Hey guys (and gals), I have not been around much, but have been making a lot of progress with my project. I just rebuilt my 350 turbo trann and have around $750 in it, but today I came across a 86 700r4 from a 2wd silverado with 60,000 miles on it from a friend, and he offered it to me for $250. I would rebuild it and probably have a few hundred in that, but I think it may be worth it as I plan to drive this truck a bit....what are your thoughts? Is the 700 the hands down choice since I have not installed a trans yet...thanks!
--
Resident Youngin'

With the 700 you can run a lower gear..I cruise with 3:55 gears at 70-80 mph and get pretty good gas mileage.
--
If at first you don't succeed buy her another beer! Home to Lugnut!
NSRA,GG,Doughnut Derilects,CRS, Trophy Whores,etc,etc...
Charter Member: Dipstick Street Rod Association

What Bill said. I run a 3:08 gear and with the 350/4 barrel I get about 24 MPG cruising at 70. If given the choice I's sell the 350 and go with the 700. Just my 2 cents.
mike
--
chopper
Never argue with an idiot. They drag you down to their level then beat you with experience.

The 700R is a better investment these days. I would suggest a 3.55 gear or better depending on engine cam and rear wheel size, but better launch and cruising rpms.


--
Steve "Jack'Stands" Jack

"I would suggest a 3.55 gear or better"
Or better meaning what?
Numerically higher or lower?
What's the overdrive ratio in the 700R4 and what rear axle # would compute to the same as a T350 with a 3-1ratio rear?

DrJ.....my comment was to bring up the point that if you have less than 3.55 (such as a 2.73)rear end ratio you will be too low on the/most torque bands to achieve mechanical efficiency on most engines. Here is the info

Gear Ratios:
200-R4: 2.74/1.57/1.00/0.67
700-R4: 3.06/1.62/1.00/0.70
350: 2.52/1.52/1.00

more info here http://hotrodders.com/kb/search.pl?Terms=700r4&Match=0

With most wheel and tire sizes befitting a 26" to 28"ish diameter range, rpm range is around 2250 (26" with a 3.55 and 700R) to 2089 (28" with a 3.55 and 700R) at 70 mph! These ranges are perfect for the volumetric efficiency of most cams etc. EVen a 3.73 gear with a 26" tire is in the 2364rpm range...also perfect. If ya got a big cam with the floor of the torque range considerably off idle, then a move to 2400 up is the ticket. Otherwise my experience is that you are constantly having to put your foot in it to get it to go wasting gas!

Do your math here at http://www.quiknet.com/~ke6vut/rpmcalc.html with the RPM calculator.

I would use the stock C4 (Corvette)torque converter for a built in 2000 stall if you need a slight stall converter. They are plenty beefy and are less expensive than some fancy smancy aftermarket ones.
--
Steve "Jack'Stands" Jack

"Otherwise my experience is that you are constantly having to put your foot in it to get it to go wasting gas!"

With a 200R4, 2:76 gears and tall tires I get great mileage.
At about 95mph!
Around town stinks.

I'm thinking 3:73 would be the best all around gear for this combo.

95mph mileage will suffer, but I don't do a whole lot of 95mph driving! hehe


--
Charlie

Thanks,
That's what I figured you meant but I wasn't sure.
I have an 88 Astro van with enough miles on it to call it a "parts car" soon so i may have a 700 to play with in another year or so...

I like the 350 ,1st to 2nd is closer ratio then the 700.But i guess it depends on what your after.
--
http://community.webshots.com/user/jimcaf12

Once you have one you'll never go back.I'm putting another in my 29 too.
--
I'm the Mikey that dont eat everything!

I know you've already found a 700R4 but the 2004R is a much better 4 spd O/D transmission and is EXACTLY the same length as a TH350 (mount is a little further back, directly under the output shaft). They're not cheap to build but there are plenty of them in Turbo Buicks (Grand Nationals and T-Types) that are running low 10s in the quarter (even a few in the 9's!) Just my .02 Look at the vendors over at www.turbobuick.com for good rebuilders. They could do your 700R4 for you as well.
--
1936 Chevy Standard Sedan (Buick Grand National powered!!)
2003 Chevy Avalanche - Black WBH
2003 Chevy TrailBlazer - also black
1987 Buick GN (sold as rolling chassis)
1986 Buick GN (stolen 4/99)

The 86 and older 700's were a weaker tranny than the 87 and newer. Same case, and they can be built with the parts from the 87 and up. It'll just cost you more.
Along with overdrive, you get a low first gear (3.06)with the 700. Best of both worlds.
While it's true 200R's are holding up in 10 second GN's, the turbo V6 doesn't have the torque of a V8. You also don't get that low first gear in a 200.
I asked my tranny man if he could build me a 200R that would live behind a 500 inch Caddy, he told me "Sure. As long as you don't put it in anything!"
For normal driving a 200R is fine. I've got one in our 41.
If you're going to beat on it with sticky tires, either stick with the 350 or build the 700R.

