ZF5 decisions. expert advice sought after.

[IDIoit]

good morning and happy veterans day.

i tried not to post another ZF5 question.

however after researching all day yesterday.
i have accomplished all of the hardware issues.
i am asking for expert advice as to which one to run with what....WHAT?!?!!?

i have 2 rigs, that i will be running a zf5 in.

1, 1963 ranchero, with a 97 7.3 DIY 4x4, D60's front and rear with 4.10 gears with an aprox weight of 4000 lbs

currently, this has a ZF5 with a pn of
1307-050-081 / F2TA-7003-SA
this one decoded as a F450 trans that i can pull the brake off of and install a transfer case

i have 2 transfer cases that i can bolt up to this.
A) 13-56-065-909
B) 13-56-039-907

is one of these transfers better than the other?
the only thing i see physically different is the type of driveline mounting, and selector hardware.

2) 1987 F350 w/ a 94 7.3 IDI with a ATS 093 4 wd also with 4.10's with a weight of 6300 lbs

this rig currently has a T-19.
the pn i have slated to install in this rig is:
1317050012 \ F7TA-7003-BA
TRANSFER # 4407-25 / F6TA-TA

i could not find the gear ratios on either of these.
so, if anyone could give me a hand, id greatly appreciate it!

ALSO, please give me your opinions on what manufacturer of clutches you guys are partial to.

i need to order some parts!

 

[79jasper]

Far as the 1356 Tcase. One is the normal Tcase, other should have the pto provision.
Or could be flanged out put vs slip yoke.

Sent from my SM-T537R4 using Tapatalk

 

[IDIoit]

both transfers in the first rig are slip yoke styles.
the transfer i intended to use for the 87, has a flange.
PTO im not worried about, thats minor on the list.
i should put the slip yoke style in the 87 to eliminate the cost of drive shaft replacement.

 

[dunk]

I'm not aware of different ratios (thought all gas=wide, all diesel=close), just S5-42 and S5-47... Being 420 ft/lbs vs 470 ft/lbs input torque rating. Very light duty transmissions, they are fragile with the aluminum case. All my ZF failures have been broken trans ears or cracked cases (aside from typical syncro and pocket bearing wear from high mileage). I think the soft aluminum flexes and the newer cases and tailhousings have more metal and more webbing.

In any event, should be stamped on the tag. Either 97 and maybe 96 was S5-47 so that second trans you got might be the stronger one.

 

[79jasper]

1995
I think they could be found with the different ratios for diesel, just rarer to find.

Sent from my SM-T537R4 using Tapatalk

 

[IDIoit]

these are all diesel trnsmission except for the 1356065909 transfer, thats bolted up to a trans with a 460

 

[The Warden]

I think they could be found with the different ratios for diesel, just rarer to find.

I don't know if this will help at all...I found this on ZF's website, although it looks like it's a scan from the 1994 Ford FSM. It mentions the wide-ratio S5-42 as being available on g@$ and diesel applications, and the close-ratio S5-42 being diesel only:

http://www.zf.com/media/media/docum...ments/usa_4/S5-42_47__47M_Service_manual_.pdf

I saved a pdf file that was posted on here previously, that has a ZF letterhead on the top and is a fresh file, but appeard to have exactly the same text as this file...I would upload it, but the file's too big and the site rejects it

 

[79jasper]

That's the way I recall hearing it.

Sent from my SM-T537R4 using Tapatalk

 

[IDIoit]

g@$

this made me chukle.

this computer wont let me DL that link, i will try again tomorrow at work.

 

[IDIoit]

since the 1307-050-081 / F2TA-7003-SA is the stronger trans, i will be dropping this into the 87. and using one of the other transfers i have with the slip yoke style.
hopefully the only thing i need is a clutch.

since the other ZF5 i have came with the 97 PSD, it makes sense to run that in the ranchero, where im going to have to do driveshafts reguardless.

anyone have a difference of opinion??

 

[kawamatt]

Second thread in the tech articles sections.

ZF5 Speed Info for the World

Link in the last post has all the pdf's from ZF.

 

[franklin2]

I bet these zf's are just like the T5's and other trannies. The close ratio and the wide ratio are the same trannies. There are no "bigger bearings" or anything else "heavy duty" in the higher rated trans. The only reason it's rated higher is because the 1st gear ratio number is lower(speed is higher). There is less torque multiplication inside the tranny, so they can rate the same tranny at a higher torque input. The wide ratio tranny has a deeper 1st gear so it's easier to break so they have to lower the rating.

 

[madpogue]

^^^^^ Um, no. The ZF-S5-47 superseded the ZF-S5-42. The gasser S5-47, rated for 470 ft-lb, is the same ratio set as the wide-ratio S5-42, rated for 420 ft-lb. The diesel S5-47, also rated at 470 ft-lb, is BETWEEN the close-ratio and wide-ratio S5-42s.

I'm sure that _within_ each series (S42 or S47), the internals are the same among the different ratio ranges, except for the number of gear teeth. But the S5-42 and S5-47 were not built / issued at the same time, and were not given different ratings simply as a result of their ratio ranges.

It's also pretty widely known that the respective 420 and 470 ft-lb ratings are just that -- ratings -- and are very conservative. There are pullers out ther putting, ermm, measurably more torque than those ratings into these trannies.

 

[The Warden]

It's also pretty widely known that the respective 420 and 470 ft-lb ratings are just that -- ratings -- and are very conservative. There are pullers out ther putting, ermm, measurably more torque than those ratings into these trannies.

Just curious, do you know how much torque an S5-42's seen and been demonstrated to accept long-term, beyond the factory ratings?

 

[madpogue]

Just curious, do you know how much torque an S5-42's seen and been demonstrated to accept long-term, beyond the factory ratings?

Not in particular. But I'll bet if you researched any forums / sections / threads related to pulling, you'd find something.