w58 vs r154?
07-01-10, 10:33 AM
#61
Driver School Candidate
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: texas
Posts: 7
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Not meaning to bring up a post from the past, but unless you are running a 750+ hp car, the w58 is the way to go. I own drive a supra and this is what I deal with constantly. a w58 will out-stand a r154 any day of the week!
07-01-10, 12:36 PM
#63
I sell jdm motors where i work and the w58 is a great tranny it shifts way smoother than r154. Its good for no more than 500 hp. i have several customers with these tranny's in there car with 300 to 500hp and they are super happy. If you add the lsd diff its game over you will have a good sold running car. if your look for more hp then that i would get the r154. but realistically cars with over 500hp as a daily driver aren’t that common.
09-27-10, 02:10 PM
#67
No
07-13-14, 09:24 PM
#69
Driver School Candidate
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: Californa
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I have a 1985 Toyota Celica GTS with a 22-RE (2.4L) engine with a W58 transmission, now my problem is that the gear ratios are very close so you can't really stretch them. my question is, Is the R154 any better about the gear ratios or is it mainly to accommodate the extra WHP of a turbocharged supra and such?
07-14-14, 10:42 PM
#70
I have a 1985 Toyota Celica GTS with a 22-RE (2.4L) engine with a W58 transmission, now my problem is that the gear ratios are very close so you can't really stretch them. my question is, Is the R154 any better about the gear ratios or is it mainly to accommodate the extra WHP of a turbocharged supra and such?
Now aside from that, compared to a W58 a couple of the gear ratios are ever so slightly more aggressive: 1st is *slightly* less short, 2nd and 3rd are *slightly* more aggressive, 4th is the same 1:1 and 5th is ever so slightly less aggressive. I have an R154 in my NA SC300 with a 4.27:1 rear diff and yeah, there is a very very slightly discernible difference in the acceleration of those gears. It has a unique feel. It also adds a bit more weight to the car really does need a more powerful engine to take advantage of its added strength.
With an NA car you do feel the heft of the big gears in the R154. I personally feel that the NA 2JZ-GE has just enough power to keep it and the chassis moving with the short rear diff ratio. 1st sometimes is more useful but often needs to be shifted out of early just like the W58. Also, in good rebuilt condition the R-series shifts just fine but it is a bit of a "manhandle" style transmission under some conditions whereas the W58 is generally quick and easy all the time. That doesn't mean the R-series can't be smooth in most shifting but it does mean you need to use more effort to move its internal shafts.
For an NA car, especially a 22-RE (which is a nice classic Toyota engine) won't benefit from this transmission significantly. You would have to use an R150 or R151 bell housing to make it fit the 22-RE as well.
The R154 is also a heavier gearbox than the W58, owing to those significantly larger gear sets.
I'd still recommend staying with the W58 and instead going with a 4.30 gear ratio in the rear. At a certain point only more power will help and for that I tend to think in an NA 1985 Celica you could do very well by swapping in a stock NA 2JZ-GE for more reliable power. Unless the weight of the engine on the nose is an issue. I also recommend the short shifter available from SupraSport for MKIII Supras (compatible with the W58 and R154). Those things will do more to change the feel of your car.
Last edited by KahnBB6; 07-14-14 at 10:47 PM.
03-01-16, 10:44 AM
#71
something just doesn't add up here
I mean, we always hear how w58 is "weak" and "breaks constantly", but.......what EXACTLY is it that breaks? I mean, if there is an issue with weak gears, I can machine a replacement gear (bridgeport with 4th axis) out of tougher alloy, case harden it, and even test for hardness. If it's a bearing issue, one could just do a little research and come up with a higher grade replacement. So what EXACTLY is deficient in these trannies?
03-01-16, 12:30 PM
#72
W58's were never designed for big torque or horsepower. Shock loading from turbo applications with enough power 300-350whp+ can be too much for them. They have gears and shafts that are significantly smaller than what you'd find in an R154 or V160. And I sure the same applies if compared to a CD009 or Tremec T-56.
Very good transmission for NA application but ultimately limited in its ability to handle tremendous torque long term. Some people who run them in turbo applications have better luck than others due to driving style but that still isn't a determiner of longevity with a forced induction engine.
The only forced induction application Toyota ever rated them for from the factory was with the JDM only 1985-early 90's 1G-GTE 2.0L inline six 210hp/203ft-lbs engine which used twin CT12 parallel turbos. A 2JZ-GE makes more hp/tq stock. And all the 1UZ-FE's they're reliably swapped onto make more than that. It's the manner of power delivery.
There is a physical gear size comparison thread on SF with pictures. I've been looking for it but can't recall the thread name at the moment. W58 (and W55) gears are much smaller than R154 or V160 gears.
Nonetheless there already is an upgraded W58 gearset available from either PPG or PGS. Probably PGS. However this would run a few thousand in parts alone.
It would still make more sense to use an R154, AR5 or CD009 rather than spend that much unless a race application specifically called for the W58 to be retained.
Very good transmission for NA application but ultimately limited in its ability to handle tremendous torque long term. Some people who run them in turbo applications have better luck than others due to driving style but that still isn't a determiner of longevity with a forced induction engine.
