TH400 The real answer
- Thread starter charliep
- Start date
Welcome!
By registering with us, you'll be able to discuss, share and private message with other members of our community.
ITSAV6
It's my Granny's car!
- Joined
- Nov 13, 2001
- Messages
- 2,451
Ttype6 said:By the way,that clunk so many hear during a 3-2 coast down is evidence that your third gear timing is off. QUOTE]
I have a PTS Killer Street tranny. Has had the 3-2 clunk from day 1,even called Bruce about it..."Nature of the beast" Something to do with the big servo and high line psi. Still can't stand it.But it has super quick shifts.
Have you ever checked the line pressures? Mine has 300 from 1/2 throttle on. If the pressure isn't enough clutches won't last either.
The big deal with the 2004r is the builder and his attention to detail. If he's on his game. that tranny will live for a long time. I love my OD on the highway.. couldnt imagine being stuck in 3rd without a lockup as cars are wizzing by at 80 mph.
My 2004r in my car was built in 99. Dont ask how many passes with a t-brake.. Dropped the fluid two weeks ago.. no clutch material.
Been there and done that with the know-it-all tranny builders.. been burned a few times until you have a correctly built transmission.
Money doesnt get it.. but his expertise on these units and attention does.
If I was on my 3rd or 4th 2004r in a year.. i'd be also looking for another option. I feel and understand.. just you have a builder issue that needs to be addressed.
HTH
My 2004r in my car was built in 99. Dont ask how many passes with a t-brake.. Dropped the fluid two weeks ago.. no clutch material.
Been there and done that with the know-it-all tranny builders.. been burned a few times until you have a correctly built transmission.
Money doesnt get it.. but his expertise on these units and attention does.
If I was on my 3rd or 4th 2004r in a year.. i'd be also looking for another option. I feel and understand.. just you have a builder issue that needs to be addressed.
HTH
norbs said:
Well... I screwed up my measurement somehow, and had to shorten the new shaft. (getting old sucks)
If you provide all the (accurate) measurements to the driveshaft maker, he will calculate everything for you.
They want a measurement from the rear U-joint centerline to the trans seal, and also how far the output shaft sticks out past the seal.
charliep said:
My experience with the 200:
First, my car ran low 11's. Probally had over 100, 11 second passes and 200+ 12 second passes. I don't know the horsepower, whatever it takes to make a 3700 lb car with me in it to run 120mph in the 1/4.
My 200 lasted 4 years running 12's after putting around $2K in it. That was also putting 10K miles on the car on the street.
When the car started going 11's, I had problems keeping a lock-up converter together. Lonnie convinced me to go non-lockup....best thing I have done. BTW, this car has his T-brake. I guess it all depends on who builds them.
Next year I am hoping for high 9's, and I will be using my 200
KevinB said:My experience with the 200:
Next year I am hoping for high 9's, and I will be using my 200
The question is how long will it last at that power level, i think you will be counting that number with your 10 fingers, and it should be done by then............
So we haven't heard how the 400 worked out. I wonder. A 200 4R from Bruce or Lonnie would have done the job, and done it well. If you're burning clutches, you don't have enough line pressure, or your shifts aren't timed right, the transmission itself has plenty of torque capacity. I haven't had one come back burnt yet either.
6PacktoGo said:
The direct and 3rd gear clutch packs in my opinion, will not hold the hp capacity, they are just too small. I usually go through them each season, it could be the tranny builders up here, but if i could get over a year warranty against failure, i would have stayed with the 200. No vendor will give a warranty over 1 year as they know better.
No, i don;t build transmissions, but just pay the bills, and I;m fed up of freshening them every year at huge costs. I would need a 5 year warranty against any failures of componets and excessive clutch wear to make it cost effective on my side. This is at a hp level of high 9s @139 mph, dyno sessions, street driving, etc, and 20 psi transbrake launches, full weight car.
