Charger Forums banner

1 - 20 of 20 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
57 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
Hey, I'm curious if there is a point where one would need to trade out their 42RLE transmission for a NAG1 instead after reaching a certain torque level? And has anyone had that problem? I'm nowhere even CLOSE to worrying about this, but I am curious!


Sent from AutoGuide.com App
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
17,444 Posts
267 lb/ft of torque. Factory 3.5L produced 250 lb/ft. Not much buffer there. You can put in more torque but the tranny is designed to protect itself and up shift when the limit is reached. If you want to put more torque to the ground, you need a different tranny.
 

·
Vendor
Joined
·
10,351 Posts
Oh thanks for the info. Thats interesting, so I'm not probably getting all of my power to the ground right now with the 42RLE.


Sent from AutoGuide.com App
No, you wouldn't be as you lose about 18% throught the driveline anyway.

So if you had 250 hp and 250 ftlbs of torque from your 3.5L V6, you would actually be getting about 205 hp to the ground.:bigthumb:

Regards,
Brian
BND Automotive LLC:driving:
440-821-9040
www.bndautomotive.com
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
57 Posts
Discussion Starter #5
Oh yeah well that's a given. I meant what Ddaddy said about the 42RLE having fail-safes that cause it to up shift when it reaches the max. I'm assuming that max is at the crank, not at the wheels? If so, 17 foot pounds isn't a whole lot of room to work with!


Sent from AutoGuide.com App
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,407 Posts
No, you wouldn't be as you lose about 18% throught the driveline anyway.

So if you had 250 hp and 250 ftlbs of torque from your 3.5L V6, you would actually be getting about 205 hp to the ground.:bigthumb:

Regards,
Brian
BND Automotive LLC:driving:
440-821-9040
www.bndautomotive.com
That's way too optimistic as the 3.5L is getting closer to 180 RWHP and a 30% loss.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
306 Posts
That's horrible. I'm still unhappy that they used this transmission to begin with! 180 horses is pathetic for a car this size.


Sent from AutoGuide.com App
it gets worse as the temp adaptives kick in for the trans - if the trans is hot and you floor it going up an on ramp? Good luck on a down shift. My 2010 SXT had a cold air intake and the predator tune and it was nice to drive for what it was but the trans pissed me off alot early on in the 2 years i owned it, especially the first summer when it was scorching hot outside. I thought the trans was going bad, nope, just an under sized trans in a 4000 pound car.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
57 Posts
Discussion Starter #10
I totally agree. I've had the car a year and a half now and I'm still unhappy with the transmission. But what's the better option? Spending the money to change out the transmission altogether or just trading up to an R/T? Tough choices it seems.


Sent from AutoGuide.com App
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,876 Posts
42rle..... One of most horrible decisions dodge made was to pair this with a 3.5l engine.

Terrible efficiency and questionable quality. Heard quite a lot of 3.5 Charger/300 has their 42rle trans crapped out ~60k miles. Mine was already showing signs of problem ~16k miles. I switched to BND's QB and so far so good. No more excessive overheating and jerky shifting.

I thought about Forced Induction on the 3.5 with this trans. With proper cooling, it is possible to get a lot more out of this car. However I was concerned with the lifespan of the trans if I go Forced Induction. In the end I just leave it like that. Not worth it to dump loads of money into a car that has bad trans design from the beginning. It's better to simply save up for your next car than modding this 42rle.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
306 Posts
I loved my white SXT but I have been on the look out for an RT almost since I bought it. Over the years, I looked at a couple of RTs but I finally found a 58K mile 2008 RT with R&T for a price that would keep my payments very similar to the 2010 SXT. By the time I got done beating them up on the price of the car and the trade value for mine, I ended up with a payment that is $15.00 a month more than what 2010 SXT payment was and this time also includes a 3 year extended warranty and gap insurance.

What I did was tune it and add a cold air intake, the rest of the time I just drove it and enjoyed it. Only real issue I had was at times I missed the muscle car power I had with my old 12 sec Monte Carlo SS.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
17,444 Posts
Oh yeah well that's a given. I meant what Ddaddy said about the 42RLE having fail-safes that cause it to up shift when it reaches the max. I'm assuming that max is at the crank, not at the wheels? If so, 17 foot pounds isn't a whole lot of room to work with!


Sent from AutoGuide.com App
The tranny rating is based on the input (crank) not at the rear wheels. The 42LE is based off the old TorqueFlight tranny and is generally bullet proof, but it is tuned to protect itself from torque outside it's rating. The TCM is also notoriously quirky.

It was barely good enough to handle the 3.5L RWD and also why it didn't come on the AWD models (the tranny limitations made the required AWD torque loads completely unworkable). It was a cheap alternative so that Chrysler could keep the cost down on the lower models. It's limited capability is why they quickly abandoned it.

It was barely enough for the stock application and certainly can't handle much more than stock power.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
262 Posts
I have plenty of mods on my 42rle with no problems and I push her. As long as I don't have nos or a supercharger you're fine. I'm gonna add cams at one point and still not too worried about it.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4 Posts
i recently blew the super great 2.7 and am swapping it to the 3.5 but i was wanting to do a 5 speed swap as well but the motor says 4 speed so is it not possible to put in the NAG1 for that motor?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
26 Posts
Yes you can swap it to a NAG1 but you want to look for a W5A580. This is the 3.5L NAg1 with the 3.5L bell housing. Part number is RLM75491AE. I did the swap and I ended up just getting a new/reman unit for Chrysler. Defiantly not the cheapest way to go but I didnt want any problems. And trust me something wont be right and you'll need parts that you didn't expect. Happened a lot when I did my swap. Slight differences that you'll have to tweek and make work.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4 Posts
Yes you can swap it to a NAG1 but you want to look for a W5A580. This is the 3.5L NAg1 with the 3.5L bell housing. Part number is RLM75491AE. I did the swap and I ended up just getting a new/reman unit for Chrysler. Defiantly not the cheapest way to go but I didnt want any problems. And trust me something wont be right and you'll need parts that you didn't expect. Happened a lot when I did my swap. Slight differences that you'll have to tweek and make work.
last thing does it work with my current rear driveshaft?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
26 Posts
That trans had no business being in these cars.
The Jeep 42RLE VLP or the Mercedes NAG1 (W5A580)? NAG1 swap, rear gears and a MTCM will wake up these heavy cars. BUT yes the 42RLE is terrible... Its not even good for off-roading in the jeeps.

last thing does it work with my current rear driveshaft?
Yes an no. The 2.7L with the 42RLE came with the 3.90 gears and they're awesome. I have them installed in mine. The stock 3.5L with the NAG1 (W5A580) came with 2.87s. The 3.5L with the 42RLE VLP came with the 3.64 gears. The driveline is a two piece. A front and a rear. To install either gears you will need to get the front half of the driveline from a 3.5L with the up to the W5A580 and pair it with thee rear half of your current driveline. Reason for this is the mounting flanges aren't the same. One is a three both and the other is a 4 bolt.
 
1 - 20 of 20 Posts
Top