5spds for 504's
  • Help
Results 1 to 24 of 24

Thread: 5spds for 504's

  1. #1
    Fellow Frogger!
    Join Date
    May 2001
    Location
    New Zealand
    Posts
    314

    5spds for 504's

    Hi guys,

    just wondering about conversions for 5 spds for 504's, I am in the process of putting a fuego 5spd into my R17. I have had to modify (i.e. bash holes) the transmission tunnel to allow the 5spd box to fit in.

    Advertisement


    Is it better to start with the automatic optioned 504 if wanting to convert to a 5spd or does the 4spd version have enuf room under the floor already?

    The good bit about just using the manual pug would be having the pedal box already I guess. Also I notice that Dave Mcbean makes mention of using a BA10 5spd- has anyone used a celica 5spd box over there, or with the BA10 does it mean you then don't have to modify the tailshaft etc?? is the BA10 5spd only availabel in 505's.

    Thanks for any advice....(ps I don't have a pug just storing all this info away till I can get back to RWD fun again....)


    Cheers Ben

    Ps there is a really tidy 604, metallic gold down the road for $900 o.n.o (NZ$)

  2. #2
    Guru davemcbean's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2001
    Location
    Camden NSW & Selwyn NZ
    Posts
    2,343
    Ben,

    Both manual and auto 504s use the same pedal box. The only difference is that the auto 504 has a different brake pedal (larger foot pad), no clutch pedal and the hole for the clutch master cylinder has a blanking plate. To convert the pedals all you need to do is buy a manual brake pedal, clutch pedal, clutch activation rod and master cylinder.

    All 504/505/604 gearboxes are the same length regardless of whether they are 4 speed, 5 speed or auto (although I'm not 100% sure that this applies to the 604 Strasbourg/trimatic auto).

    The locating spigot on the front of the tailshaft housing/link tube (torque tube is not the correct term for IRS cars, although people still call it that) is slightly smaller for the BA10 5 speed from the 505 as compared to the BA7 4 speed from the 504 (I'm not sure what size the BA10 4 speed or BA7 5 speed use). You can either have the 504 tube machined or use a 505 tube (as I did). The trouble with the 505 tube is that it doesn't have the bracket for the gearshift mount welded to it (505s use a different and rather vague gearshift mounting system), neither do 504 autos. On my car I made up a gearshift mounting and attached it to the tube. I also shortened the shift throws (by lengthening the selection arm on the bottom of the gearstick by 2 inches).

    Both the BA10 and BA7 5 speed will fit into a manual 504 bodyshell, but I have a feeling that the tunnel may need to be bashed slightly on the manual bodies for the gearshift to clear the body when selecting fifth gear. My car is an auto body and the gearshift only just clears when selecting fifth, however I know that the BA10 5 speed can be fitted in a manual bodyshell because my friend's 504 has this conversion.

    The BA10 is only available in early 505 2 litre cars (pre 1982), 505 turbo diesels, 505 turbo petrols and 505 V6s. All other 505s use the BA7. The 604 and V6 504s (coupes and cabrios) also use the BA10 although it has much closer ratios than that used on the 505. The 505 BA10 has lower 1st, 2nd, 3rd and 5th gears than the BA7 4 speed and 5 speed, but the first 3 gears are slighty closer together. I noticed quite an improvement in acceleration when I fitted the 505 BA10 to my 504.

    For competition use, the close ratios of the BA10 (4 speed or 5 speed) from the 604 are the best of all the Peugeot RWD gearboxes.

    I have seen a Celica 5 speed conversion on a 504. The rear of the Celica box had to have a flange welded onto it to attach it to the 504 tailshaft housing. The 504 tailshaft and housing had to be shortend and a spline from a Celica uni-joint had to be welded on the front of the 504 tailshaft in place of the 504 spline. The gearshift also came out slightly futher back than on the 504, which makes the Celica shift better, although the hole in the floor must be modified.

