6R80 transmission

[Mach1 Driver 560]

I've been leaning toward a 4R70W because it bolts right up to a 351W, but wonder what has been done lately with the 6R80? Its a 6 speed Ford that is wider for most of its length and about 100 lbs heavier, but a little shorter. The only hit I got in a search here was behind a Coyote in 69 Mach with extensive metal rebuild. Does anyone know of a more conventional swap of one of these beasts into a classic? My guess is that the tunnel is too small.

[ralt962 11]

I might be able to get some dimensions of the 6R.  But I do know the electronic controls of the 6R are much more complicated.   The torque management system is buried in the PCM.  Typically they need to work together with the engine controls as it reads the torque output of the engine, based on throttle position and the Mass air flow sensor.   The 4R would be an easier fit.  If you have the Coyote engine and the PCM the 6R would be a good match.

Worked at Ford in Trucks for 37 years.  Now working for Roush.  Was never a calibrator but worked with them extensively over the years.

[Mach1 Driver 560]

On 3/17/2018 at 11:44 AM, ralt962 said:

I might be able to get some dimensions of the 6R.  But I do know the electronic controls of the 6R are much more complicated.   The torque management system is buried in the PCM.  Typically they need to work together with the engine controls as it reads the torque output of the engine, based on throttle position and the Mass air flow sensor.   The 4R would be an easier fit.  If you have the Coyote engine and the PCM the 6R would be a good match.

Worked at Ford in Trucks for 37 years.  Now working for Roush.  Was never a calibrator but worked with them extensively over the years.

Huh, I wonder how it reads torque? Thanks, but since its that complicated I'll stick with the 4R70W and 351W

[ralt962 11]

4 hours ago, Mach1 Driver said:

Huh, I wonder how it reads torque? Thanks, but since its that complicated I'll stick with the 4R70W and 351W

Good idea to stick with the 4R70W.  Actually a very good trans.  Used them in trucks for a long time.  Hold a lot of torque.   

The engine is mapped with speed load points with the mass air flow sensor before the throttle body.  Along with the output at the O2 sensor and the injectors they know what the torque is and try to optimize the trans shift schedule.   Way too much for what its worth.  The 4R will work great.

[mwye0627 44]

2 hours ago, ralt962 said:

Good idea to stick with the 4R70W.  Actually a very good trans.  Used them in trucks for a long time.  Hold a lot of torque.   

The engine is mapped with speed load points with the mass air flow sensor before the throttle body.  Along with the output at the O2 sensor and the injectors they know what the torque is and try to optimize the trans shift schedule.   Way too much for what its worth.  The 4R will work great.

Correct, I too worked with Ford calibrators for over 20 years...   They use the  output from several sensors to calculate what they call "Inferred Load", which they use for several engine management functions...    Before the days of Wide Band O2 sensors, they used Inferred Load to approximate Volumetric Efficiency for Fuel Management.   The Inferred metrics are derived from extensive dyno testing which allows the calibration engineers to create "Maps" and "Tables" to control Fuel and Spark under almost all operational and environmental conditions!!!   

[bigmal 225]

There's some realy smart bartards on this site. Very humbling.

[Mach1 Driver 560]

3 hours ago, bigmal said:

There's some realy smart bartards on this site. Very humbling.

and interesting

[ralt962 11]

All that stuff was interesting to work on, but I really love working on the old iron.  Give me a Holley 4 barrel and a 69 Stag any day.   

[Stangn 1]

The 6r80 in my 13 GT is a beast! Trans doesn’t have bands it’s all clutches and  planetary‘s. Bands fail because of limited clutch material and hydraulic pressure to grab the drum, that’s the death card of a 4r70 or aod/aode. Bad thing for 6r80 is electronics to run and it’s bellhousing pattern is only for modular engines. 

[1969_Mach1 333]

The 4R70 is a good trans.  Our old 1996 Mustang GT had.  It went over 300K.  Still worked fine when we got rid of the car.  I serviced it regularly and installed both a shift improver kit and auxiliary cooler when the car was fairly new.  I've installed both Transgo and B&M shift kits or shift improver kits on those transmissions.  In my opinion, the B&M kit has worked better for that particular application.

However, I don't think the 4R70 was ever installed behind a 351W.  To the best of my knowledge Ford always put the larger E4OD behind 351W and larger motors.

[Mach1 Driver 560]

1 hour ago, 1969_Mach1 said:

However, I don't think the 4R70 was ever installed behind a 351W.  To the best of my knowledge Ford always put the larger E4OD behind 351W and larger motors.

