MT-82 Redline Lockouts

[Calif boss302]

I actually was just talking to McCleoud about this. The RXT design better tolerates the high rpm capabilities of the Boss. It's specific to how the organic material vs ceramic material is bonded/secured to the clutch discs, not the pressure plate design .They went as far as to tell me not to run the RST.

That was the same response I got from Mc Leod as well. The guy told me if you run up through the grears at or near redline go RXT. For lower RPM shifting RST would be fine. I wonder if McLeod just realizes the RXT will work well in both situations and for the extra premimum recommend it.

 

[pufferfish]

im going to chime in here. lockouts are not clutch related. you can tell me ten ways to sunday that it is the clutch, but the science doesn't support it. if the clutch doesn't disengage or drags, you will a) have a hard time pulling it out of gear and b)grind terribly going into gear. but, you can force the trans out of gear and into gear without using the clutch (its detrimental to the synchros, but is entirely possible. it can also be accomplished less detrimentally with rev matching.

lockout is from placing the shifter in the dead zone between gates and hitting a mechanically induced brick wall. this is human error that is unavoidable because humans cannot anticipate where the gate is at any point in the process because it is constantly moving. this is a function of the semi-remote shifter arrangement. it is further complicated by the fact that the gate spacing is too narrow. its like trying to hit a bullseye with a bow and arrow while driving by in the back of a pickup truck. i have beaten this horse to death, but just try the shifter support. it really does work. don't buy single fulcrum shifters (steeda, hurst, sr) as the shifter's geometry forces the gates to narrow even further. i perfer the throw of the factory shifter, but for shorter throws, the barton or the old mgw are great. and, i will throw this out there because its more important to me to fix the issue, if you don't want the blowfish shifter support, try the mgw race spec. it disconnects the shifter from the body, which is what is needed for this drivetrain to not cause lockouts.

 

[302BOB]

The devil's advocate just called and wants to know if there's any lockout issues with the new Shelby GT350's 8250 red line shifting?

 

[Champale]

Steve/pufferfish - Sooooo what do you say to someone who has the following mods - Blowfish bracket, old MGW, Whiteline bushing, clutch assist spring removed, Spec Stg 1 clutch and alloy flywheel, stainless steel clutch line and RBF600 fluid - and still gets the high rpm lockouts? The clutch has about 1k miles on it now, so it is just now getting broken in, and everything else was done 1 at a time leading up to the clutch/flywheel/SS line and fluid. I even got a longer shifter shaft from MGW and that has helped some, too.

The shifting is markedly better than it was before everything was done, but the high rpm lockout thing continues to frustrate me to no end. I am wondering if I waited too long to do the clutch upgrade and my synchros are shot. My next resort is a rebuilt MT82, either OE or Calimer/Rev Auto.

 

[drano38]

In for Steve/pufferfish reply too since I plan to order an RST clutch this evening for Cyber Monday.

I have the stock shifter and Blowfish bracket. Mine has always shifted pretty good (and never had a lockout), and the bracket makes it better. I normally shift slower than most (BMW school instructor a few years ago said give the system a chance to do its work). I do get a bit of grinding going into gear if I shift too fast. Always comes out of gear just fine (but I normally shift at 6500-7000 rpm).

 

[pufferfish]

sorry for the late response. i didn't get notification of any activity and decided to check in this morning.

there are a lot of things going on in these drivelines and to make matters worse, there are people controlling them. without the car in my shop i can only take stabs at it.

bad synchros will generally cause audible complaints. in most cases getting in and out of gear is absolutely possible and noisy. i have had rare occasions where synchros get partially engaged and actually mushroom over the teeth and close up the gap enough that you cannot get into gear no matter what. it just grinds. sychros go bad as a result of missed shifts and bad clutches...and age, but nobody can seem to get enough age out of these things to see a synchro fail naturally.

if it goes into gear, but grinds at higher rpm or under fast shifting and not low rpm and slow shifting, the synchro cones are shot. the cones are what attempts to match rpms between the snychro ring and synchro so they can engage. if it takes less rpm or slower shifting, the cones are worn and unable to get the rpms matched up in the time given. these often times will show their wear in inspection, but i had an instance where my 5th gear ground no matter what. rev auto took the trans apart and ronnie and i both inspected the 5th gear synchro, cone, fork and fork pads and saw no wear whatsoever. it went back together carefully and did the same thing. brought it back and replaced the cone that looked perfect and 5th gear was functional again. its weird, but the synchros and supporting parts are so incredibly sensitive in these MT82's.

