t-case crapped again. NP 205???

[FrozenRedneck]

Boy i've had three trucks with 205's and never had a problem, and i'm by no means nice to em. I wanna do the swap on my 91 next, soon as it starts running right. One of, if not the best in my opinion, but what do i know

 

[THECACKLER]

Hey I'm not knockin' The BW's. The 1300 series really are decent for a chain drive alloy case. I think the main screw-ups with them are related to chain stretch from running low on ATF and then the Mallot Mechanics putting 50wt or worse in them to quiet them down. The pumps can't tolerate high viscosity and just twist off.
The NP205 has massive gears that sling lube and will outlast any chain driven oil pump case. It's the only case that is on the same par is an Atlas. It's all gear as well.
Personally I never found myself short of gear with an NP205. So I guess that means I've got torque.

 

[GRU]

well this certainly wouldnt be considered a bolt in swap. however the bolts are the only thing that actually does bolt right up! ive been ******* with it for a week now. i was under the impression the 1350 output yoke off the 1356 would interchange. nope. so i ordered one from jeffsbronco graveyard. i still need a 1330 large cap front yoke for it too. seeing as how i just scrapped the driveshaft that had the 1310 u-joint. its been laying around since 98. i just scrap it 2 months ago and now i need it! oh well... and yes the 1356 was just about bone dry. it was my fault.

 

[yotee]

well this certainly wouldnt be considered a bolt in swap. however the bolts are the only thing that actually does bolt right up! ive been ******* with it for a week now. i was under the impression the 1350 output yoke off the 1356 would interchange. nope. so i ordered one from jeffsbronco graveyard. i still need a 1330 large cap front yoke for it too. seeing as how i just scrapped the driveshaft that had the 1310 u-joint. its been laying around since 98. i just scrap it 2 months ago and now i need it! oh well... and yes the 1356 was just about bone dry. it was my fault.

here is a great write up with pics on getting a 205 bolted up to a zf5
http://www.ford-trucks.com/forums/942927-the-not-quite-bolt-in-np205.html

 

[sootman73]

what was the cause of the failures? you said the second was due to lack of lubrication was that what is was on the first one too?

NM i reread through the posts and figured it out.

 

[GRU]

damn. i wish i had that link a week ago. i didnt know anything about the clearance needed for the cap screws. i didnt have any trouble bolting it in though... hmmm...

 

[yotee]

damn. i wish i had that link a week ago. i didnt know anything about the clearance needed for the cap screws. i didnt have any trouble bolting it in though... hmmm...

i posted it a week ago, but must have been in a different thread.

 

[6.9poweredscout]

i'll take a gear driven case any day, lower gears or not. i've seen wayyyy too many chain driven cases split in half to want one. the stock scout's dana 20 is gear driven and tough, only once i twisted off and output shaft, but i was beating it harddddd. and the 205 in the 6.9 scout is big, strong and heavy, and with the torque of a diesel it's plenty low enough.

-Jon

 

[THECACKLER]

X2... Gears Rule. I've seen Cast Iron boxes run dry and still work. I mean completely bone dry, every bit of lube baked out from the heat, and they still got her home. And as far as the low range goes, I don't do any Technical Crawling, I just do the kind of stuff they were made for, Trails and Tricky Roads. 1.96:1 has always been low enough for me.

 

[GRU]

any cause for concern with that heavy t-case on the back of an aluminum trans?? should i make an auxiliary mount to support some of it?

 

[THECACKLER]

Most definitely.

 

[yotee]

Most definitely.

i would too, think about where it mounts now. that even scares me

 

[BigRigTech]

These were used on C6's for years, shouldn't be an issue.