Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

McKinnon V-8

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

  • #16
    Chrysler FWD transmissions are the only ones that I've had fail on me. And at that, Chrysler replaced the entire unit at no cost after the warranty ran out. My Ranger has the 5-spd AOD and so far, so good with 165K on it. I've towed with it long and hard (the Daytona has about 4K on the tow dolly).

    One tip I received from the trans tech at the Ford dealer in Saline, MI in 2002 was not to do the shift from reverse to drive without coming to a stop. Not doing so with blow out the valve body gaskets on the 2001 models only. They upgraded to a thicker gasket for 2002. I have a 2001 and again, I've had no issues.

    My GM experience has been at a GM dealer. While not every vehicle will be trouble free, you do get to see what is a common occurance and just a freak of nature. The GM transmissions have been excellent for the most part. Some engines, ehhhhhh, so-so. But GM builds these for mileage as well as durability.

    Or let me put it this way, and every car company is the same in this regard. When the Olds Aurora first came out, the 4.0L V8 was bullet proof. Warranty claims were almost nonexistant. So the bean counters see this a say, 'Hey, we can save a few bucks if we replace the rod bolts with cheaper pieces. So the save .03 per bolt (multiply this by 16 for each car, and then by 'X' number of cars, and remember this is a Northstar engine). Now warranty claims are thru the roof. At some point the manufacturer reaches a 'happy' medium of part cost vs part failure (and the warranty cost). They don't care if the part fails at 95K if the warranty was for 36K.

    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Tom - Valrico, FL

    1964 Studebaker Daytona

    Tom - Bradenton, FL

    1964 Studebaker Daytona - 289 4V, 4-Speed (Cost To Date: $2514.10)
    1964 Studebaker Commander - 170 1V, 3-Speed w/OD

    Comment


    • #17
      personal i wouldnt touch the 283 as i had one in my 65 it run perfectly and all that but now i have a 63 259 and boy what a power difference in every way i say you cant go past the stude motor overall

      Comment


      • #18
        '65 Chevy 2 bbl 283...195 HP @ 4800 RPM, 285 ft pounds of torque at 2400 RPM

        '63 Stude 2bbl 259 ...180 HP @ 4500 RPM, 260 ft pounds of torque at 2800 RPM.





        Dick Steinkamp
        Bellingham, WA

        Comment


        • #19
          quote:Originally posted by Dick Steinkamp
          I've had the opposite experience. I had the non electronic version of the 4L60E (TH700R4) in my '88 Safari with the 4.3 V6...bought new. I sold it with 260,000 miles on it and it still shifted as new. Towed a lot with it also.



          Frank V runs a TH700 in his FAST R2 powered Champion coupe.


          Correction on the 700R-4 in the 41 Champion, actually it is a 200-4R ,it is a BOP transmission in other words all gm divisions used it including turbo Buick GN so I figured it would be strong enough.Properly built they are good for up to 500 hp,not something I have to worry about(g) I used it because of space considerations and it has a higher ratio first gear than the 7004R so it has a smaller drop in rpm between first and second.






          [/quote]
          Frank van Doorn
          Omaha, Ne.
          1962 GT Hawk 289 4 speed
          1941 Champion streetrod, R-2 Powered, GM 200-4R trans.
          1952 V-8 232 Commander State "Starliner" hardtop OD

          Comment


          • #20
            quote:Originally posted by 41 Frank
            Correction on the 700R-4 in the 41 Champion
            Sorry Frank [:I].

            I've heard good things about the TH2004R. Not only a better gear spread, but also a smaller package AND bolts in where most other GM transmissions were (not that that's a factor with your ride )




            Dick Steinkamp
            Bellingham, WA

            Comment


            • #21
              Ok guys my 2cents worth.Isnt the 200 a metric tranny?I think its good up to 300 hp. uses a vacumn kick down ,where as the 700 r4 is cable kickdown good to 500 hp.I think the 200 was the equivilent to 350 with over drive and 700 was for the 400 overdrive replacement.Correct me if im wrong ,I been there before.

              David Baggett Mantachie,Ms.

              Comment


              • #22
                quote:Originally posted by stude freak

                Ok guys my 2cents worth.Isnt the 200 a metric tranny?I think its good up to 300 hp. uses a vacumn kick down ,where as the 700 r4 is cable kickdown good to 500 hp.I think the 200 was the equivilent to 350 with over drive and 700 was for the 400 overdrive replacement.Correct me if im wrong ,I been there before.

                David Baggett Mantachie,Ms.
                The 200 metric is a different tranny, the 200 4R is cable operated just like the 700R4
                Frank van Doorn
                Omaha, Ne.
                1962 GT Hawk 289 4 speed
                1941 Champion streetrod, R-2 Powered, GM 200-4R trans.
                1952 V-8 232 Commander State "Starliner" hardtop OD

                Comment


                • #23
                  quote:Originally posted by stude freak
                  200 was the equivilent to 350 with over drive and 700 was for the 400 overdrive
                  Both the TH700R4 and the TH2004R are at least as stout as the non OD TH350.

                  There was no GM OD tranny as stout as the TH400 until the 4L80E that came along around 2001 or so (it's still in production).

                  For a super strong auto, try the Allison that GM uses behind their Izuzu diesel.


                  Dick Steinkamp
                  Bellingham, WA

                  Comment

                  Working...
                  X