[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]

Re: Thi's musings on Metric Mechanic

>
>From: [email protected]
>Date: Wed, 30 Nov 94 0:36:39 EST
>Subject: Metric Mechanic again, or, Will Thi ever shut up?
>
>	All this talk about quality and stuff makes me say one thing:
>Korman races successfully, MM doesn't (that I know of...) and that speaks
>volumes about long-term reliability under high-stress conditions.  And
>quality of engineering.  Of course, Jim Rowe might not drive like Fangio,
>but their support of racers is undocumented.
>
In their catalog, Jim Rowe talks about the Autocrossing and racing he did in 
the late seventies.  Supposedly, their "ultimate transmission" was a product 
that originated from the need to make Autocross speed type shifts.

>	I don't know what to make of the comment "and ask [Jim 
>Blanton, former MM co-head] what he thinks of Metric Mechanic trans-
>missions".  Sounds, ahem, less than congenial.
>			thi v.

Jim Blanton is largely responsible for the development of the Ultimate 
transmissions.  Most of the improvements in those trannys was originated by 
him.  I've talked to Blanton over the phone about various transmission 
related issues in the last several months, and he seems knowledgable enough. 
 Blanton is no longer with Metric Mechanic, and I'm not sure if there were 
hard feelings or not after that separation.   Blanton gave me some good tips 
about making a B/W gearbox really shift.  Too bad none of my trannys have 
Borg Warner synchros...

BTW, neither of those two guys were very helpful with my questions on 
rebuilding a Close Ratio 2002 five speed.  (Blanton made an attempt to help 
me, and Jim Rowe only wanted to sell me another transmission.  In all 
fairness, though, Rowe did answer a lot of engine related qustions for me, 
and wasn't afraid to express an opinion or two.)


Erik
1968 2002
[email protected]

2002's are now on the World Wide Web!
http://ccwf.cc.utexas.edu/~efrank/index.html