MTFCA Forum

I posted this in the wrong place so I moved it here. Has anyone run an auxiliary transmission with a low, straight, and overdrive without a low gear drum or band in the transmission and shifted with the auxiliary? This would turn the high/low pedal into a straight clutch pedal. Pulling the drum would reduce the rotating weight of the transmission. You could even cut the low gear teeth off the triple gear. You could run a Ruckstell if you wanted a lower first gear, which would give you 6 gears. Not sure if the Ruckstell would be needed and it would clutter up the legroom. Obviously, you would need auxiliary brakes. I have never seen this done, but heard of it from someone.

For context, my car will have a Rajo BB, so there would be some extra power.

A search on line shows that Warford low is 5.75 to 1. Ruckstell low is 3 to 1. If I understand this correctly, combining Warford low with Ruckstell low would give you 17.25 to one (?). Standard low is 9.98 to 1. The choice of ring gear would obviously play a roll as well.

You would need an auxiliary box with a reverse if you are going to scrap the trans drum, or still run it's hub, they are all needed to run the triple gears for the T reverse.

Hi Morgan,
My BIL has Warford & Ruckstell with a 10 tooth pinion never uses low peddle starts in Ruckstell/Warford low using the clutch. Look @ Hank Lee's
Gentalmans speedster ad that has a chevy trans with only a clutch & brake in the T trans. Two peddles ( no need for revearse drum )I have a
Model A trans adaptor with a Model T drive shaft adaptor that I will use the same way. ( the T brake will work like a trans brake like in a big rig )
Craig.

!937-39 Chevy transmission with reverse works awesome! Built a few over the years but retired from it now.

Hank

Hank

your skills are visible from across the room

your craftsmanship is only visible up close

folks, if you want to know how much care goes into his creations, just look and see that every screw is oriented with slots vertical

there are a lot of excellent welders...and Hank is one of them

there are a lot of folks who are stylistically creative...and Hank is one of them

but there's damn few that go to the point of aligning screw heads...this is Duesenberg-level care.

Every time I see a photo of that car, I'm amazed with new things...KUDOS Hank!

I am not sure I would do this, but it’s an interesting idea. The transmission in my car was rebuilt/balanced by Milt Web and I many years ago and I don’t want to change things.

The reverse issue is interesting. I have a hard time operating the reverse pedal with my big feet. I do it on my 22, but it’s an issue. I am moving the parking brake lever to the outside of the body on my speedster. I have thought about turning it to a two lever and also putting a reverse lever outside the body. If you did that, removed low, added a ruckstell, auxiliary transmission, and a foot gas pedal it would drive almost like a modern car. All with period available items. I happen to have some good period auxiliary T transmissions and Ruckstells so it’s maybe not as nuts as it sounds.

I need to look into the mechanism for the two lever.

My dad ran a Volvo 4 speed for many years in his Fronty powered speedster. At first with the complete T trans, low pedal was dangerous as the additional gear reduction would strip the teeth off of any gear in the Volvo. The T trans was eventually stripped of all but the clutch, and the car began to drive like a MG! The clutch was a bit touchy with very little pedal travel required to actuate, but may have been possible to overcome by tinkering with linkage ratios.

As I recall an original accessory Muncie was 3 forward gears with reverse

I happen to have a very nice Muncie.

Both most T UDO Muncie transmissions and the Jumbo Giant UDO "usually" have reverse gear. I have seen a couple rare exceptions of a Muncie without reverse, and no sign it ever had it.

If I recall correctly, one of Vic Sala's model T racing cars had no low gear in the planetary. He was saying for a racing car it started out fine in Ruckstell and the drag from the low gear and band being eliminated improved performance noticeably. I don't recall if that car had reverse or not?

If you are just looking at gearing ratios it may be worth mentioning that what looks good on paper inst always the easiest to drive. A warford can be shifted easy between d to o and back but nowhere near as easy from u to d and we'll d to u could be very noisy. . .Of course this is assuming original equipment not repro.