![]() |
![]() |
#1 |
Senior Member
![]() Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Leander, Texas
Posts: 850
|
2004R vs. 700R4?
I have a 2004R that was built by a buddy of mine and a 3000 convertor to go along with it. He says he's "beefed it up". I've still heard otherwise and that the 700R4 is still the way to go with a truck. I haven't installed it yet and may try to sell it depending what I find out. Any advise would be appreciated.
Thanks, B |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#2 |
Senior Member
![]() Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Leander, Texas
Posts: 850
|
Re: 2004R vs. 700R4?
One more question.....Is my B&M ratchet shifter for the turbo 350 I currently have going to work with the 200?
Thanks, B |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#3 |
its all about the +6 inches
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Hilliard Ohio
Posts: 2,693
|
Re: 2004R vs. 700R4?
the answer will depend on your intended use of the truck.
Did he tell you what he did to "beef it up"? What's your engine combo? Whats your rear gear ratio? |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#4 |
Registered User
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Cypress, Tx
Posts: 4,005
|
Re: 2004R vs. 700R4?
It really depends on your application. I have one in my '56 Bel Air and it is fine behind a very mild 350 that is driven like a granny car. I'm not sure how it would handle slot of horsepowernor torque unless it was built by a reliable shop (like Phoenix transmissions ) or id your buddy is really good.
Shawn
__________________
1972 C20 Suburban- Big Blue Betty '56 Chevy Bel Air Sedan- Frame up Restoration -What would you attempt to achieve if you knew you could not fail?- -I Refuse To Tiptoe Through Life, Only To Arrive Safely At Death's Door- R.I.P. EAST SIDE LOW LIFE Last edited by Longhorn Man; 03-13-2009 at 04:54 PM. Reason: Removed the WTB part |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#5 |
Registered User
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Bakersfield, Ca
Posts: 538
|
Re: 2004R vs. 700R4?
do a search on this site for the 200r. There's more out there than I thought, including mine.
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#6 |
Dork For Days
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Dallas
Posts: 407
|
Re: 2004R vs. 700R4?
I always heard that the 2004R is stronger than the 700R4.
__________________
1972 C20, 402/700R4 - My first classic truck, bought in September 2005. 85% transformed from "Farm" to "Cool" status! ![]() 1970 Dodge Challenger 440, 4sp (my other toy) 12.67 @ 117 MPH, with a pathetic 2.022 60' 2007 Dodge Charger SRT-8 2008 Cadillac CTS All-American garage, baby! |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#7 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Wakaw, Sask, Canada
Posts: 3,180
|
Re: 2004R vs. 700R4?
A recent issue of CarCraft had a buildup of a 200 by Art Carr. Worth a read.
__________________
"You can take the man out of PA, but you can't take PA out of the man" |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#8 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Terrell, TX
Posts: 1,967
|
Re: 2004R vs. 700R4?
In stock form and in most builds the 700 is tougher. There are a few Buick GN 200's that are tougher than 700's but they are rare...they are completely different from the normal 2004r.
__________________
Kelly '05 GMC Sierra SLE Z71 Bone stock except for new bed rail caps. |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#9 |
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Forney TX
Posts: 4,512
|
Re: 2004R vs. 700R4?
DD with short shaft 350 trans go with 2004r but keep your foot out of it if you will be hammering on it go 700r4 and you can probably modify your shifter to work. I have a b&m from a 350 non ratchet shifter and I had to grind some on the slider slot so I could get low gear but If your not worried about pulling manual low then it will work fine. Also be sure to set the tv cable by pressure or by a good kit like tv made easy.
__________________
Troy 1965 Chevy Bagged,361 sbc,voodoo cam,1.5 full roller rockers,patriot 185cc vortec heads 2.02-1.60,vortec weiand polished intake,demon carb my truckhttp://67-72chevytrucks.com/vboard/s...d.php?t=332884 Big Red Dog build http://67-72chevytrucks.com/vboard/s...d.php?t=572274 |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#10 |
Registered User
![]() Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Saint George, Utah
Posts: 30
|
Re: 2004R vs. 700R4?
I had a 200 on my BNuick skylark with a 455. It was beefed up pretty good, to handle an 11.5 sec car.
The benifit of the 200 is that there is a closer ratio between first and second gears, where as the 700 has a big drop off. The 700 has a steeper first gear, I think over 3:1 and the 200 is around 2.7:1. Both are much steeper than the th400, and lighter. I had the whole thing done my Jimmy's trans shop in Mundelein IL, it was like $1800 with a new drive shaft that was balanced. THat was with a lock up converter controlled from the dash. I think I could get 17 mpg on the highway and go about 1900-2000 rpm at 65 with 3.42 rear gears. |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#11 | ||
I have a radical idea!
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Sweet Home Alabama!
Posts: 6,513
|
Re: 2004R vs. 700R4?
Quote:
I also a fan of the 200 for the reasons above. I don't like the steep drop from 1st to 2nd with 700. Truth be told, neither are particularly strong in stock form, but the according to Art Carr and other people that build racing transmissions, the 200 can be built to stronger than the 700. The fact that 200 can be put in without cutting the driveshaft and the better gear spacing makes it the best choice, IMO. From a gearing standpoint, the 200 is basically has the same ratios as a TH350, with .67 : 1 OD. Here's the article that Heavy D referred to: http://www.carcraft.com/techarticles...ild/index.html Quote:
__________________
'67 C-30 Dually Pickup 6.2 Turbo Diesel, NP435 ‘72 C-10 SWB , 350 4bbl, TH350 '69 C-10 SWB , 250 L6, 3 OTT '69 GMC C3500, dump truck, 351 V6, NP435 '84 M1009 CUCV Military Blazer 67 C-30 Turbodiesel build thread http://67-72chevytrucks.com/vboard/s...d.php?t=254096 My trucks http://s226.photobucket.com/albums/d...ediafilter=all Member of the 1-Ton Club! Last edited by 67_C-30; 03-15-2009 at 12:22 AM. |
||
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
Bookmarks |
|
|