"
I guess maybe when I break a crankshaft in the Warford equipped '26 Touring, I'd rather not have to think,...."yeah, it must have been because of that darned Warford!"
I think that Layne is just building transmissions and is not concerned about how it is mounted and the forces that occur in the installation. Frankly I would never hard-mount any auxiliary transmission without support AND isolation. I have two cars/trucks with cast iron Warfords, both with the front U-joint and rear support...the way it is supposed to be. A overhung load of the type we are discussing is more than just a dead weight...there are many dynamic forces (road disturbances) that the mass responds to...in addition to the forces coming from the torque tube/radius rods. If one can insulate the crankshaft from the bending then the hogshead may be the victim.
I have a original Warford support crossmember for a cast iron Warford. If you are interested let me know.
Don't know if it will work with the new Layne case.
Thank guys for all the info. I`m going to support the rear of the warford. With the weight of the rear of the engine and trans. And the Warford I think that`s to much for the hogshead brackets to hold all the weight by them selves.
Here's a period accessory support that would help.
Jay: You are awesome! I was just going to comment that when I installed my new KC Warford I used the exact hanger you pictured because I had it with an original aluminum Warford I already had. I added this just at the rear of the KCW to make me feel comfortable not because I felt it was absolutely ness? Incidentally I love my KCW and consider it to be the best thing I have ever done to make a T more useable!!! I think one could fabricate one of these by just looking at your great picture - I did not even know what I had!!Thanks John
If you do a keyword search on Accessory Of The Day here on the forum you can view 560 acccessories from our collection I have posted over the last 5 years which include photos, the original box's, original instructions, trade journal ads etc.
The one Jay has pictured is very sim to the one I made. I think an improvement to it would be the addition of a spring inserted between the support bracket and the tensioning nut. I don't have one on mine but have seen others
While we're on Warfords,,,
How many have ones, Old or New that leak?
Here's a picture of an original Warford crossmember for a TT:
Don't know ifn it will fit a T or not, but I suspect it would.
The lower rail of the TT frame is lower then a T. As far as I know you would need to add a spacer between the frame rail and support, I was thinking rubber between the frame and the brace to allow it some give.