PDA

View Full Version : trans ID #FF24021



USAJon
19-03-2006, 10:41 PM
anyone know info on this trans...it's 5 speed in my 1981 trubo diesel caddy..and I am wondering about the number..thank's

Morninglight
20-03-2006, 07:16 AM
That is the illusive FF gearbox from a Mk1 GTD



GKB Typ Art Bauzeit 1. Gang 2. Gang 3. Gang 4. Gang 5. Gang Achse
FF 5-Gang 08/80 - 02/84 3,455 1,944 1,286 0,909 0,711 3,895

The tallest gears you can find in a 020 box (4T is close too)

USAJon
20-03-2006, 12:59 PM
dude you the man! thank you very much...I found a place that sells 6 speeds...is that possible?

Iowa Caddy
20-03-2006, 06:03 PM
...info on this trans [FF24021]...I am wondering about the numbers...The transaxle code FF24021 indicates FF gearsets, assembled Feb 24, 1981. As originally assembled, the gearing for this "wide-ratio" transaxle was as given by Morninglight, although "early" FF's (pre-Aug 1980) had shorter 4th & 5th ratios, the same as code FO -- and the ratios in your 'box may be different if it has been rebuilt.


That is the illusive FF gearbox from a Mk1 GTD...The tallest gears you can find in a 020 box (4T is close too)...I have to disagree slightly with the ever-helpful and knowledgable Morninglight. The FF is not quite so "illusive" (at least in the US). It was a common 5-speed (in the US) from 1979-1983, as it was one of the "standard" 5-speed's for both petrol/gas and diesels (along with the FN), while relatively few FO's were installed. The close-ratio 2H/FK was only in the '83-'84 GTi, some 'Roccos/Cabbys -- and possibly the '84 Jetta GLI?

edit: changed status of FN from "relatively few" to "common". Thanks Garry. :td ;)

Also, the 4T (as well as ACL, ACN, AON, and ASF) is taller than the FF -- especially in 1st and 2nd gear, but also slightly taller in 5th as well. The ATH, CHD and DFP are taller in all gears, although again, only slightly taller in 5th.

The format for Morninglight's info doesn't load properly in my browser. Here's the same info (plus extra) in different format -- maybe(?) it will display better:

"Late" FF ratios______1st________2nd_________3rd________4th_ ________5th_
Individual Ratio - - - 3.455 - - - - 1.944 - - - - 1.286 - - - - 0.909 - - - - 0.711
RPM drop @ upshift. . . . . . 44% . . . . . . 34% . . . . . . 29% . . . . . 22%

(Final drive ratio is 3.895:1)

vwabbitman
20-03-2006, 07:39 PM
a little off topic but what does the ratio mean. is it 3.985 turns of the gear that drives the final drive to 1 turn of the wheel or what. final drive is the differential right. also i have a fn tranny and would like a little more speed at a lower rpm but dont want to sacrafic power so what ratios should i look for. if thats at all possible.

Iowa Caddy
20-03-2006, 09:06 PM
...what does the ratio mean. Is it 3.985 turns of the gear that drives the final drive to 1 turn of the wheel?Yup, you got it. :td

...also i have a fn tranny and would like a little more speed at a lower rpm but dont want to sacrifice power...Nice try, but...sorry -- TANSTAAFL. (There Ain't No Such Thing As A Free Lunch) ;) It's just like up-shifting from 4th to 5th -- lower RPM but less "power". (It's more correct to think in terms of torque rather than [horse]power.) Whether via up-shifting or via swapping to a 'box with different final drive and/or individual gear ratios, to reduce engine RPM versus vehicle speed will reduce torque at wheels by the same percentage at that RPM. Under normal conditions, torque at wheels at the same vehicle speed will usually be reduced even more because, in addition to the reduced torque multiplication of the new gearing, the engine will also be putting out less torque at the new reduced RPM (at the same vehicle speed).

