"Dave G." wrote:
>
> Here's a real unqualified opinion,because I've never done this job,but it
> seems to me that it would be easier to put both engine and tranny in
> together.
> I hope you get the real answer to this question!
There's much more to be done by pulling the engine and transmission
together, than by pulling the transmission alone. Just consider the
following: To pull the trans requires removing trans cover, removing
the bolts retaining the slave cylinder to the clutch housing, blocking
the rear of the engine to height and removing the rear trans mounts, and
then removing the bolts to the driveshaft, and removing the bolts
retaining bellhousing to engine.
To remove the engine and trans combination requires disconnection and
plugging of fuel lines, removal of the rear trans mounts and driveshaft
connections, disconnection of the front engine mounts, removal of the
exhaust system from the engine, and the bonnet, unless one can maneuver
the engine/trans around the bonnet as it's removed. Removing the engine
and trans will also require a hoist.
So, the difference is, removing the transmission alone, with no hoist,
requires an hour or so of labor, while removing engine and transmission
requires a hoist, more items to be disconnected and four or five hours
of labor.
Seems obvious to me, having done it both ways, many times, over many
years. If I'm rebuilding a car from scratch, yeah, I'll insert an
engine/trans combination at once, but for ordinary repairs, it's a waste
of time to remove the engine and transmission as a unit, just for
trans/clutch repairs.
Cheers.
--
Michael D. Porter
Roswell, NM (yes, _that_ Roswell)
[mailto:mporter@zianet.com]
The gulf between content and substance continues to widen....
/// spitfires@autox.team.net mailing list
/// or try http://www.team.net/cgi-bin/majorcool
/// Archives at http://www.team.net/archive
|