The Stovebolt Site Forums The Shop Area Driveline What's your favorite auto tranny??

I've been collecting parts for my 1951 1/2 ton street rod project. Had decided to spend a bit extra and buy a 700R4 trans due to the overdrive capability (higher MPG). I'm looking for a cruiser and not a racer. Anyway, a fellow at the local Friday night car show highly recommended the GM 200R4 saying it was a better tranny. Better at take off and bullet proof. Now I'm confused. What do some of you with experience with building street rods say about it? Which one would you go with??

700R4 by far. The 200 doesn't even compare, unless you dump tons of money into upgrading it. The 700 is far better as it comes, is cheaper, and has much better availability as it was used in S10s, Corvettes, Camaros, and C/K pickups up to 3/4 ton.

not! the 200R is an older version of the OD automatic not produced very long, not at all 'bullet proof' unless you have it specially built to be - the 700R [and successor 4L60] is great for the average engine/truck, it's what I'm putting in a 57 project behind a 283 - otherwise the more 'bullet proof' one is the 4L80 [a TH400 with OD], which is what I'm using behind a 454 in a very large bus

the 200R has a 1st ratio of 2.74, the 700R 1st is 3.05, the 4L80 is 2.48

Bill

Ran a 350 tranny in my '37 pickup for a few years but later put in a 700R4 and the pickup just loves it!!

Currently I'm having a 700R4 built to replace a 350tranny in my panel. I vote 700R4.

Note, my tranny man likes the later model 700R4, meaning AFTER 1986 or may it was 1987. He explained the difference but I will not attempt to repeat here so I don't confuse anyone. IF you go to get one be sure to do homework so you'll be able to tell "by the numbers" which is which.
The one I have is an earlier version and I should be just fine. But, if you have a choice then go for the later model.
...just my thoughts.

The main difference is the pump. The early 700R4 had a 5 vane pump, and would lose pressure in overdrive. If pulling a load, the lower line pressure would let the clutch plates slip. The later version has a 7 vane pump, which eliminated most of the problem, then when it became the 4L60E, an electronic pressure regulator was added that eliminated completely by adding the "Tow/Haul" mode. The 7 vane pump is an easy upgrade on the early 700, and clutch packs from the 350 can also be used to eliminate slippage. Both are cheap upgrades.

....longbox, didn't they also add a small valve body or maybe some kind of governor, or something, after 86?? I better shut up. I'm no tranny man

They put 2004R's in Turbo Buick Grand Nationals and they were fast. 2004R has a better gear spread. 700R4
has a big jump in ratio between 1st and second gear.

how about a four speed muncie..love em

I think what 55 Shaker said about the 700R4 having a big jump in ratio between 1st & 2nd gear is what the fellow at the car show was trying to tell me. He was saying the 200R4 was better at taking off from a dead start & that the shift to second was smoother. He did talk about some small upgrades that would make it better too but said that the additional costs would still make total cost less than the 700R4.

I had my doubts as I listened to him. I'll keep looking for a later model 700 as Alvin suggests. Thanks everyone.

the 200 and 700 2nd gears are about the same, the "jump" is because the 700 has a lower 1st, which I'd expect to make for better standing starts, especially in a truck .... and the cost depends on what you can find, I got a 700R and a 4L80E together at a very low price, haven't ever found a 200R for sale in my area, other than the spendy hotrod rebuilds

Bill

Can anyone post a link to a good discussion or article about the 700R4 transmissions as it pertains to using them in old trucks or cars??

try this site... looks like they might help you

older post with one broken

what do you need to know spot? be like putting any automatic in an old truck, need to modify the cross members to suit, mate an open driveshaft, which would mean a different rear for your early trucks, and rig an aftermarket shifter [Lokars are great] - depending on the engine you're using you might need an adapter - they work fine in any vintage, especially with the OD for the road

Bill

You might be right about that. I had to have one overhauled a while back from my '85 S10, had a specialist do the work that knows 700R4s inside and out. In addition to the pump, he did replace the valve body and governor. I do know that the early 700s had issues with the governor, I haven't had a problem since the overhaul.

would help if we knew the engine and rear ratio.. you might not need an over drive............ I have been to many shows and seems like a lot have the 700, some 350, and some power glide.... very few have my favorite... the four speed

Read this article about the similarities and differences: http://www.webrodder.com/article.php?AID=426

As joker just said, you might not need an overdrive. Depending on your engine, camshaft, rear gears, and tire diameter, you may be lugging at highway speed. A mistake I have seen many guys make is put in an overdrive and then have to run in third gear all the time, because the overdrive drops the RPM too much at cruising speed. Either that or assuming they'll get better mileage with an overdrive, when it drops the RPM out of the range of where the camshaft wants to be running ideally, and they get worse fuel mileage. Just some things to think about.

The 700R4 all the way. GM kept improving on the transmission through the years. Most of the internal parts from the 4L70, 4L65, and4L60 are interchangable. I recommend a mild shift kit in one. I put a Transgo NOYOYO kit in an 85 K10 truck, it made all the difference in the world.

These guys are 700R4 experts: http://www.transmissioncenter.com/

Thanks everyone for your comments and suggestions, especially 46gmcpu!! That link describing a side by side comparison of the 700R4 vs. the 200R4 sealed the deal for me. The 700R4 is far superior, and for my application it's all I need and more. Had originally thought I'd put in a Turbo 350 like everyone else, but the overdrive and increased MPG prompted me to look into buying a 700R4. It may be a more difficult installation, but I think it'll be worth it in the long run.

Thanks again!

