BRINGING IT ALL TOGETHER.... A's, G's & E's


700R4 vs. 350 Transmission

Share
avatar
Lazarusvan

Number of posts : 1292
Location : Charleston, South Carolina
Age : 44
Registration date : 2011-02-22

Re: 700R4 vs. 350 Transmission

Post by Lazarusvan on Sun Jan 04, 2015 4:06 pm

m1dadio wrote:Stay with the 336, do the trans first, if youdon't like the rear gear later you can change tire size and/or rear gear.

The differences between the 200r4 and the 700r4 are debatable you can get good ones or crap ones in both.  The differences genneral equate to the differences of the TH350 vs the TH400
The basic 700R4 apparently handles more torque than the basic 200R4 which is usefull when your towing a 2000lb trailer up a 13% grade for 2 miles. (do you need that?)

I have a 700R4 in my 90" with a 342 gear. I think it would be better with a 336 based on the fact that the 1st gear is plenty low amd I would get lower engine speed and better fuel economy with the lower gear. Most of these 4 speed lock up trans came in vehicles with factory 308 range of rear gear.

I am going with a 200R4 "Z" code trans from a 1988 Montecarlo SS which had a 342 gear and the HO SBC into my 68 90". I think it will be a much stronger trans than the stock 700R4 I have in my 65.

With the 200R4 I will use the stovk drive shaft with the 200R4 yoke and new ujoints.  U joints come in all sizes and you just pick the right one to addapt any yoke to drive shaft. (special yokes and shit are not requried. If you go to a 700R4 I think there is a 2nd gen drive shaft that can be used if you have a 108" van. But if you have to make a drive shaft you get a good junk yard shaft with the same ujoint ends (because larger DIA tube is better) have it cut down and ballanced and use what ever new U joints make it fit. Mine cost less than 200 CND which would be about $150USD.

The torque converter lock up is a very important function to make the R4 transmisions work correctly and achive the best they can be. Just as is the TV cable set up to the carb. Either one set up wrong can make the trans performance be poor or less than optimum and/or can cause transmision failure in a short period of driving. The physical geometry of the TV cable connection and the Lock up wiring both inside and outside the trans is not rocket science but it does have to be built up correctly. This is the area where most people end up very happy or totally disatisfied with thier transmision change.

The lock up TC is for improved fuel economy in cruise. By nature of the beast no TC can achive 100% transmision of engine speed or torque to the transmision  because the fluid drive conection between input and output will allways have some loss. This loss can be anywhere from 5% or more depending on the condition of the TC . The older they get the less eficient they become.  The Lock up feature is to overcome this inefeciency  and cause 100% transmision of power by physically locking the imput and the output of the TC together. Again this is only done at cruise speeds, not when accelerating or decelerating. There are other factors within the transmision that are tacken into account when lock up is needed or not needed. Again if the TV cable and TC wiring are not set up righ you can ruine a good transmision or have one that works like crap.

If you are going to do disc brakes than don't buy different wheels until the time you are doing disc brakes because you need to end up with wheels that fit the disc brakes and your 70,s corvette wheels  allready do fit disc brakes.

I recomend you change the transmision first and get it operation correctly before doing any other changes. Too many changes at one time will lead to many hard to diognose and resolve issuse.


m1d

Thanks, Michael. I was thinking the same thing in regards to the rear gears. I figured it was easy enough to change that afterwards if I didn't find enough torque in 1st.

I found someone selling a 200r that had been rebuilt about a year ago. He said that the TC that comes with it essentially turns his rear gear into a 4:10 (he has a 3:76) in first gear. I understand that in general. What I don't know is how to determine how the TC should be setup? I likely won't take a chance on even a one year old rebuilt, but I was just learning about it from him.

I don't know what the "Z" code is, but is there any reason why this tranny can't handle my 90" wheelbase and stock 350 with 4bbl carb without beeing beefed up?
avatar
Xelmon

Number of posts : 333
Location : Smell-A, CA
Registration date : 2011-10-11

Re: 700R4 vs. 350 Transmission

Post by Xelmon on Sun Jan 04, 2015 7:03 pm

Lazarusvan wrote:I found someone selling a 200r that had been rebuilt about a year ago.  He said that the TC that comes with it essentially turns his rear gear into a 4:10 (he has a 3:76) in first gear.  I understand that in general.  What I don't know is how to determine how the TC should be setup?  I likely won't take a chance on even a one year old rebuilt, but I was just learning about it from him.