A direct quote from Mike Kurtz of PMAC, Century Trans, etc at one of our Buick events when asked the 2004r vs T400 question:
"I could build a turbo 400 in a sandbox and make it live in a Buick"
Once I got to the 11 second range as a daily driver I was "freshening" the trans every year. I also got tired of spending the $400 to go through a built trans after 10K of street miles and the season of racing. The neatness of driving to the track in overdrive wasn't cooler than worrying if this was the time I was going to have to limp it home or get the trailer because the trans failed. With the stage motor I went to the 400 and haven't looked back. So it gets a little less mileage on the highway, BFD. Anyone using a mid 10 second or better car as their daily driver and only car is a little off in the head to begin with (I used to be one of them). Yes a 2004r can live behind a 9 second car, just like the are 9 second stock ecu cars out there. That does not make it the easiest, cheapest, or even best way to do it, but it can be done. Just like we choose to stick with a V-6 when a v-8 will do it easier and cheaper. Sometimes we choose routes just to be hard headed, but we have more fun doing it. If the question is durability then the answer is T400 hands down. If it's a mileage question, then decide what kind of mileage you need to get to justify the added expense of the 2004r. In the same vein, I spent quite a bit installing a behind the dash vintage air unit on my car to keep the A/C and still have room for the Stage II heads. I had the car three years before selling it and never used the A/C once. I made sure to tell everyone who saw it that it still had A/C and ran 150 in the quarter, which was the real reason I kept the A/C. That's my late night rant.
Greg Kring
Arlington, Texas
"I could build a turbo 400 in a sandbox and make it live in a Buick"
Once I got to the 11 second range as a daily driver I was "freshening" the trans every year. I also got tired of spending the $400 to go through a built trans after 10K of street miles and the season of racing. The neatness of driving to the track in overdrive wasn't cooler than worrying if this was the time I was going to have to limp it home or get the trailer because the trans failed. With the stage motor I went to the 400 and haven't looked back. So it gets a little less mileage on the highway, BFD. Anyone using a mid 10 second or better car as their daily driver and only car is a little off in the head to begin with (I used to be one of them). Yes a 2004r can live behind a 9 second car, just like the are 9 second stock ecu cars out there. That does not make it the easiest, cheapest, or even best way to do it, but it can be done. Just like we choose to stick with a V-6 when a v-8 will do it easier and cheaper. Sometimes we choose routes just to be hard headed, but we have more fun doing it. If the question is durability then the answer is T400 hands down. If it's a mileage question, then decide what kind of mileage you need to get to justify the added expense of the 2004r. In the same vein, I spent quite a bit installing a behind the dash vintage air unit on my car to keep the A/C and still have room for the Stage II heads. I had the car three years before selling it and never used the A/C once. I made sure to tell everyone who saw it that it still had A/C and ran 150 in the quarter, which was the real reason I kept the A/C. That's my late night rant.
Greg Kring
Arlington, Texas
If anyone would take the time to calculate the available friction area of the high/rev (third gear) clutch pack in the 200-4R and the available apply piston area (both cavities included) you would find that it loses out big time to the turbo 400. Even if you calculate for a 9 friction plate high clutch in the 200-4R, it still comes out short to a simple 6 pack in the 400. In high horsepower applications the physics is simply against you with the 200-4R, period! I don't care how many fancy parts or needle thrust bearings you throw at it, or how carefully you time the syncronized shift from second to third. When it comes down to it, the simple, basic size of the high clutch pack will not allow life at high HP levels. If your serious about racing, switch to the 400. Easy unit to PM and cheap. It has been the mainstay for HD racing for decades. Even before fancy parts started coming out for them.
The physicla size of the third clutch pack is the Achilles heel of the 200-4R.
The physicla size of the third clutch pack is the Achilles heel of the 200-4R.
don when you dual feed the direct drum in the 2004r the situation between the 2 is very close although the 400 frictions are larger.but when you compare the heavy weight of the direct drum of a th400 to the lighter 2004rs direct drum the 2004r has equal power transmission capabilities with 6 clutches when you dual feed it.everyone using the dual feed method that i intoduced a few years back has cured the direct clutch problem as long as everything else is working correctly.eliminating the restricion that impede band knock off at light throttle by bypassing 2 checkballs incorporated into the circuit creates the fastest most reliable direct clutch apply circuitry in the gm2004rtransmission.
