FE Power Forums
FE Power Forums => FE Technical Forum => Topic started by: Jackal on May 17, 2021, 11:36:46 AM
-
I hope this is an appropriate post here. If not, please delete and accept my apologies. I tried to keep as short as possible while providing enough information to get some assistance.
I have a '63.5 Galaxie 500XL w/ original Feb. '63 390 w/ 112k mi. and a '67 C6 that was behind a 390 in a Fairlane column shift. I want to start my transmission project in prep for engine rebuild in a year or two. I plan to take the 390 to 410 or 445, shooting for 450'ish HP using a BT 4v 427 MR intake and hopefully worked over 6090-C heads. This will be for street only, no special application, and I like bottom-mid torque and rarely live near red-line. I want a big lumpy idle, but not at the expense of driveability or power brakes. I will probably do something like a custom ground cam from Ken @ Oregon Cams. I currently have a 3.00, open, 9" rear-end, and I'm satisfied with the RPMs @ 70 mph. I'm not sure if a gear change is warranted or not, but do plan to install a TrueTrac diff. I also assume a mild stall converter will be in order.
I will probably build the C6 myself if I can get the shaft end-play sorted out without a big investment/gamble, and make sense of a straight forward rebuild manual that covers rollerization. I think I have decided to send the valvebody off to Broader to have it modified as a reverse, manual VB. This seems like it would work well with the stock console shifter and would allow deletion of the vacuum modulator, governor, and kickdown linkage and lever. (Curious what your thoughts/experience is if you have driven something similar. Maybe there is a performance shifter for this application that fits in the stock location that I should consider for safety or performance reasons?)
I bought the Crites C6 conversion bracket and isolator, but it sounds like this puts the trans at an unnecessary angle that even prevents getting the speedometer cable in place, so not knowing of any other source, I plan on going with the 1/8" plates to instead relocate the original crossmember. I'm not sure which isolator would be required at this point. I will also need some sort of slip yoke for the driveshaft. (Luckily I got the factory 1-piece shaft.) Not sure if I'd be better off swapping the column shift lever over to the console shift lever or just going with the TCI universal lever for extra adjustability.
This just leaves one last piece to sort out so that I can get started. I'm not sure if I should go wide-ratio or not, based on all these other aspects and what I THINK is my desired outcome. They add quite a bit to the cost of the build assuming my stock internals are in good shape. Any thoughts/input here is greatly appreciated. I have been hum-hawing over this for a year now. THANKS!
-
In my opinion, a "big lumpy cam sound" in a big heavy car with 3.00 gears(convertor stall not mentioned, but with 3.00 gears, I wouldn`t recommend much over factory)is most certainly going to come at the expense of low speed performance and drivability. I also think that a reverse pattern manual valve body, with a tight convertor and tall gearing will likely shift more harshly in normal driving than you may want. I only had the C6 low gear set in my 428 Fairmont drag car, over 20 years ago, so no idea how you will like it, but I would have to think it would help get a heavy Galaxie moving from a stop a bit brisker, I can`t really see a down side to it, other than cost. If you do a lot of freeway driving, I understand your desire to keep the 3.00 gears, but a lower ratio would really help get that barge moving.
-
Thanks for your reply. Yea I know my preference in lumpy idle and low-end torque are in conflict. As long as she sounds somewhat NASTY I can deal. I over cammed a v-twin and it about ruined it for me, so I will take sound advice over my hard head in that respect. LOL
I know the cam, stall, gearing, etc. all has to work together. I've only removed maybe about 250 lbs. in total and might keep the iron heads. I'm not opposed to going a little steeper, and I spend more time on 45-55 mph roads than on the freeway, but I'm usually at 70-75 mph in both cases. ;) Maybe the wide-ratio gears would help get me rolling while preserving the suitable highway RPMs, but I could also see this going the other direction where 1st. is nearly unusable and second would be more usable if not also reduced? The engine is clapped out so I don't rev too high right now, but I know that she sure wants to shift out of "L" at 25-30 mph. Not sure if it is better to invest in a new gear set, or the wide-ratio gears, or both.