I don't know what the "Z" code is, but is there any reason why this tranny can't handle my 90" wheelbase and stock 350 with 4bbl carb without beeing beefed up?

Turns the fellows RPO into a 4.10... I presume he has a low-stall TC on there. Stall speed determines how soon the TC will start turning the transmission. With low-stall you'll have have better take-off with a torque-y setup. Medium-stall is what I have and it works fine as a DD. High-stall what drag racers use from what I've read, as the engine can rev up while still not quite engaging the TC.

As for tranny durability, I'm not sure what has to be done... Yet. Eventually I'll look it up.
avatar
m1dadio
Chevy Guru

Number of posts : 1693
Location : Victoria B.C.
Registration date : 2008-10-06

Re: 700R4 vs. 350 Transmission

Post by m1dadio on Sun Jan 04, 2015 10:10 pm

I use the term "stock or basic  " transmision  because any 200R4 and any 700R4 are not just all the same like many people want to believe. They come in different configurations from the factory depending on thier application. The Z code is one used in Monte SS, buick grand national, turbo regal,Hurst olds, 442 and corvette and there is other performance codes also.


This number tag on the tail shaft tells the year and application of the trans. In this case the 88 and the  CZF tell me this is the factory trans in this 1988 monte SS.

The Z code trans is built up with some improved and stronger parts than the basic  trans.  You might have a hard time finding one of these that hasn't been beat on if you can find one at all. The 200R4 was used in many full size GM cars and wagons. I would recomend looking for one from a full size car like caprice or olds 88 or 98 (I mean the big cars) and with big engines and the later years like 88-90 when they had all the problems workedout of them. You might have to learn up on the data tag numbering to know what your looking at. look that up online.
Also the 200R4 comes with 3 or 4 different bell housing paterns. two fit the SBC. One fits "Chevy block" only found in Corvettes  (not likely to find that one) and another fits all Buick, olds, Pontiac and chev. Look that up online also. one is B.O.P. only so you don't want that one.

this is one out of the Monte SS (its a fits all)


when it comes to these transmision used it dosn't mater what the guy says unless he is a reputable person providing a valid garranty. Otherwise consider the trans may need repair or rebuild because you have no idea what the trans has been through and especialy if it was in a hot rod or had some aftermarket TC put into it and not rigged correctly it could be toast. If the TV cable was not rigged right the trans can actually have burned bands and cluthes in a day or two of driving.

this read will keep you busy

http://web.archive.org/web/20070128173316/http://members.aol.com/powerrslid/thm2004r.html


thge200R4 can be built to handle 800HP if you need it
http://www.superchevy.com/how-to/transmission/sucp-0904-chevy-th2004r-transmission-build/

the 200R4 has an even higher fourth gear than the 700R4  it is .67:1 with the TC in lockup that is 33% better than a TH350 take your rear gear of 336:1 and math it. 3.36 X 33% = 1.108, 3.36-1.108= equivelant to 2.25:1  on the highway in lockup only. (theoretical)


I don't know what that guy is saying to you, a torque converter is not an RPM multiplyer or divider persay like a gear ratio is. When a torque converter is not in lockup you cannot state where it is exactly at in terms of rpm input vs output. There are so many technical and hydrodynamic variables that it is imposible to claim with any accuracy that "whatever torque converter" makes the effect of a different rear gear ration. The thoughts or statement that a torque converter can do that are purly hypethetical. I can give a tutorial on how and why torque converters do what they do but that would likely reduce a grown man to tears trying to read it. If anything has the effect of changing the rear gear ratio its his first gear causing it not the TC.


this is not as complicated to do as people think.


The lock up wiring is basicaly a power and a ground wire to a solinoid in the trans. usually power is run directly and fused, and the ground is run in series through several switching devices. one switch will activate the lock up and the otherswitches are designed to unlock it based on different driving conditions like stepping on the gas or pressing the brake pedal. It can be wired to work with differnt wire and switch arangments and infact any given transmision could be wired internaly any one of 47 different ways. Thats why it important to design the wiring diagram you need and than open the trans pan and make it wired the way you need it when you are doing the install.


