The definitive transmission compatibility guide, with pictures

[LJ851]

Damn, you just won't quit will you ?


Pulled from a 1989 325 coupe. Small guibo, only provision for late shift carrier.



Level on bellhousing face, black sharpie line where it exits the slave hole.



Measured.

[Andy.B]

I'm not sure how much clearer it could be. The first post in the thread i linked clearly identifies your transmission.

The transmissions are the same, just run a t/o bearing that matches the clutch setup (single mass) and a manual driveshaft that matches the bolt pattern on the rear flange. Done.

The problem is that different people are saying different things. How do I decide who to trust? The person with the higher thread count? The person who joined r3v first? The person who has the most clever signature? Different people claim different things, but I haven't seen anybody post any actual first hand proof that the bellhousings are even different. Everyone just references some older post somewhere else.

I'm not sure how much clearer I could be. I want proof. Simple, easy to obtain, proof, so there is no more question on the matter.

I'm not asking someone to pull their transmission out of their care for my sake. I'm sure someone on r3v has an i transmission sitting in their garage, shed, warehouse, bunker, corn silo, or trailer.

[LJ851]

I don't think I am thinking about it too much. Even in this thread, I have someone saying it will work fine, don't worry about, while you are referencing other threads saying I need a different throw-out bearing.

There is tons of speculation on the subject, often repeated but often incorrect facts, and plenty of firsthand/secondhand accounts without any actual proof that a difference in transmissions exists. I am not going to start sticking parts from another vehicle in my car because someone, somewhere, typed that they will fit, while others are saying it is unnecessary. What I want is to end the speculation, the claims, the quoting, the anecdotal evidence, and the confusion.

All that will take is a single picture, of someone measuring their bellhousing. Then myself, and everyone else who needs to swap a transmission in their e30 can know, for sure, exactly what parts they need.

I honestly suspect that they are the same. I have a hard time believing that there are two different transmissions with the same part number but different (not compatible) applications. I suspect that the plunge length of the slave cylinder can compensate and self adjust for the alleged 3/4" difference stack height between the different flywheels in the same way that it will self adjust for a worn clutch, or a brake caliper piston self adjusts for worn pads.

But if I make that assumption and it works, then I have nothing but more anecdotal evidence to add to the confusion. What I want is some form of proof to settle it. If I had an I transmission I would make multiple measurements and post the pictures. Instead I just need someone to be willing to help by taking several minutes and measure their transmission and post the pictures. I am willing to pay them to do so.

I'm not sure how much clearer it could be. The first post in the thread i linked clearly identifies your transmission (late eta with late shift carrier provision) and suggests the 323 TO bearing with a single mass fly/clutch because it has the deep bellhousing which you measured and confirmed.

I would not run the 325i TO bearing, even if you got the slave to push that far it would very close to the end it's travel and possible damage. The slave does not move that far, 3/8 inch addition is a hell of a lot more percentage wise.

[Andy.B]

You are thinking about this too much.

http://www.r3vlimited.com/board/showthread.php?t=215361

I don't think I am thinking about it too much. Even in this thread, I have someone saying it will work fine, don't worry about, while you are referencing other threads saying I need a different throw-out bearing.

There is tons of speculation on the subject, often repeated but often incorrect facts, and plenty of firsthand/secondhand accounts without any actual proof that a difference in transmissions exists. I am not going to start sticking parts from another vehicle in my car because someone, somewhere, typed that they will fit, while others are saying it is unnecessary. What I want is to end the speculation, the claims, the quoting, the anecdotal evidence, and the confusion.

All that will take is a single picture, of someone measuring their bellhousing. Then myself, and everyone else who needs to swap a transmission in their e30 can know, for sure, exactly what parts they need.

I honestly suspect that they are the same. I have a hard time believing that there are two different transmissions with the same part number but different (not compatible) applications. I suspect that the plunge length of the slave cylinder can compensate and self adjust for the alleged 3/4" difference stack height between the different flywheels in the same way that it will self adjust for a worn clutch, or a brake caliper piston self adjusts for worn pads.

But if I make that assumption and it works, then I have nothing but more anecdotal evidence to add to the confusion. What I want is some form of proof to settle it. If I had an I transmission I would make multiple measurements and post the pictures. Instead I just need someone to be willing to help by taking several minutes and measure their transmission and post the pictures. I am willing to pay them to do so.

[LJ851]

You are thinking about this too much.

http://www.r3vlimited.com/board/showthread.php?t=215361

[Andy.B]

I'm of no help it's an Eta trans... But I can give you some other interesting info.. Kinda.