-
After I grenaded my Cruise-O-Matic in my '62 Galaxie I went to a C6. I also had the factory 3.00 with open diff. I did the E40D wide ratio kit. While a bit 'whiney', it did work nicely to get the barge off the line. This was a factory z-code hydraulic 390, so nothing spicey under the hood. I trimmed the factory trans cross member to clear the pan on the trans and drilled two new holes for the insulator. It required a different length driveshaft I think, the factory column shifter did work, though didn't exactly line up on the column lines for P-R-N, etc. Pinion angle had to be adjusted, but that could have been due to the car being slammed as well.
-
If you're going that far into the C6, and want to keep the 3.00 gears then yes I'd say go for the wide ratio.
It WILL make a higher drop on the 1-2 shift, but not as bad as the GM 700r4 or Powerglide.
x2 what Rory said, a lumpy cam will kill that big car with 3.00 gears, BTDT. The biggest cam you want with that 3.00 gear is a Comp 270S, which is not very lumpy. Anything bigger will be slower.
For crossmembers, you can just turn the stock crossmember backwards, use 2 holes to mount it to the frame, which is plenty, and re=weld the E=brake bracket. A 50-year old trick, still works. Or make your own!
Why all the work to the C6 if it's just a street car as you say? Lots of cost, and a C6 will shift itself just fine with a little governor tuning, then just hook up the kickdown & leave it in "Drive".
For that money in that BIG car (4100 lb at least), adding more cubes would add more fun & make it less of a dog with any kind of cam. The 3.00 gear is nice at those freeway speeds so I can see trying to keep that. But in that case, the more inches the better ie go for 445cid or more.
-
Thanks all.
Street car all the way, but I had to put a teardrop on it and tape off the headlights too like a true poser.
I like the idea of the manual VB because I am used to manual trans. plus it eliminates parts which I'm oddly drawn to. I had to fabricate an adjustable kickdown linkage when I switched to the 427 MR intake manifold, so I didn't want to have to fight that again or fab up a Lokar cable. It sounds like I should plan on going wide-ratio and if need be, once all else completed, change gearing to accommodate. I had read somewhere that the wide-ratio kit could actually slow you down in the 1/4 mi., but I don't plan on doing much of that anyway.
I don't THINK I'll have to change the driveshaft length, but time will tell. I hesitate getting projects like this started without some sort of bail out plan in place and I just don't seem to have much luck doing things "locally".
-
I'm doing something similar but, with a much lighter car 3300 lb. My specs are 2.73 x 26" tires stock converter and a 423 ci, 5500 rpm engine.
I'm a old road racer and I dislike wide ratio's because you loose part of your torque band, going into the next higher gear.
If you plan 5500 rpm as a shift point, here is what your looking at:
-
I'm in agreement with the other guys, you don't want a big radical cam in a heavy car with a tall gear. It's a recipe for a turd.
A compromise is a short duration camshaft that still gives you the torque and lower rpm powerband, but ground on a tighter lobe center to give a little bit of sound. The short duration would work with a tighter converter. Keep in mind that for everything to be *right*, you will not have a big radical idle, but you can have a little bit of chop.
This is one of those situations where you can't have your cake and eat it too. That's why you see a lot of guys going to deeper gears and overdrive transmissions.
-
Have you considered a 4 speed auto or the newer 6 speed auto ? I've done a couple GM swapped to 4sp auto's and it's night day from a 3 speed , even with a 700R4's gear spread it's a big improvement over a T350 especially with lockup torque converter really knocks it out
-
Thanks for the calc/chart and input guys! (Though I'm confused by the shift points. Maybe this is where an auto VB would shift into that gear w/o low vacuum?)
I think I could live with a Comp 270'ish chop. I definitely know better than to over cam again.
https://youtu.be/alWXQyBhKfA
-
I couldn't live with a GM trans in my car, although I am running a Delco 10SI alternator. :-[ Maybe cool to stuff a massive 6R100 in there or something, but I would prefer to keep it fairly near 1967 era save the MSD and electric fan. ;D
-
Thanks for the calc/chart and input guys! (Though I'm confused by the shift points. Maybe this is where an auto VB would shift into that gear w/o low vacuum?)
I think I could live with a Comp 270'ish chop. I definitely know better than to over cam again.
https://youtu.be/alWXQyBhKfA
Man, what a fine looking machine that is!!!! :)
I think a 270H will be ok in a 445 with the 3.00, but IMO it'll really like the wide ratio (my car was lazy with a 2.32 first/3.00 T10 combo but of course didn't have a convertor helping). It should be fine at cruise @ 70mph, which I think is 2600rpm or so? The 390 pulls 70mph @ 2200rpm in OD, which is a deeper final ratio.
