Quaife 6 spd sequential box......

[Guest Ash]

 

 

After reading about all the auto-tranny blowups on the Yankie site, the thought of fitting an aftermarket Quaife 6 spd sequential box came to mind.

 

Good for 1000 HP they claim. But then they start talking about "dog engagement" and "straight-cut gears". Hmm... it all sounds mighty clunky and noisy to me. But at the back of the catalogue they present pictures of road-going demo cars with Quaife boxes fitted.

 

I wondered if ChrisW or anyone has had experience of these kinds of aftermarket boxes fitted to a road car. Are they really clunky and noisy, or wouldn't you know the difference?

 

Yours,

J

[Flipfinger]

One of my Cosworth-owning buddies put in a sequential box a few years ago, I'll have to ask him what make it was, but it worked like a dream and still does.  Slightly noisy to get it into first (push back twice on the shifter) but other than that it's fine.  His was a manual to start with though, that probably made a difference, what with having an auto clutch actually DESIGNED for a sequential manual shift in there...

 

My manual Supe makes more noise going from 1st to 2nd than his sequential shift does.......

[Alex]

Veilside also have a sequential shifter for the Supra...

 

www.veilsidejpn.com - put it through babelfish on altavista to read it!!

[Gareth Davies]

About how much would you expect a system to cost (excluding installation?), since the veilside one is expensive, but not a bad price if you were replacing the gearbox anyway. Would you be looking to increase the ratios to give a better top speed (240 mph anyone?), or just a better launch?

 

Trouble is they need rebuilds at stupid intervals. The sequential box in the Jun supra didn't even need a clutch the gearbox was that strong, needed rebuilding every 2500 miles though. Increases your running costs a little bit

[Syed Shah]

It had a JUN Holinger 6sp sequential 'box with a HKS Triple plate clutch according to JUN. That would be a gearbox I would like :biggrin:

[Guest Ash]

 

 

The Gearbox is about £6,000 plus VAT.

 

Quaife don't mention anything about needing regular servicing. I suppose if you were involved in some top-class race series (which is what they are really designed for) then you'd strip and re-build every race. Which you'd almost always have to do anyway in order to change ratios to suit different tracks.

 

They also make a wide range of gearboxes and uprated internals for quite a number of road-going cars. So I would think that they'd be manufactured with what ordinary owners would consider to be normal re-build intervals. It's a good point and something I will definitely ask them. The last thing I want is to have to re-build the thing twice a year!

 

A bellhousing would have to be manufactured to suit. Or maybe the stock bellhousing could be adapted in some way, I don't know. Plus, I would have to organise some kind of clutch and flywheel as mine is currently an auto. But having a clean slate will enable me to source the right components for the job, rather than have to rely on the likes of HKS. Who don't actually make the stuff anyway.

 

Yours,

J  

 

 

[Syed Shah]

Is it better than the JUN gearbox?

 

Is it tougher etc and would it be a worthwhile improvement over the Getrag 6sp?

[Guest Ash]

 

 

Syed, I cannot say. But CW may be able to fill us in on that.

 

The Getrag box I, personally, would never have. If I would not fit the sequential unit then I'd stick with the auto. This is because I simply don't like the manual MKIV.

 

Okay, there are those people who wouldn't have an auto to save their life, and I fully respect that. But having driven both, I simply do not like the feel of the Getrag box, nor do I like H-pattern boxes. Plus, I have deformed bones in my left foot due to a motorcycle crash and repeated pumping of a heavy clutch is not my forte.

 

The only manual boxes I have ever gotten used to are sequential boxes that have always been fitted to motorcycles, and I am a big motorcycle fan.

 

I always remember my Ducati 916 that had a quickshifter: which meant you could apply full-power up-changes. Gearchanges were made in the blink of an eye.

 

I am wondering if the same thing could be done to the MKIV.

 

If so, upshifts, would be virtually instantaneous. Far faster than any auto and the stock Getrag would feel agricultural by comparison.

 

Not only that, the Quaife unit offers the prospect of tailoring ratios to suit the car.

 

Yours,

J

 

[Flavio]

Ash,

 

Have you seen this thread on Supra Forums?

 

http://www.supraforums.com/supravb/showthread.php?s=&threadid=13358

 

It might be the soluition to your problems and not a bad price either! If there is anyone who abuses his autobox in a Supra it's Marko!

 

Flavio

 

http://albums.photopoint.com/j/View?u=1391042&a=13943948&p=55937533

 

[Gordon F]

I wouldn't have thought you would have too many problems fitting a flat change system to a sequential box on a MKIV. It's just a sensor fitted to the gearlever which cuts the ignition momentarily as a gear is disengaged and before the next one is engaged. You should be able to source one from the drag racers.