The only forced induction application Toyota ever rated them for from the factory was with the JDM only 1985-early 90's 1G-GTE 2.0L inline six 210hp/203ft-lbs engine which used twin CT12 parallel turbos. A 2JZ-GE makes more hp/tq stock. And all the 1UZ-FE's they're reliably swapped onto make more than that. It's the manner of power delivery.
There is a physical gear size comparison thread on SF with pictures. I've been looking for it but can't recall the thread name at the moment. W58 (and W55) gears are much smaller than R154 or V160 gears.
Nonetheless there already is an upgraded W58 gearset available from either PPG or PGS. Probably PGS. However this would run a few thousand in parts alone.
It would still make more sense to use an R154, AR5 or CD009 rather than spend that much unless a race application specifically called for the W58 to be retained.
Last edited by KahnBB6; 03-02-16 at 05:14 PM. Reason: Gear size note.
03-02-16, 10:03 AM
#73
W58's were never designed for big torque or horsepower. Shock loading from turbo applications with enough power 300-350whp+ can be too much for them. They have gears and shafts that are significantly smaller than what you'd find in an R154 or V160. And I sure the same applies if compared to a CD009 or Tremec T-56.
Very good transmission for NA application but ultimately limited in its ability to handle tremendous torque long term. Some people who run them in turbo applications have better luck than others due to driving style but that still isn't a determiner of longevity with a forced induction engine.
The only forced induction application Toyota ever rated them for from the factory was with the JDM only 1985-early 90's 1G-GTE 2.0L inline six 210hp/203ft-lbs engine which used twin CT12 parallel turbos. A 2JZ-GE makes more hp/tq stock. And all the 1UZ-FE's they're reliably swapped onto make more than that. It's the manner of power delivery.
There is a physical gear size comparison thread on SF with pictures. I've been looking for it but can't recall the thread name at the moment.
Nonetheless there already is an upgraded W58 gearset available from either PPG or PGS. Probably PGS. However this would run a few thousand in parts alone.
It would still make more sense to use an R154, AR5 or CD009 rather than spend that much unless a race application specifically called for the W58 to be retained.
Very good transmission for NA application but ultimately limited in its ability to handle tremendous torque long term. Some people who run them in turbo applications have better luck than others due to driving style but that still isn't a determiner of longevity with a forced induction engine.
The only forced induction application Toyota ever rated them for from the factory was with the JDM only 1985-early 90's 1G-GTE 2.0L inline six 210hp/203ft-lbs engine which used twin CT12 parallel turbos. A 2JZ-GE makes more hp/tq stock. And all the 1UZ-FE's they're reliably swapped onto make more than that. It's the manner of power delivery.
There is a physical gear size comparison thread on SF with pictures. I've been looking for it but can't recall the thread name at the moment.
Nonetheless there already is an upgraded W58 gearset available from either PPG or PGS. Probably PGS. However this would run a few thousand in parts alone.
It would still make more sense to use an R154, AR5 or CD009 rather than spend that much unless a race application specifically called for the W58 to be retained.
I think machining out a gearset in Maraging 250 heat treated and given a nice phosphate treatment should make it good for 750 HP AT LEAST.
03-02-16, 05:25 PM
#74
^^ It's true about technology having improved since the 80's however that's very a tall order and not so easy but if you do that kind of metal and machining work yourself and want to try it out on a W58 by all means give it a shot. I still think it's better to start with a different transmission entirely if you want to make that thing even hold half that power reliably with abuse.
750whp isn't a small number to ask of many manual transmissions let alone one not designed for high horsepower applications originally.
There was a recent thread regarding new strengthened replacement 3rd gears for R154's on Supraforums last year.
http://www.supraforums.com/forum/sho...ight=PGS+gears
A lot of discussion on the subject with the inclusion of Jack @ Jack's Transmissions, Jeremy @ SpeedForSale and others. The end of it was that the first potential vendor offering fizzled out but eventually it lead to both Jack's and SFS becoming distributors of PGS upgraded gearsets for R154's. And I do believe PGS is the same company that makes the stronger upgraded gearset for W58's. Very, very, very pricey solution in either case but available for those who need and want it.
My understanding is that it's a very difficult thing to make stronger alloy gears for a performance transmission but also the issue of torque holding has a lot to do with the internal design itself.
750whp isn't a small number to ask of many manual transmissions let alone one not designed for high horsepower applications originally.
There was a recent thread regarding new strengthened replacement 3rd gears for R154's on Supraforums last year.
http://www.supraforums.com/forum/sho...ight=PGS+gears
A lot of discussion on the subject with the inclusion of Jack @ Jack's Transmissions, Jeremy @ SpeedForSale and others. The end of it was that the first potential vendor offering fizzled out but eventually it lead to both Jack's and SFS becoming distributors of PGS upgraded gearsets for R154's. And I do believe PGS is the same company that makes the stronger upgraded gearset for W58's. Very, very, very pricey solution in either case but available for those who need and want it.
My understanding is that it's a very difficult thing to make stronger alloy gears for a performance transmission but also the issue of torque holding has a lot to do with the internal design itself.
Last edited by KahnBB6; 03-02-16 at 05:28 PM.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