-
OIC...lol. NICE ride chilly!
-
I couldn't live with a GM trans in my car, although I am running a Delco 10SI alternator. :-[ Maybe cool to stuff a massive 6R100 in there or something, but I would prefer to keep it fairly near 1967 era save the MSD and electric fan. ;D
I hear that , the GM I referenced were classic GM's converted to 700R4 and the difference before and after was huge , I wouldn't want a GM in my Ford either but it does have me wanting to convert my 63 Fairlane 4 speed top loader to 5 speed TKX
-
I gotcha. Thanks for offering it up. I definitely haven't explored my options, I just fixated on a C6.
If I went 3.25:1, would wide ratio still be something I might want to consider with the bigger jump between gears and all? It looks like the gear set would nearly accomplish the same as the wide ratio kit in 1st, although I imagine all the fun happens in 2nd.
It looks like my original curb weight is supposed to be about 3,979 lb. or < a new Taurus. :o
==================================
For my reference and to help "visualize" the difference:
==================================
If I grab a gear at 70 mph with a wide ratio & 3.00:1, RPM jumps from 2,600 to almost 4,000 and I'm only doing 88 mph @ 5,000 RPM. Dropping back into 3rd. it would jump down to 3,300 RPM.
W/ stock ratios, I would only drop down to 3,800 RPM, hitting 92 MPH @ 5,000 RPM, and grabbing 3rd. would put me at 3,400 RPM.
W/ 3.25:1 @ 70 mph I'd now be turning over 2,800 RPM. Grabbing 2nd. would put me over 4,100 RPM, hitting 84-85 mph @ 5,000 RPM, and grabbing 3rd. would put me just over 3,400 RPM.
-
I like the idea of the manual VB because I am used to manual trans. plus it eliminates parts which I'm oddly drawn to. I had to fabricate an adjustable kickdown linkage when I switched to the 427 MR intake manifold, so I didn't want to have to fight that again or fab up a Lokar cable.
Just on the kickdown thing. I have not had the kickdown connected to my C6 in the 26 years I have owned the car. Frankly never missed it and you wouldn't even know its not connected.
-
Hmmmm, I could see this working out if the shift pattern was:
P-R-N-D-2-1
...and you just drop into 2 as-needed and be cautious about shifting back into D? This might be the best of both worlds. I'm not sure if mine is a "Green Dot" pattern or not. Broader said the 66 and 67 C6 is a clicker type VB.
I will re-consider it for sure. I guess with the manual, reverse it could get hairy accidently shifting from 3 to 1.
-
I have never actually had to shift down to mimick kickdown. Maybe its just my converter, gear combo ( I have had a few too) but the governor just seems to know what to do. If I took you for a drive you would never pick its not connected. Torque is a wonderful thing :)
-
Thanks for the calc/chart and input guys! (Though I'm confused by the shift points. Maybe this is where an auto VB would shift into that gear w/o low vacuum?)
I think I could live with a Comp 270'ish chop. I definitely know better than to over cam again.
https://youtu.be/alWXQyBhKfA
I wondered why that sounded so ROUGH. That's a Comp 270H (in a little 390).
I thought that video was the 282S or the 427-8v 324-324 cam until I looked.
IF that big Merc has a 3.00 & stock stall it's a dog off the line.
The Comp 270S is smoother than that, idles about like a 428CJ, when it's warmed up it's like there's "no cam" in it.
Solid cams idle smoother & make more power. Downside is setting the valves, not that bad for the low miles we drive em.
ON THE KICKDOWN:
If your intake doesnt have to 2 holes to mount the "Rat Trap" (bellcrank?), you can mount it up on the firewall.
Just keep the pivot bar in the same spot in space & "swing" the Rat Trap up 90 degrees so the holes aim at the firewall.
We even just used 1 hole on our original XL, didnt want to drill another hole in the firewall & there was 1 hole already there.
Works fine, although we just us it for the kickdown, not the throttle itself.
I've also used the stock 64 PRNDDL with a 67-up C6 column trans, works fine as noted above, but kinda sloppy for manual shifting.