    Regards,
    Dave
    NZ Fleet
    1976 504 Ti
    1984 205 GT twin carb
    1991 205 SI 1.6GTI motor
    1994 106 Xsi
    1996 Mondeo V6
    Aus Fleet
    1955 203C
    1997 Civic Cxi (great allrounder- revy, flexible, nimble, comfortable , economical, simple and durable )

  3. #3
    Fellow Frogger!
    Join Date
    Apr 2001
    Location
    Melbourne Victoria
    Posts
    302
    David,

    Sorry to change the subject a bit but i have a question
    I have looked at a few 504 around in the cheap car yards and some private sales and noticed that some of them have a conventional solid axle at the rear end is there particular models with the i r s and others with conventional setups.
    I have also had a ride in a 505
    I did not like it that much but it was a very bad example
    I will go for a ride in another soon i hope.

    Murat

  4. #4
    Guru davemcbean's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2001
    Location
    Camden NSW & Selwyn NZ
    Posts
    2,343
    Murat,

    Basically, the Wagons have a live rear axle and the sedans have IRS. In Europe, South America and Africa they also sold cheaper versions of the 504 and 505 sedan with a live rear axle (these versions of the 504 are still in production in Nigeria), but only a small number of these have ever been imported into Australia (probably less than 5).

    Unless you come across a rare import, all the sedans you see should have IRS (unless somebody decided to convert it to a live setup -easy but silly).

    All petrol engined sedans sold in Australia have 4 wheel discs. Wagons and some diesels have rear drums.

    Most 504s and 505s (with the exception of the 505GTi) have very soft springs (particularly the rear springs which sag alot). They are usually fitted with pretty roly-poly 80 series or 75 series profile tyres. The combination of the soft rear and the dodgy tyres makes alot of 504s and 505s feel pretty mediocre (the 505 also has a tiny rear sway bar).

    If you drive a 504/505 with low profile tyres (65 or lower) you will notice a huge difference in the handling. Stiffer rear springs or swaybar also make a huge difference.

    If you really want to get an impression of the potential in the chassis of these cars, try to get a test drive of a well looked after 505GTi, particularly the series 2 (December 1985 onwards). It is often difficult to get a good impression of these cars potential if they have dodgy tyres, sagged springs and dead shocks (I guess this is stating the obvious).

    The best way to get an impression of the chassis of the softer sprung models is to give them a good thrash along a very potholed dirt road with lots of corners. They are truly awesome when the going gets tough (providing the shocks are OK and the rear springs aren't too sagged).

    Regards,
    Dave
    NZ Fleet
    1976 504 Ti
    1984 205 GT twin carb
    1991 205 SI 1.6GTI motor
    1994 106 Xsi
    1996 Mondeo V6
    Aus Fleet
    1955 203C
    1997 Civic Cxi (great allrounder- revy, flexible, nimble, comfortable , economical, simple and durable )

  5. #5
    Guru davemcbean's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2001
    Location
    Camden NSW & Selwyn NZ
    Posts
    2,343
    The non power steered 504/05s have very low geared steering (4.5 turns lock to lock -sounds worse than it is, they actually turn through a very large angle). The power steered versions (everything after about 1983) have 3.5 turns lock to lock, but since the steering turns through such a large angle, this is equivalent to about 3 turns lock to lock on a front wheel drive car.

    As I said before, have a drive of a good 505GTi, to get an idea of the potential that the cheaper cars have.

    Even a 505 GTi will feel pretty soft compared with a 205GTi, but it will give you an idea of the chassis potential if you were to fit stiffer springs and swaybars. Try to test the car on a winding country road to get an idea of the road holding. In city streets even a 505GTi will probably feel pretty boat-like after driving a 205GTi.

