So we get stuck with low end Tremec?

[camaroguy]

Looking around for more information about the Tremec TR-6060 tranny, I came across a GM link with info about the different types of tremecs. Basically the tremec in the Camaro is only rated for 430 lb -ft. of torque. All along I assumed it was 600 lb ft. according to the Camaro5 wiki.

I know its a cost cutting measure, but leaving only a 10 lb ft. torque difference in the specifications?

Gm Link - http://media.gm.com/us/powertrain/en..._MG9_M10_n.doc

Low maintenance
The TR6060 6-speed uses Texaco ATF Type III 1863 fluid and is certified "fill-for-life," requiring no fluid changes. The clutch is activated hydraulically, which automatically compensates for clutch disc wear, eliminating manual adjustments (except for the ZR1 which uses a traditional clutch). The Tremec TR6060 six-speed has evolved from a design that aimed to require virtually no maintenance in all but the most severe conditions.

Overview
Both the standard Corvette and the high-performance Z06 use the TR6060 designated as MM6, which is validated to 500 lb-ft of torque, while the TR6060 with the Z51 option features higher ratios and is designated as MZ6. It is validated to 430 lb-ft of torque. The ultra high performance ZR1 uses the TR6060 designated as the MH3, which is validated to 650 lb-ft of torque. The CTSv uses the MG9 version of the TR6060 validated to 560 lb-ft of torque. The Camaro uses the M10 gear set validated to 430 lb-ft

[CamaroSpike23]

doesnt say that it broke at that power, just that its capable of holding that power... which is roughly what the LS3 puts out... isnt it?


you are reading too much into it.

how much power does the Z06 make? ~500hp.... the ZR1 makes around 650hp.... CTSv makes around 550hp....

do you think GM is going to put a transmission in there that can juuuuuuuuuuuuust barely support the existing power of the motor?

[BackinBlackSS/RS]

Originally Posted by CamaroSpike23

doesnt say that it broke at that power, just that its capable of holding that power... which is roughly what the LS3 puts out... isnt it?


you are reading too much into it.

how much power does the Z06 make? ~500hp.... the ZR1 makes around 650hp.... CTSv makes around 550hp....

do you think GM is going to put a transmission in there that can juuuuuuuuuuuuust barely support the existing power of the motor?

My thoughts exactly.

[InventoryGuy]

Originally Posted by CamaroSpike23

doesnt say that it broke at that power, just that its capable of holding that power... which is roughly what the LS3 puts out... isnt it?


you are reading too much into it.

how much power does the Z06 make? ~500hp.... the ZR1 makes around 650hp.... CTSv makes around 550hp....

do you think GM is going to put a transmission in there that can juuuuuuuuuuuuust barely support the existing power of the motor?

700r4 would be a shining example. Used in Syclone and Typhoons and was easily detroyed. In fact they rated power output with the motors used in a lot of 700r4 applications to make sure they didn't exceed the trans limits on paper.

[THE EVIL TW1N]

Originally Posted by camaroguy

Looking around for more information about the Tremec TR-6060 tranny, I came across a GM link with info about the different types of tremecs. Basically the tremec in the Camaro is only rated for 430 lb -ft. of torque. All along I assumed it was 600 lb ft. according to the Camaro 5 wiki.

I know its a cost cutting measure, but leaving only a 10 lb ft. torque difference in the specifications?

Gm Link - http://media.gm.com/us/powertrain/en..._MG9_M10_n.doc

Low maintenance
The TR6060 6-speed uses Texaco ATF Type III 1863 fluid and is certified "fill-for-life," requiring no fluid changes. The clutch is activated hydraulically, which automatically compensates for clutch disc wear, eliminating manual adjustments (except for the ZR1 which uses a traditional clutch). The Tremec TR6060 six-speed has evolved from a design that aimed to require virtually no maintenance in all but the most severe conditions.

