Technical 2004r Installed convertor wrong - now what?

No they're not. LS1 is LONGER , as stated earlier.

 

Here you go, second post on this thread.
http://ls1tech.com/forums/automatic...e-between-lt1-ls1-stall-torque-converter.html

 

I remember putting it on the input shaft, sliding it back then mating the transmission to the engine, then there was a large gap. Had to slide the convertor forward to bolt to the flywheel.I'll be taking it out in the next couple of weeks and do some measurements. At least now I have an idea of what to look for. It's in th 54 Pontiac shown as my avatar.

 

If you had 3/4 inch of clearance between the convertor and the flex plate that's definitely too much and the pump gears won't be engaged.

 

What I said a half an hour ago.
I wouldn't put a lot of faith in internet forums comments though.
People are still reading this thread and trying to figure out who knows what they're talking about and who doesn't.

 

My work here is done...

 

Push the converter all the way back, and measure between the flex plate and the mounting pad on the face of the converter. If its more than about a 1/4", you have found the problem. Front pump is probably fragged at this point. Depending on how much more than 1/4" it is, you may be able to shim it. If its really 3/4 of an inch, thats an issue.

 

While you have the converter pushed back , disconnect the cooler lines and spin the converter in the direction of engine rotation. You should see a spurt or two of fluid out of the cooler fittings.
1/4 " is too much . It should be half of that.
I assume you're using a dual pattern case, bolted directly to the engine, and a stock size 13" converter?

 

Blanchae said "Installed brand new street/strip 2004r transmission behind 400 cid sbc. I was replacing a tired turbo 350. Sounds like I didn't install the torque converter on properly because when I started it up, it made a terrible pinging sound like I stripped the input shaft. Shifiting gears didn't do anything.

So I need advice on what to do next after I pull the transmission. Is the torque converter shot? What do I look for? Is the damage limited to the input shaft and torque convertor? Can the convertor be saved?"

falcon george said "He said in the first post that it is an aftermarket converter"

Mark says "Is it in some kind of Canadian code?" ;-)

 

Stock rpm lock-up converter, street/strip transmission, 400 sbc is pushing about 300-350 hp, 500 ft-lb torque. Cars still in storage for winter, will take a look at it this weekend. It is up on blocks so I can crawl under and remove inspection cover, unbolt converter and see how much play there is.

Thanks for all the help, I know what to look for which I didn't when I installed it. At least I have an idea of what to do. Once I get more info, I'll post back to update everyone.

 

Okay then. That's what I was getting at .
Very unlikely then ,for the converter to be build way short. Sometimes a rebuilder will replace the hub (not a snout) if it's damaged. That particular core is so common that it's hardly worth doing.They'll just change the impeller (back half ) with another core piece.
But, changing the hub is about the only way to change the stack up height.
Now that I think about this, I'll bet they gave you a 30 spline 700 converter rather than a 27 200 series. It will slip on just fine but it won't move , and it will probably strip out a bit of the splined turbine hub . The input shaft is much harder so it probably won't hurt that.
Let us know what you find.

 

http://www.makcotransmissionparts.com/4L60-700R4tc.html

 

I am interested in why you chose a 200-4R in lieu of a 700R4 ? A little history is in order from my side. I want to use the little O.D. in my '40 sedan behind a 327, 300 HP SBC, as a road car. I don't look forward to lifting the body in order to alter frame center section for a 700R4. The trans man who has done all the automatics in our club is DEAD SET against my using the 200-4R. Says it will cost at least twice what a 700R4 will to get it up to par. Even then, he goes on to say the 200-4R is just not up to the task unless I spend thousands on it. Please give me a direction. My car will be used mainly on interstates for cruising across country, and therefore requires decent mileage without a super tall gear

 

Gary, I don't want to hijack this thread. PM me, I'll tell you my experience with a 327/200 4R.

 

Yes ,that is correct.The 82-84 700 was 27 spline, same as 200.
If he was given a converter for an 82-84 700 he'd never know the difference, and it would probably be working. That's the reason that I didn't see fit to mention it, but you just did ,and that's fine.

