Getrag Tranny .. 284/282

[Juglenaut]

this is an interesting tid bit....

http://www.rodneydickman.com/getraginfo.htm

[RidgeRunner]

I wonder why that site makes no mention of the 1990 and later transmissions. I thought up through 1992 were still considered "Getrag", with 1993-1994 being essentially the same thing but branded "New Venture".

[brian89gp]

There was the original "Getrag 282" up until 89, then they did a simple rename to "HM-282" I think. In the w-body 89 was called one thing and 90 was called another.

[SCREECH]

OK, you're all in the right ballpark as far as information goes, and most of what has been posted thus far is correct for the most part.

The HM-282 was introduced to replace the 4-speed Muncie in V6 equipped Fieros - true. It was also used in various other platforms as early as 87, if not before, such as the A-bodies (Celebrity, 6000), J-bodies (Cav, Sunbird), and W-bodies (GP, Grand Am, Cutlass, etc). There may have been one or two other platforms, but I'm going by memory at the moment, so you'll have to excuse me.

The transaxle was referred to as the Muncie/Getrag HM-282 5-speed (5TM40 was the "official" designation, 5-speed, transverse mount, 40 class torque handling). It was used in applications when engines with more power were installed, such as the V6 cars, the Quad4, and the 2.2L turbo found in some Sunbird GTs of the late 80s. Until 1989, the transaxle had an external clutch release arm. Starting in 1990 (I know this for sure, as I've got a 1990 Cav in my garage right now that I'm ripping apart) the slave cylinder bolts right onto the back of the bellhousing. I am not familiar with changes beyond this year and when they were implemented.

The information previously posted about the platforms that used the HM-284 was, as far as I can tell, correct. It did indeed have a very limited production run, and was implemented in a very limited number of platforms.

Now for torque handling capacity: belive it or not, the HM-284 is not worlds above the HM-282. According to the following link (not the one I was originally looking for, but you can Google it to find substantiating information) the HM-282 is capable of 200-275lb/ft, while the HM-284 is capable of 250-300lb/ft. (http://www.statikdesign.com/scratchb...arison_v21.PDF)

As some of you already know, I'm in the process of installing a 3.4RWD with GenII aluminum top end into my '90 Celebrity. I've chosen the HM-282 for my manual transaxle. Why would I make a "silly" move like this? Several reasons:

- The HM-282 is as common as skunk stink - it can be found in a plethora of Z24s in the boneyard, and can usually be had for around $200-$300. I just purchased a BRAND NEW unit meant for a '92-'94 GrandAm with a Quad4 which I will be swapping the bellhousing on to put behind the 3.4. I got it on eBay for $120US! The same seller has more for sale, but he's asking like $149 for them I think. Just do a search for grand am transmission, you'll see it if the auction is still going.

- There are aftermarket parts available for the HM-282 transaxle which I have yet to see for the HM-284, such as different gear sets and final drive gears, not to mention limited slip differentials with several designs to choose from. Like I said, I have yet to see any such parts for the 284.

- Cost for the HM-284 from a boneyard: I've never found one yet in the past 7 years.

- Cost for rebuild parts for a 284: last I checked, they don't exist. Apparently you are only able to send the transaxle, in it's entirety, to the manufacturer (would this be Getrag? I don't even know where you'd have to send it) and pay $2500 to get it rebuilt. If this has changed, please let me know.

All in all, I chose the Muncie/Getrag HM-282 5TM40 because, even if I do eventually grenade it, I can get a replacement as cheap as $200 and I'm up and going. And on top of that, I fully plan on installing an LSD into it.

Just so you know, I also plan on putting this transaxle behind a Cadillac Northstar motor sometime in the not-too-distant future. There's even a gentleman that's already in the midst of doing so in a Beretta. Check it out: http://www.cadillacforums.com/forums...dex.php/t-4058

As for the question about why Rodney Dickman's website doesn't cover the transaxles of '89 and later - it's because his site is a Fiero site. Fiero owners aren't usually concerned with much stuff beyond '88. In '89 GM started outfitting these transaxles with electronic VSS units as opposed to cable driven (very few, of the transaxles, including the one that's in the '90 Cavalier I bought, had a combination sending unit which had BOTH cable and electronic VSS sending capabilities). It's a big hassle for a Fiero guy to covert an electronic VSS back to a cable driven unit, so they just go with a pre-'89 transaxle most times.

