Greetings,
Is It Feasible To Switch Over The Three Speed Manual Trans. Out Of My 63 223, To An Automatic? Any Particular Type Auto Trans, With Minimal Drive Line Alterations?
Thanks, John

 

John,
Feasible is a relative term and has a lot of flexion & leeway involved.

The issue IMHO, is finding a decent A/T that bolts to your 223 engine with a way to mount it in your 63 which uses side mounts on it's bellhousing. There is no transmission X member in a 63, or 57 thru 64 for that matter.
Automatic transmissions that will bolt in aren't the best, or even very good way, to get an A/T. If you do find an A/T that Might work, next assignment will be finding a Flywheel & torque converter that fits & works on both engine & transmission.

If I was faced with the problem I'd most likely adapt my 63 to hold a 300CID I-6, then put an AOD behind it. At least that way I'd get some gain and return from all the work, effort, expense & time of going through the exercise of changing it to begin with.

Of course this is just my opinion on this matter, others may disagree with me.

FBp

 

The Cruise-o-Matic/FMX trans are Quite reliable w/ the Bellhousings & Torque Coverters can be found in Wrecking Yards for the 223 I-6.
Plus in '64 the last of the 223's was Mated to the 1st of the C-4's in the Mid-size Fords.

 

I hate the manuel trans. In my quest for knowledge I was told that my 223 in my 1964 would not mate to any AOD trans. Someone mentioned a c-4, but if they were only available for 1 year, how many are likly out there? You can send you housing off for an upgrade to pop in a different T-4 or 5 trans I think. Still a manuel though.

 

The early A/Ts may have been reliable but they all are far from efficient, and far from reasonable weight. Some have power loss coefficients over -25%. If a 223 I-6 makes 120 HP & 200 lb ft torque, a FMX will eat about 30 HP & 50 lf/ft just to run. A C-O-M is not too far off those figures.

Conversely a C4, a C5, and an AOD in Drive gives up about 12%, an A4OD in OD Range gives up about 18%, & a C6 gives up about 20% coefficient of loss.

Also FoMoCo never made a 5 bolt pattern C4 A/T. All SB Bellhousings in 1964 were 5 bolt, so I don't think you'll find a C4 that bolts to a 223 I-6. Even if you ever did how would it fasten into a 57-64 F-Series chassis that requires mounts off the side of the bellhousing, plus has no rear Trans X Member to support a C4?

Again I'd suggest everyone consider a total Power train upgrade. Later I-6s have at least 2 more Main Bearings, make more power than early ones do run better and more efficiently plus they support a plethora of latter day A/Ts that will surely satisfy anybody's needs.

Newer A/Ts are sophisticated, more efficient, lighter, easier to come by easier to repair [if or when needed] plus easier to procure, and easier to get pieces~parts for.

Just my $.02 on this subject.

FBp

 

I have seen adapter kits that run from $145-$800 to mate different transmissions to various engines. Use google to run a search for "transmission adatper kit" and it pulls up a few sites they may be able to help with what you are trying to do.

 

Then explain Why my FoMoCo book states & NumberDummy has backed this up, that in '64 the 1st of the C-4's were mated w/ the Last of the 223 I-6's in the Mid-Size cars, as I stated previously.

Plus I've a C-4 mounted in my '58 Mercury M-100 truck & it has Trans supports that look as if it came out of the factory that way. So it is Possible to mount a C-4 w/o much trouble.

 

Good then send the guy the transmission you think he should have, or tell him where to get one on his own, why doncha?

He doesn't have a midsized car he has a truck, that's what F Series designates. Ford did NOT put C4 transmissions in 64 Ford F Series trucks. NOBODY has a book that says FoMoCo ever put C4s in 64 trucks, even Number Dummy won't make that stretch.

So your answer is not straight it's distorted or what ever but it's sure not straight as you boast in your pretty red warning across your signature space. Besides that it's incorrect by your own admission. You clearly say Midsized cars.

Your info won't help John remedy his problem getting a decent A/T in his TRUCK.

FBp

 

He's asking what trans can be used, I answered him.
He Did Not ask if it came Originally in a Truck or a Car, Just what could be used!
To bad you don't care for my responce, have a nice life.

 

You asked me in post #7 to explain why your book, & your reference person say your response is correct and I say it's not by citing a partial quote of what I stated, so I explained that. And you get an attitude? Grow up!

The member is asking about a truck application and you are citing Failrane~ Meteor References, plus including Bill in your error.

I see we are dealing with a person here who can't, or is unwilling to admit when you make skewed remarks which are essentially incorrect, or in simple terms wrong.

Don't flatter yourself by thinking I care about your responses. It's not about you. It's about providing useful, accurate, useable, information to folks here in this FTE forum.

It's not about you or your image here, inspite of all the gawdy trappings you display.

Don't worry about my life, as long as I have pompous arrogant, fools I can laugh at, I'll have a great life, THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

And with that we are done, and you remain incorrect, I might add.

FBp