1960 Bellhousing and C1/C2 cross shaft differences.

[Greg L.]

Is the 1960 bellhousing a Corvette only part or is it common to other GM cars of the era?

Does anyone know what the difference between a C1(1960) and C2 cross shaft is in terms of leverage and mounting? Are they interchangable?

Thanks.

[Jack H.]

Re: 1960 Bellhousing and C1/C2 cross shaft differences.

Yes, it was used on other Chevy vehicles, does that help you? You'll be fighting the very rich & affluent owners of 348 tri-power and 409 engines. I hope your wallet is DEEP...

[Tom D.]

Re: 1960 Bellhousing and C1/C2 cross shaft differences.

Cross shaft for the clutch linkage? The one that fits in a ball on the left side of the engine? If yes, they are diff.

[Mark P.]

Re: 1960 Bellhousing and C1/C2 cross shaft differences.

The going rates for the 60 bellhousing is about $400. I thought I got a great deal on "an excellent and restored" unit I bought on EBAY for $280 but found out later it was missing part of the lower flange, a section about 1/2" X 3" that was broken off and ground smooth. I sold it for $200 to a guy that was going to repair it. I realized it 6 months after I bought it so had no recourse to the seller.

[Tom P.]

Re: 1960 Bellhousing and C1/C2 cross shaft differences.

The 60 housing is one year only. It was use on all 60 Vettes, regardless of engine and on the 60 pass cars with the hi-perf 348 engines.
The 61-62 bell housing is virtually identical to the 60 housing except for a difference in the size of the opening on the side of the housing for the throwout bearing fork. Again, all 61-62 Vettes, regardless of engine, used the housing as well as 61-63 pass cars with the hi-perf 348 and the 409 engines. MANY people believe that the alum housing used on 61-62 Vettes was only used in 61-62, but it was carried over on the 409 engines for 63 pass cars.

[Greg L.]

Re: 1960 Bellhousing and C1/C2 cross shaft differences.

Thanks guys for clearing that up and hear's the deal.

I just bought this car but have yet to actualy see it(other than lots of pics) let alone drive it. I bought it based on the opinions of what I feel are three trust worthy individuals, one of which is a member so I should be okay.

The car is a driver so the engine and trans aren't correct and apparantly the clutch is quite 'heavy" or stiff due to the leverage or geometry of the C2 cross shaft and the "403" bellhousing. I'll try it out when I get it and decide if I'll live with it or not. In the mean time I wanted to do a bit of research to see what it would take to make this part of it "correct" again.

I don't really want to go out and spend that kind of money on a correct bellhousing right now but I will IF I have to. I guess a "temporary option" would be to use a earlier cast iron bellhousing for now.

What is the difference between the 60 and the earlier bellhousing other than the earlier ones are cast iron and the 60 is aluminum? If they are configured the same maybe for now I could get away an earlier one and just spray it with say Krylon Dull Aluminum for the time being. Just a thought.

[William C.]

Re: 1960 Bellhousing and C1/C2 cross shaft differences.

Earlier cast bellhousings, will interchange directly and work as intended. just make sure you use one that has the provision for bolting the cross-shaft pivot arm on the side, and also that you use a bellhousing mount starter, rather than the block mount starter used with the 403 bellhousing. I'm not at all sure that the block mount starter can be used with the early bellhousing, and I'm pretty sure it can't be.

[Greg L.]

Re: 1960 Bellhousing and C1/C2 cross shaft differences.

Thanks Bill. Do you know what all years and models used this cast iron bellhousing or were they a Corvette and 348 equipped car only item as well?

With the exception of one being iron and the other aluminum would they both look the same when installed or are there some noticeable differences?

[Tom P.]

Re: 1960 Bellhousing and C1/C2 cross shaft differences.

Earlier cast bellhousings, will interchange directly and work as intended. just make sure you use one that has the provision for bolting the cross-shaft pivot arm on the side, and also that you use a bellhousing mount starter, rather than the block mount starter used with the 403 bellhousing. I'm not at all sure that the block mount starter can be used with the early bellhousing, and I'm pretty sure it can't be.

TOTALLY, COMPLETELY different--------------NOTHING will interchange!!!
The 403 bell housing is a 64-later fully enclosed housing and it is ONLY for the smaller, 153 teeth flywheel. ALL 55-62 Vettes used the larger, 14in diameter, 168 teeth flywheel (but had a bolt pattern for a 10in clutch). Thus, if you use ANY 55-62 (either iron or alum) bell housing (even an early truck housing will work), you will need to change the existing small 153 teeth flywheel to the larger 168 teeth flywheel. MOST early 168 teeth flywheels had a bolt pattern for the 10in clutch and the later (mid 60s-later) 168 teeth flywheels have a bolt pattern for an 11in clutch (which is my personal preference).
So, with all of this said, if you switch flywheels and bell housings, then you have TWO choices for a starter. You can use a bell housing mount starter, or, a block mounted starter that has a CAST IRON starter nose with the staggered bolt pattern (this starter will only work if your block has the staggered threaded holes).
The bell housing mounted starter was used 55-62 on Vettes/pass cars and continued use on trucks through about 1970. BUT, I would recommend using a 57-later bell housing mounted starter because the 55-56 starters had a somewhat different configuration and will look out of place on your 60------------------but it WOULD physically bolt up and work.