    Dave
    NZ Fleet
    1976 504 Ti
    1984 205 GT twin carb
    1991 205 SI 1.6GTI motor
    1994 106 Xsi
    1996 Mondeo V6
    Aus Fleet
    1955 203C
    1997 Civic Cxi (great allrounder- revy, flexible, nimble, comfortable , economical, simple and durable )

  6. #6
    Fellow Frogger!
    Join Date
    Apr 2001
    Location
    Melbourne Victoria
    Posts
    302
    Dave,

    Yeah was i glad to get in the 205 after a ride in that worn 505 SRI.
    As you said i only went a couple of k's in a busy area so i couldn't stretch it out
    I will try to get a ride in a 504 and a 505 gti when a good one arrives at a dealership.

    Thanks Murat

  7. #7
    Gone Fishin' Ray Bell's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2001
    Location
    Burpengary and Murrumburrah, Qld and NSW
    Posts
    9,223
    <font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by davemcbean:
    All 504/505/604 gearboxes are the same length regardless of whether they are 4 speed, 5 speed or auto (although I'm not 100% sure that this applies to the 604 Strasbourg/trimatic auto).
    I would lay very large odds that the Strasbourg box is the same length. I'd say that from 1953 to the last of the 505s the boxes were all the same length.

    <font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">The locating spigot on the front of the tailshaft housing/link tube is slightly smaller for the BA10 5 speed from the 505 as compared to the BA7 4 speed from the 504 (I'm not sure what size the BA10 4 speed or BA7 5 speed use). You can either have the 504 tube machined or use a 505 tube (as I did). The trouble with the 505 tube is that it doesn't have the bracket for the gearshift mount welded to it (505s use a different and rather vague gearshift mounting system), neither do 504 autos. On my car I made up a gearshift mounting and attached it to the tube. I also shortened the shift throws (by lengthening the selection arm on the bottom of the gearstick by 2 inches).
    This is news to me (the size of the spigot), but I'm always willing to learn. If this is the case, I'd be betting the Strasbourg gearbox is that size too... but I've just fitted a BA7-5 to a 504 Familiale and the fit there was okay.

    The gearchange had to be fabricated, not hard using the original bits off the 505 donor sedan. I think the change is all right, anyway.

    Anyone wanting details of problems you'll strike doing this can contact me on raybell@eisa.net.au

  8. #8
    Guru davemcbean's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2001
    Location
    Camden NSW & Selwyn NZ
    Posts
    2,343
    Ray,

    The different size of the locating spigot on the front of the tube was also news to me, when I went to fit the BA10 in my car and the gearbox wouldn't mate up to the tube. I was glad I hadn't thrown out the 505 tube when the 505 went to the metal recyclers (as I had originally planned to do).

    One of the guys in Canberra with a 504 Cabrio told me he had his 504 tailshaft housing tube spigot turned down by a machinist, when he fitted his BA10 and modified V6.

    I think alot of people prefer the BA7 5 speed because the conversion is easier and I've also been told that it is the only 5 speed which will fit the wagon gearbox mount.

    Are you the same Ray Bell who used to live in Silverdale? If so, I went to school with your son and visited your place a few times.

    Regards,
    Dave

    NZ Fleet
    1976 504 Ti
    1984 205 GT twin carb
    1991 205 SI 1.6GTI motor
    1994 106 Xsi
    1996 Mondeo V6
    Aus Fleet
    1955 203C
    1997 Civic Cxi (great allrounder- revy, flexible, nimble, comfortable , economical, simple and durable )

  9. #9
    Gone Fishin' Ray Bell's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2001
    Location
    Burpengary and Murrumburrah, Qld and NSW
    Posts
    9,223
    You guessed it... Don't have that vast storehouse of Peugeot bits any more, it's absolutely tragic what I've lost over the past fifteen years.

    You didn't keep track of Justin, I don't suppose? He's a bit harder to reach these days, lives in Indiana.

    [This message has been edited by Ray Bell (edited 11 June 2001).]