That's very interesting. Please correct me if I'm wrong, but I've never heard of the E40D being used in a classic Mustang. The 4R70W is the latest and greatest version of the AOD, supposedly redesigned to remove the shortcomings of the AOD and AODE.  The AOD, AODE, and 4R70W are one of the few ways to get an overdrive in a classic, and it bolts right up to a 351W. Wikipedia says the 4R70W was used on these cars, but it doesn't mention the engine in front of it (notice that Mustang isn't on the list):

• 1993–1998 Lincoln Mark VIII
• 1993–2003 Ford F-Series
• 1994–1997 Ford Thunderbird
• 1995–2004 Ford Crown Victoria
• 1996–2001 Ford Explorer
• 1993–2004 Lincoln Town Car
• 1994–1997 Mercury Cougar
• 1995–2004 Mercury Grand Marquis
• 2003 Mercury Marauder
• 1997–2004 Ford Expedition
• 1997–2001 Mercury Mountaineer
• 1996–2004 Ford Mustang

[det0326 179]

The bronco I purchased to get the 351w  to put in my 69 also had an E40D in it and I looked at maybe putting it in the 69 as well but would have required tunnel work.

[Midlife 814]

1 hour ago, Mach1 Driver said:

That's very interesting. Please correct me if I'm wrong, but I've never heard of the E40D being used in a classic Mustang. The 4R70W is the latest and greatest version of the AOD, supposedly redesigned to remove the shortcomings of the AOD and AODE.  The AOD, AODE, and 4R70W are one of the few ways to get an overdrive in a classic, and it bolts right up to a 351W. Wikipedia says the 4R70W was used on these cars, but it doesn't mention the engine in front of it (notice that Mustang isn't on the list):

• 1993–1998 Lincoln Mark VIII
• 1993–2003 Ford F-Series
• 1994–1997 Ford Thunderbird
• 1995–2004 Ford Crown Victoria
• 1996–2001 Ford Explorer
• 1993–2004 Lincoln Town Car
• 1994–1997 Mercury Cougar
• 1995–2004 Mercury Grand Marquis
• 2003 Mercury Marauder
• 1997–2004 Ford Expedition
• 1997–2001 Mercury Mountaineer
• 1996–2004 Ford Mustang

What's that at the bottom of the list?

[1969_Mach1 333]

Back in the day of pushrod motors, the 5.0L and 5.8L (302 and 351W) in F-150 trucks and Bronco's, etc., the 5.0L models got the 4R70W trans and the 5.8L models got the larger E4OD trans.  In 1997 when Ford went to modular motors in trucks I think they all got the 4R70W.

It has always been that way with auto transmissions.  Ford cars and trucks with a 5.8L (351W) got a larger automatic trans than the 5.0L (302) or small motors.  Even these classic Mustangs.  Mustangs with a 302 got a C4 and Mustangs with s 351W got the larger FMX.  I can be wrong, but in my mind I think its because the 351W makes a lot more torque than a 302.

[1969_Mach1 333]

2 minutes ago, det0326 said:

The bronco I purchased to get the 351w  to put in my 69 also had an E40D in it and I looked at maybe putting it in the 69 as well but would have required tunnel work.

Yeah, the E4OD is huge.  Mine with a Ford Racing oil pan hold 17 gts of oil.

[Mach1 Driver 560]

1 hour ago, Midlife said:

What's that at the bottom of the list?

Musta been cut off below the bottom when I looked. Thats my story and I'm stickin to it.

[Mach1 Driver 560]

1 hour ago, det0326 said:

The bronco I purchased to get the 351w  to put in my 69 also had an E40D in it and I looked at maybe putting it in the 69 as well but would have required tunnel work.

That's what I figured Dave, or we would have heard of the swap before now.

[Mach1 Driver 560]

1 hour ago, 1969_Mach1 said:

Yeah, the E4OD is huge.  Mine with a Ford Racing oil pan hold 17 gts of oil.

That's 3 more than the 4R70W. Monster rates their E40D heavy duty at 350hp/600tq and the super duty at 450hp/900tq.

Interestingly they don't give torque numbers but have 3 versions of the 4R70W: mild= 280hp, heavy= 460hp, and super= 600hp

[Darkman 2]

The 6R80 has 6 speeds and handles much more torque and horsepower than the AODE/4R70W. The rpm drop between shifts is much less. Adapter kits to bolt up to small blocks and FE's. I'm exploring putting one behind my 69 428 CJ Mach 1. I'd like to see them side by side to see how close the tunnel will be. It's supposed to be wider but not taller. In 2011 Ford removed the ECM from inside the 6R80 and now there are stand alone controllers available. Torque converters and internal parts are available. Can easily handle 1000 horsepower.

Hoping this will work for my car

[stangman69 17]

What about using a stand-alone aftermarket transmission controller al la https://www.usshift.com/usq6.shtml?

 

[ralt962 11]

See notes at the start of this string.  6R80 is a good trans.  At Roush we still use it in the Mustang that is tuned to 775HP.  But we spend time on the trans shift schedule.  

The calibration is key to making it run smoothly.  Its dependent on the engine control system and torque management.  I'm not familiar with the stand alone controller and how they make it work.  As stated before its a torque based shift schedule which reads a map of the engine based on the throttle position sensor.  With out the other engine sensors I"m not sure how they would make it work.