Click on image for the lowdown. 
====
| | |
8 members (Hotrod Lincoln, carbking, tclederman, Bill Hanlon, 49choptop, Guitplayer, John L., Otto Skorzeny),
125
guests, and
4
robots. | | Key: Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod | | | Forums66 Topics128,042 Posts1,055,501 Members48,424 | | 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: Mar 2008 Posts: 38 'Bolter | | 'Bolter Joined: Mar 2008 Posts: 38 | I need to learn about and understand the relationship between a transmission and how it works with an enclosed drive shaft. What was the stock transmission in a 1950 half ton? Will this transmission marry to a sbc motor? Basically, I want to keep the stock rear end in the truck, and the enclosed drive shaft, but I would like a new motor/tranny combination. Can anybody explain to me, what modern transmission will work with and enclose drive shaft? OR is there a conversion kit to get from the transmission to an enclosed drive shaft? Does this make sense? | | | | | Joined: Aug 2007 Posts: 1,859 Grumpy old guy playing with trucks, cars, and boats | | Grumpy old guy playing with trucks, cars, and boats Joined: Aug 2007 Posts: 1,859 | you have to keep the existing trans with the enclosed driveshaft. also, with an updated motor/trans, why not change to later model open driveline or swap to something made within the last 30 years.
without changing the rear, the motor change wouldnt make sense. If you just want higher road speeds, swap to a different ring and pinion from Patricks
The problems we face today can not be addressed at the same level of intelligence we were at when we created them - Albert Einstein Or with the same level of $ - Me
| | | | | Joined: Dec 2003 Posts: 2,953 'Bolter | | 'Bolter Joined: Dec 2003 Posts: 2,953 | I think most sane people would want to swap out the torque tube system. Its supposed to be bullet-proof but I for one am not a fan. As Scott says if you are going to put a SBC you may as well go whole hog and do it all. Another question. Why does everyone want a small block V8 in their AD trucks? I have a 235 and its fast enough for me and furthermore it sounds real nice too. | | | | | Joined: Mar 2004 Posts: 874 'Bolter | | 'Bolter Joined: Mar 2004 Posts: 874 | Yes, you can use the stock transmission with the sbc. Everybody will tell you to get rid of the torque tube, but there is nothing wrong with it and it will work fine if you're okay with the 4.11:1 gatio. | | | | | Joined: Sep 2001 Posts: 29,269 Bubba - Curmudgeon | | Bubba - Curmudgeon Joined: Sep 2001 Posts: 29,269 | Ditto on Steve's comment on the torque tube. If you want a higher-speed rear-end, the 3.55 ring/pinion from Patrick's (as posted by Scott) lowers your RPMs and allows easy cruising up to 65 mph. If you want safe, higher cruising-speeds, you'll need to consider a variety of other changes.
If you want to mate a different engine (from a 216/235/261) to the torque-tube transmission, wait to hear from someone who has actually done this. Maybe Steve has information on how to do this.
| | | | | Joined: Mar 2008 Posts: 38 'Bolter | | 'Bolter Joined: Mar 2008 Posts: 38 | Hey.... thanks.... now I can tell you the rest of the story. An acquaintance gave me the remains of a 1928 Chevy truck, and to make a long story short, it was worse than a basket case, but I worked on it for a couple of months last winter, and got it to the point where I will pursue it, but not stock.... money!!! So the 1950 frame IS an update for me as the original frame, well, let's not go there. I talked to a guy who put a 350/350 in his and he had to do a lot of mods to the firewall which left him very little leg room; not acceptable. I now am working with this 1950 frame that I bought to get me to modern brakes, steering etc. and simply, I don't need to go fast, I just need it to be respectable. I talked to some guys at Hot Rod Hardware that told me to consider a V6 that would fit the best. It is even shorter than a four banger. So now on to the questions. I could find an S10 rear end, or a camaro rear end, but would prefer to keep the existing enclosed shaft so that was my intent on asking the original question. This IS a four year project that got accelerated (I finished a previous project that went very well) and I have time to consider different options but wanted to ask a bunch and be informed. Thanks to all for your advice. Does anyone have any ideas for matching a transmission with a carbureted V6 that will install in the original enclosed drive shaft? So far, that has been my fest option. Also, I saw one tech tip where they have installed a modern drive shaft in rear pumpkin with a few mods. Has anyone done that and tell me about $$$$$$? Thanks again. | | | | | Joined: Mar 2004 Posts: 874 'Bolter | | 'Bolter Joined: Mar 2004 Posts: 874 | If you want to mate a different engine (from a 216/235/261) to the torque-tube transmission, wait to hear from someone who has actually done this. Maybe Steve has information on how to do this. The torque tube transmission, 3 speed or 4 speed will bolt to a '55-'67 V8 truck bellhousing. '60-'62 used a hydraulic clutch and you may not want mess with that. '68-'91 or so bell housings will also work, but the pilot hole is slightly larger. Novak sells a spacer for this. You will have a steering gear clearance issue with a V8 or a V6 in the 1950 frame. A '63 or later 250 or 292 straight six may be a better option for a more modern engine and will not interfere with the steering. They also use the same bellhousing as a V8. The V8 housing will not bolt to your stock crossmember. Ideally, you could change it out for a '54-'55 1st crossmember if you can find one. Or modify it yourself. | | |
| |