[land crusher]

I'm plotting an H55 upgrade for my 9/83 FJ60. In searching the forums I'm finding incomplete or inconsistent information.

The main questions I'm trying to find answers for are:

1. Transfer shifter linkage: the article linked in the 60/62 FAQ says one has to finesse and modify the existing linkage. Other posts seem to indicate that you can just use linkage from a later truck. Is that possible?

2. Transfer case: some posts say you need a later case, others say the early case is fine with the right bits and pieces. Can I use my existing case?

3. Drivelines: Much talk of lengthening/shortening drivelines. Seems to me that it would be cheaper to just use drivelines from an 85 or newer truck, but one post said they have a different bolt pattern. Can I just use later drivelines that are the right length?

[4x4Rugger]

you are good to go your rig was made before the cutoff in 1985, it should be a direct bolt in application, do you know your spline count?

also, you can do a visual on the linkage before pulling out old tranny and swapping for a new one, see if they line up visually,

my cruiser was made april of 85 and was a direct swap, pretty straight forward,

good luck, if i can do anything give me a shout

[land crusher]

Uhh, I think the problem is that it's late '85 and later that are "bolt-in." Mine was built in Sept. '83.

[Cruiserdrew]

Originally Posted by land crusher

I'm plotting an H55 upgrade for my 9/83 FJ60. In searching the forums I'm finding incomplete or inconsistent information.

The main questions I'm trying to find answers for are:

1. Transfer shifter linkage: the article linked in the 60/62 FAQ says one has to finesse and modify the existing linkage. Other posts seem to indicate that you can just use linkage from a later truck. Is that possible?

You need the later shifter. I think any 85 up will have the right shifter.

Originally Posted by land crusher

2. Transfer case: some posts say you need a later case, others say the early case is fine with the right bits and pieces. Can I use my existing case?

We've gone back and forth on this and it all depends on the case you have. Most 83s have the appropriate machining for the input shaft bearing, but there are reports that some do not. My 4/84 case had the appropriate machining, and casting for the oil nipple. Yours probably does, but you won't know until you tear it down.

Originally Posted by land crusher

3. Drivelines: Much talk of lengthening/shortening drivelines. Seems to me that it would be cheaper to just use drivelines from an 85 or newer truck, but one post said they have a different bolt pattern. Can I just use later drivelines that are the right length?

DO not over think this. Changing driveline length is trivial. The bolt pattern changed in 85, so if you use later drivelines you'll need to change all the flanges. Just use the drivelines you have, and get the length changed at a shop, should cost $100 or so per shaft to get the length changed.

[orangefj45]

the later linkage will work. pretty sure i have what you need for the conversion. i'm also in the finishing stages of producing a twin-stick kit for these.

if your case does not happen to be machined properly, hit me up. i'm pretty sure i have an extra correct front case half.

you will need to plug one hole in the front case half so the trans and t-c cannot "swap" fluid.


georg @ valley hybrids

[land crusher]

Originally Posted by Cruiserdrew

DO not over think this. Changing driveline length is trivial. The bolt pattern changed in 85, so if you use later drivelines you'll need to change all the flanges. Just use the drivelines you have, and get the length changed at a shop, should cost $100 or so per shaft to get the length changed.

I understand that getting drivelines modified is easy, but I want to know ALL the options before embarking on the project. If I come into some later drivelines for cheap and can use them, that would be good to know.

So, the bolt pattern changed on the later drivelines. Could one--just for the sake of argument--use the yoke flanges from the '83 drivelines on post '85 drivelines and thus mate them up? My understanding is that the u-joint is the same from '74 to '90.

[orangefj45]

sure you could.

but then you'd run the risk of damaging a u-joint or yoke if not done properly.

you could also change the tc drive flanges since they're the same spline count and the pinion flanges......

just get the drivelines modified.

[land crusher]

What would damage the yokes? Are they different aside from the bolt pattern? Or are you saying the process of installing the u-joints is likely to damage them (which seems strange since it's an ordinary task)?

[orangefj45]

yup. it's not a tough job but if done improperly you can damage the yokes and joints.

[land crusher]

I understand that standard practice is to modify the drivelines, but the point of my questions is to learn what parts are/are not compatible across the years.

[land crusher]

All things considered, this isn't really seeming that difficult of a job to put a five-speed in an earlier 60.

Out of curiosity, does any one have comparison pics of the early and later transfer case halves?

[Cruiserdrew]

Originally Posted by land crusher

All things considered, this isn't really seeming that difficult of a job to put a five-speed in an earlier 60.

Out of curiosity, does any one have comparison pics of the early and later transfer case halves?

It isn't hard at all and If I can do it, anyone can.

[orangefj45]

it really is not a difficult job as long as you're somewhat mechanically inclined, you have a place to do the job safely and you have the proper tools.

you will need to rebuild or at least re-seal your t-case. get one of the FSMs if you do not have one already.

if you do decide to go with the newer drivelines, then you can change the flanges or the yokes; your call. if you change the yokes, then i would highly advise installing new pinion seals at the same time. setting the proper preload on the pinion nuts is crutial since that sets the preload of the pinion bearings. new stake-nuts are a must as well.

[land crusher]

No lack of mechanical inclination. I've never taken a car to a mechanic in my life. I've done the clutch on this truck and the 40 I used to have, so I've had the tranny out before--I skin a lot of knuckles and invent new obscenities, but really a pretty easy job on these rigs. TC rebuild goes without saying and it needs it anyway (should've done it when I did the clutch last year). Undecided on drivelines, probably will just modify the ones I've got, but will keep my options open since I have a way of coming into parts for next to nothing. As for pinion seals, I'm rebuilding the diffs this weekend when I install my ARBs .