Overview
Both the standard Corvette and the high-performance Z06 use the TR6060 designated as MM6, which is validated to 500 lb-ft of torque, while the TR6060 with the Z51 option features higher ratios and is designated as MZ6. It is validated to 430 lb-ft of torque. The ultra high performance ZR1 uses the TR6060 designated as the MH3, which is validated to 650 lb-ft of torque. The CTSv uses the MG9 version of the TR6060 validated to 560 lb-ft of torque. The Camaro uses the M10 gear set validated to 430 lb-ft

Well, they have always made different specs of their tranny's. It's like the T56 in my Cobra is not the same as the fbody or the viper.

That being said, the CTSV's TR6060 probably does have some noticeably upgraded internals that makes it differ from the base vettes and camaro's.

[a6pk2go]

Gee..........I'm getting an automatic.........I guess I'm just nosey tonight or bored.

[patriotpa]

Originally Posted by CamaroSpike23

doesnt say that it broke at that power, just that its capable of holding that power... which is roughly what the LS3 puts out... isnt it?


you are reading too much into it.

how much power does the Z06 make? ~500hp.... the ZR1 makes around 650hp.... CTSv makes around 550hp....

do you think GM is going to put a transmission in there that can juuuuuuuuuuuuust barely support the existing power of the motor?

Also, what a part is rated at and what it takes to break it are completely different numbers. Continuous load, peak load, and shear strength are just three of those ratings. The number you're looking at is continuous load. There is a safety margin built in for manufacturing tolerance also. My degree is in electronics, but I dabble in mechanical.

[Steve1968LS2]

Originally Posted by camaroguy

Looking around for more information about the Tremec TR-6060 tranny, I came across a GM link with info about the different types of tremecs. Basically the tremec in the Camaro is only rated for 430 lb -ft. of torque. All along I assumed it was 600 lb ft. according to the Camaro 5 wiki.

I know its a cost cutting measure, but leaving only a 10 lb ft. torque difference in the specifications?

I'm sorry but you are wrong.. the Camaros have the 700-lb rated trans.. the same as is in the GT-500 Mustang, Vette, and very similar to the ZR1 version.

Don't get your tech from any Wiki page.. it's only as good as the person writing it. lol

I have two TR-6060 varients in my shop and I'm currently working with Tremec on a tech story explaining the difference between the TR-6060 (T56 Magnum) and the T56...

Being rated in the 400s is nonsense and the person that wrote that isn't very well informed.

[Steve1968LS2]

Originally Posted by patriotpa

Also, what a part is rated at and what it takes to break it are completely different numbers. Continuous load, peak load, and shear strength are just three of those ratings. The number you're looking at is continuous load. There is a safety margin built in for manufacturing tolerance also. My degree is in electronics, but I dabble in mechanical.

It's rated at 700 lb-ft of torque.. however, if you toss on a set of slicks the "torque spike" when the car hooks can break the trans.

Then again, on street tires you could run 1000 hp though the trans since it will never hook.

Hard shocks is what kills transmissions.

The main differences between the various TR6060 varients is in gearing and in the front case/tail shaft areas. Acutally most have the same gearing except the ZR1 which has a very close ratio setup.

I will talking with the Tremec guy all next week.. what questions do you want me to ask?

[rayhawk]

Originally Posted by Steve1968LS2

It's rated at 700 lb-ft of torque.. however, if you toss on a set of slicks the "torque spike" when the car hooks can break the trans.

Then again, on street tires you could run 1000 hp though the trans since it will never hook.

Hard shocks is what kills transmissions.

The main differences between the various TR6060 varients is in gearing and in the front case/tail shaft areas. Acutally most have the same gearing except the ZR1 which has a very close ratio setup.

I will talking with the Tremec guy all next week.. what questions do you want me to ask?

Ask him how to stop people who don't know what they are talking about from posting on wikipedia.

Oh, and I assume that the different variants all use the same housing, shaft design, bearing support locations, etc., so what (besides ratios) really changes depending on application? Do they use higher grade steel for the higher hp cars?

[brandotron]

Originally Posted by CamaroSpike23

do you think GM is going to put a transmission in there that can juuuuuuuuuuuuust barely support the existing power of the motor?

