Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

53 232 with 700 R4 transmssion

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    Hi Jack, I was happy with the 3.73 stock gears.

    Comment


    • #17
      I have a 259 with a 700R4. I'm running a Nova rear end with a 3.42 ratio. I have a small 2bbl (350 CFM Holley). I'm very happy with the in-town driveability and I can go 70 mph on the freeway. With a few less cubes and the 3.54 stock ratio, you'll probably be just fine. One of the things I like about the conversion I have is that it uses a modern starter which is available at just about any auto parts store anywhere. As is suggested above, I went with the 700R4 because it was the cheapest. I think the 2004R would be great too.

      Comment


      • #18
        My 289 and 700R works well with 3.54 rear gears, but not so well with the 3.31 or 3.07 I tried before. I'd think the 232 would work well with a 3.73 or 3.92, but 1st gear may become a bit of a granny gear. It's gonna be a trade off, but really anything from a 3.54 on up would work, just a question of how well, and what your priorities are. Of course if the car already has a 3.54, I'd start with that.

        Comment


        • #19
          Gary,

          Good luck with your project, I hope you get what you are looking for. I hope that you are willing to make available to your Studebaker brothers your obsolete sixty five year parts. Not all of us believe that the trans was substandard or "junk," as you describe it. Or that Jaguar was wrong in using it, well into the 60's in it's own offerings.

          I've driven cars with DG 200, and DG 250 for sixty years. My considered opinion is that given what I believe your standards are, you will probably never be happy with any automatic behind your 232. The 120 hp is the problem not the transmission. As you can tell from the comments in this thread there is no consensus as to the best solution. It's often just someone's best guess. I certainly don't have an answer for you. You're mind is made up, but whatever solution you choose, you should factor in that it may take twice as long as you might hope, and cost twice as much as you budget for. Please keep us in the loop and let us know how you're progressing.

          Comment


          • #20
            Originally posted by Hallabutt View Post
            My considered opinion is that given what I believe your standards are, you will probably never be happy with any automatic behind your 232. The 120 hp is the problem not the transmission.
            For true. Like you, I've been doing this for sixty years and agree, our frame of reference has changed as cars have changed. Today's four-cylinder mini-vans make more than twice the horsepower of the 232" and will turn 100-MPH quarter miles.

            I have three old car guy friends back in Alabama. Between them, they own at least forty collector cars, from Ford Model A to newer Corvettes. They go to a lot of car shows, but to get there they usually borrow one wife's Acura. When I harass them about this, they say, "Old cars are a lot more fun to look at and reminisce over than they are to drive long distances in today's traffic."

            jack vines
            PackardV8

            Comment


            • #21
              I believe the 700R will simply be an automatic's version of a T85 or T86 in the OP's car. Over the decades, those two transmissions have been installed behind countless 232 powered Stude C/K cars. Hard to believe all those folks were disappointed in the results. As for the OP, only way to find out is to give it a try. I certainly understand removing the ancient DG transmission, and modernizing. No matter what your future impressions of the 700R, I seriously doubt you will ever wish you'd kept the DG.

              I say go for it!

              Comment

              Working...
              X