You are also going to have to consider the speedo gear ratio and connection to your speedo cable. you deal with this usually after you are back on the road andcan measure the error of the speedo

M1d
avatar
Lazarusvan

Number of posts : 1292
Location : Charleston, South Carolina
Age : 44
Registration date : 2011-02-22

Re: 700R4 vs. 350 Transmission

Post by Lazarusvan on Mon Jan 05, 2015 7:48 am

Thanks, again, M1D.  My eyes are starting to glaze over...slightly.

I have located a 2004r locally.  It would be coming out of a clean car 1986 Caprice with 64,000 original miles. It was in a wreck and both front and back got crunched.

Car was owned by an elderly lady and had a 4.3 Chevy motor.

I spoke with the guy on the phone and he said no B.S. the car is super clean and that is was an elderly lady's car, so we know it wasn't beat on.

Driveshaft may not be any good due to rear end damage.

Quoted $400, but I think they would wiggle a bit.  That price re-confirms the fact that it is a good tranny or one they believe is good because they are asking a strong price for it being ready to go.  I was quoted $175 for a 2004r at LKQ if they had one, which they don't.  I think the driveshaft would run another $50-60 if they had one.

I spoke with a local shop with a straightforward owner. He charges -+ $325 to build a custom, beefed up driveshaft with CUSTOM yolks or U-Joints. He will not build one using over the counter yolks/Ujoints (can't recall which one's tend to break.)

Although not 88-89, it would seem to fit the other requirements.  If so, at this mileage, would it perhaps make sense to get this one, just rebuild the seals and get a new pump, and go with this one?

I don't know enough about transmission life to know how many miles a tranny is good for even when well cared for.  The guy on the phone at the scrap yard suggested to just replace the seals and pump and should have solid tranny.

Since I've posted this, I've called two tranny shops. Neither one likes the 200's under any circumstance. One guy sounds like he doesn't like them due to their being used in heavier cars vs. the lighter van and he reference the fact they were used with 308's.

The first guy has nothing but disdain for them, even though I mentioned finding one from a beefy car. He quoted $1500 to rebuild either, which is twice what I was expecting.

Thoughts?
avatar
Twinpilot001

Number of posts : 6186
Location : spokane ,Wa.
Registration date : 2009-09-28

Re: 700R4 vs. 350 Transmission

Post by Twinpilot001 on Mon Jan 05, 2015 9:09 am

Careful on tranny shops!!!!!!!!!!!!! wat toomuch to rebuild usually -there is =ALWAYS a tranny guy that works in a tranny shop That builds @ home too-look in craigs for them!!Now -from experience!!- i dont replace any pumpon alow mileage tranny! unless that fluid is bad & really dirty!! I always replace the seals & dont forget the spedo o-ring too!! I always also add a transgo or b&m shift kit!! This alone will extend the trannys life as it firms up the shift points!! that allows clutch plate wear to be negligible--im my 56 chev truck - built v-8 & 3:70 gears & posi - I installed aknown good turbo 350 trans from atruck i had 30 years back -trans had 156,000. miles on it & after seals & transgo shift kit- it still chirps the tires in second gear & doesnt need any work as yet!! I also always install that shift kit for the max shift firmness too! Tranny kits usually only costs from 100-150.00 bux too so @ a quote of 1500 bux - see whoose gettin made a fool of?? usually a backyard builder will do a trans for 100-150 bux around here - just need to look for aguy locally!!cheers
avatar
steelrat

Number of posts : 103
Location : BC Canada
Registration date : 2014-11-24

Re: 700R4 vs. 350 Transmission

Post by steelrat on Mon Jan 05, 2015 10:15 am

I have a 700R4 in my 70 Nova with 373 gears. It is a built up 700R4 to handle 500 hp/tq. It is a great trans. 1st- 3.06:1 2nd - 1.63:1 3rd- 1:1 4th - 0.70:1

1st gear is a beast Very Happy  Great for boiling the tires and launches. There is a pretty big drop in ratio to 2nd, not an issue when making big torque. 4th is great on the highway 55 mph @ 1800 rpm.
a wee demo of 1st & 2nd... Shocked

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QmN_NBsu5wQ&feature=player_embedded
avatar
Big W

Number of posts : 3270
Location : Saskatoon,Sask,Canada
Age : 53
Registration date : 2011-01-13

Re: 700R4 vs. 350 Transmission

Post by Big W on Mon Jan 05, 2015 3:34 pm

I'd have to say, that's a John Force class burnout. That trans is working goooood. cheers
avatar
m1dadio
Chevy Guru

Number of posts : 1693
Location : Victoria B.C.
Registration date : 2008-10-06

Re: 700R4 vs. 350 Transmission

Post by m1dadio on Mon Jan 05, 2015 6:15 pm

If you go with a 200R4 you won't need a drive shaft just nthe yoke and If my memory serves me right I think its a pretty commun yoke, same as TH350 but don't quote me on that. A 200R4 is worth about $300 just as a core around here. That sounds like a good deal out of the caprice but if the drive shaft got dammaged in the crash you need to look at the tail shaft and tail housing for evedence of damage.