lockouts are another issue all together. we need to be clear about the terminology here. "lockout", as i define it, is when you are trying to get into gear and it will not go into the gate. it doesn't make noise. then, after the rev's settle down, it goes into that gear just fine.

assuming that your definition matches mine, lets talk about lockout. why it happens and how to correct it. first, the shifter geometry makes the gate spacing narrower than a Tremec. single fulcrum short throw shifters make it worse. the other part of this is lead in to the gate. its the gate's funnel of sorts. this is controlled inside the transmission. i have seen first hand, the vast difference in lead in on the MT82 verses the TR6060 and its drastic. furthermore, the TR6060 has a detent ball path that the gates and throws operate in, so theres sort of a mechanical guide for the shifter to follow. the MT82 just has the shift rail tabs and slots so it requires more feel to properly engage. all this means that the driver must be more precise in placing shifts. if you can be precise, you have a better shot of high rpm and fast shifting, but until it becomes repeatable as well, there will always be missed shifts.

i have the ability to repeatably powershift my MT82 at 7800-8000 (my youtube video from earlier this year proves it). I have no special clutch (spec stage 1), no special shifter (stock), no special synchros (none available), no special internals (just a brass shift rail stop pin and factory plastic fork pads). i can do this because i have spent a lot of time becoming precise in my shifting and worked hard to be repeatable. i too, have occasaional lockout and grind synchros to dust from sloppy clutch pedal work. i know it was my fault when that happens. it gets exaggerated when on track because i have so much more to focus on than just my shifting. so, i slowed my shifting down on track because i am not capable of managing it all with total accuracy.

here's a story: customer calls with shifting issues even after buying an MGW shifter (non-race spec) and hopes the shifter support will cure it. i tell him it will. he buys it and installs it. he calls me and tells me it didn't work. he was fairly local, so i told him to come by and let me evaluate the situation. he brings it by and he tells me that when he goes to the drag strip, he is trying to "bang gears" and gets constant lockout and can't manage to get better than a 13.50. we go for a drive and evaluate. i take it easy to analyse and can't find anything binding, so i push it further and further until i was poswershifting his car with his shifter at 6800 (gt manifold) first through fourth. he was astounded. he had a long life as a manual driving drag racer, stepped away from it for several decades and bought this mustang to give himself something more to live for after his wife of 38 years died. he vowed to relearn how to shift this transmission and the last i heard, he slowed things down and clicked off a 12.80. i hope he has continued to improve as time passes.

in that case, the car had nothing to do with the problem. that doesn't mean the next time that happens, the car won't be. its just a lightbulb moment to hopefully give everyone cause to pause and evaluate if it really is the parts we throw our hard earned money at that fail us or its ourselves that fail us.

 

[Champale]

Hey Steve - thank you very much for that post!

I have both symptoms, unfortunately. Semi-frequent grinding on 7500rpm shifts and lockout. I have owned at least 9 manual transmission cars over the last 20 years and have driven another probably 50 manual cars and have never, ever had these issues with of them. Maybe my technique is all wrong, but on all of the other cars I always have been able to do very quick shifts at high rpms - with literally only a few misses or grinds in all of that driving.

With my first Boss (2012) all I did was a Steeda shifter and bracket and it very rarely gave me any grief. My 2013 LS has been pretty bad since day 1.

I think I need to just bite the bullet and get a rebuilt MT82.

 

[pufferfish]

if you successfully managed a steeda shifter before, its not a skill problem. but, you can't compare this car to any other. i have never seen a shifter with such narrow gates in any car i have had.

high rpm grinding is the synchro cone, but it has compromised the synchro teeth too. you may also have some other internal issues such as a bent fork or broken fork pad. switching out your box for a new one might be your best bet...unfortunately.

i believe the TR6060 swap is going to become popular soon (and maybe an option to consider for you). It utilizes off the shelf parts, is very robust, has wide gate pitch and gate funnels and with the updated carbon fiber blocking rings, high rpm shifting is no problem. oh, and you can buy tremec part numbers for any refurbishing needed instead of ford only, which end up costing 30-40% less. sure, gear ratios are not super ideal, but if you ignore 1st gear, the 2-4 is nearly identical to the 3-5 on the MT-82, which is where all of the track driving is and everything but stop and go traffic isn't of any consequence. drag racing would lose advantage, but could be easily made up for with rear gears.

