just wonderin some of the pros and cons on both of these trannys and opinions on which is better and why. also is the hasport conversion a reliable setup and will the hydro funtion the same as the cable tranny?

 

I think that each of them have their advantages and disadvantages.

Cable: You can swap internal tranny parts with each other. I believe the OEM Honda LSD will bolt into pretty much any cable B-series tranny without modification/needing other parts.

Hydro: There is a lot more potential for different engine swaps with a hydro tranny since most "good" swaps are hydro.

I personally like the hydro (in Hondas), simply because it's newer and can support many more swaps.

 

cable trannys are a direct swap for pre-92 civics and pre-94 integras...
no clutch master cylinder to bleed or have crap out...

 

the hydro trannies are much easier to remove if your swaping or just need to do the clutch... ontop of that since it runs on the brake fluid if anything is wrong its a leak,water in teh system, or air in the system. so its not hard to trouble shoot.
the only con about the hydro tranny is if you want to put it in an older car.

cable trannies..... harder to work with cause of all the extra parts that it has on the outside... which makes it harder to put back into the engine cause when your putting the tranny back in usually it starts getting cought on things....
also since it runs on a small metal cable it can rust and just snap over time.. or get pinched by anything heavy in the engine bay and make it consideriabbly harder to press the pedal. on top of that since its metal it can strech if you like for example drop the tranny out without removing the cable shifting components...
pros about it are few... best pro about it is that if your building a totally custom car its best to use a cable transmission cause it will bolt up anywhere and you can just run the lines how ever you want without much headache.. but hydro tranies would require metal lines to be made and whatnot.... some people use regular hoses but i dont like that idea..

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by nickG &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">no clutch master cylinder to bleed or have crap out...
</TD></TR></TABLE>

Just broken or stretched cables

 

do you even know what the hell your talkin about

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by LordAphotic &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">the hydro trannies are much easier to remove if your swaping or just need to do the clutch... ontop of that since it runs on the brake fluid if anything is wrong its a leak,water in teh system, or air in the system. so its not hard to trouble shoot.
the only con about the hydro tranny is if you want to put it in an older car.

cable trannies..... harder to work with cause of all the extra parts that it has on the outside... which makes it harder to put back into the engine cause when your putting the tranny back in usually it starts getting cought on things....
also since it runs on a small metal cable it can rust and just snap over time.. or get pinched by anything heavy in the engine bay and make it consideriabbly harder to press the pedal. on top of that since its metal it can strech if you like for example drop the tranny out without removing the cable shifting components...
pros about it are few... best pro about it is that if your building a totally custom car its best to use a cable transmission cause it will bolt up anywhere and you can just run the lines how ever you want without much headache.. but hydro tranies would require metal lines to be made and whatnot.... some people use regular hoses but i dont like that idea..
</TD></TR></TABLE>

umm....buddy there more parts on the hydro then there is on the cable. the cable can pop on the cable trannys and cost like 50 bucks. the slave cylinder and master cylinder can crap out on the hydros and cost like 200. the only thing i can say is the throw-out bearing is easier to instal on a hydro tranny then a cable one.

 

the best advantage of hydro is the vast seclections of trannie and different gear ratios and the avalibilty of them. its almost impossible to find a short geared b16/gsr cable trannie that does not grind. in my opinion you can feel the clutch grab better in a cable trannie and there is more room for turbo because it does not have the solenoid like the hydro which gets in the way of puting a filter on the compressor of a turbo lots of times. small spline 89-91 cable trannies (the non ys1 ones like y1, s1, a1, j1) have weeker syncros and can stand as much power. cable is also more simple and it works good. no clutch fluid to leak or rubber lines to replace. its also very easy to adjust where the clutch grabs in a cable trannie. i'm not sure if this is even adjustable in a hydro. i also dont think that are much after market gearing or lsd's for cable trannies like there is for hydro

 

it was roomered that the actual outer casing is stronger on the cable trannies and is less prone to cracking due due to its design. Ive heard of high HP guys doing this due to the heilical gears wanting to pull apart from high hp/tq. Phantom Grip came out with a tranny cradle brace which should help minimize it..unfortunately you lose 5th gear in doing so...
Can anyone confirm the cable tranny casing is stronger???

 

to me, it all depends on what kind of car your motor is going in and what motor is goig in it. if your going into a car that was stock cable tranny (pre-94 integra or pre-92 civic) then i would jus use a cable tranny but if the car came stock with hydro than i would jus stick wit hydro. reason being that if u want to swap a hydro tranny into a car that came stock cable than your gonna spend extra money on the cable-to-hydro conversion kit. jus my opinion. i have a 92 integra the only problem i can say about is the cable has broken 4 times in less than 2 years but i dont mind payin $37 for the cable. jus my opinion

 

hydro trannys engage a little faster than cable. Other than that cable tranny's are a little lighter than hydro.

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by HONDA RR &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">hydro trannys engage a little faster than cable. Other than that cable tranny's are a little lighter than hydro.</TD></TR></TABLE>

you can adjust the cable on cable trannies to your desired endgagement height.

92-93 ys1's (both ls and gsr) you can swap in hydro internals