[William C.]

Re: 1960 Bellhousing and C1/C2 cross shaft differences.

usable versions of cast iron bellhousings include V8 Chevy pass cars 55-59, fairly readily available at swap meets etc.

[Tom P.]

Re: 1960 Bellhousing and C1/C2 cross shaft differences.

Thanks Bill. Do you know what all years and models used this cast iron bellhousing or were they a Corvette and 348 equipped car only item as well?

With the exception of one being iron and the other aluminum would they both look the same when installed or are there some noticeable differences?

The cast iron bell housings (with an open bottom) that will physically interchange and use the bell housing mounted starter are ANY 55-62 V8 pass car/Vette, REGARDLESS of engine, as well as pickup trucks up to about 70. Although, it would not be advisable to use a 55-56 housing, specifically because of a different type of ball stud in those housings for the throwout bearing fork. The 55-57 pass car and early Vette bell housings as well as pickup truck housings had angled flats on each side for engine mounting purposes. Since the Vettes didn't use bell housing mounts, that is a non issue. The 58-62 iron housings for pass cars did not have the flats for engine mounting (58-later pass cars switched to side mounts on the engine block and a rear tranny mount).
The 60-62 open bottom alum housings used on Vettes and 60-63 hi-perf 348-409 pass cars are visually identical to the 58-62 cast iron housings used on pass cars (NO angled flats for engine mounting). Other than the absence of the mounting flats, the appearance of 55-62 (up to 70 for pickup trucks) housings is almost identical, and all of them used the bell housing mounted starter.

[Gary C.]

Re: 1960 Bellhousing and C1/C2 cross shaft differences.

Tom, does this bellhousing have the recess allen head screw throw out arm pivet? In earlier cast iron bellhousings the passenger cars used the throw out arm pivet that was smaller and screwed from the inside of the bellhousing while Corvettes, trucks and taxis used a larger throw out arm pivet that screwed in from the back side. Same casting part number with two different versions of the pivet stud. Gary....

[Tom P.]

Re: 1960 Bellhousing and C1/C2 cross shaft differences.

Gary,
ALL 55-56 bell housings that I've seen have the smaller ball stud that is installed from inside the housing, and 57-later housings have the ball stud with the hex-recess and is removable from the back side.
As you know, 55 Vettes with a 3sp are extremely rare (maybe 75 units out of 700 cars built for 55). So, I've never seen a GENUINE 55 Corvette bell housing (that I knew was originally out of a 55 Vette). Also, with only 3467 56 Vettes built, and about half with 3sp, plus many of those having the 265 and 3sp replaced with later, larger displacement engines, as well as many of the 56 PG cars being fitted with manual trannys in later years, I'm not completely sure which ball stud was used in genuine 56 Vette bell housings. But I seriously doubt that 56 Vette and 56 passenger cars used a different bell housing/ball stud configuration.
Thus, I suspect that BOTH 55-56 pass car and Vette bell housings and ball studs were the same. And then the change to the ball stud that was installed from the rear was introduced across the board with all 57 V8 bell housings.
When I bought my 56 in 1973, the original 265/tranny were long gone and had been replaced with a 327-later bell housing-Muncie. And today, the bell housing that was in it back then is long gone and replaced with an alum 60 housing. Also, the 327 is long gone and now replaced with a SB400.

[Tom P.]

Re: 1960 Bellhousing and C1/C2 cross shaft differences.

Here is a comparrison of a 61-62 alum bell housing (-63 for 409 cars) and a cast iron housing for 55-57 pass cars and 55-59 Vettes with the angled flats for engine mounting (only in 55-57 pass cars).
Unfortunately, I can't show you a 60 ONLY alum housing (the difference is the size/shape of the opening for the throwout bearing fork), because it is installed on my 56. NO, I'm not going to go out there and crawl under it to take a picture of the fork opening! But it's similar to the opening in the iron housing.




Here is comparrison of cast iron housings for 55-57 pass cars and pickups. As can be seen, the angle and configuration of the flats for mounts is different (pass car has 2 threaded holes, pickup has one threaded hole and a pointed pin). Notice the hex hole in the ball stud for using an Allen wrench to remove/install it.
The very bottom picture is the 55-56 style which has the ball stud that is removable from the INSIDE of the housing.

[Gary C.]

Re: 1960 Bellhousing and C1/C2 cross shaft differences.

Tom, totally forgot that 56 early 3704922 casting had the small pivot stud like 55's. Thanks for reminding me. Didn't the 56 dated 3733365 Corvette bellhousing have the large pivot studs like the 57 Corvette bellhousing did? Great pictures! Thanks, Gary....