fwd 90-91 tranny differences

[Kevin 1G Drummer]

I searched here, and vfaq, but couldn't find anything. I'm just wondering what the differences are between 90, and 91 fwd transmissions. Any help is appreciated.

[TheBlizzard]

Thread title fixed. There are no differences in 90-90 FWD manual transmissions.

[Kevin 1G Drummer]

Ok, sweet. Thanks

[carltalon]

The shifters are set up different. you'll need the shifter assemble and cables to go with the tranny. 90 shifter and cables or 91+ shifter and cables. there are a few differences internaly but they dont really matter if you just droping in the tranny. the spline count and axil size changes in 92.5

[Kevin 1G Drummer]

Ok, so the 91 shifter and cables won't work with the 90 tranny?

[carltalon]

heres some pics of the difference in the shift leavers

[johnson]

i put a 91 n/t in my 90 and it worked perfect???

i think it was from a 91

[sleepydsm]

The internals are different in the 1990, and to use a 1990 tranny in a 91+ car you need the shifter cables, shift lever, and shifter lever base. Or you can cut and weld the shifter arms on the tranny if you're ghetto.

[Andrew7dg]

Umm... Johnson....I could be wrong but I think the N/T trans are way different then the turbo trans

[1QUICK4]

I dropped a 91 GST tranny in my 90 Laser when I broke an axle off in the differential.

I didn't swap cables or shifter and it worked fine.

[johnson]

all i did was buy the n/t clutch....

[Andrew7dg]

I hope I am not sounding like a jerk by posting this johnson. I just want this to sound informative. I own a N/T eclipse (93) and wanted to do a turbo swap. The thing that is preventing me from doing so is the trans (which I should just go out and find a good FWD trans)

I think this is true in the earlier versions (90-92) like it is in the later (92-94) but
The N/T FWD trans are much weeker then the Turbo FWD transmissions. They fail after 250hp because of thinner and weeker gears used in the transmission. Thats why the performance shops won't rebuild the N/T trans for racing spec. They have a smaller housing so I can understand why you needed a different cluch, the N/T cluch needs to be smaller to fit into the housing. So while it may work right now, later if you ever wanted to make big power, you will need to switch back to the FWD trans or else you will shred the gears.

[Pimpin Dsmstyle]

Originally Posted by Andrew7dg

I hope I am not sounding like a jerk by posting this johnson. I just want this to sound informative. I own a N/T eclipse (93) and wanted to do a turbo swap. The thing that is preventing me from doing so is the trans (which I should just go out and find a good FWD trans)

I think this is true in the earlier versions (90-92) like it is in the later (92-94) but
The N/T FWD trans are much weeker then the Turbo FWD transmissions. They fail after 250hp because of thinner and weeker gears used in the transmission. Thats why the performance shops won't rebuild the N/T trans for racing spec. They have a smaller housing so I can understand why you needed a different cluch, the N/T cluch needs to be smaller to fit into the housing. So while it may work right now, later if you ever wanted to make big power, you will need to switch back to the FWD trans or else you will shred the gears.

There is no reason a turbo trans wouldn't bolt up to your n/t motor unless you have a 1.8 which in any case is trash and you should just forget about anything related to a 4g63T setup. But if you have a 2.0 DoHC 4g63 motor.. n/t and turbo trannies are interchangeable. The clutches are likely different and I do believe the gears are shorter in a N/t which I guess could help acceleration if you don't have any power to begin with. I would guess the internals are cheaper as you stated as well.

Point is that a 1.8 tranny mounts on the other side which is entirely different than anything related to a 2.0 1g motor. If you have a 1g n/t 2.0, you can definitly use a turbo tranny it just wouldn't make alot of sense.