Morninglight
20-03-2006, 09:41 PM
I have to disagree slightly with the ever-helpful and knowledgable Morninglight. The FF is not quite so "illusive" (at least in the US). It was by far the most common 5-speed (in the US) from 1979-1984, as it was the "standard" 5-speed for both petrol/gas and diesels, with relatively few FO/FN installed. The close-ratio 2H/FK was only in the '83-'84 GTi, some 'Roccos/Cabbys, and possibly the Jetta GLI.

Also, the 4T (as well as ACL, ACN, AON, and ASF) is taller than the FF -- especially in 1st and 2nd gear, but also slightly taller in 5th as well.

The format for Morninglight's info doesn't load properly in my browser. Here's the same info (plus extra) in different format -- maybe(?) it will display better:


You have quit some knowlegde on demand yourself ;)

The more common boxes are the 2H/4S/4T overhere... Overhere the FF is 2nd hand much pricier than the 4T for some strange reason.

Darth Garry
20-03-2006, 10:50 PM
It's kinda funny, the FN being rare and all, I have had them in 3 cars, but I find the ratios being perfect for my driving habits and economy minded ways.

Garry

Iowa Caddy
21-03-2006, 01:28 AM
It's kinda funny, the FN being rare and all, I have had them in 3 cars...Hey! I didn't say "rare" -- I said "relatively few". :D But you've made me havta' eat my words, Garry. :td After thinking about it a little, I realized that since most of my time has been spent with 'Rocs, I'm still thinking in terms of them -- which, of course, were made in Germany. Just did a little research and it appears that in US built vehicles, the FN is probably as common as the FF -- maybe/probably even more common. (I've edited my earlier post to reflect that.) It has the same ratios as the "late" FF's, though. The 7A seems to have replaced them both for '84 production. Same ratios, except 3.94 final drive instead of 3.89, and has a finer-toothed 5th gear -- still 0.71:1.
...but I find the ratios being perfect for my driving habits and economy minded ways.And for the progressively closer spacing as ya' go up through the gears -- as opposed to the A2 'boxes with spacings all over the place. But I prefer my custom-ratio 'boxes -- at least for my gassers. My favorite keeps the same total reduction (and thus low revs) in top cog, but the 3.67 final drive pushes the lower gears "up" a bit to allow squeezing the gears closer together while still retaining a progressively closer spacing. I especially like loosing the huge 1st-2nd jump (44% rpm drop @ upshift) of the "wide-ratio" boxes and also getting a slightly closer 2-3 shift -- while still keeping the same low-rev top cog. :thumbs_up

edit: corrected numbers.

Darth Garry
21-03-2006, 12:09 PM
Do you still drive around without using your clutch?

Garry

mortskeg
22-03-2006, 08:41 AM
...as opposed to the A2 'boxes with spacings all over the place. You said it. The ACH is a big offender here. I didn't notice it much with the 1.5 gas, but with the 1.6d the 3-4 is super close compaired to the 4-5 flying leap. :)

USAJon
22-03-2006, 07:28 PM
ok how about this trans.(4K16123) It came with my storck diesel 1980 vw caddy. it was in the pick up bed..as if a previous owner was going to instal...my 1980 vw caddy has a 4sp. stocK? I think

mortskeg
22-03-2006, 08:09 PM
RogerB has it listed on his website-
http://www.4crawler.com/Diesel/VW_020_transmission.shtml

Though he does have the qualifier- "Factory codes marked with * may not have been sold in the US, but may appear on imported gearbox cores."
Looks like yours was man'd Dec 16, 1983. According to Roger's chart, it is a close ratio gearbox, probably not the most desireable if you want to do alot of highway cruising. However, it could have been rebuilt with different gearing, so the only way to know for sure is to check it by spinning around the drive flanges or the mainshaft and counting the revs on both to determine what gearing you have. Or open up the transmission, but IMHO I'd go with just turning and counting. Actually, even if you do alot of highway cruising, it wouldn't be too bad of a trans to do a 5th gear swap on, probably with a .75 fifth vs the .71.

Hope this helps. Keep us posted.