 

[Tucson 302]

I am still on the stock clutch and trans and for almost three years haven't had any issues. However, this past weekend we were at a track that has a very fast straight and requires you to go from 5th to 3rd as you exit the straight. I couldn't get it into third most of the first few runs without max force and on occasion some grinding so I decided to go into 4th and downshift again at the next turn. I do have the Watson Racing solid motor mounts and the Barton shifter and two post bracket, but I'm thinking a Blowfish bracket may be in my near future. Yet I was still able to take first in my class in time trials beating out three Corvettes!

 

[k98dave]

Ok there have been clutch pressure plate issues, and the shifter itself could be better, but there are 3 other contributors, 1 the shifter mounting to the chassis with a soft bushing, 2 the soft mushy trans to cross member mount all the result of Fords attention to N.V.H. contribute to the "lock out" condition at high RPM. I have read on various posts and on other mustang sites where correcting the first two does make a difference. The 3rd issue being the clutch hyd line. The common theory being the line is soft and flexes. I agree with the info from Joe Heck racing on You Tube video (below) The line itself isn't the problem its the way the metal end fittings reduce the inside diameter buy better than 50% from one end of the fittings to the other reducing the flow of the fluid causing the slave cylinder to be starved and thus not allowing the Hyd throwout bearing to function completely. I have ordered aftermarket parts for all three of these areas. I haven't experienced the lock out because I haven't pushed the RPM's past 6500 or so but I think there is enough evidence to make these small and inexpensive mods now and hopefully avoid issues. Take a few to watch this if you haven't already. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m_5U1j-gXGc

 

[pufferfish]

that is absolutely plausable to be part of the clutch issue...but i have run the factory line since new and 8k shifts are no problem. i shift as fast as i please. i am not saying my experience should be everyone elses, but the fact is mine works. until someone can quantify the fluid flow requirement needed to actuate the clutch as fast as the human leg can do it and then back it into a formula to determine how big the line needs to be, its all heresay.

look, i get it. people want to find answers and its not easily quantified. factory clutch discs have exploded. clutch pedals have stuck to the floor. lockouts and grinding and torn up chinese built, german designed transmissions. its been mind blowing. its good to look at everything, but the average consumer can't measure fluid flow requirements or truely quantify the issue(s) and the manufacturers of aftermarket parts are salivating at this problem and creating "solutions". i understand i am one of those manufacturers, so take this however you'd like. but, if Joe Blow is telling me I need this line, he better come to the table with more than orifice sizes to convince me. i spent 3 years in hydraulic engineering and i assure you, orifices are not bad things. they are there for a reason. they are fixed metering of flow. that doesn't mean bad things. headers are fixed metering of flow and they are for VERY good things. you wouldn't put 2.5" primaries on a coyote because it would make less power than 1.88" do.

Hey, Im open to improvements because, as we all know, when you take a car past its intended potential, improvements are needed. i just need to be informed and that video did nothing for me other than make me question what reason ford had for those orifices they so obviously, intentionally included in the tube ends. maybe they are there to reduce the chance of cavitation? maybe they are there to slow the flow to avoid the clutch spring from recoiling and making the throwout bearing bump back out. maybe its a carryover part where flow was less needed in a 2005 mustang than is needed now and ford f-ed up by reusing an underengineered part. yeah, i just looked it up. the part is the same from 2005 to 2014! but, those are all just questions that beg for an answer. a real answer. not a simple observation of the existance of orifices.

 

[WinterSucks]

My shifting issues have been solved since going to urethane engine mounts, whiteline trans bushing insert, and an MGW. I have a feeling the urethane was all that was necessary, though. The mounts and insert keep the engine and trans from moving too much and causing the misalignment with the OEM shifter, at least by my reasoning. But I will still be installing the original Blowfish shifter mount, and I don't regret the MGW at all.

The stainless clutch line is a must with headers (or so I have read), so that upgrade seems harmless even if it does not fix the real issue. It could be that the crap OEM brake fluid is overheating in the line and causing air bubbles, too. I am sure that would have a negative impact on the slave cylinder throw.