So I just play with the governor & modulator til I'm happy with full-throttle shift RPM & then it's done.
I suppose your plan is ok if you want to shift it every time, but that would make Werby's Wife mad if she had to shift an automatic.
EDIT_EDIT:
Oh, that's Chilly's Merc!
I like the sound of those aerochambers. Like good old glasspacks but way better flow than most of the smallish ones.
-
As far as a manual valve body a Transgo 67-3 shift kit installed in your valve body would work fine .It is a forward pattern full manual shift .It makes shifter selection easier .I used one of these in my drag car before I went to a trans brake .It shifts harder than most other shift kits but not to hard .It has parts and instructions so you can have automatic shifts also .With the forward pattern valve body your selection of shifters becomes much easier.Whenever I would tear down my c-6 the clutches looked like new after 5 years .Good luck Doug
-
If the C6 shift lever engagement doesn't match well with the original console shift gates (?) then I would definitely look at going with the stock forward pattern auto VB instead. I'll try to check with those who have done the same swap to confirm so I know which way to go here. Thanks all.
I didn't realize the trans governor was "tunable". Do you have to drop the driveshaft and tail housing to get to it? Any more thoughts on going auto VB w/o the kickdown linkage? I have the original bellcrank and factory style intake to accommodate it, but I assume the linkage is quite a bit different. I already had to re-bend, cut, and thread the original FMX linkage and put a tapped section in-line for adjusting length. Maybe I'm already setup nicely for it to be adapted, but my luck doesn't usually go that way.
-
I have a wide ratio C6 in a heavy car with 445, 3.5 rear, 2600 stall, Brent did the cam, we were targeting a racy(ish) idle and 500HP/TQ with aluminum heads etc..
It is nice to get it moving a little quicker but yeah the 1 2 shift drops rpm's out of the power band a bit but for 90% of the driving wide ratio is nice.
Hard part for me is I keep expecting an engine to purr, just grew up that way around stockish 390's so having one that is a bit choppy makes me think my tune sucks all the time (maybe it does).
Without experience on various cammed engines I never know what a perfect tune is for my setup in terms of idle/vacuum smoothness/chop etc..
-
I wondered why that sounded so ROUGH. That's a Comp 270H (in a little 390).
I thought that video was the 282S or the 427-8v 324-324 cam until I looked.
IF that big Merc has a 3.00 & stock stall it's a dog off the line.
I agree, always surprised it idled that rough for what's a pretty short cam at 270* advertised/224* @ .050" on a 110lsa.
As a reference, here is same combo with the Survival Motorsports 276/282* 224/230* @ .050" hydraulic roller...fairly similar.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7auTeu_-kbU
I would say they both can pull O/D cleanly at 1600rpm, they're not "snotty".
-
Thanks for chiming in on the wide ratio gearing. It sounds like they still have a place on the street even with big displacement, shorter gearing, and a decent stall. I think I understand the issue with dropping out of the power band with the larger jump between 1&2. How is the 2-3 shift in comparison with its larger jump too? I'm kind of leaning toward 3.25:1 instead, assuming 2,850 cruising RPM isn't unreasonable.
It sounds like the Comp 270 doesn't typically sound so aggressive? What is initial timing? It seems as though my mild 460 is a lot more choppy @ 10 deg. vs. 14. Same w/ my H-D v-twin @ 6 deg. (stock) vs. 10-12.
-
Jackal A reverse pattern valve body requires its own reverse pattern shifter such as a B&M or Hurst .I wouldn't want to attempt making a factory shifter work with a reverse pattern valve body but I suppose it could be done .Doug
-
I added some info in my gearing chart. You can see that after the 1-2 & 2-3 shift, you are about 2000 rpm higher, in your power band, with the std gearing over the wide ratio gears.
-
It sounds like the Comp 270 doesn't typically sound so aggressive? What is initial timing? It seems as though my mild 460 is a lot more choppy @ 10 deg. vs. 14. Same w/ my H-D v-twin @ 6 deg. (stock) vs. 10-12.
It’s setup with 16* initial
-
If the C6 shift lever engagement doesn't match well with the original console shift gates (?) then I would definitely look at going with the stock forward pattern auto VB instead. I'll try to check with those who have done the same swap to confirm so I know which way to go here. Thanks all.