  10. #10
    Gone Fishin' Ray Bell's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2001
    Location
    Burpengary and Murrumburrah, Qld and NSW
    Posts
    9,223
    By the way, Jim Taylor in Canberra told me he fitted a BA10-5 to a 504 wagon, but he reversed the gearbox mount to make it fit. I thought that was a bit dodgy, but they must have some integrity and it is probably all right as long as the mount stays in good shape. The mount, incidentally, can readily be reversed because it has the bolt holes in line with the centre plate...

    I'm presently anxious to get a fuel injected engine into the beast... all the fittings, fuel lines, pump etc have been done... A lot of detail work in this conversion.

  11. #11
    Gone Fishin' Ray Bell's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2001
    Location
    Burpengary and Murrumburrah, Qld and NSW
    Posts
    9,223
    Getting back to the Celica box, I did a bit of thinking about this because I had one on hand and a Strasbourg auto in a 604 that was terribly leaky as well as a wife who had finally mastered driving a manual.

    My scheme involved using the bellhousing from a Corona, I think it was the RT104, or a Crown 1900, which is a partial bellhousing that bolts onto the box just fine. Then casting an outer ring that bolts between that and the engine would have been simple.

    For the rear, I had no thoughts about welding, there was too much risk of distortion and shrinkage and nasty things like it not being strong enough. My plan was to turn up a flange that slipped over the little land on the back of the box and bolted/bracketed back to the studs that hold the extension housing onto the iron centre housing. The flange would naturally be machined to the same dimensions as the rear of a Pug box.

    The length difference would have necessitated a 504 ... what did you call it? I still think it's a torque tube, with the necessary change to the front spline on the tail shaft.

    As always, the flywheel would have been a snag... clutch would be no problem, Corona, Celica, Hi-Ace would all do it.

  12. #12
    Guru davemcbean's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2001
    Location
    Camden NSW & Selwyn NZ
    Posts
    2,343
    Ray,

    Sounds like an interesting project.

    According to the engineering textbooks I've seen, the tailshaft housing is only called a "torque tube" if its attached to a live rear axle and acts as a "torque arm" to resist the turning torque of the axle housing. Some of the Haynes manuals refer to the tailshaft housing as a "link tube" which makes sense. I've taken to refering to it as the "tailshaft housing" because it houses the tailshaft, so it is a straight forward term for others to understand what I'm talking about. I bet the French have a more poetic name for it.

    I recieved an email from Justin. Sounds like he's going pretty well. It was great to hear from him!

    All the best,
    Dave
    NZ Fleet
    1976 504 Ti
    1984 205 GT twin carb
    1991 205 SI 1.6GTI motor
    1994 106 Xsi
    1996 Mondeo V6
    Aus Fleet
    1955 203C
    1997 Civic Cxi (great allrounder- revy, flexible, nimble, comfortable , economical, simple and durable )

  13. #13
    Gone Fishin' Ray Bell's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2001
    Location
    Burpengary and Murrumburrah, Qld and NSW
    Posts
    9,223
    David, have you considered the torque-carrying job the 'link tube' does?

    It does indeed carry torque, or torque reaction, which is the same thing. Engine torque reaction is cancelled by differential torque reaction..

    Which wouldn't be so true if they still had wormy diffs...

    I imagine the diff mounts would have to be more substantial if they didn't... it's something Paul Quinn had to deal with when he put the Alfa engine and the 504 rear end into the 404.

    [This message has been edited by Ray Bell (edited 12 June 2001).]

  14. #14
    Guru davemcbean's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2001
    Location
    Camden NSW & Selwyn NZ
    Posts
    2,343
    Ray,

    Yeah, I've considered that torque, however it's axis is at 90 degrees to the torque which is resisted by a true "torque tube". So yes it is a torque tube of sorts, but an entirely different kind to the ones on live rear axles. A conventional torque tube/torque arm set up is the loan resistor of axle torque, while the 504 sedan "torque tube" distributes the engine torque out over both the engine and diff mounts.