--
Charlie

Not to start an argument, but your tranny guy is WAAAAYYY off-base with his 2004R commment. Not surprising, most have no clue about this tranny. "..the turbo V6 doesn't have the torque of a V8..." You must be joking! The '87 Grand National made 245 hp and 355lb/ft of torque!! And that's stock!! By comparison a 2004 Corvette makes 360 ft/lbs of torque. Torque is EXACTLY what makes the Turbo V6 so strong. How else do you propel a 3660# Buick Regal to 10 second quarter mile times?? Oh yeah, add VERY STICKY tires!! Check out some video evidence: http://www.buickpower.com/buickvideos.htm
--
1936 Chevy Standard Sedan (Buick Grand National powered!!)
2003 Chevy Avalanche - Black WBH
2003 Chevy TrailBlazer - also black
1987 Buick GN (sold as rolling chassis)
1986 Buick GN (stolen 4/99)

And it makes that 355# of torque after the boost comes on, not off idle like a V8.
My tranny man builds about half of the drag race trannys in upstate NY. I'll take his word about the strength of the 200R.
--
Charlie

Don't make me sit you two in the corner!!! BOTH are good points,However I don't think the question started as " I'm going to burn the wheels off my car...". I thought it was a pros and cons of the 350 vs 700r4 and if he wanted to build it to go behind a monster motor that would've been stated.
--
If at first you don't succeed buy her another beer! Home to Lugnut!
NSRA,GG,Doughnut Derilects,CRS, Trophy Whores,etc,etc...
Charter Member: Dipstick Street Rod Association

My My My...here I thought you were gonna turn the mother into a wheelstander and give Chevado a run for it's money. LOL

Personal Preference? TH350...... I'll go back into my corner now and watch the preceedings. This'ns fixin' to get gooooood. LOL
--
Lower Susquehanna Chapter Member of DSRA - DSRA Mid Atlantic Division P.R Associate in care of Lugnuts 2003/2004 World Tour

No argument Bill. Just 2 different opinions.
I'm no tranny expert. Don't even want to be.
But it is the opinion of the tranny experts I do know that the 200R isn't strong enough to run behind a V8 with a lot of torque.
I've got one in the 41 with a stock 350 Olds, but that has about 80HP 3Ft # of torque! hehe
--
Charlie

Whoa, not trying to "stir the pot"! Just wanted to offer a fellow rodder another option he may not have considered. Torque is Torque. Doesn't matter when or how it occurs, will the tranny handle it? Yes the 2004R will (as will the others when properly built). And BTW, the boost comes on almost immediately off idle and progresses exponentially with RPM as exhaust velocity increases. Not as linear as a blower but far more efficient. I don't doubt your tranny builder's qualifications. There are VERY few in the country who can properly build a 2004R. They aren't used as often as the others so most are content with building what they already know and what sells the most.
--
1936 Chevy Standard Sedan (Buick Grand National powered!!)
2003 Chevy Avalanche - Black WBH
2003 Chevy TrailBlazer - also black
1987 Buick GN (sold as rolling chassis)
1986 Buick GN (stolen 4/99)

Dragginsplash,
I apologize for taking your post in another direction. E-mail me directly if you'd like any other info.
--
1936 Chevy Standard Sedan (Buick Grand National powered!!)
2003 Chevy Avalanche - Black WBH
2003 Chevy TrailBlazer - also black
1987 Buick GN (sold as rolling chassis)
1986 Buick GN (stolen 4/99)

As you said..I hate to start trouble...but... I that web page (the Buick one) they also had a section for tranny upgrades...They were installing 700R4's in the Regals. My neighbor runs a low 9 second street GNX and the first thing he did once he started making HP was to go to a 700R4.

I had a 200r4 built for my 33 Ford, 388cid Chevy, Edelbrock heads,etc,etc making about 450hp the 200R4 lasted about 15,000 miles. It has a turbo 350 in it now, until I get the 700R4 put together.
Jerry...

