PDA

View Full Version : FOM OR HD-FOM vs GM 400 or 700R



studee64
05-29-2006, 06:35 PM
I need to switch from a standard transmission to an automatic in my '64 Daytona, (factory 240 hp 289)

I would appreciate some feed back on the pros and cons of the costs involved for each, performance expectations and the benefits of keeping or not keeping the car all Studebaker..

Thanks

Barry

Dick Steinkamp
05-29-2006, 08:15 PM
quote:Originally posted by studee64

I need to switch from a standard transmission to an automatic in my '64 Daytona, (factory 240 hp 289)

I would appreciate some feed back on the pros and cons of the costs involved for each, performance expectations and the benefits of keeping or not keeping the car all Studebaker..

Thanks

Barry


A lot of questions there :). Keep in mind you'll get mostly opinions here. A lot of your decision is going to be based on what's important to you.

By a 240 HP, do you mean a factory R1? If so, altering it from the build sheet will probably effect the value regardless of which auto you put in the car. This would probably not be true for a non Avanti powered car, but the Jet Thrust engine puts it in another category. If you really want an automatic Daytona, you might consider selling yours and buying one with an auto.

If you really want to change out the stick for a Studebaker auto on yours, you can probably find someone with the necessary parts that would swap you straight across...especially if the car is a four speed.

IMHO, a TH400 doesn't have any advantages over a HD FOM or Powershift...especially one with a valve body to allow a 1st gear start. The FOM is plenty stout enough for the R1 and they are dependable.

The TH700R4 (or TH2004R) will give you an stump pulling low gear and an overdrive. If you desire either (or both) of these features, then go this route. Adapters are a couple of hundred dollars, a rebuilt trans is about $1500. You'll have to fab shift linkage, trans mounts, driveshaft, speedo cable, linkage to carb, and probably a few other items.



http://thenobot.org/images/s2d/s2d_01.jpg

Mike Van Veghten
05-29-2006, 08:31 PM
I for the most part agree....

Absolutly no need for a T-400. The heaviest of the bunch and takes the most hp to drive it.

My vote goes to the T-200-4R. Very much the same in strength as the 700-R4....(which is more than enough for a 300+hp Stude engine) but the 200 has a much better gear spread. And that includs the deeper overdrive. The 200's the smallest and lightest of the bunch...and as I said, no sacrifice in strength. You can get several different stall speed converters while still hangen onto the lockup feature.
I've got one waiting in the corner for my hot rod 299 powered Conestoga. Hopen to get it into the 13 sec. bracket with a carburetor only.

Mike

studee64
05-29-2006, 08:58 PM
Thanks Dick and Mike..

My error.. the 289 is a 225 hp and not an R1..

It was originally a 4 spd, and we put in a T-5 when it was restored..
It has a 3:73 TT, which will have to go as well..

What would you suggest for rear gears that will still give me a perky little hardtop and reasonable mileage as well??

Looks like sticking with Studebaker is a good direction from a $$ and a performance standpoint..

Tks,

Barry

Roscomacaw
05-29-2006, 09:12 PM
Since you've got two threads going for this same question, I repeat myself from the other one.....

There IS the matter of the crankshaft bolts to contend with NOT TO MENTION.... that the FOM bellhousing will have to be "dialed in" to the V8 block you're using. Each bellhousing-to-engine mating was aligned seperately, so you can't just sling a auto bellhousing on there without dire consequences.

(Dan Miller reminded us of the crank bolt differences. Thanx Dan!:D)

Miscreant at large.

1957 Transtar 1/2ton
1960 Larkvertible V8
1958 Provincial wagon
1953 Commander coupe
1957 President 2-dr
1955 President State
1951 Champion Biz cpe
1963 Daytona project FS

hi-peral
05-29-2006, 09:42 PM
studee64 thanx for starting this topic.

Dick S.... Would you be kind enough to enlighten me about the valve body mods? My ole girl will only go to low in D if you mash the throttle at a very slow speed or from a complete stop. It would be wonderful if it just started in low without hammering the pedal!

Mr Biggs....From your statement it leads me to believe that even changing trannies from Stude to Stude requires that the trans mounting be dialed in. Is this correct? I have a vibration from 25 to 30 mph accelerating or deaccelerating that prompts me to ask this. I have tried a ton of changes and have not found it.

Thanx for your folks time.....Al

Live your dreams!

N8N
05-29-2006, 09:48 PM
you should only have to dial in the bellhousing if it is not the one that the engine left the factory with. But if you have a weird vibration... might as well check it.

Generally I would assume that a slight misalignment would be unnoticeable, only showing up as slightly faster wear of some parts. More severe misalignment could cause blowing up flexplates and/or a manual trans jumping out of gear...

nate

--
55 Commander Starlight
62 Daytona hardtop
http://home.comcast.net/~njnagel

Dick Steinkamp
05-29-2006, 09:53 PM
quote:Originally posted by studee64

Thanks Dick and Mike..

My error.. the 289 is a 225 hp and not an R1..

It was originally a 4 spd, and we put in a T-5 when it was restored..
It has a 3:73 TT, which will have to go as well..