[orangefj45]

you're definetly on the right track.......

[land crusher]

Is there any problem with angles using 85 and later drivelines (assuming yokes are changed) on an H55 on an early bellhousing that doesn't rotate the tranny like the later bellhousing? Or do you have to use a double cardon in the front?

[Cruiserdrew]

Originally Posted by land crusher

Is there any problem with angles using 85 and later drivelines (assuming yokes are changed) on an H55 on an early bellhousing that doesn't rotate the tranny like the later bellhousing? Or do you have to use a double cardon in the front?

Shouldn't be a problem. You don't run the front shaft at speed anyway.

[Dirtgypsy]

Is there any change in cross members from early to late? I am pretty sure there is. The later model tranny has a spacer to make up for the difference in tranny length.

Clint

[land crusher]

I wouldn't be driving 75mph in 4WD, but I might be driving 55mph in 4WD.

[land crusher]

Originally Posted by Dirtgypsy

Is there any change in cross members from early to late? I am pretty sure there is. The later model tranny has a spacer to make up for the difference in tranny length.

Clint

If I'm not mistaken, the later crossmember accounts for the fact that the tranny is 9 degrees off-kilter, does it not?

[Cruiserdrew]

Originally Posted by land crusher

If I'm not mistaken, the later crossmember accounts for the fact that the tranny is 9 degrees off-kilter, does it not?

This is true. It actually mounts to the same place on the tranny. The cross members are different, but in exactly the same place. The later mount has parallel feet and I think would be easier to usem if custom fabbing a new crossmember.

You just need to keep things consistant. Use either

2F bellhousing and early crossmember. Remember too that the slave and shifter fork is also different early vs late. The early one is adjustable and thus superior in my book.

Or..Use the "3F" bellhousing that rotates the assembly, with the later crossmember and the later slave/fork.

Clear as Mud?

[land crusher]

Question for those that have put an H55 in an early truck:

If I use my early bellhousing and crossmember and thus my tranny and transfer are not rotated as they are in later trucks, am I going to have any trouble aligning my late model transfer shifter through it's place in the tranny hump (due to the shifter being design for rotated setups)?

[land crusher]

Also, I'm not having any success searching for this: what's a good source for the longer bolts necessary to bolt up the transfer? CCOT claims to have the market cornered, but obviously people are getting them elsewhere.

[lehiguy]

A friend and I did just what you are doing; we put an H55 into an '83 FJ60. The cross members are very different, they will not interchange. The late bell housing rotates every thing to the passenger side and you give up some clearance because of that. When we did the swap, we kept the old bell housing and cross member and everything worked just fine. I think you should keep your front drive shaft since it has the CV on it that later 60s didn't have. This will give you options down the road when you lift it, go SOA or whatever. Swapping flanges to the new style is easy, I wouldn't lose any sleep over it if it comes to that. Switches and connectors for reverse and four-wheel indicator are the same, we didn't even bother to change them. It seemed there was some minor T-case shifter issue that was easily solved but i don't recall what it was exactly, just that it was not a problem for more than a minute or two.

[qldunipolo]

did mine just a year ago. got the bolts from the local toyota dealer parts dept. don't remember what the parts numbers are but i remember them being in one of Dunbar's posts about H55 conversion.

regards,

mm

[land crusher]

Originally Posted by qldunipolo

did mine just a year ago. got the bolts from the local toyota dealer parts dept. don't remember what the parts numbers are but i remember them being in one of Dunbar's posts about H55 conversion.

regards,

mm

Thanks. I didn't realize the longer bolts were available from Toyota, seems like people are always talking about trying to source them. I guess I wasn't envisioning how this was set up--is it that the bolts are longer because they must go through the added length of the h55 and thread into the main body of the transmission? Thus the longer bolts would be used on a factory h55 installation... Ok. Brain fart, I guess. I've gotta stop reading about this project and just get it done.

[land crusher]

Originally Posted by lehiguy

A friend and I did just what you are doing; we put an H55 into an '83 FJ60. The cross members are very different, they will not interchange. The late bell housing rotates every thing to the passenger side and you give up some clearance because of that. When we did the swap, we kept the old bell housing and cross member and everything worked just fine. I think you should keep your front drive shaft since it has the CV on it that later 60s didn't have. This will give you options down the road when you lift it, go SOA or whatever. Swapping flanges to the new style is easy, I wouldn't lose any sleep over it if it comes to that. Switches and connectors for reverse and four-wheel indicator are the same, we didn't even bother to change them. It seemed there was some minor T-case shifter issue that was easily solved but i don't recall what it was exactly, just that it was not a problem for more than a minute or two.

I'm using my existing crossmember and bellhousing so there will be no rotation from the tranny/transfer's current position. What I'm wondering is if that lack of rotation will cause fitment issues with the post 1985 transfer shifter/linkage that is designed for the rotated setup. In other words, will it be tricky to align the shifter through it's place in the hump?

[lehiguy]

Originally Posted by land crusher

I'm using my existing crossmember and bellhousing so there will be no rotation from the tranny/transfer's current position. What I'm wondering is if that lack of rotation will cause fitment issues with the post 1985 transfer shifter/linkage that is designed for the rotated setup. In other words, will it be tricky to align the shifter through it's place in the hump?

That's the part that I recall being something that we had to address, but it turned out to be a non issue. In fact, that very rig and mine are Moab bound tomorrow.

[land crusher]

As much as I dislike slowing myself down by taking pictures while I work, I think I'll do write-up on this project for the benefit of humanity.