I didn't realize the trans governor was "tunable". Do you have to drop the driveshaft and tail housing to get to it? Any more thoughts on going auto VB w/o the kickdown linkage? I have the original bellcrank and factory style intake to accommodate it, but I assume the linkage is quite a bit different. I already had to re-bend, cut, and thread the original FMX linkage and put a tapped section in-line for adjusting length. Maybe I'm already setup nicely for it to be adapted, but my luck doesn't usually go that way.
A comp 270S will idle smoother than a comp 270H. Same specs but the solids & lash mellow out the idle.
Yes, to tune the governor you have to drain the trans somewhat, then pull the driveshaft & tail housing off. Not that bad, you can usually re-use the gasket. The governor valve itself is made from Kryptonite so it cannot be machined by any earthly material. Machinist had to order a special tool & machine it from Apollo Moon Rock. I might have exaggerated a little but not much. Sometimes just swapping governors around will get you there, eg a 428CJ or 429SCJ or 351CJ governor.
For sure you can run the C6 without a kickdown at all, but even then you'd still need the vacuum modulator if you want any automatic shifts.
If you just disconnect the kickdown, the full-throttle shift points will drop 800-1000rpm, which is likely going in the wrong direction.
-
I couldn't live with a GM trans in my car, although I am running a Delco 10SI alternator. :-[ Maybe cool to stuff a massive 6R100 in there or something, but I would prefer to keep it fairly near 1967 era save the MSD and electric fan. ;D
If you need any advice on a 6R80 swap let me know. Consider it a compromise between the C6 and the 10R80. ;)
-
Anybody have any data on how much power a cruiso sucks up vs a C6? Local argument.... One guy saying the cruiso. I say he is nuts, nothing uses more power than a C6
-
C6 is the king of the hill.
https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=2ahUKEwj2oIu56NXwAhVBM1kFHQtGDcgQFjAbegQIERAD&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.460ford.com%2Fforum%2F42-general-tech%2F118570-transmission-specifications-including-parasitic-hp-losses.html&usg=AOvVaw0vYSPOKScd5MHhviHZUqCH
-
Jackal A reverse pattern valve body requires its own reverse pattern shifter such as a B&M or Hurst .I wouldn't want to attempt making a factory shifter work with a reverse pattern valve body but I suppose it could be done .Doug
Actually, when I had the reverse manual valve body in my Fairmonts C6, I used a factory Ford Floor shifter, from a 69 Mustang. I liked the stock shifter for several reasons, first off, it was laying around in the garage, so it was free. 2nd, having experienced aftermarket shifters where the plastic cable melted on the headers or exhaust, the idea of a sturdy steel rod was very appealing. Having also experienced the frustration of the detents on the aftermarket shifter not lining up correctly, because the shifter was designed for a GM application, and the detent spacing on a Ford is a bit different, so if you get it adjusted to fully go into the 1rst gear position, by the time you get into Park, it does not engage correctly. I also liked the factory look, plus I was able to retain the original C6 neutral safety switch on the side of the transmission. To make the stock shifter work with the reverse pattern valve body, I just ground away the detent that would normally be between "D" and "2". That way, if the shifter is in the D position, which is 1rst gear with the reverse pattern VB, and you want to grab 2nd, I would just pull the shifter handle down, until it hit the next detent, which originally was between 2 and 1, but is now between 2nd and 3rd. Then when it was time for high gear, I would just push the stock button on the side of the T handle, and pull it down as far as it will go, and, voila, you got 3rd. I raced the Fairmont with the C6 for the first 10 years, using that shifter, and it always performed flawlessly.
-
Comment regarding whittling on governor valves. When I was involved in such shenanigans, I was working at T&C Livonia. The QC Lab and Process Section was within a few feet of a small experimental section where they were set up to work on the governor valves. They used small grinding wheels on the interior circumference of the valves.Whittle out a bit of weight and then test the valve to see how much you'd moved the shift point. With the governor, it's actually the centrifugal force on the valve, acting against the spring. Modulation is done by the vac-pot. Replacements are adjustable. Turn off the vacuum supply and it's all controlled by the governor. (We used a tricked governor valve and a quarter-turn shut-off in the vac line on Brother Lon's '67 Mustang/427 TP street-race car. It was led into the interior of the car and the quarter-turn was mounted to the lower edge of the dash.