I would hope not but given the 10 bolt rear end in the previous generation, it wouldn't be totally unthinkable.

[Steve1968LS2]

Originally Posted by rayhawk

Ask him how to stop people who don't know what they are talking about from posting on wikipedia.

Oh, and I assume that the different variants all use the same housing, shaft design, bearing support locations, etc., so what (besides ratios) really changes depending on application? Do they use higher grade steel for the higher hp cars?

No, they all have the same internal parts.. Although I'm not sure on the ZR1 varient (but I do know it has special ratios).

Since the TR6060 uses a remote shifter system that's the biggest change.. and of course there would be differences base on whether the target car is IRS or live axle.

I have the aftermarket version (called a T56 Magnum) in my orange '68 Camaro. The big diff there is that it has a direct (more traditional) shifter, but the internals are identical to the OEM version.

I will ask them next week about differences in internals.. but I'm pretty sure they are the same from a strength standpoint.

[Steve1968LS2]

Originally Posted by brandotron

I would hope not but given the 10 bolt rear end in the previous generation, it wouldn't be totally unthinkable.

You know.. this has always bugged me.. that rear was perfectly fine for the way the car came from the factory.

It's not GM's responsibility to over-engineer parts so that people can run slicks, add blowers, or do other changes to the car.

I found it fascinating that someone would add slicks, toss on a 200 shot of nitrous and then complain that the "crappy" rear blew apart. lol

[brandotron]

Originally Posted by Steve1968LS2

You know.. this has always bugged me.. that rear was perfectly fine for the way the car came from the factory.

It's not GM's responsibility to over-engineer parts so that people can run slicks, add blowers, or do other changes to the car.

I found it fascinating that someone would add slicks, toss on a 200 shot of nitrous and then complain that the "crappy" rear blew apart. lol

I disagree.

I understand not having to engineer stock parts for people with FI, nitrous, etc in mind, but SLICKS? Come on now, there are countless horror stories on ls1tech about people blowing up their rear ends on sticky tires and STOCK POWER. There are also a few about DONUTS on street tires killing 10 bolts. The way I see it, durability involves the purposeful over engineering of a wear item. The fourth gen wasn't an economy commuter car - why would they design a rear end that could juuuuust barely handle 300-350hp on street tires?

[CamaroSpike23]

Originally Posted by Steve1968LS2

You know.. this has always bugged me.. that rear was perfectly fine for the way the car came from the factory.

It's not GM's responsibility to over-engineer parts so that people can run slicks, add blowers, or do other changes to the car.

I found it fascinating that someone would add slicks, toss on a 200 shot of nitrous and then complain that the "crappy" rear blew apart. lol

ive blown 10bolts on street tires with only a CAI on the car.

but looking at it from GM's pov at the time, it was a cheap and easy rear to throw in the car that would not be destroyed by 90% of the buyers for the car.

Originally Posted by brandotron

I disagree.

I understand not having to engineer stock parts for people with FI, nitrous, etc in mind, but SLICKS? Come on now, there are countless horror stories on ls1tech about people blowing up their rear ends on sticky tires and STOCK POWER. There are also a few about DONUTS on street tires killing 10 bolts. The way I see it, durability involves the purposeful over engineering of a wear item. The fourth gen wasn't an economy commuter car - why would they design a rear end that could juuuuust barely handle 300-350hp on street tires?

axle flex is a bitch. but you dont hear about the numerous people who HAVENT blown their rears. also, how many miles are on the rears of the cars getting the rear blown over on tech? how many passes down the track?

[CamaroFan1]

If you were GM, or Tremec, what incentive would you have to rate the trans above the maximum HP of the car? Now, if you add an sc or other mods, they just say the trans was not rated for that HP to get out of warranting the repair.

[brandotron]

Originally Posted by CamaroSpike23

axle flex is a bitch. but you dont hear about the numerous people who HAVENT blown their rears. also, how many miles are on the rears of the cars getting the rear blown over on tech? how many passes down the track?