[Guest Ash]

 

 

Thanks, Nick, I had not seen the link. Problem is, you never know with these Americans... whether it's truthful information or just yet another disguised sales pitch.

 

Yours,

J

[Chris Wilson]

Quote: from Ash on 2:16 pm on Nov. 25, 2001[br]

 

After reading about all the auto-tranny blowups on the Yankie site, the thought of fitting an aftermarket Quaife 6 spd sequential box came to mind.

 

Good for 1000 HP they claim. But then they start talking about "dog engagement" and "straight-cut gears". Hmm... it all sounds mighty clunky and noisy to me. But at the back of the catalogue they present pictures of road-going demo cars with Quaife boxes fitted.

 

I wondered if ChrisW or anyone has had experience of these kinds of aftermarket boxes fitted to a road car. Are they really clunky and noisy, or wouldn't you know the difference?

 

Yours,

J

 

It's a dog box, I'm pretty sure (they do a six speed dog H pattern for the Skyline R33 and a six speed dog sequential for the R34 I believe). Almost certainly straight cu gears, too. Dog engagement means ANYTHING other than full blooded brutal race changes will be baulky and very noisy, and straight cut gears mean they will howl like a love sick wolf. Definitely NOT for road cars unless these two factors won't bug you. I'd say 99.9% of the list will NOT want one of these boxes, although I am putting their 6 speed H pattern dog box in my RX-7. However, it is only used for track days and getting to and fro them. You MUST drive a dog box straight cut car of similar weight to see if you could put up with one, apart from the noise the change is usually very heavy, if you don't "snatch" the next gear the dogs can fail to engage and then you are stuck in neutral. It would take someone very different to live with one in a road car.

 

I think the Hollinger box is a better bet. I doubt HKS make their own internals or case, like Trust they probably buy in. I thought they made their own clutches but have now been told they are re badged Tilton ones. Not that their is anything wrong with Tilton, when bought at Tilton prices

[Guest Ash]

 

 

Chris, could I ask why you think the Hollinger is a better bet?

 

And who are Hollinger?

 

Yours,

J

 

Still chuckling at the thought of all those Yanks paying 5x the price for Tilton clutches.

 

[Chris Wilson]

Quote: from Ash on 8:46 pm on Nov. 25, 2001[br]

 

Chris, could I ask why you think the Hollinger is a better bet?

 

As far as I know the box has helically cut gears and synchromesh.

 

If you think the stock MKIV Getrag box is heavy and clunky you won't like a dog box at all. They are fine in motorbikes, very nice in light single seaters, but put dog engagement on a heavy gear train like that needed to pass the torque of a MKIV, then the change gets progressively more agricultural.

 

And who are Hollinger?

 

Australian firm, make some expensive competion boxes known for their torque handling characteristics and their reliability. De rigeur for things like Bathurst. VERY expensive, change quality probably no better than stock Getrag either. Only Porsche seem to make really sweet changing boxes that handle mucho torque. The R33 stock Skyline box is a nice change, but handles the torque marginally and eats synchros.

 

Yours,

J

 

Still chuckling at the thought of all those Yanks paying 5x the price for Tilton clutches.

[Syed Shah]

Repeat post.

 

Why does this happen?

 

(Edited by Syed Shah at 9:06 pm on Nov. 25, 2001)

[Syed Shah]

The Hollinger gearbox is what was put on the JUN supra. It must be very strong to cope with the power output of that car, 1000bhp+. It was mated to a HKS triple plate clutch.

[Gareth Davies]

That Supraforums thread looks a bit, err questionable. Considering the competition want £5k plus for a similar setup how exactly can someone do it for

 

When I was looking at the Hollinger box a while back it was £20k+ for the box with none of the supporting components and rebuilds every 4500. But changing gear perfectly without having to use the clutch sounds like a dam fine box to me. Tiny bit rich for my blood though Now i'm no great fan of the auto, but it's not that much of a problem.

 

But a Quaife box for £6k sounds a bargin, guess it's about the same for the install though. To me it seems a shame not to do a gearbox conversion on an Aero, since it makes it ultra exclusive.

[Rich J]

Quote: from Gordon Flynn on 6:55 pm on Nov. 25, 2001[br]I wouldn't have thought you would have too many problems fitting a flat change system to a sequential box on a MKIV. It's just a sensor fitted to the gearlever which cuts the ignition momentarily as a gear is disengaged and before the next one is engaged. You should be able to source one from the drag racers.

