Click on image for the lowdown. 
====
| | |
7 members (frogfarmer, Hotrod Lincoln, 52Carl, KEVINSKI, Cletus1950, 1955 1 Series, fonz8261),
118
guests, and
2
robots. | | Key: Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod | | | Forums66 Topics128,177 Posts1,057,060 Members48,460 | | Most Online14,466 Apr 26th, 2026 | | AD Chevy Trucks Over 6,000 pictures Brad Allen has an awesome collection of Chevrolet factory pictures that he has set up from film strips. Check them out!
Lots of work on Brad's part ... pure enjoyment (and references) for you!
| | THANKS!
For helping keep this great
old truck web site
on the Internet for over 30 years! and not clogged down with Ads! Again, thanks! | | | | Joined: Jul 2005 Posts: 595 Shop Shark | | Shop Shark Joined: Jul 2005 Posts: 595 | guys' drug home a 83' S-10 long bed today for $30 bucks. the reason other than the price was for the t-5 trans and the wheelbase being correct for my 52' panel(future project) the t-5 is for my 54' burb i just drug home. the problem of bolt pattern choice has come down to using a donor 77' nova for the rearend and the disc rotors for the front. i'm keeping the 235 and using the t-5 and just guessing the nova rear is 3:08 ratio is this going to be to high of a ratio for the t-5?anyone who has done the t-5 swap chime in and yea or ney the install of the nova rear.i do realize tire diameter will affect the final ratio and havn't gotten that far yet. just don't want to waste the time using the wrong rearend. thanks. FEEDBACK PLEASE.  | | | | | Joined: Feb 2002 Posts: 12,029 Cruising in the Passing Lane | | Cruising in the Passing Lane Joined: Feb 2002 Posts: 12,029 | I wouldn't use a 3.08 [if it is, don't guess, check it!] behind a 235 with any trans, too high for the low gears, never mind OD
Bill | | | | | Joined: Oct 2004 Posts: 348 Shop Shark | | Shop Shark Joined: Oct 2004 Posts: 348 | most likely it is too high unless you are running 13 inch tires | | | | | Joined: Jul 2005 Posts: 595 Shop Shark | | Shop Shark Joined: Jul 2005 Posts: 595 | what ratio with 235/60/15" tires would be "acceptable"? 3:31+ feedback please! | | | | | Joined: Oct 2003 Posts: 5,152 Cruising in the Passing Lane | | Cruising in the Passing Lane Joined: Oct 2003 Posts: 5,152 | I'm not sure I'd jump to the conclusion that your 3.08 gears won't work out okay. I have 3.08 gears in my '55 1st Suburban and while it doesn't pull a loaded trailer very well, running around empty its fine.
I have an SM420, not a T-5, but if you don't pull a trailer and only use 5th on the highway I suspect you'll do fine.
If you do pull a trailer the T-5 is the wrong transmission anyway.
One of my other vehicles has 3.08 gears and an OD that drops the ratio to about 2 to 1. That OD gear isn't much good around town, but on the highway I'm loafing along getting 26 MPG from a 3000+ pound car that smokes the tires at will. Of course it won't pull a trailer either...
1955 1st GMC Suburban | 1954 GMC 250 trailer puller project | 1954 GMC 250 Hydra-Matic | 1954 Chevy 3100 . 1947 Chevy COE | and more... It's true. I really don't do anything but browse the Internet looking for trouble... | | | | | Joined: Jan 2000 Posts: 2,074 'Bolter | | 'Bolter Joined: Jan 2000 Posts: 2,074 | I'm also running the 3:08 rear in my 46 pickup with the T-5 and while I'd rather have a 3:50, this works just fine in my light weight pickup.
Prior to the T-5 trans I was running the Saginaw 4 speed so the 3:08 was fine. If I had a better ratio I'd change, but it's together and I like it. | | | | | Joined: Nov 2003 Posts: 70 New Guy | | New Guy Joined: Nov 2003 Posts: 70 | It depends on which t5 you've got. They didn't all have the same gears. Get the numbers from the tag on the case and go to the Inliners website to find out which one you have. The t5 with the .86 overdrive might work fine with a 3.08 rearend. | | | | | Joined: Jul 2005 Posts: 2,031 Shop Shark | | Shop Shark Joined: Jul 2005 Posts: 2,031 | 216 - 302 motor it does not matter the ratios are below line up the columns to all 5 gears.