Haha, perhaps 'tech was a bad example - enthusiasts are far more likely to blow the rear than your average joe nutsack.

That being said, age and mileage can be a factor, but I was in highschool (graduated '99) when the fourth gens were new and I heard about rear end problems then.

...I say "heard about" because I was still walking to school. With zero ladies. I was pretty metal.

[Hylton]

These trannies are fine. The only thing I've been told by guys in the know is not to power shift them while the rear tires are spinning.

[patriotpa]

Agreed. Don't believe us? Search Trannies on Google.

[brandotron]

Originally Posted by patriotpa

Agreed. Don't believe us? Search Trannies on Google.

[Steve1968LS2]

Originally Posted by Hylton

These trannies are fine. The only thing I've been told by guys in the know is not to power shift them while the rear tires are spinning.

Yes.. it's the price we pay for a very smooth trans.

The death knel is if you do a first gear burnout and then, while the car is stationary, you shift to second. That little deal is VERY hard on the tranny.

I was told to just start in second if you HAVE to do this.

Second just can't take that hit..

It's different if the car is moving..

We road raced and autocrossed a 2010 a couple of weeks ago and the trans work flawlessly.

[Steve1968LS2]

Originally Posted by brandotron

I disagree.

I understand not having to engineer stock parts for people with FI, nitrous, etc in mind, but SLICKS? Come on now, there are countless horror stories on ls1tech about people blowing up their rear ends on sticky tires and STOCK POWER. There are also a few about DONUTS on street tires killing 10 bolts. The way I see it, durability involves the purposeful over engineering of a wear item. The fourth gen wasn't an economy commuter car - why would they design a rear end that could juuuuust barely handle 300-350hp on street tires?

That's because you don't hear about all the people that didn't break there rear ends. lol

Hey, they were the weak links in the chain, but again, it's not GMs job to make the car stand up to drag racing and certainly not doing donuts.. lol

It's the same reason they didn't come painted (and thus rusted).. because it saved GM a few bucks and let them give you Corvette performance at Camaro prices.

[brandotron]

Originally Posted by Steve1968LS2

That's because you don't hear about all the people that didn't break there rear ends. lol

Hey, they were the weak links in the chain, but again, it's not GMs job to make the car stand up to drag racing and certainly not doing donuts.. lol

It's the same reason they didn't come painted (and thus rusted).. because it saved GM a few bucks and let them give you Corvette performance at Camaro prices.

Haha, fair enough. Good writeup in your mag last issue, BTW...or was that two issues ago?

[CamaroSpike23]

Originally Posted by brandotron

Haha, perhaps 'tech was a bad example - enthusiasts are far more likely to blow the rear than your average joe nutsack.

That being said, age and mileage can be a factor, but I was in highschool (graduated '99) when the fourth gens were new and I heard about rear end problems then.

...I say "heard about" because I was still walking to school. With zero ladies. I was pretty metal.

in '99, 4th gens were already 6 years old lol. but I know what you're saying. but with those cars you were hearing about, how many were running slicks? power adders etc? the 10 bolt was a POS from the start. it was made to deal with the power the car made, but once you start dead hooking, they dont last.

Originally Posted by Steve1968LS2

That's because you don't hear about all the people that didn't break there rear ends. lol

Hey, they were the weak links in the chain, but again, it's not GMs job to make the car stand up to drag racing and certainly not doing donuts.. lol

It's the same reason they didn't come painted (and thus rusted).. because it saved GM a few bucks and let them give you Corvette performance at Camaro prices.

[Steve1968LS2]

Originally Posted by brandotron

Haha, fair enough. Good writeup in your mag last issue, BTW...or was that two issues ago?

The new issue just came out so it's two ago.. they all start to blend together at some point. Thanks though!

I have a 2010 in my garage right now.. it's mine to mod for four months. After spending some time behind the wheel I really like it. Good solid performer. I can't wait to start modding it.

And it did real well against other cars at the road track and autocross.