Also find out what the rear gear ratio is in the doner car. That info will help when calibrating your speedo. Keep the electrical connector to the trans

Thats a good burn out Steelrat!
M1D
avatar
Lazarusvan

Number of posts : 1292
Location : Charleston, South Carolina
Age : 44
Registration date : 2011-02-22

Re: 700R4 vs. 350 Transmission

Post by Lazarusvan on Mon Jan 05, 2015 7:05 pm

m1dadio wrote:If you go with a 200R4 you won't need a drive shaft just nthe yoke and If my memory serves me right I think its a pretty commun yoke, same as TH350 but don't quote me on that. A 200R4 is worth about $300 just as a core around here. That sounds like a good deal out of the caprice but if the drive shaft got dammaged in the crash you need to look at the tail shaft and tail housing for evedence of damage.

Also find out what the rear gear ratio is in the doner car. That info will help when calibrating your speedo. Keep the electrical connector to the trans

Thats a good burn out Steelrat!
M1D

Thanks, M1D.

You are a scientist in your approach. The vehicle, a 1986 Caprice, had a 4.3 Chevy engine. If it bolts right up AND I DON'T have to rebuild it, it will save me a good bit of money. Rebuilds here from the Craigslist rebuilders are about $600-$650.

I thought the price sounded good as well. I was told that the 200's are a pain to rebuild by a third rebuilder who thought they were fine, so perhaps that is why one guy would say nothing good about it.
avatar
m1dadio
Chevy Guru

Number of posts : 1693
Location : Victoria B.C.
Registration date : 2008-10-06

Re: 700R4 vs. 350 Transmission

Post by m1dadio on Mon Jan 05, 2015 10:25 pm

I don't know about what it takes to rebuild one. I do know GM put them behind many large cars and also into larger performance cars like those I named above and GM could have easily fit the 700R4 into those large cars. But they chose not to. everbody has an oppinion about this or that including me. I have a 700R4 in my van and its good but I now believe I will be happier with the 200R4after researching all the info and oppinions.

info

http://www.bowtieoverdrives.com/index.shtml

http://www.cpttransmission.com/techinfo.htm

m1d
avatar
m1dadio
Chevy Guru

Number of posts : 1693
Location : Victoria B.C.
Registration date : 2008-10-06

Re: 700R4 vs. 350 Transmission

Post by m1dadio on Sun Jan 11, 2015 9:32 am

To a question asked:
One aspect considered in drive line  design is "how much flex can be permited of the 3rd member pinion shaft".  These vans with thier leaf spring design permit a crazy amount of leaf spring wrap/flex. If the rear end is on riser blocks the situation is much worse.

The basic rule is, (with commun U joints)  for every 12" of drive shaft the rear pinnion can flex out of alignment by 1/4 of a degree without venturing into the noticable vibration range.

this is my van before track bars

http://illiweb.com/fa/pbucket.gif?sort=3&o=4

http://illiweb.com/fa/pbucket.gif?sort=3&o=3


With the 700R4 in a 90" van the drive shaft will be about 19" long. That means  in therory the rear end pinion should not be aloud to flex 1/2 degree.  This is very difficult, if not imossible to control with the type of suspension the rear end is mounted to.

Also the rear end was moving up and forward so much it was pushing the trans and engine forward. This is partly due to a problem GM had with metalurgy of the slip yokes and the yoke was actually grabbing the spline under load and not "slipping". (I also twisted the yoke spline which made it worse)

http://illiweb.com/fa/pbucket.gif?sort=3&o=2

I have installed properly engineered track bars and installed diagonal bracing to the trans mount which really improved the situation. and a new yoke wiith the proper lubrication.


http://illiweb.com/fa/pbucket.gif?sort=3&o=1

http://illiweb.com/fa/pbucket.gif?sort=3&o=0

I have changed the drive line aligment angles with wedges until I am blue in the face. I either get smooth while crusing with vibs under acceleration (normal highway acceleration)  or vibs while I cruise and no vibes under acceleration. becaause I have reduced the angle change down to about 1* under noemal use.

