shifting nv4500 vs sm465

[kipps]

I've read that a early 90's nv4500 shifts harder than the later 90's and early 2000's ones.

When was the change made?

Are the early "hard-shifting" nv's any worse shifting than a sm465?

[mongocanfly]

the design changed in 96 I believe...no experience with the early ones but mine shifts easy..

[SunSoaked]

My 94 shifts smooth and easy. At least it did when I test drove it before pulling it. In the process of swapping it into my 85 K20 still...

[B. W.]

I've driven both early & late in more that a few rigs (only one was mine) and never really felt a difference. If one did shift hard I attributed it to the clutch or the gear lube. It may be an issue but I never perceived it. If I were buying one I wouldn't be concerned about it.

They all shifted better than the 465, with that said, I think the 465 shifts fine.

['63GENIII]

Originally Posted by B. W.

I've driven both early & late in more that a few rigs (only one was mine) and never really felt a difference. If one did shift hard I attributed it to the clutch or the gear lube. It may be an issue but I never perceived it. If I were buying one I wouldn't be concerned about it.

They all shifted better than the 465, with that said, I think the 465 shifts fine.

^^^This.

My beat up 465 shifted great once I learned it's personality. If it didn't shift well, it was user error.

That said, my early 4500 shifts like I would think a Porsche would compared to the 456. Never drove a later model but would expect the same or better.

I have heard that the round tower transmissions "can" be prone to dragging the shift forks if the shift stub "ball" starts wearing into the top cover. I have heard that the square top (later 4500) design eliminates this possibility. Again, Ive only heard this and not experienced it firsthand.

FWIW, my 4500 was rode hard and put away wet when I got it. If any transmission could have been worn at the stub shift ball, it would have been that one.