I don't think a 700 would be my first choice in a 9 second car.
--
Charlie

I agree. Nobody around here runs a 700 in their bracket cars either.
--
I'm the Mikey that dont eat everything!

Ditto that, Most I`ve seen are Glides, 400`s and 350`s Mostly Glides. Not that it can`t be done but it just doesnt make sense for drag racing. Street rods benifit the most on O/D trannies.
--
WPoC

A 7004R won't bolt to a Buick motor w/o an adapter. I searched the site again myself and found no 9 sec turbo Buicks running a 700R4. I could've missed it, so if you can find it again, please point it out. Most Turbo Regals are running 2004R's because there are more hi-performance "hard parts" available for them than for the 700R4 (though more are being produced recently). These cars are usually "dual purpose" cars. Those who are doing nothing but racing their cars have moved on to TH400's and sacrificed the overdrive.

I did note a post by PTS Xtreme trannsmissions that the gear ratio's in a 700 are more favorable for a naturally aspirated car although the "step" from 1st to 2nd is considerably wider.

BTW, if your neighbor has mutilated a REAL GNX (one of only 547 built) to run 9's I hope it was a rebuilt wreck or a theft recovery or something! Surely nobody would hack up a GNX.
--
1936 Chevy Standard Sedan (Buick Grand National powered!!)
2003 Chevy Avalanche - Black WBH
2003 Chevy TrailBlazer - also black
1987 Buick GN (sold as rolling chassis)
1986 Buick GN (stolen 4/99)

I think a lot of the problem is that we don't know why you are building this thing. If you want a drag racing tranny I've been told that the 350 is about the strongest auto that GM makes. If you are going to drag the 700R you will be disappointed in the second gear. It seems too high to me. To cruise the 700R would be the choice, hands down. Right guys?
--
docchevy Remember Physics explains everything!

700R is a great cruising trans. I`m using a highly modified TH350 because I was tired of huffing trannys. So far this one has been flawless and I have been known to pound the crap out of my coupe on occaision.
--
WPoC

very interesting lines of discusssion and thoughts.
--
Tony

Come on Tony. Let's hear from someone who does this for a living!
--
Charlie

moondisc , Not sure what to comment on.

Lot of cash in the t-350. Depending on final gear ratio numbers with tire size and gear set would make decision on t-350 or 700 trannys. That was clearly pointed out already

Most folks yap about the gear change percentage from 1st to 2nd on the 700r4. It don't mean squat unless you are a serious racer. If you are a serious racer you dont run a 700r4.

I recently built a 1985 700r4 (oh my gawd, an early 700 tranny!?) for a street car. A 3.55 gear in an 8 inch Ford under a Studie baker. A WOT 1-2 shift produced about 20 feet of rubber marks, the 2-3 shift was a few feet of marks. Engine is the 350cid , 330 hp chevy crate.

Gear ratios in the area of 3.50 to a 3.73 seem best in most street rod apps. Goes back to tire height and camshaft timing for cruise RPM.

The original post was about T-350 & 700's but i will comment on the 2004r too.

The 9 second turbo cars that run with 2004r trannys have a multitude of heavy duty parts in them to live. There IS a difference in the torque application to these trannys between a large CID engine to the turbo'd V-6's.


If you want a tough 2004r , on the west coast you go see Bruce at PTS trannys in CA.

Oddly enough if you ask a sorta mechanical knowledgable rodder if they would use a T-200 tranny in a rod.......the answer is a loud NO. The 2004r uses the same rear gear train setup as the T-200. The clutch pack frictions and steel plates are the same size too.


your mileage may vary
--
Tony

Man, when I mentioned putting a 2004R in a rod, I thought I was trying to help! You guys act like I said "Buy an Import!" As mentioned above, Bruce Toelle at PTS Extreme is "the man" in CA for durable 2004R's. I'll include a list of others at the bottom of this post. As for why any "...knowledgeable rodder.." wouldn't use a 2004R my guess is a fear of the unknown. Many, many 2004R's are being used today behind healthy small and big block GM motors (and a few Fords!) with no more failure rate than an equally built TH350 or 700R4. If you want to put 700hp in front of one, it's gonna cost you the better part of $3000 to get it to live. If you're talking about the usual 300-400 hp in street rods you're talking about a lot less money.
The BRF and CZF valve bodies are preferred but TCI modifies the others to perform like these.