florida as well as kansas are better suited for a 3.08
CHEVROLET T-5 Borg Warner Transmission Ratios: 1st: 2.95 2nd: 1.94 3rd: 1.34 4th: 1 5th: 0.74 Tire Diameter 1: 28.5 inches Rear Gear Ratio 1: 3.08:1 MPH RPM 1st 2nd 3rd 4th 5th 6th 1000 9 14 20 26 36 0 1500 13 20 30 40 54 0 2000 18 27 39 53 71 0 2500 22 34 49 66 89 0 3000 27 41 59 79 107 0 3500 31 48 69 92 125 0 4000 36 54 79 106 143 0 4500 40 61 89 119 161 0 5000 45 68 99 132 179 0 5500 49 75 108 145 196 0 6000 54 82 118 159 214 0 6500 58 89 128 172 232 0 7000 63 95 138 185 250 0 7500 67 102 148 198 268 0 8000 72 109 158 211 286 0
Tire Diameter 2: 28.5 inches Rear Gear Ratio 2: 3.43:1 MPH RPM 1st 2nd 3rd 4th 5th 6th 1000 8 12 18 24 32 0 1500 12 18 27 36 48 0 2000 16 24 35 47 64 0 2500 20 31 44 59 80 0 3000 24 37 53 71 96 0 3500 28 43 62 83 112 0 4000 32 49 71 95 128 0 4500 36 55 80 107 144 0 5000 40 61 89 119 160 0 5500 44 67 97 131 176 0 6000 48 73 106 142 192 0 6500 52 80 115 154 208 0 7000 56 86 124 166 224 0 7500 60 92 133 178 241 0 8000 64 98 142 190 257 0
CHEVROLET T-5 Borg Warner Transmission Ratios: 1st: 2.95 2nd: 1.94 3rd: 1.34 4th: 1 5th: 0.74 Tire Diameter 1: 28.5 inches Rear Gear Ratio 1: 3.73:1 MPH RPM 1st 2nd 3rd 4th 5th 6th 1000 7 11 16 22 29 0 1500 11 17 24 33 44 0 2000 15 22 33 44 59 0 2500 18 28 41 55 74 0 3000 22 34 49 65 88 0 3500 26 39 57 76 103 0 4000 30 45 65 87 118 0 4500 33 51 73 98 133 0 5000 37 56 81 109 147 0 5500 41 62 90 120 162 0 6000 44 67 98 131 177 0 6500 48 73 106 142 192 0 7000 52 79 114 153 206 0 7500 55 84 122 164 221 0 8000 59 90 130 175 236 0
Tire Diameter 2: 28.5 inches Rear Gear Ratio 2: 4.11:1 MPH RPM 1st 2nd 3rd 4th 5th 6th 1000 7 10 15 20 27 0 1500 10 15 22 30 40 0 2000 13 20 30 40 54 0 2500 17 26 37 50 67 0 3000 20 31 44 59 80 0 3500 23 36 52 69 94 0 4000 27 41 59 79 107 0 4500 30 46 67 89 120 0 5000 34 51 74 99 134 0 5500 37 56 81 109 147 0 6000 40 61 89 119 161 0 6500 44 66 96 129 174 0 7000 47 71 103 139 187 0 7500 50 77 111 149 201 0 8000 54 82 118 158 214 0
Jim & Caroline The highway is for gamblers, better use your good sense." Gooday-that's my 1¢ answer due to the lousy economy ~ cause I ain't got - no . mo . doe Every Shaver | Now Can Snore | Six More Minutes | Than Before ... | Half A Pound for Half a Dollar | Spread On Thin | Above the Collar || BURMA-SHAVE
| | | | | Joined: Oct 2005 Posts: 1,317 Shop Shark | | Shop Shark Joined: Oct 2005 Posts: 1,317 | I tried the 3.08 in my 54, 1956 235, single Holley/Weber, w/Fentons with a .72 T5 and a 28.5" tall tire. It was great around town as a 4 speed but you had to be running 65-70 to get it into the torque curve and it was very flat....no pickup and the engine labored. I went with a 88 Camaro with a 3.42 and built my 1960 dual Carter/Weber, Fentons, engine up for low end grunt.
Around town you can use 1-4 and drop down to 35-40 in 4th.....slide into 5th at 50-55 and you're good to go. Don't have any real lugging.... down to 45 mph in 5th. No downshift necessary to run back up. She's happiest at 65-70 at 1900-2000 rpm's in 5th. I'm working on getting my fuel mileage up to 21+ and have no doubt that I can better that with a 65 mph cruise.
With the 3.42 setup at 65 mph cruise, she's just purring along....plenty of throttle left up to 80 but up there the wind noise and aero package (brick) make for some white knuckle driving....but it's there!!!! All under 3000 rpms.
I considered popping in a .86 T5 but with the 4.03 1st gear you'd be wound up pretty tight at 10-15 mph. I see no need to stress a 4 main engine that by design, was set up for low end torque. Cutting down tire height gives you about 100 rpms per increment and the stock 235 works well at 1600-2300 rpms.
I just couldn't see any sense in having an OD transmission that wouldn't give you a chance to cruise in 5th. IMHO I would recommend a 3.42 as the lowest number (tallest) ratio....a 3.55 or 3.73 if you live in an area with long hills or plan on pulling a load. Hope this helps!
