Borg Warner T-10 transmission on eBay (?)

[elagache]

Dear mid-60s Buick parts hounds,

Somebody claims to have a Borg Warner T-10 that was from a 1965 Buick A-body for sale on eBay:

http://www.ebay.com/itm/1965-65-Buick-Skylark-Borg-Warner-T-10-T10-4-Speed-Transmission-w-Hurst-Shifter-/382127067630?hash=item58f88c51ee:g:ThwAAOSwbopZQE3x&vxp=mtr

Since I know absolutely nothing about this transmission, I'll let the experts assess this one!

Cheers, Edouard

[WkillGS]

I can't positively ID whether it's for a GS.
The tailshaft housing casting date is very early, July 1964, might not be the GS version..... if there is even a difference.
Input shaft would have 3 grooves for the close-ratio 'high-nickel' GS trans. Tough to see what this one has.
It may be a 64-65 small block trans, wide ratio I believe.
The aluminum side covers were upgraded to cast iron sometime during 1965 since the alum ones cracked.... as this one did.

Others here know the small-block trans better than I do....

[Brian]

That is definitely a small block trans for a 64 or 65.  Correct tail housing, and the vin is for a 65.  Most likely from a late 65 car since it has an aftermarket shifter on it (to replace the junky factory style round handle shifter).  64 and early 65s had a hurst from the factory (that is not one of them though).

[WkillGS]

Thanks Brian, I was hoping you would chime in.
So.... main case is the same as the GS version.
- Gearset is wide ratio vs the GS close ratio.
- Tail housing isn't the GS version, but is it similar enough for a GS?
Seems like a decent price considering it includes the Hurst shifter.
Does need a new side cover and maybe a $150 rebuild kit with bearings and syncros.
BTW, I'm not interested in buying it...

[Brian]

Tail housing will not work on a GS--the bosses to attach the rear mount are about 1/2" further to the rear on the small block tailhousing and it only has the rearmost shifter mtg location (5 bosses instead of 10 on a gs)

[schlepcar]

Yes,
There is definitely a difference between skylark and GS. I had the two sitting side by side and the rear tail has a different spacer and it makes the GS trans physically longer compared to the Skylark. I am not sure about the internals,but I think the GS is the only one with nickel gears. The seller does not seem to be advertising it as a GS,but it still seems like a decent price when you consider what just linkage costs now.

[elagache]

Dear mid-60s Buick parts hounds,

The previous T-10 transmission didn't generate a single bid.  However, there is another one now on eBay:

http://www.ebay.com/itm/MUNCIE-M21-Close-Ratio-4-SPEED-TRANSMISSION-GM-CHEVROLET-CORVETTE-MUNCIE-/152593803802?hash=item23874caa1a:g:HlIAAOSwFqJWjHJx&vxp=mtr

Details are sketchy.  The good news is that this one has been rebuilt supposedly.  The bad news is that it is more than double the price!

FYI, . . . . Edouard

[Brian]

That is a Muncie 4-speed transmission--Buick did not start using the Muncie transmission until the 67 model year, so that is not correct for a 65. 

[elagache]

Dear Brian and mid-60s Buick sweating out the details types,

That is a Muncie 4-speed transmission--Buick did not start using the Muncie transmission until the 67 model year, so that is not correct for a 65.

Oops!  That's what happens when you read an ad very causally!  Of course the fellow claims it would be correct in a 1965 - but that's another example of eBay "entertaining fiction!"  

Cheers, Edouard