ausmini
https://www.ausmini.com/forums/

Remote change GB
https://www.ausmini.com/forums/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=6260		 Page 1 of 1
Author:  Bromley [ Mon Apr 11, 2005 3:07 pm ]
Post subject:  Remote change GB
In my entire mini history (13 months now) I have always thought remote was better than rod without needing any justification. Is this true? what are the differences? and which came first?
Author:  fuzzy-hair-man [ Mon Apr 11, 2005 3:14 pm ]
Post subject: 
Yes it is true (according to most people on here anyway) the rod change has two rods coming back to the gearshift from near the diff the remote change has a alumium housing that comes back to the gearshift.

The biggest advantage to the remote shift is that it acts like a second or third engine steady meaning less strain on the ones up front.

The remote change came first.
Author:  Bromley [ Mon Apr 11, 2005 3:19 pm ]
Post subject: 
I ask because I am in the market for a new engine and have seen a few with rod change boxes.
Author:  MrBob [ Mon Apr 11, 2005 3:28 pm ]
Post subject: 
Not being quite as much of a mini historian as most on here, I think Rod change is newer. Both have pros and cons as far as I know, you need better engine mounts for rod change as I think the remote acted as a rear engine mount.

As far as internals go i don't know much, but my rod change seems good and I'm happy with it - especaially since i put the extra heavy duty pressure plate in on saturday!!
Author:  Lillee [ Mon Apr 11, 2005 4:14 pm ]
Post subject: 
The remote box are from earlier minis, I think first designed by John Cooper. When BMC was taken over by Leyland they decided to produce the rod change as it was easier and cheaper to produce. Deluxe's came with 3 synchro remote box (1st gear doesn't have a synchro, I have one of these for sale in the For Sale section 8) ) and the mini K came and Cooper S's came with 4 synchro remote boxes.

IMO the remote boxes have more advantages over rodchange. The gearchange is much "tighter" than rod boxes, but you can get the rod box to be quite tight with some adjustments. The engine steady issue is no existant with remote change. I still prefer a remote box after having driven one.

Probably the biggest disadvantage of remote boxes is the fact that the parts are harder to come by and some parts are just not available new.

Just to let you know, the main reason that I am doing up this 1275 engine with remote box to replace Lillee's (perfectly good) 1098 is because it's currently a rod change box! I am sick of it! the slack is too much and I couldn't be bothered to change the parts necessary to tighten it up. It feels like a chopstick in a empty cup at the moment :shock:
Author:  Fez [ Mon Apr 11, 2005 4:18 pm ]
Post subject: 
I like the metaphor :)
Author:  Lillee [ Mon Apr 11, 2005 4:20 pm ]
Post subject: 
But it does! about the only thing that is making the gearstick even remotely stiff is the rubber boot! :? It's got at least 2-3 inches of play, and that is IN GEAR! :shock: :lol: Needless to say I have to drive her very carefully otherwise I grind metal :oops:
Author:  drmini in aust [ Mon Apr 11, 2005 4:56 pm ]
Post subject: 
Internally the gear sets are exactly the same for 4 synchro remote, and most Oz rod change boxes. Except the reverse gear is different shape. :wink:
Once a rod change shifter gets slack and sloppy it's pretty hard to fix other than by replacement.
OTOH, the ball linkages in a remote box can be hard faced, polished to size and refitted.
Of course, I'm biased.. but we do have cars with both setups. :wink:
Page 1 of 1 All times are UTC + 10 hours
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group
http://www.phpbb.com/