    Dave
    NZ Fleet
    1976 504 Ti
    1984 205 GT twin carb
    1991 205 SI 1.6GTI motor
    1994 106 Xsi
    1996 Mondeo V6
    Aus Fleet
    1955 203C
    1997 Civic Cxi (great allrounder- revy, flexible, nimble, comfortable , economical, simple and durable )

  15. #15
    Fellow Frogger!
    Join Date
    May 2001
    Location
    New Zealand
    Posts
    314
    Hi guys,

    just out of interest what sort of money do the 5spd peugeot gearboxes (for 504's/05's go for over in OZ) in comparison to the celica gearboxes. I say this because the multitude of jap imports over here mean that a celica/supra gearbox can be had for some $150 NZ. That and the fact that every 505 I have seen seems to be an automatic- is this the case in OZ too? I think to get a 5spd box here I'd probably have to wreck an entire 505....

    Cheers Ben

  16. #16
    Gone Fishin' Ray Bell's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2001
    Location
    Burpengary and Murrumburrah, Qld and NSW
    Posts
    9,223
    Yes, that's a problem, Ben. Finding cheap manual cars and converting them to auto might be the go. Flog them off for what they cost and then whack the five speed into your car.

    Prices vary considerably, BA10s I've been offered for about $400, but some are asking $1500 for BA7-5s.

    If you have a sedan, investigating the Celica alternative might be worthwhile, or a Gemini 5-speed might work too. They wont for a wagon.

  17. #17
    Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2001
    Location
    Adelaide, SA ,Australia
    Posts
    43
    <font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by Ray Bell:
    This is news to me (the size of the spigot), but I'm always willing to learn. If this is the case, I'd be betting the Strasbourg gearbox is that size too... but I've just fitted a BA7-5 to a 504 Familiale and the fit there was okay.

    The gearchange had to be fabricated, not hard using the original bits off the 505 donor sedan. I think the change is all right, anyway.

    Anyone wanting details of problems you'll strike doing this can contact me on raybell@eisa.net.au
    The trimatic is the same length as the BA10. I converted a 604 to 5sp some time ago, and everything fitted fine, but the gearbox I had brought back from the UK was so noisy that I took it straight out and had the auto done up instead. This explains why the car still has a tiny brake pedal, and if anyone ever looks, a clutch pedal under the carpet. I was so worn out by the time I had finished that there was no energy left to undo what had seemed such a good idea at the time. Subsequently I have converted a 505 GR carb2L pushrod from 3sp ZF auto to BA7 5sp. with Kugelfischer injection from the 504..... A huge improvement in performance, a very high 5th, but there seems to be some increase in backlash, in diff, splines etc, partly caused the F.I. system being really quite old. Jon Hardy
    Currently own '69 404, '72 504 (V6), '72 504 cpe 4cyl (unrest), '74? 504 ti x2, '76 504 auto, '76 504 ti on gas, '80 604SL '81 505(ti) ba10/5 '83 505 (ti) ba7/5 fam,
    '84 505 Sti ba7/5, '86 505 Sli ba7/4 fam (project), 405GRI auto. Too many....

  18. #18
    Gone Fishin' Ray Bell's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2001
    Location
    Burpengary and Murrumburrah, Qld and NSW
    Posts
    9,223
    Fortunately the BA7-5 conversion in my wagon has worked out very well, the linkages I made up are fine, the box sounds good, the change nice (even with those nasty remote 505 bits in it!) and all that.

    Now, when the engine is sorted... it will be a Familiale of a whole different character...

  19. #19
    Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2001
    Location
    Sydney, NSW, Australia
    Posts
    41
    In response to Murat's question re chassis on 505 and davemcbean's reply.

    I think its a bit difficult to compare 205 vs 505 as it is a totally different car. Being of the FWD generation myself I found driving an RWD car for the first time (Alfetta GTV) pretty amazing. The 505 is very soft compared to a 205GTi, but the whole balance of the car is incomparable.