Iowa Caddy
23-03-2006, 12:08 AM
USAJon -- looks like you're not too upset with the near high-jacking of your thread? :td Very superficially, the "wide-ratio" boxes like the FF add an overdrive-like gear to the top of GC 4-speed gearing, while the close-ratios (like your 4K) push 5 "closer" gears into the same "gearing space" (low-to-high gear) of the 4-speed. Make sense? There can be/are additional not-so-subtle differences such as final drive ratio, which gear changes are wide/close, how low is 1st gear, how high is top cog, etc. BTW, your 4K is slightly more valuable than other early close-ratio 'boxes. It's the only (US) close ratio with both the lower 3.94 final drive and the later mounting points necessary to install in an A2/A3 -- sometimes desirable for tight AutoX courses. More on a 0.75/0.71 swap into a 4K later in this post -- and on your 6-speed question near the end. (A bribe to help you slog through this long and boring missive. ;) )

Do you still drive around without using your clutch?Occasionally -- to keep my skill set up. ;) But usually only in my work Caddy. It has a -- shall we say -- kinda' loose 'box. :D Did you ever work up the courage to try/master it?


Iowa: "...And for the progressively closer spacing as ya' go up through the gears -- as opposed to the A2 'boxes with spacings all over the place."

Morts: "You said it. The ACH is a big offender here..."Amazing, innit, that we can so easily tell the difference in spacing? And be so annoyed by it. :( On paper, it doesn't seem possible that a point or three difference in percentage rpm drop would even be detectable, let alone readily noticable. Especially when comparing car to car -- days or even months apart. But by seat-of-pants alone, I notice any difference in 'tween-gear spacing immediately, and find it more easily detectable than to tell, for instance, precisely how "low" 1st is, or how "high" 5th is -- unless I closely compare tach to speedo.


I didn't notice it much with the 1.5 gas, but with the 1.6d the 3-4 is super close compared to the 4-5 flying leap.Close, but no cigar. :D Sorry, couldn't resist the pun. Third-to-4th in the ACH actually isn't any closer than your FO was. As you say, it's now much closer than 4-5 (the opposite of what you had before), and probably seems even closer because your new 3rd is so short -- the 3-4 upshift is coming at a lower speed (mph) than before, where you don't need the "closeness" as much as you do at higher speed. As you know, you now have a closer 2-3 (and lower 3rd and 4th gears) in exchange for a wider 3-4. I find the ACH/ACN "4-5 flying leap" is so noticable not only because of how large it is, but more so because it's not progressive. BTW, your new 2-3 is even closer than your close-ratio GTi 4K was!

% RPM drop @
Gear Change_____1-2_____2-3____3-4____4-5_

FN/FF(late) - - - - 44 - - - 34 - - - 29 - - - 22
FO - - - - - - - - - 44 - - - 34 - - - 25 - - - 22
ACH/ACN/etc.- - - 44 - - - 30 - - - 25 - - - 28
GTi 2H/4K - - - - - 39 - - - 32 - - - 22 - - - 21
2H w/0.71 5th- - - 39 - - - 32 - - - 22 - - - 37

(Do these charts line up at least half-way readable for everyone? I can't figure out how/if one can force mono-spaced fonts using vBulletin Code -- anyone know??? :i_dont_kn Tabs won't work either, and any more than 2 spaces get stripped out. I guess I could print out mono-spaced text, then scan it and post as a JPEG/GIF. What [free or OSS] app/utility would I use to do that w/o the printing/scanning steps?)

So you think your 4-5 is a "flying leap", eh morts? Check out the 4-5 flying leap when you swap an 0.71 into a "close ratio" like your '84 GTi had. I swapped in an 0.75 before I drove the '84 back from Tac-town/BI -- wasn't looking forward to almost 2000 Borla-droning miles of 75-90 mph Interstate cruising @ 4000-4800 RPM. :tb :tb I thought the 34% jump of the 0.75 wouldn't be as bad as the 0.71/37% that I've used before. But if I did it again, and was doing a lot of 75-80+ mph work, I'd go with an 0.71 (except in 9A's with 3.67 final drive -- then it's better to use the 0.75, IMO). Once the "leap" is more than 30%, I don't think it would/could be any more objectionable if it was even 40% -- it's just plain annoying (and un-livable for me) for any "normal" driving.