Soooo, measurement it seems from inside of where slave cylinder is to bell housing is 6 1/2

Just to clarify, this measurement is of the depth inside the bellhousing (the way I measured and got 6 9/16 ) not of the depth from outside the bellhousing where the slave cylinder mounts, and through the bellhousing to the mating surface to the engine(the way I measured and got 6 7/8)?

If that is the case, then your measurements match mine for a dual mass flywheel equipped car.

[FLG]

I'm of no help it's an Eta trans... But I can give you some other interesting info.. Kinda.

I believe this trans was a replacement from bmw...

Orange warning label says that it needs to be filled with oil

Hmm I'll go measure anyways

Soooo, measurement it seems from inside of where slave cylinder is to bell housing is 6 1/2 but my digital calipers seems to be dead and i couldnt find my straight edge so i had to make due with what i had. I have the motor this trans was on, and its a dual mass flywhee.

TOB that was in it was same as an I TOB, i had a spare laying around.






Sent from my SCH-I545 using Tapatalk 2

[Andy.B]

I have a tranny sitting in my garage. I'll check pn and measurements tonight. Idk what it's from off hand. Came from an e but looks to be swapped at one point... Well see.

Sent from my SCH-I545 using Tapatalk 2

eta trans part number is 260.0.1270.90
i transmission part number is 260.0.1346.90

I'd love to see proof that there are different depth's among eta transmissions, and that the i is different from the late eta's.

[Andy.B]

Bumplestinltskins.

[FLG]

I have a tranny sitting in my garage. I'll check pn and measurements tonight. Idk what it's from off hand. Came from an e but looks to be swapped at one point... Well see.

Sent from my SCH-I545 using Tapatalk 2

[Andy.B]

If you post a picture of the measurement of an I transmission, I will change my r3v signature to anything you want* for 3 months, and will make sure to post regularly in lots of topics so it gets lots of mileage. It can be an ad, joke, picture, insult, junk, your junk (wink wink), political ad, misquoted quote, etc.














*as long as it is legal and not prejudiced. In poor taste is acceptable, and expected.

[Andy.B]

Someone out there MUST have an i transmission sitting around that they can measure.
Do I need to offer more than $5?
How about a donation in your name to the 'People Fund'!
I'll write your name inside the bellhousing to be preserved forever!
I'll get your likeness tattooed on my butt (I won't).
I'll gift you 'Goat Simulator' on steam!
If we ever meet in person, I'll buy you an ice cream cone! (unless you are lactose intolerant, in which case, I'll buy you frozen yogurt, or some other desert of your choice)

[AwakenNoMore]

I'm running into the same issue. I'm probably going to just buy the two different throwout bearings unless this thread brings some results.

[Andy.B]

Bump: I will send $5 via paypal to anyone who can post pictures of the bell-housing depth measurement on an i transmission so we can accurately document this.

[Andy.B]

I've done these swaps many times, usually using a single mass flywheel and an eta trans (easier to find). It will work.

I believe you have put it together and had it work, however, there are also accounts of people using a single mass flywheel with a transmission from a dual mass car, and having it not work:

(abridged quote from this thread)

... I am 100% positive that my 88 super eta transmission was the deep bellhousing. My proof? well... i measured it and it came out to 6 7/8 where as my 325i is 6 1/2. i had my friend measure and take a second look also because i couldn't believe it. also, i had to wait a damn week for the euro 323i throw out bearing (longer length to make up the gap) to get in so i could put it together and drive it. the clutch would not engage with the rest of my I parts.

....

So I KNOW my transmission's bell-housing is a late eta that was equipped with a dual mass flywheel, and the bell-housing has a 6-7/8" depth.

I have a single mass i flywheel, clutch, and pressure plate stack to install.

Every quantified measurement indicates that there IS a difference between the two transmissions depths.

While I see people saying they had luck matching that combination of parts, I also see people saying it didn't work out, and they needed the thicker throw out bearing.

I don't want to do this job twice. I'm doing it on my back in my driveway.

Lets say that both combinations of parts will work, but the i flywheel/clutch stack IS a little shorter than the dual mass eta flywheel/clutch stack, then using the 323 throw-out bearing will keep the slave cylinder plunger in its 'normal' operation range, while the i throw-out bearing will require it to extend further. The only thing I can think is that some people get lucky, and the i stack works, but the *better* way (at least in terms of maintaining correct geometry of parts) is to use the 323 throw-out bearing, right? I mean, from all accounts, even if the i throw-out bearing CAN work, the 323 throw-out bearing WILL work.

If that is the case, I am willing to spend a few extra dollars to save some hassle.

I just want to understand why there is so much contradiction on this subject before I start putting this all back together.