 

[k98dave]

OK Pufferfish, the point I'm making is I will add all the items that have been developed by you and others as a result of the "lock out" issue. That includes your bracket, the rear trans mount, and yes this hyd line so I can avoid having issues down the road. Not sure if these were intended to act as a way to meter flow or just the way the fittings were made. You made the point of the gentleman who posted the video about the change in the fitting orifices size slowing down the velocity of the fluid which as you know will happen when area increases.
Its been 30 years since my fluids dynamics classes so maybe I missed something but seems like if the fitting was intended to act as a metering orifice they would only need one at the clutch end instead of one at each end opposing each other?

So i'll stick to my point that all of these things together could help avoid the problems and combined they don't even cost a fraction of a clutch job.

 

[pufferfish]

Its been 30 years since my fluids dynamics classes so maybe I missed something but seems like if the fitting was intended to act as a metering orifice they would only need one at the clutch end instead of one at each end opposing each other?

metering devices get used directly in front of pumps and actuators frequently to prevent cavitation. its not very common to meter at both ends of the line, though. that may have been as simple as commonality of the ends?

 

[k98dave]

"its not very common to meter at both ends of the line, though. that may have been as simple as commonality of the ends?"

Yes that's what I was thinking. More than likely they just specified the same fitting at each end for cost since the line being pre formed can't be swapped for installation. I'm sure the engineering guys had to figure out ways to keep the bean counters happy. I agree with what you mentioned about Ford just using existing parts that may have been fine in 2005 2009 cars but marginal in design for the later year application

I know Ford Racing has a hard line am I'm curious how that one is made. GT 500 guys seem think thats the way to go, along with removing the pedal assist spring. Whats your though on that little deal?

While we are on the subject I wished they had used a separate clutch fluid reservoir but no doubt cost issues again. That may be an aftermarket mod someone comes up with. I know several BMW racers that converted their clutches from using the brake fluid. Should be pretty simple to come up with or maybe something from the parts bin already would work.

 

[WinterSucks]

"its not very common to meter at both ends of the line, though. that may have been as simple as commonality of the ends?"

Yes that's what I was thinking. More than likely they just specified the same fitting at each end for cost since the line being pre formed can't be swapped for installation. I'm sure the engineering guys had to figure out ways to keep the bean counters happy. I agree with what you mentioned about Ford just using existing parts that may have been fine in 2005 2009 cars but marginal in design for the later year application

I know Ford Racing has a hard line am I'm curious how that one is made. GT 500 guys seem think thats the way to go, along with removing the pedal assist spring. Whats your though on that little deal?

While we are on the subject I wished they had used a separate clutch fluid reservoir but no doubt cost issues again. That may be an aftermarket mod someone comes up with. I know several BMW racers that converted their clutches from using the brake fluid. Should be pretty simple to come up with or maybe something from the parts bin already would work.

I can't find it, but I thought someone had posted how they added a separate clutch reservoir. it has been done, a guy I autocross with did it on his Boss.

 

[pufferfish]

i have never removed my helper spring, and i can't really identify the benefit or pitfall of it.

shelby makes a separate reservoir. installed one on the DG Racing car. pretty easy. one word of caution is to pull the booster vacuum check elbow out to release vacuum. if you don't and loosen the lower master cylinder nut, the vacuum can suck the gasket in.

 

[TMSBOSS]

Steve

I had lockout issues which were diminished with the MGW shifter and fixed with your bracket.

The spring I removed simply because I did not like the feel of the clutch pedal with it in. No change to clutch performance

I saw zero difference when adding the stainless line.

I added the Shelby reservoir to separate the two systems and to reduce the volume of fluid I have to change when flushing the brake fluid. I run castrol in the brakes and a cheaper fluid, had leftover, in the clutch.

 

[k98dave]

"I added the Shelby reservoir to separate the two systems and to reduce the volume of fluid I have to change when flushing the brake fluid."

Can you post a "how to this"? Is the shelby reservoir a GT500 part that's available or did you have to piece it together?

Thanks

 

[WinterSucks]

"I added the Shelby reservoir to separate the two systems and to reduce the volume of fluid I have to change when flushing the brake fluid."

Can you post a "how to this"? Is the shelby reservoir a GT500 part that's available or did you have to piece it together?

Thanks

Kit made by Shelby. I don't doubt you could piece it together for much less if you fab your own bracket from some sheet stock aluminum. AND I would prefer to replace the OEM brake reservoir with an automatic trans version instead of just plugging the nipple that used to feed the clutch. That seems very risky for the street and might be a tech inspection fail if they notice, right?

http://www.americanmuscle.com/shelby-isoclutch-reservoir-1014.html