My drive line friends sugest I go to double cartagan joints or CV joints. But with all the flanging and joint size and all I don't know if that can all be fit into a 19" space. And than again after spending mucho bucks its all expiremental at this point.

http://illiweb.com/fa/pbucket.gif?sort=3&o=21

Thats just my expirience and $2000 worth of trying to fix the problem.

However maybe I am just anel about bad vibs. As an engineer vibration  is undesired mechanic forces causing distruction to dynamic components. Not to mention the vehicle runs like a freaken ratle trap to those who notice or care. That being said I have been in other vans which rattle like a Chinese new years parade and you have to yell from the passanger seat to be heard by the driver; but the owner/driver dosn't notice anything because his other ride is a Harley davidson with open pipes and a rigid frame. So it depends what you are trying to achive.

I am now going with not shortening the drive shaft, that means a 200R4 in the 90"for me. Other vanners run a 200R4 and beat on them all day with no more problems than the 700R4 guys are having; but cheaper to install, the gearing is great and less bad vibs in the 90" van

M1D
avatar
Twinpilot001

Number of posts : 6186
Location : spokane ,Wa.
Registration date : 2009-09-28

Re: 700R4 vs. 350 Transmission

Post by Twinpilot001 on Sun Jan 11, 2015 11:00 am

Thanx M1 for the videos- interesting to watch!! My best experiences have been with a balanced Drive shaft and enough end play @ the tranny to driveshaft area-to prevent bottoming out when rear does flex or road bumps are hit. Ill add since mid 60's also - ive added the old "Traction Bars" usually made by myself with rectangular tubing-heavy wall also as the light speed shop stuff will actually flex way too much! The - so called ="Traction bars also were mounted to the frame and will actually "LIFT" the chassis (frame) under a hard acceleration. Power of course is different in every case too. Also , ill add - that the torque from some high powered engines will lift the frame greater to one side - anyone can view this when visiting a drag strip & watching some cars launch hard. One wheel higher than the other-- Most of us old guys experienced this & came up with "Wheelie Bars" & to prevent higher than wanted Wheelies way back then. Remembering all this now was done without the nice small vudeo cameras we have now- was from watching / looking @ still camera shots & Backyard Engineering then! It is nice to now have the advantages of our modern technologys!! Anyone remember when we only had front engine dragsters? Who was the 1st builder to make a rear engine dragster? No Fair googling that either!! affraid lol! lol! lol!
avatar
63 vanup

Number of posts : 3
Location : Blythe, CA
Registration date : 2015-01-09

Re: 700R4 vs. 350 Transmission

Post by 63 vanup on Sun Jan 11, 2015 1:21 pm

Don Garlits
avatar
Twinpilot001

Number of posts : 6186
Location : spokane ,Wa.
Registration date : 2009-09-28

Re: 700R4 vs. 350 Transmission

Post by Twinpilot001 on Sun Jan 11, 2015 4:06 pm

63 vanup is the =WINNER!!!!!!!!!!!!! do u remember what year that was in?? affraid
avatar
samsvan

Number of posts : 377
Location : Sarasota, Fl.
Age : 54
Registration date : 2014-09-04

Re: 700R4 vs. 350 Transmission

Post by samsvan on Sun Jan 11, 2015 4:40 pm

My Dad used to take me to the Gator Nationals to see Big Daddy run. I'm guessing 1969?
avatar
Space Truckin

Number of posts : 1173
Location : Upland,Ca
Age : 61
Registration date : 2009-10-17

Re: 700R4 vs. 350 Transmission

Post by Space Truckin on Sun Jan 11, 2015 8:06 pm

Not to confuse the op, but just finished installing a 700R4 in my 73 Chevy shorty "Orange Bang", and WOW! 1st tank of gas I got 15.9mpg, previously with the original factory th350 best I could do was 11.4mpg. Needless to say I am ecstatic considering the sbc came from factory w 155 hp / 255 torque trying to push around 2 tons of sheet metal. woohoo bounce

Sponsored content

Re: 700R4 vs. 350 Transmission

Post by Sponsored content


    Current date/time is Thu Jul 27, 2017 7:17 am