I think that about covers the meat of the subject. If you have any questions, please feel free to post 'em. I've spent too much time researching these transaxles as I wanted to be as informed as possible when I did my swap - been planning it for years now.

[jmgtp]

Until 1989, the transaxle had an external clutch release arm. Starting in 1990 (I know this for sure, as I've got a 1990 Cav in my garage right now that I'm ripping apart) the slave cylinder bolts right onto the back of the bellhousing. I am not familiar with changes beyond this year and when they were implemented.

My 1990 282 also has the slave bolted to the bellhousing and the pivot internal. I was wondering about what v6ho had said about the 91-92 being renamed to NVG 5TM40 and having the internal pivot and the <91 external pivots. So which is it? Are the 1990 models labeled a getrag 282 (with an internal pivot) or was 1990 the first year it was labeled NVG 5TM40. Had I thought of it I wouldve checked the tag on the bottom of the trans case last week when I was under the car.

[RidgeRunner]

So I can picture how the 1990-1992 clutch slave works, just a slave bolted on the outside of a bellhousing, with the fork completely inside the bellhousing... so are you saying the 80's models had the fork actually protrude from the bellhousing?

Then there's '93-'94 having yet another type of "slave", ie. hydraulic release bearing.

[Juglenaut]

If you want a rebuild on a Getrag 284 you would have to send it to Getrag Gears of North America. Alot would say it is not worth it in its base entity, but think of howmuch these units or any manual transaxles is when brand spankin new. Plus Getrag bolts on a Getrag recommended clutch assy which can run close to 600-1000 just for a kit, even more if you get it from a GM dealer.

I had mine sent in to Getrag and about 3 weeks later it was returned to the shop. They called me in and I looked at it....Wow it was like a brand new tranny they replaced the main transaxle housing and did a 100% rebuild with new gears the works. I did however request it to be totally redone, I didn't have to since it was originally remanu'ed in 1997. The price range is between 1000-3600+ for a rebuild ranging form minor to severe. I didn't have to pay for shipping out but getting back cost 79 or so dollars. Get this the shop I brought the car to installed it for minimal labor ($48.85!!!) since they charged to to remove it (245 including 3 week engine storage) of course this would change if severity occured with the install but at which it went smooth.


So my main thought is if these trannies are so expensive to upkeep would that increase the car overall value if upkeep went into the tranny??

[RacerX11]

I just purchased a BRAND NEW unit meant for a '92-'94 GrandAm with a Quad4 which I will be swapping the bellhousing on to put behind the 3.4. I got it on eBay for $120US! The same seller has more for sale, but he's asking like $149 for them I think. Just do a search for grand am transmission, you'll see it if the auction is still going.

Is this the guy you bought it from? http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/ws/eB...category=33733

Have you received it yet? Looking at the pictures, I don't think it is a getrag. All of the getrags I have seen (both V6 of all vintages, and Quad4) have a plastic cap inside the bellhousing which covers the shift rail detent mechanism. The transmission shown in this auction does not have this. Also, the other pictures of the sides of the case do not look like what I am familiar with. Is it possible this is the newer 5-speed used in the 4 cylinder cars that is weaker than the getrag? The code on the stickers says M22, I am not sure if this is correct or not. That would suck if you go to swap the case halves and it doesn't mate up.

Marty

[SCREECH]

The code on the stickers says M22, I am not sure if this is correct or not.

I was initially concerned (ok, I still am a bit) about how different the transaxle looks, however, I keep telling myself that it's a transaxle design that is from a newer generation of vehicles than the ones I've dealt with up til now. I double-checked the part number (97078720) and it did indeed show the part number to be '92-'94 GrandAm, 2.3 w/o high output. However, the Quad4 HO motors received a Getrag 282 with a final drive ratio of 3.94 instead of the regular 3.61. The option code listed (in the line which says "M/TRAN..." above the "Genuine GM" portion of the sticker, bottom left) I believe is MG2 - which is the Muncie/Getrag 282, 3.61 final drive - same as I've got in the '90 Cav. If it was the Isuzu it would need be to MG4 or M32. The last number is definately not a 4, nor is the 2nd last letter a 3.

