Xantia 16v/8v 5sp man trans compability

[Harvey]

G'day Xantia experts,

Do any of you know with certainty whether the 5 speed manual transmission out of a '97 2.0L 16 valve wagon, would be the same as that in a '96 2.0L 8 valve sedan (liftback) ?

Thanks,

 

[Nigel]

- Harvey

Does this help? What were the engine codes of the two vehicles?

 

[PeterT]

They’re physically the same case with some slight changes in gear ratios. I doubt you’d be able to tell the difference. The Citroen versions of the gearboxes have lower cwp’s compared to Peugeot however, due to the higher profile tyres used on the Xantia. If you want exact details and like counting teeth, look here:
catcar.info

 

[AlexB]

G'day Xantia experts,

Do any of you know with certainty whether the 5 speed manual transmission out of a '97 2.0L 16 valve wagon, would be the same as that in a '96 2.0L 8 valve sedan (liftback) ?

Thanks,

I saw this note when I was looking to see which BE3 might have hydraulic clutch for another post a few days ago.

Appears once the manual 16v RFV came out, only the automatic used the 8v RFX.
So in addition to crown wheel & pinion, it's likely the 97 16v RFV gearbox casing is different to the 96 8v RFX as this translates to

Vehicles concerned: all types except: Turbo CT, 2.1 Turbo D.
All BE3 boxes have evolved following the new reports.
2.0i 16V vehicles: 6 mounting points on the engine (instead of 4).

 

[Harvey]

Thank you all.

The (prospective) donor transmission is off an RFV engine.

The car we're looking to insert it in to has the RFX engine.

PeterT, I suspect you're right about the similarities in overall ratios. The casing similarity question sounds more of a concern for confirmation one way or the other before any major surgery is commenced.

Nigel and AlexB, from what references and publication dates are your excerpts ?

The 'Gearbox and Tyre Specifications' table would appear to be for mid-98 onwards Xantias, given the listing of the AL4 for the automatic option. Do you Nigel have an earlier version of that table that lists for the RFX engine ?

Under Paragraph '6.2.1', I am surprised about the note re. the different number of mounting points, but I'm having trouble interpreting it any other way than you AlexB !

Thanks again !

 

[PeterT]

Under Paragraph '6.2.1', I am surprised about the note re. the different number of mounting points, but I'm having trouble interpreting it any other way than you AlexB !

Early XU10 engines are connected to the gearbox by four bolts, in the block only.
Later XU10 engines have a winged sump, with two additional mounting bolts for the gearbox.

 

[Nigel]

Correct - factory manual from 2001. I don't have an earlier one.

I do have a Spanish manual for '96 that covers the RGX and others... brilliant line drawings, and Google Translate becomes a friend. PM your email if you'd like me to get you a copy.

 

[Nigel]

And... according to Russek, the final drive ratios differ -
2.0 litre/ 8 valve - 3.838 or 4.060:1
2.0 litre/ 16 valve - 4.427:1

The transmission removal instructions in Russek aren't differentiated for the 16V - but then, it doesn't specify the number of mounting bolts either. Maybe PeterT's sump identification is a quick way to check?