Dave | | | | | Joined: Jul 2005 Posts: 595 Shop Shark | | Shop Shark Joined: Jul 2005 Posts: 595 | thanks guys! i have to pull the trans and see what od. ratio is the truck is a 83' so according to the t-5 id chart(without checking tag) it's supposed to be a .86 5th gear. just want to drive this thing at least to one show this summer. GITTER' DONE! | | | | | Joined: Oct 2005 Posts: 1,317 Shop Shark | | Shop Shark Joined: Oct 2005 Posts: 1,317 | You've really got to check the tag...the numbers stamped in the case are not going to tell you the OD ratio. If the original S10 truck was a 4 cylinder you can pretty much bet it was a .86...if it was a 2.8 or 4.3 V6 I'd bet a .72. A quick way of determining the ratio on the S10 NWC transmission is with the transmission in 5th gear, mark both the input (front) and output (rear) at 12:00. Turn the output shaft (rear) 1 full turn (360 degrees).....and watch the front (input) shaft......if it turns over less than 3/4 (270 degrees) of a turn it's a .72....if it turns more than 270 degrees...it's a .86. This should help you ID your T5 if you don't have a tag. I've been running some numbers...if it does turn out to be a .86 and you're running a 28" tall tire it might just be fine with the 3.08. The key is to remember that the stock 235 makes good power between 1700-2400 rpms and that's where you want to keep it. I use this calculator: http://csgnetwork.com/multirpmcalc.html I use the bottom calculator as it is more accurate. I hope this helps. Dave | | | | | Joined: Feb 2000 Posts: 364 Shop Shark | | Shop Shark Joined: Feb 2000 Posts: 364 | I'm using a Nova rear in my '42 1/2PU with a T-5/235., The 3.08 was tough...couldn't get up a steep driveway w/o smelling the clutch and forget about 5th gear!. I switched to 3.55 rear and am pretty happy, but 1st is rather low. If I was going to do it again I'd probably go with a 3.31 or 3.42. By the way, I converted the the 5 lug set-up to 6 lug so I could mount my artillery wheels. Good luck. | | | | | Joined: Jul 2005 Posts: 595 Shop Shark | | Shop Shark Joined: Jul 2005 Posts: 595 | well i'm going to put the nova rear in and if it is too tall geared i can always switch it with shorter geared rear, i have access to a few. main reason for the nova is i prefer to "use up" the donor car or they end up getting hulked. i can always use the 3:08 rear (if it doesn't work out) in a diferent truck with a automatic trans. | | | | | Joined: Feb 2001 Posts: 4,095 'Bolter | | 'Bolter Joined: Feb 2001 Posts: 4,095 | i have a 54/..235 with 2.73 nova rear and 215/75/15 tires and i am satisfied. also have dual carbs and fenton headers. i live in realitivly flat country. ron
Ron, The Computer Greek I love therefore I am.1954 3100 Chevy truckIn the Gallery 2017 Buick Encore See more pix1960 MGA Roadster Sold 7/18/2017
| | | | | Joined: Aug 2006 Posts: 37 Wrench Fetcher | | Wrench Fetcher Joined: Aug 2006 Posts: 37 | I am planning to use a T5 behind a .030 over 292. The rear end I will use is from a 68 GMC and I think the ratio is around a 3.22. This is going into my '53 1/2 ton. I would like to find a 3.07 because the 292 is such a brute that I think it will handle the over drive. With the price of gasoline I am trying to get a few more mpg. Don
"Sometimes my luck is so bad that if I bought a pumkin farm, halloween would probobly be outlawed."
| | | | | Joined: Apr 2005 Posts: 275 Shop Shark | | Shop Shark Joined: Apr 2005 Posts: 275 | Don, from 3.22 to 3.08 is probably only a 100 RPM change at 60 MPH. Run the numbers on one of these online gear calculators. With truck tires you're gonna be pretty high already. In my car I have a trans. high gear of 0.73 & a 3.08 axle. My 292 motor pulls this quite well, but another consideration is low gear for take-off pull. My trans. has a 3.09 1st gear. It starts off OK but I have a 3.36 axle gear I want to try someday. I suspect the low gear multiplication factor will outweigh the small top gear change. In O.D. my tach reads 1500 to 1600 keeping up with normal traffic on a 55 MPH highway now. In direct gear (1:1) it reads 2100 to 2200. I have no speedo so this is the best example I have. Try what you have already, you're gonna love that 292 pulling power. Doug | | | | | Joined: Aug 2006 Posts: 37 Wrench Fetcher | | Wrench Fetcher Joined: Aug 2006 Posts: 37 | Doug I had that 292 (stock) in a full size '76 Blazer mud racer back in the early '90s and loved it. I could run in high range on the transfer case and never run out of power where most others had to use low range so that they wouldn't run out of power. I plan to make the swap on my '53 this winter. Don
"Sometimes my luck is so bad that if I bought a pumkin farm, halloween would probobly be outlawed."
| | |
| |