E40d - AOD Transfer case
Thread Starter
|
New User
Joined: Oct 2010
Posts: 4
Likes: 0
E40d - AOD Transfer case
Help! I'm hosed!
The 302 in my 89 XLT Bronco blew out it's rear main, and decided to destroy itself on site. It's looking like its going to be cheaper to buy another Bronco than replace my engine. I found a smokin deal on one, I think. It's a 92 Custom 351W, E4OD, with a manual transfer case. The Transfer case is stuck in low range. You can shift it manually, but it's still in low range.
Can I just bolt the transfer case from my AOD transmission onto the E4OD? What does that entail? The Bronco is 150 miles from where I live. I just need to figure out how to get it here. No, I don't have a trailer. I'm kinda hoping that I can bolt on the transfer case I have, and limp it home.
Please help. I can't get to work until I figure this out.
I should probably mention that the 92 has a brand new AAMCO Transmission. THEY say that the problem is in ther transfer case, so they won't touch it.
I'm stranded and broke.
The 302 in my 89 XLT Bronco blew out it's rear main, and decided to destroy itself on site. It's looking like its going to be cheaper to buy another Bronco than replace my engine. I found a smokin deal on one, I think. It's a 92 Custom 351W, E4OD, with a manual transfer case. The Transfer case is stuck in low range. You can shift it manually, but it's still in low range.
Can I just bolt the transfer case from my AOD transmission onto the E4OD? What does that entail? The Bronco is 150 miles from where I live. I just need to figure out how to get it here. No, I don't have a trailer. I'm kinda hoping that I can bolt on the transfer case I have, and limp it home.
Please help. I can't get to work until I figure this out.
I should probably mention that the 92 has a brand new AAMCO Transmission. THEY say that the problem is in ther transfer case, so they won't touch it.
I'm stranded and broke.
Cargo Master
Joined: May 2004
Posts: 3,007
Likes: 5
If you're broke, I would suggest some other vehicle besides the Bronco. Maybe a city bus or bicycle.
It's a 4 hour drive with the bronco in 4L take the front driveshaft off? Turn the hubs off?
But seriously, you're not solving a problem by getting another problem, solve the problem you have.
Pull the engine in your 89 and repair it.
It's a 4 hour drive with the bronco in 4L take the front driveshaft off? Turn the hubs off?
But seriously, you're not solving a problem by getting another problem, solve the problem you have.
Pull the engine in your 89 and repair it.
Lead Driver
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 9,182
Likes: 12
From: Gateway to the West
NO, even if the t-case in the 89 is a Borg-Warner 1356 just like the 92, the output shaft on the 89 is too small to accept the output flange splines in the 92. The 89 has no flange. It has a u-joint yoke. You can't just swap the flanged unit for the yoked version. You MIGHT (and that's a huge might) be able to to swap the output shafts in the two t-cases but as was already mentioned, to drive in 4WD low will not only take forever, you will be cruising with the "good engine" well above its normal rpm's for hours just getting it home... why buy another truck just to abuse the engine in it to replace a truck that has an abused (to the point of death) engine in it? How the cost of buying a new engine is greater than the cost of buying a whole truck is really beyond my comprehension. If you are buying a whole truck for less than the cost of a new engine, you have to ask yourself what kind of condition the "new" truck is really in.
Senior User
Joined: Sep 2010
Posts: 124
Likes: 0
From: Central Illinois
explain how the tcase from behind the manual in a 90 f250 with a 351 bolted right behind my e4od in my 95 F250 with a powerstroke then, and is still going fine. Only thing i took from the powerstroke t case was the shift arm as the manual and autos use different lengths on manual t cases, and the front knuckle because the powerstrokes was alot beefier.
Lead Driver
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 9,182
Likes: 12
From: Gateway to the West
It has absolutely nothing to do with attaching it to the transmission. It has to do with the FACT that in 1990 Ford changed the output on the T-case to a flange rather than a yoke. So the problem is at the other end of the t-case. When it changed, the output shaft size got .020 diameter BIGGER. Of course you had no problem going from a 90 to a 95... the change happened IN 1990 so it worked. The T-case from an 89 would not have. The model years in question above are on either side of this change making the swap a moot point because swapping would require rebuilding the 1356 with the larger diameter output shaft... unless you wanted to strip the splines out of it the first time you romp on the accelerator.
Senior User
Joined: Sep 2010
Posts: 124
Likes: 0
From: Central Illinois
i apologize then, as i was not aware of that change. So its year specific then, as long as you use the right years your good. Whenever i crawled under 1 they all looked close enough, and i was surprised at the time when the swap worked so i just assumed wrong.