Yes!

I run a tci th400 with 4:10 rear and 27" tires. I haven't had any issues ever. I drive a blown small block powered 65 c-10. I've thought of getting a 4l80e but $7500 is a big chunk of change. Friends with mild small blocks have issues with their 700's. I'm not convinced on them myself. I cruise at 60 mph and pull 3000rpm and get 16mpg. I think that's decent. My brothers new 2500 full size doesn't get that many mpg. I also run the stock 2 piece drive shaft.

I'm turning about 2,800-2,900 rpm's at 60 mph & that translates to about 14 mpg.
Aside from wanting better mpg, I wanted to ruduce the rpm's to reduce the wear & tear on my engine.

Hopefully your reduced RPM actually does increase your MPG. It sounds like it should. 2900 at that speed is a tad high.

What percent is that of your engines max rpm? I run at 3000 and that about 45% of my max. I cruise at 50% in my cummins but that only has 3000 rpm. They say aim for your peak torque output rpm while cruising for optimum mpg. Gears might be a better deal than a trans swap. No drive shaft shortening or messing around and cheaper.

are you running a stock 216 with stock rear end

700R4 is not my favorite. Most all the newer transmissions are made from pressed sheet metal parts. Gone are the nice machined parts of the old transmissions. Pretty much cheap junk. And they do have a rash of problems with some of those parts like the sun gear shell, its a transmission with some difficult to work on parts without the special tools. The only thing it has going for it is OD.
These are a stronger better transmission
http://www.bteracing.com/

So either a PG or THM400 if you want a good auto trans.
http://www.atiracing.com/products/trans/pg/supercase.htm

I used a TH400 in my '63 C10 for years. Never had any problems with it. I swapped it in because I kept blowing the clutch bands in the old PowerGlide. It had problems keeping up with the 325 horse 400sbc I had in there.

A Powerglide. My 54 sedan has one.

Walt Williams
La Verkin, UT

Hollow65, I don't know what percentage of the engine's max RPM's I'm running. That's way over my head!! But, I do know that I tend to agree that changing the gears in the pumpkin would be much easier than changing out the tranny, and cheaper too. I'm running a Chevy 350 engine with a Turbo350 tranny now. The PO put a F**d 9" rear in it and could not tell me what gears were in it, except to say they were "tall". He was right!! What ring and pinion set would everyone recommend putting in it to help me get where I'd like to go with this project..... much lower RPM's and better mileage??

Thanks!!!

If you're getting high rpm and poor mileage, you have a short gear, rather than a tall gear. 3.55:1 is a common choice for best of both worlds, but with the 9", you can go as high as 1.9:1, which was a factory option in the Lincoln Versailles.
I have to 100% disagree with the statement posted that modern transmissions are "made with stamped steel parts" and do not have the "nice machined parts" that old transmissions have. Todays transmissions have as many, if not more machined parts, often to far tighter tolerances than any trans ever put into a vintage vehicle.

Thank you Bill for pointing out my mistake. Rather than editing my post I'll own up to it. I really meant to say I have "short" gears in the pumpkin. It would be nice to get a signifient reduction in RPM's by changing out the gears instead of the trouble & expense of switching out the tranny. I'll start the process of thinking that through. Thank you.

I went from a 31" rear tire to a 27" recently. I'm thinking of going 3:42:1 in my own truck. I like the low profile tire but I lost like 25-30 mph at top end almost. Max speed is like 130 now and thats at 7100rpm. Aren't toys fun. My buddy runs a differential shop here so it shouldn't be a huge hit to the wallet. Gears over trans is my suggestion.

remember
The gear ratio is simply the number of revolutions that the drive line has to make for the tires to make one complete revolution.
in case you dont know what rear gear you have..

good read about the nine inch

Great read on the 9" RE joker.
Back in the day I used to have a 71 Ranchero. It was totaled while sitting in front of my house. I ended up pulling the engine & tranny and putting it in a 66 Fairlane. If only I had known to keep that rear end.........

re. Chevy auto's. This'll show how long it's been since I've been into muscle cars but back in the day the 400 was considered the unit to have, that or a Munsey 4 speed
Dave

Spotbiltxo, to figure out what gears are best for you, you need to figure out what you have now. This can easily be done by marking the driveshaft and tires and counting how many driveshaft revolutions are required for one tire revolution. 3.08 or 3.42 (or somewhere in that range) are probably your best bet if you do mostly highway cruising.

Its obvious you have never taken one apart. The 700R4 is full of corrugated sheet metal welded to disks for clutch packs. In the old days it was all machined.
Go visit a transmission shop and ask to see them.

Spot specifically stated he's not into racing - Trucklet would prefer overbuilt transmissions like the racing grade 'glides and 350/400's he linked above, might be satisfied with an equivalent 700R [but prolly not]

OD is what's being sought, the stock 700R [or4L60] is at least as dependable and durable as a stock powerglide or TH350/400 for normal street driving

Bill

I've got two 64's with 350/700r4 combos, one has 3.73 the other 3.42 rear gear. Both work very well and are around 2000 rpm at highways speeds. Love that quiet cruise...
Got several thousand miles on each. My transmission guy says they are updated to the newest parts and should hold up many more miles.

For reference, could you state your tire diameter too? I'm just thinking for future people referring to this thread. A 26" tall tire vs a 31" tall tire get very different results.

I went from 31" to 27" tires with 4:10 rear and added an extra 650rpm at 60mph.

back up the truck, I always thought a taller tire would make it go faster.................well, then maybe longer to get there..

better break out the physic's book..