Found a 2004R from a Monte Carlo in a boneyard for $50. Paid $287 for a "Kit" that is advertised to handle 550HP. Paid $390 for the labor and misc. things on the rebuild.

The tranny swapped right in, no problems. Will have track times Saturday night for those who are so set on the 700 being the auto tranny of choice (LOL).

Total investment so far:
$727 into the Tranny
$360 for crossmember and torque arm.

So, $1087 for a tranny that will handle 550HP, and stands a good chance to reducing ET's in theory, but it is unproven for now.

 

You're still going on about that?

------------------
89 iroc-z 305 tbi
k&n filtercharger, open element air filter. nuffin' else

 

Im forgetfull did you have a 700r4 before and according track times? I would really be interested in a comparison because i Do think that the 2004r would be a better track transmition.
SSC
BTW what gears do you have in the rear?

 

I think your the only person i've ever heard of to put a 200R4 in a thirdgen.. good luck, n i wanna see those time slips also

------------------

• 83 Z28--ttops, 200k miles--very ragged out. sold, thank goodness
• 74 Z28--slightly modded 383, TH400 tranny, not too quick but fun to drive

 

for $1087 I could get exhaust, intake, cam, non-computer carb & distributor, shift kit, and probalby get the same ET drop. I will admist the 2004R is a good tranny, but i don't see why its better fro drag racing. I prefer the 700R4 for a couple reasons. First, thirdgens are heavy, so the deep first gear helps get off the line faster. Second, you don't have to have it drop below your power band on the 1-2 shift. Adjust your TV cable to shift at higher RPM. If you want to stay in your power band, the best solution is to have more gears, like a manual 5 or 6 speed.
This way you can start out with a deep first gear, and build up to overdirve more gradually, and have less RPM drop every shift. you might have a quicker ET, but i bet you add to your 60 ft time.
Actually, if I had $1087 laying around, i would have one hella keg party!

------------------
1983 Firebird
TH700R4 Auto
Small Block 400
LG4 ECM, Intake, Carb, Distributor, etc.
Soon to be non-computer.
Clarion Head Unit 45X4
2 Pioneer 400W 12" Subs
Third Gen Performance
"A four cylinder is half an engine."

 

"God, please god tell me now, I deserve to know why!!!" -Dennis Leary "No cure for cancer."

Look, basicly, sure you could et an exhuast, intake, blah blah blah for that money, but what about us who do have that? Further more, you are still stuck with a tranny with HORRIBLE ratio's for accelerating, that will fold at about 300HP, maybe 320 if your lucky.

Deep first gear translates into deep first shift piont. You then go on to contradict yourself with, adjusting the TV cable to shift higher, but build the car so that the shift will put the car back in it's powerband. Well, are you saying we should have a car that makes a lot of power both high and low? Tell me how! Particularly with a carb! If you adjust the TV to shift higher, you won't go anywhere because your motor just can't breath that high IF it's designed for torque in the midrange and down low, like you're suggesting it should be to work with the severe drop in engine speed from 3.06 to 1.62 (or something along those lines).

Great, you can get out of the hole by

A)Spinning tires
or
B)Breaking axles

Look face it, everyone else has, the 700 is not nearly ideal for drag racing. Higher numeric gear ratios in the rear end make the car accelerate harder throughout the entire 1320, but, how are you going to use that to your advantage is your first 60 feet is a burnout because your final drive ratio is something way up ther like 12 or 13 to 1 (Due to the 3.06 first gear).

Do the math...

4.10 rear gears times 3.06 = 12.55:1 (700)
4.10 gear gears times 2.75 = 11.3:1 (200)
or
3.73x3.06 = 11.41:1 (700)
3.73x2.75 = 10.25:1 (200) [-Ideal ratio for launching a street car without breaking traction to badly as most hotrodders and history would say.]

Which do you think is more likely to get more of the power to the ground? ESPECIALLY IN A CAR WITH LITTLE WEIGHT DIRECTLY OVER THE REAR AXLE! The 4.10 with the 200 is still lower numerically than the 3.73 and the 700, which is not only great for the first 60 feet because you can grab the pavement, but makes the car faster in every gear, not just first!

And too lead by example, the 1993 Fbody T56 had a deep first gear. The 94 and after units had a closer first gear. Why is it that the 94's improved so much over the 93's despite absolutely NO difference in engine horsepower ratings and torque ratings??? Also, the tranny's torque capacity increased as well, just because of a gear change to a lower gear, numerically.

Learn it, live it, accept it... I plan on proving it Saturday, but I can tell you this, the car doesn't spin the tires as hard on the street (mind you, I'm running 275's in the rear), but it feels a hell of a lot faster overall! Instead of the car kinda going dull after the 1-2 shift for a few momments, it just keeps on pulling, with no delay in rate of acceleration like the 700's shift gave me.

Lastly, how many Turbo Regals do you know that run much faster than our cars? How many of them have switched to the 700, for that great first gear, and power handling? Slam dunk, case over, please don't babble anymore, I'd hate to see another post go to flame hell because you refuse to get out of your tunnelvision mindset.

[This message has been edited by Slow Iroc (edited May 25, 2001).]

 

well considering a 700r4 won't bolt up to a buick 3.8L(or so i was told) i'd say thats a good reason i see your point...and it makes sense...i'm gonna be doing a turbo 3.8 swap into my GTA hopefully towards the end of this summer...not sure if i'm keeping the 200r4 that i'm getting with the engine or going with a built T-5...shame a T-56 won't bolt up to it

------------------
Originating member of the SJNEP Crew
Member of the Jersey Fbody Crew(JFA)
Check out MyGTA Nicknamed:The Big Red Machine
***AOL IM RiceEatinGTA***
Moderator at www.transamgta.com
"What does not kill us only makes us stronger"

Tony

 

damn it....double post

[This message has been edited by fly89gta (edited May 25, 2001).]

 

What kind of temps/weather conditions did you run in before, and what's it like where you're running at this week? How long ago were the original runs? Just curious, I'm just wondering how well we'll be able to compare the times to each other...

------------------
Ray87Z
-Vortec headed 350.
86 IROC w/ a cammed 305 TPI.
Formerly Ray86IROC.
www.inter-scape.com/Ray

 

Last Summer I ran a 14.4, but I won't be comparing it to that.

Last weekend I ran a 14.5, in high humidity, and mid to low track temps. According to weather reports, this weekend should be very similar to last. It is suppost to rain Saturday night, so I think that will count as high humidity, lol. The temps should be within 5-7 degrees of each other if not closer.

Nothing else in the car as been changed.

 

Forgot to address this.

Fly, I would stick with the auto. If this is going to be a strip only car, forget the T5 and go with a TH350, they did makes those to bolt up to the 3.8L bolt pattern.

First, automatics will ALWASY be handle to handle more power and abuse than manuals. Why? There are a bunch of reasons but it really comes down to a manual is primarly mechanical, while an auto is primarly hydrolic. Manuals are great for gear ratio spacing however! But with a turbo 3.8, you might be more concerned about power handling than ratio's at that piont in time. By "Built" T5 what exactly are you refering too? I think a WCT5 would fold soon under a serious T3.8, and you are still limited by the means by which the tranny transfers power.

 

The car won't be just a track car...its gonna be my daily driver as well...as far as built...i'm talking about rebuild kits that would allow the tranny to stand up to more power...i still not 100% sure about what im doing with the tranny situation...then again i haven't even gotten the drivetrain yet but its lined up

 

I could be mistaken, but I don't think there are many kits out there that will increase the torque capacity of the T5 or WCT5. Maybe an additional 100ft/lbs, but I can't imagine that would be cheap, and 400ft/lbs of total capacity is nothing for the turbo 3.8's, you know that. Besides, if you blew a shift, I don't see anything even remotely good coming from under the hood. Turbo explosion? LOL, that is if you didn't fire one of the heads off the block from cylander pressure.

I still say, stick with the auto. If you could find a T56 to upgrade, that might be one thing, but the 5's aren't your best bet.

 

i think i'm gonna stick with the 200r4...a T-56 won't bolt up to a buick 3.8 so a 200r4 its probably gonna be

 

Actually, the 2004R is a better transmission with a lot more development work and performance parts available to it (thanks to the turbo Buick guys). I am talking about the 2004R in the turbo Buicks, which is different from a non-turbo Buick 2004R.
Bruce Toelles from Performance Transmissions www.ptsnctb.com in Sacramento is a leading pioneer with the 2004R development. Just about everyone in the www.turbobuick.com board knows his reputation and speak highly of him. He’s worked with big name people such as “the real” Art Carr, TCI, etc. You will always find him at the track with a competitors tranny in his test car and run it into the ground to see what made it fail.
With much discussion with him a while back at the track and at his shop, he’s pointed out all the limitations of the 700R4 (you’ll have to ask him about it), and yes he does a lot of work on those too. Considering how a few friends of mine with 10 and 9 second IROC’s are having a hard time making their 700R4’s live a long time (they’ve tried A-1, Darrell Young, Hughe’s and Art Carr) and have since gone to turbo 400’s, I asked Bruce, considering he’s built long living trannies for quite a few 9 and 10 second GN’s. Per the Discussion, the 2004R can be mated to the Chevy motors via a simple adapter plate. SPOHN I believe sells a crossmember and adapter for the torque arm.
Slow Iroc, give Bruce a call, he’ll set you in the right direction.


------------------
N/A 406, TPIS Miniram, 58mm TB, 30lbs injectors, Custom Ground Elgin Cam, Ported TFS heads, SLP 1-3/4", & DFI computer.
11.70@117mph

 

So... wheres the results?

 

Sorry, thanks for reminding me. The results turned out to be about what I expected...higher trap speed, lower ET, and reduced 60ft time. Kept stock stall convertors on both trannys as a control. The 700 was in very good condition, about 19 months old, and I don't drive it during the winter months. This is on a mostly STOCK car, I would expect to see better results on a car built for developing a higher peak torque operational speed. Here are the exact numbers, including weather numbers.

05/19/01
700R4

Temp: 61 degrees
Humidity: 81%
Bar. Reading 28.93

60ft. 2.19
1/8 ET 9.84
1/8 speed 64MPH
1/4 ET 14.47
1/4 speed 92 MPH

05/26/01
200-4R

Temp: 64 degrees
Humidity: 88%
Bar. Reading 27.13

60ft. 2.03
1/8 ET 9.11
1/8 speed 67MPH
1/4 ET 14.19
1/4 speed 95 MPH

 

Not to shabby slowiroc, I was fairly sure that the top speed would drop a little but overall time would improve. Guess I was wrong
SSC

 

Thanks SSC. The swap was no more difficult than taking a 700R4 out and replacing it. The only thing is that I haven't corrected my speedo gear yet.

I think it's kinda funny that everyone wanted to bash my theory, and now it has proven true. LOL, I guess I am the moron you guys painted me out to be.

 

Were youu getting wheel spin with the 700 on the 19th?

 

Well thats impressive at least...

So how many runs did you make with each?

 

I hadn't seen your times when I posted, was just addressing the low torque capacity of even the stock WCT5. The times are respectible to say the least. I didn't say you were a moron at any poit, but I will offer this, perhaps the reason for the hostility was the attitude with which you defended your posistion. I believe this effort could have been completed in under 30 overall posts, but that's just me.


the top tremec T5 handles over 500 ft/lb. Also for the arguement that you can't have power up high, and torque down low are not considering power adders, such as turbo charging, or nitros. This particular discussion has been beat to hell in the last month, month and a half. Truth be known, hot-rodders will make whatever the hell they have available the fastest thing they can make it... that's what it's all about. if you design your own turbo application it is entirely possible to build for stump pulling torque down low, and hella-high rpm power up top.. That, and any 3.48" or higher stroke V8 running on all 8 in good tune will have a fair ammount of torque down low no matter what the powerband.. more than enough to move a vehicle.. and a hell of a lot more than any ricers. It may lack low end torque in the practical sense that you're *** cheek dyno feels, but it's still there. My $.02.

Anthony

pick it apart as you wish, I have said my share.

------------------
previous ride: 87 Camaro LT
350, A4.Comp Cams 268H, Edelbrock Preformer intake, Hedman Headers and y-pipe, gutted cat, No AIR/smog pump. 14x3" Open element K&N, Q-jet w/ D hanger and DA rods, adjusted AV spring tension and quick can.

Current ride: 1992 Camaro RS, K&N, Flowmaster, 305, T5, Black, T-tops, 76k miles.

[This message has been edited by Ragin'87 (edited May 28, 2001).]

 

Madmax, I've made countless runs with the 700R4 over almost two years of testing many many things, right down the the gasket material I use for the runner to the plenum and runners to base (as I said before, high density rubber, much better them OEM material gaskets!)

The 2004R, I only got 3 runs to crack at it, but I didn't do to bad. It started to rain when I was lined up for my forth run, as they closed the track.

As far as using a power adder to build power high and low, I see two big problems. First, he was talking about using a carb, so a supercharger and turbo applications are gone, for the most part...there are those goofy looking boxes people put over the carb, but that's not realistic.

Secondly, the only way to do it, might be with Nitrous. In a turbo application, if you run enough boost to force air through the long, small tubes for High RPM power, you are going to have to reduce the compression considerably...with that reduction goes your low end torque, and combine that with the turbo lag, and your not looking at much of a bottom end. However, it will make for one very fast car, and the car will be faster with a 2004R than a 700R4, due to shift ratio's.

A supercharger fall under the same flaw...to run enough boost to force the motor to breath you have to drop compression.

Short runner intakes don't fall into this however, which is why I think a twin turbo LT4 would be down right scary! You don't have to run insane boost levels, because the air dosen't have to go very far, reducing resistance in air travel, reducing the need for high density of the charge.

The only way to make big power low and high, is called a BIG BLOCK. 540CI sounds good. However, you will still be forced to make a choice with a big block... powwer high or power low, because you can't escape the physics of air flow and resistance over time.

And I really don't think the Super T5 (the tranny I assume you are talking about) can hold that much power anyway...they just need to remain in the mix of things, so they rate their tranny's higher than what they can actually take. Last time I talked to Chuck Everly (some of the old timers should remember him), he had melted a few T5's. I'm not sure if he ever went to the Richmond 6 speed, or the T56, or if he just sold the car.

 

I'm calling bull****. Thats right. BULL****!

#1- a low-mid 14 second car runs in the mid-high 70s in the 1/8.
#2- A low-mid 14 second car CANNOT put down 28 (!!!) mph between the 1/8 and the 1/4.
#3-Even if said car was this miracle of uneven acceleration, i find it hard to belive that it ran 6 tenths faster at the 1/8, with 3 extra mph, only to end up 3 tenths faster at the 1/4. Why? Simple, you take 5.08 seconds to cover the last 1/8 in your 14.1 runs. You take 4.63 seconds to cover the last 1/8 in your earlier 14.4 run.

So either A.) your track timers are completely shot for everything related to the 1/8 mile. Or B.) You are full of ****. Given your attitude, your insistence in the 200r4 as being everyones salvation, and that YOU didnn't notice the 1/8 timing problems, i place no weight in anything you say.

------------------
Ed Maher - Moderator @ The Carb Board
92 Z28 Convertible - Quasar blue / Tan top
LB9 4L60 GU2 G80 - stock, soon to be sleeper
-=ICON Motorsports=-

- Definitely prototypes, high powered mutants of some kind. Too weird to live, too cool to die

 

I'm with ed. you're full of $hit. No one is dumb enough to blow a grand on swapping from a perfectly good 700r4 to a 200. Not to mention you were just going on and on about the 200r4 not long ago..I don't think you could have gotten it done that fast.

------------------
"American made baby. 100% American iron. The muscle among the masses. My hero. Yep, you can take your ergonomically designed, space age, computer controlled, 4 door, cup holding map lighted split double wishbone split fold down retractable cargo covered moon roof piece of transportation and keep it. For I have felt the thunder. And I know the difference!"
JSP Motorsports
ICON Motorsports

 

not to mention how bad the weather was on the 200R4 day compared to the 700R4 day. you would have run slower that day with the 700R4 than your consistant years of testing #s.

 

Yup... I agree completely, and I could produce a handful of 14.2x @ 97.x timeslips that I got with my '70 Nova to back this up.

Something sounds fishy here....

 

Slow Iroc,

I'd like to ask you again, were you getting wheelspin with the 700R4 on 5/19?

 

I'd like to hear the answer to that as well mike. I mean, how did he pick up 60' times with a tranny with a taller first gear when the torque converters are nominally the same and the rear is the same.
Oh wait, i know! He pulled the #s out of his *** ... And even if somehow there were 18 typos in his #s and the 60's were true, i'd say it's a pretty ****ty comparison.

 

Instead of fighting with you guys, I think I'll just laugh at you. LOL, peons.

 

looks like slow iroc doesn't have much to say to all of you that doubt him, wonder why. since this isn't tech, or has strayed from tech it's getting locked.

------------------
ICON Motorsports

1st & 3rd
MM Black Diamond 538 F&AM