Trending Topics
Senior User
Joined: Aug 2009
Posts: 236
Likes: 1
who cares about the output on the Tcase, he needs to do some rear driveshaft mods anyway. the E4 is longer than an AOD.
Or open the 92 tcase and fix the shift forks.
take all the stuff from the 92 including the driveshaft and install it.
BTW the fixed yoke tcase is usually a 1345, not a 1356.
Or open the 92 tcase and fix the shift forks.
take all the stuff from the 92 including the driveshaft and install it.
BTW the fixed yoke tcase is usually a 1345, not a 1356.
FTE Stories
Ford Trucks for Ford Truck Enthusiasts
10 Things Every Truck Owner NEEDS (2026 Edition)
Michael S. Palmer
Rezvani's Latest Post-Apocalyptic Monster Is a Ford F-150 Raptor Underneath
Verdad Gallardo
Top 10 Most Expensive Ford Trucks Ever Sold on Bring a Trailer
Joe Kucinski
2027 Ford Super Duty Buyer's Guide (Every Model, Engine, & Package)
Brett Foote
Top 10 Ford Truck Tragedies
Joe Kucinski
AEV FXL Super Duty - the Super Duty Raptor Ford Doesn't Make
Brett Foote
Lobo Vs Lobo: Proof the F-150 Lobo Should Be Even Lower!
Michael S. Palmer
Ford's 2001 Explorer Sportsman Concept Looks For a New Home
Verdad Gallardo
10 Best Ford Truck Engines We Miss the Most!
Joe Kucinski
Lead Driver
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 9,182
Likes: 12
From: Gateway to the West
Who cares? Well, he will when he has the DS redone and the output shaft is the wrong size for the application. And his question was will the t-case. Which was ALWAYS 1356 in the Bronco... the 1345 was the cousin used in the Rangers.
Senior User
Joined: Aug 2009
Posts: 236
Likes: 1
1345's saw action in ALL the Fseries from 85/86 to 90/91
1345's are ALL fixed rear yoke.
Like i said he will have to do dshaft mods anyway. so read the answer and comprehend it. You're splitting hairs over the output shaft when the whole shootin match will be moved back, IE the front Dshaft will be longer and the rear will be shorter. no matter what he'll need to mod his rear dshaft, and use the front off the 92, OR fix the tcase from the 92, and use BOTH those shafts, which i also stated.
Posting Guru
Joined: Apr 2006
Posts: 1,274
Likes: 1
I have switched the flange from a newer T-case to the older style. Yes, it is .020" smaller. So it goes on a little loose. It worked fine for three months til I got my case fixed. It probubly makes more vibration. I am NOT recomending this for the long haul. But I think you will be fine to get it home. The other possibillity is to install the t-case and remove the rear driveshaft and just drive on the front wheels. (in 4HI)
One other possibillity is to crawl under the truck and make sure the linkage is OK.
As far as the shafts needing work. He didnt say he was going to move the E40D and engine to his 89'. if he is just going to drive the 92', he only needs to get it home and fix the t-case.
One other possibillity is to crawl under the truck and make sure the linkage is OK.
As far as the shafts needing work. He didnt say he was going to move the E40D and engine to his 89'. if he is just going to drive the 92', he only needs to get it home and fix the t-case.
Post Fiend
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 19,402
Likes: 38
From: Bonita Springs FL
This is wrong. My '86 Bronco used an NP208 case, and my '89 F-150 used a BW 1356 slip yoke case.
Lead Driver
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 9,182
Likes: 12
From: Gateway to the West
WRONG
1345's saw action in ALL the Fseries from 85/86 to 90/91
1345's are ALL fixed rear yoke.
Like i said he will have to do dshaft mods anyway. so read the answer and comprehend it. You're splitting hairs over the output shaft when the whole shootin match will be moved back, IE the front Dshaft will be longer and the rear will be shorter. no matter what he'll need to mod his rear dshaft, and use the front off the 92, OR fix the tcase from the 92, and use BOTH those shafts, which i also stated.
1345's saw action in ALL the Fseries from 85/86 to 90/91
1345's are ALL fixed rear yoke.
Like i said he will have to do dshaft mods anyway. so read the answer and comprehend it. You're splitting hairs over the output shaft when the whole shootin match will be moved back, IE the front Dshaft will be longer and the rear will be shorter. no matter what he'll need to mod his rear dshaft, and use the front off the 92, OR fix the tcase from the 92, and use BOTH those shafts, which i also stated.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
Armytruckchuck
1987 - 1996 F150 & Larger F-Series Trucks
5
Feb 20, 2016 10:05 AM
gustang818
1987 - 1996 F150 & Larger F-Series Trucks
4
Aug 25, 2006 06:55 PM