I guess I'll be an outcast because I didn't build a SBC for my rod and I'm running a 2004R! That's fine by me. I always did like doing things my own way.

Anyone interested in a 2004R can gain alot of info here (written by Bruce Toelle):
http://www.turbobuick.com/forums/showthread.php?threadid=31365

Also the "Transmission Talk" section at www.turbobuick.com

A list of performance 2004R builders:

http://www.turbobuick.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=84598
--
1936 Chevy Standard Sedan (Buick Grand National powered!!)
2003 Chevy Avalanche - Black WBH
2003 Chevy TrailBlazer - also black
1987 Buick GN (sold as rolling chassis)
1986 Buick GN (stolen 4/99)

Why do you take this personal?
Crosley "who builds trannys for a living BTW" agreed with you. He said they can be built to hold up.
But why spend $3000 when a 700 can be built for half of that? Or a 350 for a third?
Crosley also taught me that the 200R4 has the same hard parts as the T200, which was first used in Chevettes.
When I was a "mistergoodwrench" back in the mid 70's, we had a lot of Chevettes come in with smoked T200's.
Like I said before, different strokes.
Wouldn't it be boring if everyone ran a 350/350?
BTW, I like your sedan!
--
Charlie

Charlie you're right. I shouldn't have taken it personally, as I'm sure that's not the way it was intended. Just seemed like everyone had the "NO WAY! Don't do that!" attitude 'bout the 2004R. If I hadn't had so much success with them, I'd probably feel the same way. If nothing else comes from this post, maybe it'll get someone thinking "outside the box" when it comes to 350/350 combos. That's what roddin' is all about, right? That's one of the reason's I love it. There's no "wrong way" to build your car. Unlike the crap I used to take from Corvette restorers when I was into those!! Incorrect number of stitches per inch in your seats?? 50 lashes with a NOS wiper blade for you!! LOL!

Thanks for the compliment on the '36. She's coming along, slowly but surely. I love your '41 Olds! Especially the grille area. GM hit a home run there! Don't think I've ever seen one before.
--
1936 Chevy Standard Sedan (Buick Grand National powered!!)
2003 Chevy Avalanche - Black WBH
2003 Chevy TrailBlazer - also black
1987 Buick GN (sold as rolling chassis)
1986 Buick GN (stolen 4/99)

No one has the "NO WAY" attitude here. Dave "stupidbaker" has shown ALL of us how to think outside the box.
--
WPoC

Stupid is so far outside the box that the guys in the white coats are after him!
That's what I love about the guy!
--
Charlie

People asked why I used a 200R in the 41. They acted like I was putting a Pinto engine in it.
I had it, it fit in the stock X member, my bud built it using the same parts as a GN, so I know it will take anything a stock 350 can throw at it.
I've seen a ton of Olds 98's with 200R's and 150,000 miles on them. Some I know never had a fluid and filter change.
Can't be all bad!

"Incorrect number of stitches per inch in your seats?? 50 lashes with a NOS wiper blade for you!!"

I think it was My Classic Car TV show that did a thing on a guy who restored a Vette to be exactly as it came off the assembley line. Overspray, no paint on the rockers, scraps of carpet under the seat.
All I could think is I'd like to run over the guy with my buds blown BBC powered 63 Split window! hehe

--
Charlie

Mistrgoodwrench,

Not sure if your comment are directed fully at my post;


It appears you did not really understand my post in the area of comments about " knowledgeable rodders" using a T-200 in a rod.

My point was that when you mention a "T-200" to folks that have heard of that tranny...... they say "NO" to installing them into anything but a trash dumpster. I was NOT talking about a 200-4r tranny. That is why I purposously typed "T-200".

As I pointed out the back end of the gear train of the 200-4r is the same as a T-200. Same sprag, same gears, same stuff, same strength.

I've built a few trannys since I screwed up my first T-400 in 1974. I still learn something new every week.

;)



--
Tony

Tony, you're right. And if I'd been thinking, I would've known that a transmission builder knows the difference and typed T-200 on perpose. My oversight. This has been a good discussion even though it got off of the original subject. Should make a valuable addition to the archives when folks are searching for transmission info.
--
1936 Chevy Standard Sedan (Buick Grand National powered!!)
2003 Chevy Avalanche - Black WBH
2003 Chevy TrailBlazer - also black
1987 Buick GN (sold as rolling chassis)
1986 Buick GN (stolen 4/99)