 

The RLTC will also do it for you if you add the clutch switch, keeps the revs at a preset level while the clutch is in (you supposed to possition the switch to work at the clutch biting point.

[Guest Ash]

 

Quote: from Chris Wilson on 8:05 pm on Nov. 25, 2001[br

 

 

I'd say 99.9% of the list will NOT want one of these boxes, .............

 

 

It would take someone very different to live with one in a road car.

 

 

 

 

Cheers, Chris, you just convinced me. :biggrin:

 

Thanks for the info. I was doing some gear calculations earlier. I can get a 1st gear lower than the stock 5-speed, have no more than 2000 rpm drop between changes, and 6th gear levels out at circa 220mph at only 6750 rpm.

 

Sounds like heaven to me.

 

Yours,

J

[Doughie]

Ash

 

When you're doing 220mph in a Supra I'd like to be there to watch.

 

that is, if any of your very detailed theory ever does actually results in becoming real actual tangible results.

 

looking forward to the high speed run

 

cheers

 

(Edited by Doughie at 11:34 pm on Nov. 26, 2001)

[Chris Wilson]

Quote: from Ash on 6:42 pm on Nov. 26, 2001[br]

Quote: from Chris Wilson on 8:05 pm on Nov. 25, 2001[br

 

 

I'd say 99.9% of the list will NOT want one of these boxes, .............

 

 

It would take someone very different to live with one in a road car.

 

 

 

 

Cheers, Chris, you just convinced me. :biggrin:

 

Thanks for the info. I was doing some gear calculations earlier. I can get a 1st gear lower than the stock 5-speed, have no more than 2000 rpm drop between changes, and 6th gear levels out at circa 220mph at only 6750 rpm.

 

Sounds like heaven to me.

 

Yours,

J

 

Sounds like a job for an 8.2 litre big block Chevy to me Ash, have you ever been to see any historic GT racing?  The Can-Am cars of the late sixties and early seventies such as the Mc Larens with the really big engines should whet your appetite for serious grunt, they make the MKIV engines look like 1 litre Micra lumps

 

220 MPH is BIG torque territory, IMHO ;-)

[Adam W]

Spot on Chris - I've seen the Can-Am cars several times at historics.  I remember the Porsche 917/30's wheelspinning as it hit fifth gear up the main straight at goodwood, in fifth gear, in the dry, at about 150.  The best memory has to be leaning over the guardrail at the "staging area" where they line the cars up before they go on track to catch a glimpse of some driver or other, when the big block Mclaren about two feet away from me started up . . . . :o

[Alex]

Reading that JUN article on the JUN site they saide they spun the wheels in the first 5 gears! but that was on a salt flat....and that car *only* managed 249mph!!!

[Guest Ash]

Quote: from Chris Wilson on 11:58 pm on Nov. 26, 2001[br]

Quote: from Ash on 6:42 pm on Nov. 26, 2001[br]

Quote: from Chris Wilson on 8:05 pm on Nov. 25, 2001[br

 

 

I'd say 99.9% of the list will NOT want one of these boxes, .............

 

 

It would take someone very different to live with one in a road car.

 

 

 

 

Cheers, Chris, you just convinced me. :biggrin:

 

Thanks for the info. I was doing some gear calculations earlier. I can get a 1st gear lower than the stock 5-speed, have no more than 2000 rpm drop between changes, and 6th gear levels out at circa 220mph at only 6750 rpm.

 

Sounds like heaven to me.

 

Yours,

J

 

Sounds like a job for an 8.2 litre big block Chevy to me Ash, have you ever been to see any historic GT racing?  The Can-Am cars of the late sixties and early seventies such as the Mc Larens with the really big engines should whet your appetite for serious grunt, they make the MKIV engines look like 1 litre Micra lumps

 

220 MPH is BIG torque territory, IMHO ;-)

 

 

Yep, at the back of my mind has always been to slot in a 5.0 V8. But an 8.2? That would be wild. The idea is *very* tempting. But I really want to explore the supercharger route. I'm committed to that now, after having wasted all that time trying to design an uprated sequential turbo setup.

 

Well, perhaps "wasted" is the wrong word. I did learn a heck of a lot in researching the idea. But it simply boiled down to too many pipes in too small a space.  

 

Yours,

J

[Adam W]

When they started running sleeved blocks and huge strokes to get those enormous displacements, they ran into reliability issues very quickly.  I think the 8.2 was a McLaren qualifying engine, and then they ran a 7.7 for racing (but even they broke fairly regularly).

Why did they have such huge engines?

Because they were trying to keep up with Porsches highly reliable, enormously powerful, (relatively) fuel-efficient forced induction engines . . . . go figure!