On top of all that, I've done as much research as I can stand with the Quad4 engines - and even in their non-HO form, they make 160HP/180lb/ft, which is more than my 3.1 motors! I haven't been able to find anything yet that states that an Isuzu was ever mated to a Quad4.

So my main thought is if these trannies are so expensive to upkeep would that increase the car overall value if upkeep went into the tranny??

You would not be able to recover your money, that's for sure. If you spend even $1000 on a transmission rebuild, and you were initially going to sell the car for say, $3000, you would likely not be able to suddenly get $4000 for it. Stuff like that usually is not fully appreciated by a buyer as far as you recouping your spendings.

Are the 1990 models labeled a getrag 282 (with an internal pivot) or was 1990 the first year it was labeled NVG 5TM40

Ok, check out http://www.v6z24.com/specs/mantrans for info on the different years and designations of the manual transaxles. It seems that in '92 the HM-282 changed to the NVG-T550. That's probably what I'm looking at in the eBay auction. From what I see, there are many similarities, however. I'll can explain later if anyone's really interested.

As far as the internal/external clutch release, I was at a wreckers a day or two ago and saw an '89 Z24 with a 5-speed, and it had the external release shaft.

Now if you'll excuse me, talking about this transaxle I bought on eBay some more has me wanting to dig for more proof that I'm not driving to Wisconsin for nothing. Oh yeah - did I forget to mention, that I'm NOT getting the transaxle SHIPPED - I'm driving the 6 hours to go pick it up. [/quote]

[SCREECH]

Ok, I've done a little more research, and it seems that what I'm getting into is an NVG-T550, which was the trans that replaced the HM-282 in either 92 or 93. It was used behind the 3.1 Cavaliers and Quad4 equipped cars. That's why it looks different in some respects from the HM-282. I'm just hoping that I can still get the HM-282 case to mate up to it. I guess we'll find out, won't we?

Worst case, as least I'll have more info that I can publish as far as the differences/similarities between the HM-282 and the NVG-T550.

[Cliff8928]

I just purchased a BRAND NEW unit meant for a '92-'94 GrandAm with a Quad4 which I will be swapping the bellhousing on to put behind the 3.4. I got it on eBay for $120US! The same seller has more for sale, but he's asking like $149 for them I think. Just do a search for grand am transmission, you'll see it if the auction is still going.

Is this the guy you bought it from? http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/ws/eB...category=33733

Have you received it yet? Looking at the pictures, I don't think it is a getrag. All of the getrags I have seen (both V6 of all vintages, and Quad4) have a plastic cap inside the bellhousing which covers the shift rail detent mechanism. The transmission shown in this auction does not have this. Also, the other pictures of the sides of the case do not look like what I am familiar with. Is it possible this is the newer 5-speed used in the 4 cylinder cars that is weaker than the getrag? The code on the stickers says M22, I am not sure if this is correct or not. That would suck if you go to swap the case halves and it doesn't mate up.

Marty

Yes, I know 100% that the auction as stated is for an isuzu trans (a friend bought one for his twin-cam)... note the obvious "Made in Japan" on the label..


Cliff Scott
89 BerettaGT
89 Volvo740

[RidgeRunner]

Somehow I don't think that's the NVG-T550. I thought they all (mine at least does) used a hydraulic release bearing instead of a fork, throwout bearing, and slave cylinder. Plus, I'm pretty certain that the NVG and the Getrag are nearly identical from the outside (except the clutch provisions of course)

I should have taken pictures of mine when it was out... but I didn't have a digicam, and I was in a hurry to get it back in.

[SCREECH]

OK, then. It's my turn to ask a question - I have been looking high and low for info showing that the Isuzu was ever installed behind the Quad4 in 92-94 cars, and as of yet, I only see that the Getrag, and then the NVG-T550 was used. Was the Isuzu ever used on the 2.3 Quad4?

[RidgeRunner]

I believe the J and N bodies used them from '95-'99.

[SCREECH]

I believe the J and N bodies used them from '95-'99.

See, that's just it - this transaxle is quoted as being for the '92-'94 cars. That's even what the GM part number shows. I'm going to the local dealership right now to get this straightened out once and for all. I'll post what I find.