Those valves are through-hardened, and we had regular sessions of having to make minute adjustments of such valves, working in bored and reamed aluminum valve bodies. Unless the diameters of the holes and the valves were watched VERY closely, the valves became small broach bars and 'ate' the aluminum parts. Production specs called out the surface finish of the holes. Air gauges, reading, actually, the leakage of air between the gauge plug and the hole were the standard.
KS
-
Like Rory I hate cable shifters, hate the 'GM' detents and wanted to retain the console. So as per the picture below I made my own detent plate with a sliding detent that locks the shifter in the forward gears. So 1-2 is a 'slap' shift against a stop, no button necessary. 2-3 is a button down shift against a stop. The lever is then pulled which drops this stop and allows you to shift into neutral and its the normal function then on to P. Of course the lever is pulled when going the other way to to drop it into D from N. Can all be done with one hand.
(https://i.postimg.cc/SxyKXwZQ/IMG-0284.jpg) (https://postimg.cc/3dchVb5z)
-
Hmmm, 6R80 sounds interesting, but I assume pricey and I wonder about all the electronics.
EDIT: NEVERMIND, I missed page 3. :\ I have the data somewhere, but IIRC 25 HP loss w/ the FMX and 55 w/ the C6 prior to rollerizing. I don't think I've seen anything on a rollerized C6, but expect its back down to 25-30 HP.
-
https://www.usshift.com/usq6.shtml this and a used 6R80 with a little bit of modifying , once you go OD you never go back
-
Hmmm, 6R80 sounds interesting, but I assume pricey and I wonder about all the electronics.
EDIT: NEVERMIND, I missed page 3. :\ I have the data somewhere, but IIRC 25 HP loss w/ the FMX and 55 w/ the C6 prior to rollerizing. I don't think I've seen anything on a rollerized C6, but expect its back down to 25-30 HP.
Here's my total spend for the retrofit. It comes down to value, future plans etc.... Probably 2X the cost of C6 but.....the 6R80 comes with a 2400 stall stock, holds at least 650 HP stock and of course has 4 gears plus 2 overdrives. In relative terms I paid a premium for my 6R80. Some sell for much less but with more miles and no warranty.
Fyi - I did post a thread in the project section. I'll bud out now. ;)
-
That does sound nice. The 4R70W also sounds like something I could have considered. I just thought the C6 would be cheaper, easier, and of course I was aiming to stay close to '67 with mods.
I tried to attach some pics that I dug up of the '63 crossmember adapter plates, but it doesn't seem to be working. I was mistaken on my trans being an FMX. I think it's actually an MX.
-
Others have covered your questions better than I can, but consider:
There is no such thing as a "6090-C heads" - most all FE heads have a "6090" (basic) pattern number (often) between the center 2 spark-plug holes. It is the prefix and suffix that are used to (usually) i.d. a cylinder head (such as the 1966-67 "poor man's" CJ, C6AE-R).
I understand "BT" (Blue Thunder) make nice Ford parts, but for less added expense, an Edelbrock might perform as well, and for less money. Your goal of 450 hp is easily accomplished.
The Truetrac differential is a good choice, along with new 31 spline axle shafts. Changing from a 3:00 gear to a 3:25 is such a small change, it isn't worth it, unless you need to buy a new ring & pinion anyway. Always use a solid pinion spacer - never the crush type.
You seem to be over-thinking much of you plans. The Crites C6 conversion bracket and isolator purchase is one example of putting the cart before the horse. The stock/OEM crossmember and a standard mount may work fine. You should consider ditching the idea of using a stock driveshaft, and plan on spending $500(+) on a new aluminum performance shaft. If the stock shaft is the wrong length, it's time to just get a new aluminum shaft.
You didn't mention chassis upgrades - especially brakes. Wilwood is probably the aftermarket leader, and they have many options available, from reasonably priced mild upgrades to big rotors and 6 piston calipers.
-
I’ve run 390 with 3.00 gear and a small cam for 30 plus years...not ideal but surprises folks as it just goes....55-60 in first,95-100 in second....heavy f100... for your application I know you want period correct but I don’t see reverspattern manual vb as period correct...I’d do junkyard 6r80 all day on this combo