    I haven't driven heaps of RWD cars but I have driven Alfas and BMWs of that era and I found that the 505 is better balanced, and more progressive at the limit. Certainly the suspension is soft but the compliance is terrific, which is what makes the 504/05 such a good car across potholed and dirt roads. While the whole nature of the 205GTi is intense and willing (reflected in the handling and terrific grip) while the 505 can be enormously satisfying to drive fast or slow. Much like the 405Mi16 ...
    "Indecision is the key to flexibility" Anon.

  20. #20
    Guru davemcbean's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2001
    Location
    Camden NSW & Selwyn NZ
    Posts
    2,343
    I agree. Thats why I plan to always own atleast one 504/505. There's been atleast one in my family since 1975, and I can't imagine life without one.

    Regards,
    Dave
    NZ Fleet
    1976 504 Ti
    1984 205 GT twin carb
    1991 205 SI 1.6GTI motor
    1994 106 Xsi
    1996 Mondeo V6
    Aus Fleet
    1955 203C
    1997 Civic Cxi (great allrounder- revy, flexible, nimble, comfortable , economical, simple and durable )

  21. #21
    Fellow Frogger!
    Join Date
    Apr 2001
    Location
    Melbourne Victoria
    Posts
    302

    Yes i agree with you both a true performance car will not be designed as a fwd
    But Peugeot engineers some of the best fwd on the market
    The only fwd that compare are hondas and they have to use sophisticated setups to achieve
    While peugeot use a simple setup
    But in the end if you are into power like me you wont have much fun putting over 300hp through the front wheels
    There will be enormous torque steer
    At the moment though it should be nice and reliable with around 175hp
    The best car i have driven to date is a 944turbo porsche superb balance the rear engine 911 don't even compare
    Bmw also rate highly as a balanced car
    As i posted to dave i will drive a 505gti as soon as i get the chance

    Murat

  22. #22
    Guru davemcbean's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2001
    Location
    Camden NSW & Selwyn NZ
    Posts
    2,343
    Murat,

    The Porsche 944 is a great car. It's a pity they stopped making them. They're pretty cheap at the moment.

    I've often thought a 504 or 505 would be great with a 944S2 or 968 engine in it.

    The other thing I've thought of is buying a 944 wreck at auction and putting all the mechanicals in a clean 924. You can buy a pretty good 924 for less than $10,000 now.

    Dave
    NZ Fleet
    1976 504 Ti
    1984 205 GT twin carb
    1991 205 SI 1.6GTI motor
    1994 106 Xsi
    1996 Mondeo V6
    Aus Fleet
    1955 203C
    1997 Civic Cxi (great allrounder- revy, flexible, nimble, comfortable , economical, simple and durable )

  23. #23
    Fellow Frogger!
    Join Date
    Apr 2001
    Location
    Melbourne Victoria
    Posts
    302
    Dave,

    I have been for a drive in a audi quatro 4x4 turbo
    Also for a ride in a 996 4x4 twin turbo 97model
    But i loved the 944Turbo the engine is half of a 928 all alloy engine as you would already know
    It would be exotic wouldn't it in a 505 or a 504
    The late model 944s can produce an easy 300hp
    But its the handling that amazes you when you drive one
    It has a nearly perfect 50/50. Japanese built a nice copy in the rx7 Series 4 but it is not quite as good
    Yes they are getting more affordable all the time

    Murat

  24. #24
    Gone Fishin' Ray Bell's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2001
    Location
    Burpengary and Murrumburrah, Qld and NSW
    Posts
    9,223
    When I used to travel up to Grenfell all the time (years ago) I had a BMW 528i for one run... and I was using 125mph on the speedo all the time...

    A few weeks later I took a 504 on the same drive, and it wouldn't do any more than 100mph... but was minutes quicker between Blayney and Grenfell purely on its surefootedness.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •