Getrag 282 insights

The Dark Side of Will · Fri Aug 10, 2007 5:14 pm

I heated them in oil because a small deep fryer was $20 and was absolutely perfect for the job. It had a lift-out basket that meant I would have to dip anything else into the oil to pull the parts out.

http://www.fieronews.net/fusion/downloads.php

Check out www.fieronews.net for hosting the manual section.

Nashco · Post by **Nashco** » Fri Aug 10, 2007 6:17 pm

I understand that it was only $20...I guess I was thinking that an oven is free to me and would do just as well, maybe there was some black magic voodoo heat treat you were trying to accomplish with the oil. Turns out you just needed a cheap way to heat them up in the shop, huh? I suppose it would be more convenient than carrying parts from the kitchen into the garage.

Thanks for the tip on the Muncie factory rebuild manual at fieronews, that will come in handy, I hadn't seen that before. I contacted Tom to see about uploading the Pontiac service manual instructions for the trans. Maybe one day I'll get a bug up my butt and just scan the whole thing in, it doesn't take too long with the scanner I've got and it autoconverts it to pdf.

Bryce

teamlseep13 · Post by **teamlseep13** » Sat Aug 11, 2007 12:33 am

Being a GM tech....I have quite a few of the tools used in the disassembly....but in all reality they just help speed things up. I will get some pics up soon.

The Dark Side of Will · Sat Aug 11, 2007 7:48 am

There are a few things that are pretty important... you need to be able to push both shafts out of the case at the same time; you need to be able to support them both at the right height when you press them back in.

Other than a couple of simple things I've made, most of it can be done with a bearing puller, as long as your press is stout enough to get the 3-4 cluster off.

The Dark Side of Will · Thu Sep 20, 2007 10:00 am

Added the IP Inner BRG to the parts list.

The Dark Side of Will · Thu Sep 20, 2007 10:00 am

Added the IP Inner BRG to the parts list.

befarrer · Post by **befarrer** » Thu Sep 20, 2007 2:57 pm

Do you guys have any information on the gearing in a Sunbird 2.0L 282 getrac. The one my dad has is from a 1990 Sunbird with the 2.0L turbo, this tranny only came behind the turbo 2.0L, the regualr 2.0 got the isuzu. I wonder if it uses Quad 4 gearing or somethign unique. I assume in 91 the 282 behind the V6 is the same as a Fiero.

The Dark Side of Will · Thu Sep 20, 2007 2:59 pm

Do you know the transmission RPO? The Fiero gearing is MG2.

The Dark Side of Will · Tue Oct 02, 2007 1:37 pm

The diameter of the input shaft inner bearing journal (integral with the input shaft) is 1.043. The input shaft seal rides on the bearing journal surface.
The diameter of the shaft proper between the splines and the journal is 0.957.

If one were making a custom input shaft in order to change gearing, one could have said shaft cut with a 1.04ish spline and diameter instead of the stock 0.957 spline which would increase the torsional strength of the input shaft by ~40% (Torsional stiffness grows as the 4th power of diameter).

Also, the 282 IP inner bearing appears to be a standard roller which has had a sheet metal retainer formed around it and the seal. It may be possible to find a bearing & seal combo that will fit without the sheet metal retainer. There may be a LOT of options for custom shaft changes open after that.

Series8217 · Post by **Series8217** » Mon Nov 19, 2007 4:13 am

Just a note, and some replies to old questions...

Diff shims from 0.60 - 1.00 and 0.90 - 1.30 appear to still be available from GM. The part numbers are:
SHIM KIT 0.60 - 1.00 8672904
SHIM KIT 0.90 - 1.30 8672905

Also, oiling was revised in the later Getrags.
The input shafts and output shafts have revised oiling holes. They moved them up or down along the axis of the shaft. The difference is obvious if you look at the shafts; the oiling groove is cut into a different location. Make sure to keep the races with their respect shafts.. the holes do not line up otherwise! I discovered this when doing some gear swapping earlier today.
Additionally, all the case baffles were removed, including the small baffle on the rear bearing cover (that gold iridite plated steel cover at the end of the tranny), and the small plastic disc that was under that cover. I guess the big bearings were getting too much oil? They don't even have that long channel baffle running along the inside of the case anymore to send oil to the main shaft bearings.

The Dark Side of Will wrote: Did yours have the 0.80 fifth or the 0.72?

My Q4 tranny had the 0.80 fifth gear.

The Dark Side of Will wrote:
lucky80 wrote:Here's pics of the kit... My camera's 6 megs so zoom in for detail.

When you open it, can you get some pics of the friction surfaces of the blocker rings?

Didn't get a pic, but I can describe them. IIRC they look like the Isuzu synchro blocker rings (and those trannys shifted nice!). Instead of having the grid-shaped grooves in the friction surface, they just have horizontal cuts going all the way around, interspersed with a few vertical cuts here and there. If that doesn't make sense I'll try to remember to take a pic when I'm back at the shop.
Note they are solid bronze/brass/whatever, not steel with a brass/bronze/whatever friction surface bonded on the inside.

-Steven

befarrer · Post by **befarrer** » Mon Nov 19, 2007 3:07 pm

By later getracs, do you mean the T550? That was apparently the same as a 282 getrac, but shifted better.

I just picked up a 92 Getrac from a Quad 4, it has the 3.92 FDR, and .72 5th gear. Comparing it to my 90 Getrac, 5th gear is about the same imput shaft rotations to 1 output, 4th and 3rd require 1/2 a turn or more on the 92 to get a full output shaft rotation. The 92 shifts nicer out of the car than my 90, I dont know if that is because it is the newer T550, or because it has /12 the mileage.

Series8217 · Post by **Series8217** » Mon Nov 26, 2007 5:04 am

I didn't see any major differences inside that would lead to better shifting, unless the syncros weren't getting enough oil with the old baffle setup. The synchronizer assemblies themselves are identical to the old ones.
GM did change the spring rate on the select shaft and on the detent assembly, and also modified the shift forks; they are a LOT beefier on the later transmissions.

Series8217 · Post by **Series8217** » Wed Feb 20, 2008 10:16 pm

Will, this is what the friction surface looks like on the replacement blocker rings:

This is a Mitsubishi Evo blocker ring.

The Isuzu rings look the same. I found one in a pile of parts that used to be my old Isuzu tranny and noticed the similarity.

Jinxmutt · Post by **Jinxmutt** » Thu Feb 21, 2008 1:01 am

That trans must call for ATF? Do you know the reason for the ?brass? ridged area vs the blocker rings with the different types of friction material? It seems to me that the gear posted above would wear out in a few months.

Series8217 · Post by **Series8217** » Thu Feb 21, 2008 4:44 am

Jinxmutt wrote:That trans must call for ATF? Do you know the reason for the ?brass? ridged area vs the blocker rings with the different types of friction material? It seems to me that the gear posted above would wear out in a few months.

No, the Isuzu and Getrag call for Synchromesh. The stock Getrag synchro blocker rings are different than what is shown but that is what the new aftermarket ones look like. The Isuzu transmission has had blocker rings like that since at least the 80's.

That's NOT a gear in the picture, it's a synchro blocker ring. Those are not gear teeth, and they do not function as such.

The Dark Side of Will · Thu Feb 21, 2008 7:30 am

The GM ones appear to be sintered brass, but I haven't disected one yet.

Maybe someone who puts kevlar friction surfaces on automatic transmission components could re-line worn out GM blocker rings with kevlar...

Jinxmutt · Post by **Jinxmutt** » Thu Feb 21, 2008 10:55 am

opps.

Jinxmutt · Post by **Jinxmutt** » Thu Feb 21, 2008 10:56 am

Series8217 wrote: That's NOT a gear in the picture, it's a synchro blocker ring. Those are not gear teeth, and they do not function as such.

Sorry, I used gear in that last paragraph by accident. I know thats a blocker ring and what those teeth are. I've seen them with sintered bronze and a fiberous (cardboard looking) material before and it seems it would protect the actual blocker ring from being worn rather than just the ridged surface. I don't really know, but I would have imagined that the gear 'cone' would wear that brass ridged area away.

i was thinking something different than what my fingers had in mind.

The Dark Side of Will · Thu Feb 21, 2008 11:14 am

That's the idea. Blocker rings are wear items just like clutch disks.
The grooved brass friction surface is an older technology than the sintered brass surface. GM went with the sintered brass surface for a reason, which made me wonder about shift quality with the grooved surface compared to the sintered surface.

Jinxmutt · Post by **Jinxmutt** » Thu Feb 21, 2008 3:06 pm

Gotcha. Even the sintered units have grooves in them for the fluid, but I understand your point.