What would you suggest for rear gears that will still give me a perky little hardtop and reasonable mileage as well??

Looks like sticking with Studebaker is a good direction from a $$ and a performance standpoint..

Tks,

Barry


Barry,
I think you will find any number of people that would trade you that
T5 set up for their FOM set up [:p]. Advertise here or in TW or both.

I personally think a 3.31 rear end would be a good choice with an FOM.



http://thenobot.org/images/s2d/s2d_01.jpg

Mike Van Veghten
05-29-2006, 09:55 PM
Hey Al...

Yes....the bell housing (not the trans.) needs to be centered (or the cool words..."dialed in". Just like putting your best foot foward with a clutch setup.
If the "[u]original</u>" bell housing goes back on (though I'd double check it anyway) it's said that it doesn't need the checking. But if you (or someone in it's past) installes a new bell housing...yes it "does" need to be recentered.

As far as your vibration, your car is a little low, have you checked the driveshaft angle to pinion angle? Does it still have the two piece drive shaft? Could be bad center support bushings, bolted into the rong set of holes, (four options I believe), bad center support bearing...etc.

Mike

Dick Steinkamp
05-29-2006, 09:56 PM
quote:Originally posted by hi-peral

studee64 thanx for starting this topic.

Dick S.... Would you be kind enough to enlighten me about the valve body mods? My ole girl will only go to low in D if you mash the throttle at a very slow speed or from a complete stop. It would be wonderful if it just started in low without hammering the pedal!




Looks like SASCO has them...

http://www.parts123.com/PartFrame.asp?ZTM=cadegeia&GHOME=studeparts.com&TITLE=STUDEBAKER_AUTOPARTS_SALES_CORP

http://thenobot.org/images/s2d/s2d_01.jpg

mjeansonne
05-30-2006, 04:16 PM
Barry;

I am presently replacing my 3 speed standard tranny for a 700R4 because physical problems. I have just test placed the 259 cid engine and trans into the engine compartment of my 63 Champ. I wish I had gone with a 200R tranny because they are shorter than the 700R. My u-joint coming from the tranny is going to be next to the fuel tank!! So I'm trying to figure what to do next! I would still go with the 700R or the 200R because there are adapters made to mate the Stude engine and GM tranny, plus there are lots of folks that havew done this swap successfully! I went with the GM instead of the FOM because of fuel concerns. My wife has a 62 GT Hawk with FOM. It starts in 2nd gear (ho hum!) and without the overdrive, gets really bad fuel mileage. 5 years ago I wouldn't have been concerned about gasoline, but now... and what will 5 more years bring!!?? I also want to use the truck on a daily basis over distances of 75 to 100 miles a day. Plus I rode in a buddy's 63 Hawk with the 700R... really nice.

The main consideration though, is what do you want and what do you want your car to do.

Good luck whatever you decide.

Laisez le bon temps roulez avec un Studebaker

Roscomacaw
05-30-2006, 05:39 PM
Barry, yes, from Stude to Stude, alignment is necessary. NOT the tranny tho - the bellhousing. Mike said the "cool words" are "Dialing in" and that's just what it requires, unless you've got one hell of a ruler to use. One that allows you to discern thousandths of an inch.[:o)]
Basically, you affix a dial gage to the rear of the crankshaft using a magnetic base or some sort of STURDY bracket. Then you make the shaft of the dial gage ride the edge of the inner hole in the bell housing (the one the tranny slides into). This is done AFTER the old alignment pins have been knocked out and the bell housing's held snug in place using some of the bolts that hold it to the block.
Then you have someone turn the crankshaft from the front of the engine while you watch the dial gage to see if it varies more than .004 during it's 360 degree circuit. If it does, you tap the bellhousing a bit in the direction you detect would bring the reading within tolerance and then have your assistant turn the engine again.
Once you get it in tolerance, you tighten the bolts and recheck to see that the dial gage still reads the same. Then drill new holes for alignment pins. It's really a pain in the backside to do this but ignoring it will only lead to problems down the road (literally). The most common failure attributed to misalignment is cracking and ultimate failure of the flex plate that the torque convertor bolts to.

As I said earlier, this isn't a problem IF you are using the very same bellhousing that a given car had from the factory. THAT B/H was aligned AT the factory and will remain alinged (thanks to the alignment pins) if it's taken off for any reason and ultimately reinstalled.

Personally - I sure wouldn't attempt to do this proceedure with the engine IN the car! I'd pull it.;) Besides - having it out of the car will also facilitate changing those flywheel bolts to the shorter ones that an automatic will require.:D

Miscreant at large.

1957 Transtar 1/2ton
1960 Larkvertible V8
1958 Provincial wagon
1953 Commander coupe
1957 President 2-dr
1955 President State
1951 Champion Biz cpe
1963 Daytona project FS

studee64
05-30-2006, 10:28 PM
Thank you Mr. Biggs and to all who commented on my questions..

Much appreciated,

Barry

hi-peral
05-31-2006, 10:02 PM
Mike , Dick, and Mr. Biggs.....Thanx much for your wisdom and enlightenment.

Live your dreams!