Transmission identification

[1970 cortina GT]

I'm trying to identify this transmission that came in my mk1. I was hoping it will fit straight onto my 1970 mk2 GT motor but it looks different. I have a spare bell housing that will fit my MK2 1600 GT but not sure if it will fit on this. So basically I. See to know what motor fits this transmission. Thanks

[peteleo]

Cortina MK1 GT 113E / 116E unit. It uses a spring coil clutch assembly. Bell housing is 1/2 longer than the 1600 housing. Gear ratios are different than the 1600 GT trans.
You can use the 1600 bell housing onto a MK1 trans. The problem is that the input shaft might bind to the end of the crankshaft. You would also need to use the 1600 clutch hydraulic system and clutch ass'y.

[1970 cortina GT]

Thanks Pete, when you say the input shaft ' might ' bind, how do I prevent/ check for that?

[peteleo]

Mk1 input shaft is a bit longer than the 1600. One way would be to measure the depth of the hole in the crankshaft beyond the pilot bushing ( or needle bearing ).
To be sure the MK1 input shaft has enough clearance.

[1970 cortina GT]

Thanks Pete, appreciate your knowledge. I'll check for adequate clearance. In an ideal world I will put the twin cam, i acquired a couple of years ago, into the mk1 and put the original 1600GT back into the Mk2. Lots of work but it makes sense......

[1970 cortina GT]

I'm still confused about my bell housing in my Mk1 66 GT. It was identified as an original for the car but now Ken at Dave Beans says it's out of a mk2. I'm not looking to prove anyone wrong I just want to confirm what it actually is. I've included some pictures, the existing bell housing has the slave mount set back from the block side edge of the housing whereas my 2 spare mk2 housings are flush. Ken mentioned that it was a mk2 housing because the part where the starter goes in doesn't have a removable plate at the back of it however it looks like it is a separate piece compared to the mk2 housing. Just need to clear it up so that I can get the correct slave, clutch etc. Thanks

[peteleo]

Ken is a bit confused. That's the correct bell housing for the MK1. I can see it also has the spring clips for the clutch fork / T/O bearing, smaller slave cylinder, exterior spring, and removable bell housing end cap. Both 1500 and 1600 have the spacer plate.

[1970 cortina GT]

Ok that's what I thought, probably my fault, my photography isn't that great. So what reason is there that I can't use this bell housing on my twin cam instead of switching it for a mk2 housing? apparently the mk1 slave is available but the mk2 isn't. Just want to do what's easiest and what works. Thanks Pete.

[peteleo]

You can use the MK1 1500 bell housing with a 1600 diaphragm clutch, T/O spacer and ( 7/8" inner bore ) Lotus Cortina MK1 slave cyl.

Apparently you want to use the MK1 1500 bell housing on your TC. Then the MK1 bell housing won't work if using the larger twin cam clutch ass'y. Then you would need the 105E bell housing , which is balkier or use the 1600 bell housing.

It seems you already have the 1600 bell housing, spacer plates, fork and T/O bearing retainer ? You would still need the MK2 slave cylinder, rod, clip and spacer between the T/O retainer and T/O bearing.
I have a used MK2 slave cyl., clip, and rod. Rebuilt kits for the MK2 slave cyl is easily obtained. I can give you the part# so you can order on line.

[Brett Wilkie]

Ken is a bit confused. That's the correct bell housing for the MK1. I can see it also has the spring clips for the clutch fork / T/O bearing, smaller slave cylinder, exterior spring, and removable bell housing end cap. Both 1500 and 1600 have the spacer plate.

Pete is correct, that looks like a stock Mk1 Cortina bell housing (similar to the 105e) and it MIGHT not accommodate your lotus clutch assembly? Here are a few pictures comparing the later 2000e bell housing to the 105e bell housing, the 105e housing is slightly different to the Mk1 Cortina in that the strengthening webs are on the outside giving more room on the inside for a Lotus clutch. You mentioned before that you have a spare 2000e bell housing, it will also fit this gearbox but the hydraulics will be different and more expensive.

[1970 cortina GT]

Thanks gentlemen, I think I'll pull the bell housing off the transmission in the car and offer it up to the motor with the clutch in place, ideally like to retain the current bell housing with slave etc. I have a clutch with it but not sure what spec it is.



Oh and I also have a couple of flywheels that I need to pick from, both are 135 tooth yet I have two starters, one with 9 teeth and one with 10 teeth, both aftermarket pre engaged.
I believe I need to change the ring gear to 110 tooth.

[peteleo]

That's a Lotus clutch won't work in the 1500 bell housing.

9 tooth starter mates a 110 ring gear only. 11 tooth mates a 132.
Don't know if a 10 tooth will work on a 110 or 135, maybe a 10 will work on a 110.

[Brett Wilkie]

See what happens when you play with these cars, you get a big surplus of parts but that's not a bad thing. I would be inclined to use the starter on the left in your picture, I think it might be a more reliable, high torque type as it looks a lot like the 9 tooth I just bought.


I bought that starter along with a 110 tooth alloy flywheel to ensure reliability.
I was a bit curious too about your flywheels?? In your photo one of them looks like it is machined really thin, do you have more photos of that?

[1970 cortina GT]

Actually I think I'll have to use the one on the left as when I bolt it all together the pinion of the one on the right doesn't reach the flywheel.... the flywheel that is off the engine has a different clutch bolt pattern so I can't use it anyway. I can take more pictures if it'll help.

[Brett Wilkie]

That's okay, don't bother with a photo if it is not potentially going to be used, it just looked very thin to me?
The reason I went for the High torque starter/flywheel combo was that in spite of large battery cables, grounds and reasonable battery size my factory Cortina starter was only just acceptable in performance, besides my recollection of that Lucas stuff from the past is that it is only marginal in the long term.