Back to the "weird" (non-progressive) ACH/ACN spacing. VOA's sales-driven choice actually does make some sense -- especially for gassers w/o the broad torque curve of your diesel, and for your "average un-conscious driver" that isn't as atuned to their machinery as you are. First cog is low enough for good off-the-line grunt and is perceived as "high performance". Then a big jump to the "close" 2nd/3rd/4th group -- where much/most of US urban/suburban dicing/driving is done. Again, it gives the perception of good performance -- the close spacing causes the un-conscious driver to be more likely "on the cam". Lastly, after accelerating in 4th up to cruise speed, a large jump to the low-revving 5th to quietly maintain speed on a level, open road. As before, not my favorite gearing by a long shot. But if I exclusively drive one of the "weird" ones for a week or two, I eventually get (mostly) accustomed to it. But as soon as I drive a "progessively"-geared car again, the annoying factor of the ACH spacing comes rushing right back. Oh, to be un-observant/un-critical/un-conscious. Ignorance is bliss, doncha' know. :tb

BTW, here's my fave (using stock VW gearsets) 020 flatlander spacings: 39-35-29-23 and 39-32-29-28.
Nearly ideal, I'd think, would be: 39-30-22-19-18. :thumbs_up (Whoops! Got an extra in there. 6-speed anyone? :D :D :D) Which leads me to:
...I found a place that sells 6 speeds...is that possible?Six-speed was/is offered in late model A4/A5's but it definitely is not bolt-in for an A1 chassis! VL enterprises offered a 5-to-6 add-on conversion, but they went t*ts-up years ago. Clearance for the extra "length" required notching the left "frame horn" by a coupla' inches and plating over the gap to regain adequate strength. I think I saw a year or so ago that someone else was offering a kit -- for $3- or $4- thou, IIRC. :tb

edit -- added: As I've posted before, be aware there's error(s) in the chart morts previously linked to -- as there are in all the other charts I've seen on the Wibbly Wobbly Web.

USAJon
23-03-2006, 12:20 AM
Yo! done testing 1.2.3.4...

USAJon
23-03-2006, 12:30 AM
will this 6 speed puppy fit in my 1981 caddyhttp://img207.imageshack.us/img207/7799/11a6speed2ei.th.jpg (http://img207.imageshack.us/my.php?image=11a6speed2ei.jpg)

Iowa Caddy
23-03-2006, 01:46 AM
will this 6 speed puppy fit in my 1981 caddyYour link [htp://img207.imageshack.us/my.php?image=11a6speed2ei.jpg] doesn't load (for me), so don't know to what you're referring. But the simple answer is -- anything will fit, given enough skill, time, and/or money. Whatever you linked to, I can guarantee it won't be a simple bolt-in. ;)

USAJon
23-03-2006, 01:52 AM
vw jetta trans... Germany WW01 02M301 103 D AZ91 HP

mortskeg
23-03-2006, 02:48 AM
You hit the nail on the head there, IC. I guess I really prefer a nice progressive gearing. Though I do realize that you could make one to be much worse than mine (.71). ;) I know exactly what you mean about reprograming my hands/feet- especially my right foot- to make the shifts nice and smooth. I think I'm about there; however, this is the first trans I've had (I think) that has this type of nonprogressive gearing. The above charts look great. :cheers:

Iowa Caddy
23-03-2006, 04:19 AM
vw jetta trans... Germany WW01 02M301 103 D AZ91 HPSorry -- don't have easy access to late-model p/n's or gearing. But if it's same as me mate's '05 1.8T GLI, what a beautiful gearbox (and car!). Spacing similar to the 020 6-speed I jokingly referenced in earlier post. By both seat-of-pants and tach/speedo while driving it, was basically similar gearing/spacing as an 020 close-ratio 5-speed -- with an additional and welcomed, progressively-spaced, "over-drive" 6th. Haven't driven one yet, but I imagine the DSG 6-speed would probably be my ideal 'box. Although the Audi CVT might tempt me too.

Morts -- thanks for the feedback, especially re: alignment of chart. :td