I rock a 420 and love it. 36's and 4.10s combined with the Mtns of East TN gives my first some use when starting on hills. But in the woods I wouldn't trade it for anything. Going down hill more than anything I love just letting the trans hold it back.
Toyota tranny or SM465? (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter BrianSanDiego
- Start date
This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate
links, including eBay, Amazon, Skimlinks, and others.
- Thread starter
- #22
Don't worry about giving me too much encouragement.
Everything I hear helps to keep my motivation level high when considering the time, expense and challenges of changing out my drivetrain!!!!
This will be the biggest undertaking yet on my 40, so don't worry about helping me too much.
Thanks again guys,
B.
I love my SM420... That being said I am patient with it. 
What about an SM465/205. I know there are not a lot of fans of the 205 but Lowmax makes a 3:1 kit for it and it wouldn't be to hard to stick a centered axle in the back. The combos are cheap. I've had mine for sale a few times in Oregon and I couldn't give it away for $100 bucks so it just sits now. You should be able to find one local and probably with a centered axle for a few hundred bucks.
Cruiserdrew
On the way there
I have a 465/205 combo given to me a couple of months ago. The 205 is a freaking beast---too bad it's only 2:1 reduction. I'm thinking 465/Atlas/14 bolt is going to be the way to FJ40 Nirvana.
SM465 here, suits the V8 powerband and the Low gear is great off-road because the v8 doesn't produce as much torque as the I-6 @ low RPM's.
I rarely used the 2nd gear in the Toyota transmission, would go straight from 1st to 3rd, but that is how the SM465 is set up.
I rarely used the 2nd gear in the Toyota transmission, would go straight from 1st to 3rd, but that is how the SM465 is set up.
- Thread starter
- #27
So I was over at a Jeeper friends house yesterday and I mentioned that I was going to swap a granny-gear transmission into my Crusier. He said, hey I've got an old truck transmission in the garage you can have if it works for you.
I checked it out and shot some pics and whadda' ya know, it seems to be an early SM420. What are the odds....
I believe its a '47-'53 per this info from Mud.
* 1947-1953:
1. No ribs on the case
2. Grooved worm on the input shaft instead of neoprene seal
3. Synchro rings all differ from each other. 1st-2nd synchro ring is bronze
4. Weep hole at 6 o'clock on the bearing retainer snout
5. Six digit casting number on the case, usually like "59xxxx" e.g., 591665.
Input and output shafts don't have too much play and turn smoothly and the shifter doesn't have much slop at all. It actually seems nice and tight. But, shifting between 1st-2nd doesn't actually shift gears, and in 3rd-4tjh the input shaft is locks in place. So hopefully the shifter is just installed incorrectly at the moment.
Anyway the interesting thing is, that it has some sort of belt drive looking drum on the output. I wonder if it was in a tractor or piece of equiptment something? Kind of interesting....
It should work right?
Anything else I should try should check out before lugging it home?
TIA, Brian.
I checked it out and shot some pics and whadda' ya know, it seems to be an early SM420. What are the odds....
I believe its a '47-'53 per this info from Mud.
* 1947-1953:
1. No ribs on the case
2. Grooved worm on the input shaft instead of neoprene seal
3. Synchro rings all differ from each other. 1st-2nd synchro ring is bronze
4. Weep hole at 6 o'clock on the bearing retainer snout
5. Six digit casting number on the case, usually like "59xxxx" e.g., 591665.
Input and output shafts don't have too much play and turn smoothly and the shifter doesn't have much slop at all. It actually seems nice and tight. But, shifting between 1st-2nd doesn't actually shift gears, and in 3rd-4tjh the input shaft is locks in place. So hopefully the shifter is just installed incorrectly at the moment.
Anyway the interesting thing is, that it has some sort of belt drive looking drum on the output. I wonder if it was in a tractor or piece of equiptment something? Kind of interesting....
It should work right?
Anything else I should try should check out before lugging it home?
TIA, Brian.
Drag it home.
Cruiserdrew
On the way there
While that is pretty cool, the lack of a seal is a major problem and most would recommend one with the seal. Mine is from 1959 and it has the seal.
Pinhead used to have the info to tell the date from the codes cast into the case.
Pinhead used to have the info to tell the date from the codes cast into the case.
- Thread starter
- #30
Thanks Cruiserdrew, thats good to know. Well I only want to do this once! so maybe I keep looking. Its not like they aren't cheap or somethin'.
If I am going to take my time looking for the "right" tranny do you think I should go with a 420 or 465? 420 is shorter and lighter, and I like that. But 465 shifts better?
B.
Cruiserdrew
On the way there
Go with which ever one you get in the best condition. I don't know that there is a huge difference in shift quality.
The 420 is 50 pounds lighter and 1.5 inches shorter, but the reverse hump in kind of in the way of the front driveshaft. Given a choice of 2 in equal condition, I would choose a 465. However, I have driven a 420 for 10 years and I'm used to it's ways.
- Thread starter
- #32
Thank you Sir, much appreciated.
edit:
Well it looks like Novak sells a sealed front bearing retainer for the early 420's, for $120. You have to ship your input shaft to them to be machined though. I guess this is also an option.
Bottom of the page here.
http://www.novak-adapt.com/catalog/sm420_parts.htm
edit:
Well it looks like Novak sells a sealed front bearing retainer for the early 420's, for $120. You have to ship your input shaft to them to be machined though. I guess this is also an option.
Bottom of the page here.
http://www.novak-adapt.com/catalog/sm420_parts.htm
Last edited:
