Another 700r4 vs. 2004r Post...come on in
03-23-2011, 10:21 PM
#1
Racer
Thread Starter
Another 700r4 vs. 2004r Post...come on in
Ok...so I started out thinking 700r4, then after reading a few posts on this subject I thought that the 2004r would be a better choice. *What made me think this? *Well, drive shaft mod and the gearing of the 2004r closer to th350. *I read the mounting holes in the stock x-member will work for the 2004r, but then someone noted that the 2004r partially blocks one of the exhaust holes in the stock x-member. *So basically I gather for either trans the stock x-member needs to be replaced. *Is that accurate? *So I talked to several transmission guys (cold calls) and most recommended 700r4 over the 2004r explaining that it can be built stronger and argued that 700r4 with 3.73 (my application) was a very drivable and popular combination; although, they all said the would build either one for the same cost.
Ok, lets talk Transmission Ratio:
GM * * * * *1st. ***2nd. * * 3rd * * *4th **Reverse
TH350 * *2.52 * *1.52 * *1.00. * * N/A * * *1.93
200r4. * * 2.74 * *1.57 * *1.00 * * 0.67 * * 2.07
700r4. * * 3.06 * *1.62 * *1.00 * * 0.70 * * 2.29
I read that if your going to run a diff. 3.30 or lower that the 700r4 is a good choice and above that a 2004r would be better. What is this based on; can somebody break this down for me? *Let's say with the 700r4 and 3.73's...can i calculate how fast you will be going and what rpm's when I shift from 1-2 and 2-3 and 3-4? I feel like this would be the biggest factor, right?
Is stall converter size selection affected by what you select above or just what rpm's your engine starts making power...how to choose the right size? *If my engine makes power between 1800-5500rpm considering the above discussion above how to choose a stall converter.
Up to this point I've tried to keep it generic because I know several people want these answers, if not now...at some point in the future. *But now my specific application: I have a 385 (stroked 350, bore 40 over), 750cfm edelbrock carb, air-gap intake, mild cam, trick flow heads, roller rockers, headers; I'm guessing 350-380hp at the flywheel. *And once I get back on the road I plan on a 50-100 shot of nitrous,*ace up my sleeve.
Ok, lets talk Transmission Ratio:
GM * * * * *1st. ***2nd. * * 3rd * * *4th **Reverse
TH350 * *2.52 * *1.52 * *1.00. * * N/A * * *1.93
200r4. * * 2.74 * *1.57 * *1.00 * * 0.67 * * 2.07
700r4. * * 3.06 * *1.62 * *1.00 * * 0.70 * * 2.29
I read that if your going to run a diff. 3.30 or lower that the 700r4 is a good choice and above that a 2004r would be better. What is this based on; can somebody break this down for me? *Let's say with the 700r4 and 3.73's...can i calculate how fast you will be going and what rpm's when I shift from 1-2 and 2-3 and 3-4? I feel like this would be the biggest factor, right?
Is stall converter size selection affected by what you select above or just what rpm's your engine starts making power...how to choose the right size? *If my engine makes power between 1800-5500rpm considering the above discussion above how to choose a stall converter.
Up to this point I've tried to keep it generic because I know several people want these answers, if not now...at some point in the future. *But now my specific application: I have a 385 (stroked 350, bore 40 over), 750cfm edelbrock carb, air-gap intake, mild cam, trick flow heads, roller rockers, headers; I'm guessing 350-380hp at the flywheel. *And once I get back on the road I plan on a 50-100 shot of nitrous,*ace up my sleeve.
03-24-2011, 08:45 AM
#3
Le Mans Master
A 200r4 fits better, has better gear spacing, consumes much less HP to run, weighs about 40-50lbs less and can be built to run 9s.... How many cars you see running 9s with a 700r4? None. That is because 700s are junk. 200r4s are weak as hell in stock form also but can be built to handle 450 crank hp pretty easy and cheaply. If you are gonna make 500+, get ready to spend some money to get a 200r4 to live.
I am planning on building a killer, full billet, lightweight 200r4 that will handle mid 9s and still be fully auto and have lock up. It's gonna cost me near $5k.
Look at how many fast Grand Nationals are running around with 200r4s.....
700r4s are for trucks that tow a lot...and they are not even good for that. That's where the low 1st gear comes in...
I am planning on building a killer, full billet, lightweight 200r4 that will handle mid 9s and still be fully auto and have lock up. It's gonna cost me near $5k.
Look at how many fast Grand Nationals are running around with 200r4s.....
700r4s are for trucks that tow a lot...and they are not even good for that. That's where the low 1st gear comes in...
03-24-2011, 09:12 AM
#4
Le Mans Master
call art carr and talk with him
if you are lucky enough to get him when he has a spare moment, the 200 would be his choice.....no one builds them better...jmo, and the same of many others.......
if you are lucky enough to get him when he has a spare moment, the 200 would be his choice.....no one builds them better...jmo, and the same of many others.......
03-24-2011, 09:57 AM
#5
Team Owner
The 700R is inherently stronger from the initial build. But, either can be rebuilt to handle your horsepower and higher. 200R is a better 'direct fit'. Gear ratios are a bit different. The 200R has a better overdrive ratio, for highway driving. The choice is really one of personal preference, which is more convenient to install, and availability/price.
03-24-2011, 10:32 AM
#6
Melting Slicks
Gear ratios...
If the total multiplication of first gear times the rear end ratio is over 10, the rear tires will most probably just spin making full throttle useless.
For final gear ratio, multiply the rear end ratio by the overdrive ratio and then figure your rpm at highway cruise speeds. If you find that, with your cam, the engine will be turning too slowly to run efficiently, the extra gearing will be wasted. In other words, a big cammed 500 hp SBC won't be happy at 1700 rpm so therefore the overdrive is essentially useless.
On the other hand, if you have a roller cam with wide lobe separations and high flowing heads, the wide power band will help mitigate the above problems.
If the total multiplication of first gear times the rear end ratio is over 10, the rear tires will most probably just spin making full throttle useless.
For final gear ratio, multiply the rear end ratio by the overdrive ratio and then figure your rpm at highway cruise speeds. If you find that, with your cam, the engine will be turning too slowly to run efficiently, the extra gearing will be wasted. In other words, a big cammed 500 hp SBC won't be happy at 1700 rpm so therefore the overdrive is essentially useless.
On the other hand, if you have a roller cam with wide lobe separations and high flowing heads, the wide power band will help mitigate the above problems.
03-24-2011, 11:06 AM
#7
Race Director
i have a 700r4 and i am happy with it......i have a 3.07 rear end
just multiply the gear ratios times your rear end and you can see the difference in the final drive ratios.....the 2004r keeps the ratios lower with a 3.73 that means lower engine RPMs for the same speed....buy what you want they both can be built well, if you are looking for lower overall RPMs at highway speeds use the 2004r.
stall converter is less dependent on gear ratio then it is on engine torque curve....for performance purposes (not gas mileage) you want the stall to keep slipping unitl you hit your power curve....so if your engine hits a power curve at 2500 rpm then you want the torque converter to slip unitl then and then stall at the 2500 rpm range. this allows you to hit your power curve sooner....now apply this to the gear ratio and you can see where that takes you
just multiply the gear ratios times your rear end and you can see the difference in the final drive ratios.....the 2004r keeps the ratios lower with a 3.73 that means lower engine RPMs for the same speed....buy what you want they both can be built well, if you are looking for lower overall RPMs at highway speeds use the 2004r.
stall converter is less dependent on gear ratio then it is on engine torque curve....for performance purposes (not gas mileage) you want the stall to keep slipping unitl you hit your power curve....so if your engine hits a power curve at 2500 rpm then you want the torque converter to slip unitl then and then stall at the 2500 rpm range. this allows you to hit your power curve sooner....now apply this to the gear ratio and you can see where that takes you
Last edited by bobs77vet; 03-24-2011 at 11:41 AM.
03-24-2011, 06:23 PM
#8
Racer
Thread Starter
...more research
Ok...so a little more research and I find:
Good article about this subject at: http://www.webrodder.com/article.php?AID=426&SID=6
&
MPH = (RPM*Dt)/(Gd*Gt*336)
MPH = Miles Per Hour
RPM = Engine Revolutions Per Minute
Dt = Tire Diameter in Inches
Gd = Diff. Gear Ratio (i.e. 3.73)
Gt = Transmission Gear Ratio (i.e. 3.06, 1.63, etc.)
------------------------
I have some follow up questions and comments to responses provided. Please do not take my comments the wrong way, my intention is only to dig deeper and understand each comment made. These questions are to anyone who wants to provide feedback, not just the us in here already
ajrothm:
"fits better" - Agreed, but minor changes to accomodate 700r4, right?
"better gear spacing" – Maybe I just don’t understand what you mean here, but the largest disparity in MPH in 1st gear is ~4mph, 2nd gear is ~2.5mph, 3rd gear is 0mph, and 4th gear is ~4mph (below 100mph)?
“consumes less hp to run” –This is a big pro of 2004r, can you explain why this is and where can I confirm it?
“weighs about 40-50lbs less” – Article above states only a 9lbs difference (123lbs vs. 132lbs)? Any other sources to confirm this?
“can be built to run 9s” – Noted, but would you argree that for 5k the 700r4 could be built to run 9's?
7T1vette:
“But, either can be rebuilt to handle your horsepower and higher” – I would agree, but can you do it for the same cost? What would it cost to build a 2004r vs. a 700r4 to handle ~400RWHP?
“The 200R has a better overdrive ratio, for highway driving.” – At 70mph, the 700r4 (with 3.73 and 26” diameter tires) only runs about 100rpm faster. This is better, but significant?
Larrywalk:
“If the total multiplication of first gear times the rear end ratio is over 10, the rear tires will most probably just spin making full throttle useless.” – WOT from zero on street? 1st gear on 2004r is 10.22 and 1st gear on 700r4 is 11.41 (with 3.73 and 26” diameter tires). What mph would you suspect you would be able to roll into and hook-up?
bobs77vet: Thanks for the TC information.
Good article about this subject at: http://www.webrodder.com/article.php?AID=426&SID=6
&
MPH = (RPM*Dt)/(Gd*Gt*336)
MPH = Miles Per Hour
RPM = Engine Revolutions Per Minute
Dt = Tire Diameter in Inches
Gd = Diff. Gear Ratio (i.e. 3.73)
Gt = Transmission Gear Ratio (i.e. 3.06, 1.63, etc.)
------------------------
I have some follow up questions and comments to responses provided. Please do not take my comments the wrong way, my intention is only to dig deeper and understand each comment made. These questions are to anyone who wants to provide feedback, not just the us in here already
ajrothm:
"fits better" - Agreed, but minor changes to accomodate 700r4, right?
"better gear spacing" – Maybe I just don’t understand what you mean here, but the largest disparity in MPH in 1st gear is ~4mph, 2nd gear is ~2.5mph, 3rd gear is 0mph, and 4th gear is ~4mph (below 100mph)?
“consumes less hp to run” –This is a big pro of 2004r, can you explain why this is and where can I confirm it?
“weighs about 40-50lbs less” – Article above states only a 9lbs difference (123lbs vs. 132lbs)? Any other sources to confirm this?
“can be built to run 9s” – Noted, but would you argree that for 5k the 700r4 could be built to run 9's?
7T1vette:
“But, either can be rebuilt to handle your horsepower and higher” – I would agree, but can you do it for the same cost? What would it cost to build a 2004r vs. a 700r4 to handle ~400RWHP?
“The 200R has a better overdrive ratio, for highway driving.” – At 70mph, the 700r4 (with 3.73 and 26” diameter tires) only runs about 100rpm faster. This is better, but significant?
Larrywalk:
“If the total multiplication of first gear times the rear end ratio is over 10, the rear tires will most probably just spin making full throttle useless.” – WOT from zero on street? 1st gear on 2004r is 10.22 and 1st gear on 700r4 is 11.41 (with 3.73 and 26” diameter tires). What mph would you suspect you would be able to roll into and hook-up?
bobs77vet: Thanks for the TC information.
03-25-2011, 08:17 AM
#12
Pro
Member Since: Dec 2008
Location: Frisco TX
Posts: 531
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I looked at both for my '73 camaro, the 200 is ideal with a 3;73 real axle and 27in tire.
Its has a slightly taller 1st gear and much better spread.
$2K minimum to build one at the 400hp level.
I saw a '72 vette with 700r4 on the rack at the paint shop where my car has been buried, its a big tranny and getting 2.5 in pipes thru the stock X member is gonna be a challenge. For this reason I'd plan an aftermarket X member or sidepipes
Spending that kinda tranny cash, I'd go with someone nationally known with deep pockets.
Its has a slightly taller 1st gear and much better spread.
$2K minimum to build one at the 400hp level.
I saw a '72 vette with 700r4 on the rack at the paint shop where my car has been buried, its a big tranny and getting 2.5 in pipes thru the stock X member is gonna be a challenge. For this reason I'd plan an aftermarket X member or sidepipes
Spending that kinda tranny cash, I'd go with someone nationally known with deep pockets.
Last edited by ED69ray; 03-25-2011 at 08:20 AM.
03-25-2011, 10:23 AM
#13
Team Owner
Any GOOD muffler man can get your pipes through the hole with either tranny in there, but he has to know WTF he is doing.....it's tite.....
last time I did the tranny, for a flex plate failure, I cut the lower loops out and did some structural steel on top of the loop, reinforce the Xmember to OEM strength....
another comment, make sure you use a TRANS GO shift kit, not that damn Superior/Fairbanks kit.....
the first gear of a 700 will upshift about 1/2 way or less through an intersection.....and tend to hold in 3rd at WOT, winding hell outta the engine for no reason......
the 200 with a TG kit does everything correctly.....
my car had a 336 rear with Muncie.....unchanged....
last time I did the tranny, for a flex plate failure, I cut the lower loops out and did some structural steel on top of the loop, reinforce the Xmember to OEM strength....
another comment, make sure you use a TRANS GO shift kit, not that damn Superior/Fairbanks kit.....
the first gear of a 700 will upshift about 1/2 way or less through an intersection.....and tend to hold in 3rd at WOT, winding hell outta the engine for no reason......
the 200 with a TG kit does everything correctly.....
my car had a 336 rear with Muncie.....unchanged....
03-26-2011, 10:11 AM
#14
Racer
Thread Starter
Feb 09 article from Rod and Custom backs up ajrothm (this may be the deal sealer for me):
"Besides the many advantages of the 200-4R over the tried and true Turbo 350, like greater performance potential and the all-important overdrive function, the 200-4R--with its multi-use capabilities--will mount to any standard bellhousing-equipped GM engine (Chevrolet, Buick, Pontiac, Oldsmobile) and is an extremely efficient transmission when it comes to putting the power to rear wheels. The 200-4R features less internal rotating mass and a lower inertia level that will not rob your high-performance engine of precious horsepower."
"Besides the many advantages of the 200-4R over the tried and true Turbo 350, like greater performance potential and the all-important overdrive function, the 200-4R--with its multi-use capabilities--will mount to any standard bellhousing-equipped GM engine (Chevrolet, Buick, Pontiac, Oldsmobile) and is an extremely efficient transmission when it comes to putting the power to rear wheels. The 200-4R features less internal rotating mass and a lower inertia level that will not rob your high-performance engine of precious horsepower."
03-26-2011, 10:43 AM
#15
Race Director
Member Since: Apr 2007
Location: Henderson Nv-Rohnert Park/Sonoma C o. ca/born in NY Rockaway Beach.
Posts: 13,874
Received 544 Likes
on
384 Posts
I my self hunted for months for the right 200r4 to have rebuilt... I checked CL religiously.. well a few weeks ago i lucked out and found a 200r out of a grand national, picked it up for 50.00.. now im just sitting on it waiting to have it rebuilt...Not sure what your time frame is but this may be an option on finding one. But there are a few good vendors that have 200r for sale, like bto..
03-26-2011, 02:03 PM
#16
Racer
Thread Starter
I actually have a automated craigslist search email me when anybody post a ad with several combinations of 200r4...I am on the hunt. Anybody know where I can get a complete list of cars that had this trans in it? And are some of the internals better from car to car (like 700r4 post 87 trans are supposed to be better)? I was going to hit the local salvage yards and see what I can find? I read some posts on turbobuick.com and they seem relatively easy enough to rebuild with the right parts. I think I may try to pick one up and attempt the rebuild...anybody done this and could recommend a good complete rebuild kit with all required parts (for 350-450hp application)?
03-26-2011, 03:59 PM
#17
Drifting
LOL!
If I want to buy parts for my '71 vert, I have to let my wife drive every now and then ( with me in the passenger seat of course ), and she will not drive a stick. Oh well! LOL!
03-26-2011, 04:31 PM
#19
Drifting
03-27-2011, 10:36 PM
#20
I have a 200-4R istalled in my 79. I used the stock 350 crossmember by removing the nose piece that is bolted to the forward side. (This is the piece that the stock 350 tranny mount is bolted to) Then the 200 mount sets directly on top of the stock crossmember where a turbo 400 would bolt if it were the original type tranny. I also ran 2 1/2" exhaust through the stock cross member as well. If you will send me your e-mail I will get you some pictures 0f my install.