 

Hate to say this but your trans guy is totally wrong on this.
A slightly modified 200 4 R will hold up for years behind a high torque 455 Olds or Pontiac..even with occasional dragstrip use, with slicks.
How do I know? Real world experience ,my friend. Otherwise I wouldn't have made this post.
You might ask your friend if he's ever heard of a GNX Buick.

 

I agree with Markyac, I have about $1300 in my 200 4R and I love it. I also have a car with a 700 R4 and it works good buy I like the 200 better.

 

x3, I have a 700r4 in my O/T small block S-10, and a 200R4 in my Chevy II. The ratio spread in the 700r4 SUCKS if you care about performance, first is too low, so it lights the tires, then falls on its face off the 1/2 shift. I am doing a makeover on the truck right now, part of that will be dropping $600 on a close ratio gear set. The only reason I dont put a 200R4 in the truck is it already has a real nice custom crossmember in it with my exhaust running through it, and an aluminum driveshaft. Id have to change both to swap to the 200.

 

Nothing really wrong with the 700.
It just takes up a bit more room, it's a little harder to build, and a little more heavy duty, which is probably not needed for most applications here.
Also the ratios are somewhat more spread out .
Again probably not needed for fairly light, V 8 usage, such as with HAMB type cars. IMO

 

Good, it was really bugging me to agree with mark about ANYTHING, now I feel better. The spread in the 700 SUCKS.

 

Good..Stay tuned for more, George LOL
I've got a 4.3 S10 with a 3.42 rear..A good place for that 3.06 first gear!

 

I see your point Mark, yea, that is gonna need all the help it can get... Mine is a "5.8" with 4.56s... Oh, I know what comes next, terrible, just terrible, how socially irresponsible of me...

 

Never saw any reason to change a thing.It'll run 75 , 4th ,l/u @ 2000 rpm.
How about this one ? I had an O/T Caprice, TBI 305, that came with 2.56's..That's an effective 1.80 something ratio in 4th. It would climb a slight interstate grade ,and stay in 4th, @ 70 MPH.
Got 28 highway @ 4000#
There's a good application for a 3.06 low gear, too.

 

The real limiting factor with the 700R4 and the 200-4r are the input drum and the planetaries. There are aftermarket solutions for these areas of weakness in the 200-4r, there is no aftermarket solution for the input drum in the 700r. For a mild street rod application, either trans will work, the 7ooR4 is bulkier, and harder to install in most 30s-40s era HAMB friendly cars, and has an ugly ratio spread. In stock form, the 200-4R has some oiling issues that will need resolving if you are going to run a V-8 in front of it with a performance oriented rear gear and sticky tires, the filter/pan design is such that it can suck air on a moderate to hard launch, and this is a bad thing. These issues are easily resolved with a 4l60 filter and a deep sump trans pan. Both trans will need a good shift kit and a servo upgrade to survive very long in a mild performance application.
If your chief concern is that your V-6 can spin the tires leaving the drive-in, the ratio spread in the 700R4 may actually be to your advantage. If you have any interest in actual acceleration through the gears, running the 200-4r with a lower final drive is a better bet.

 

Finally got the car out of storage and the time to look at it. The instructions stated the gap between the flywheel and torque converter should be between 1/8"-3/16". I measured 3/16" by putting a 3/16" drill between. It seems like a lot bigger when you look at. So that is a relief.

So I took a look at the inspection cover and it was indeed hitting the flywheel. That was making the noise. Picture attached.

Next is to figure out why it would not go into any gear? The torque converter seems to be engaged fully. Spins freely, etc..

 

I chose the 2004R because it is the same length as the TH350 that I pulled out. Didn't have to shorten the drive shaft. Thought that I would of saved some time and money. Instead spent more time fabricating/modifying the transmission cross-member as the 2004R is a lot wider and the mount is farther back.

 

Got this transmission from Transmission Depot out of Hudson Florida. It is their street/strip version. It was a fair price. Shipping was a bitch. Couldn't find anyone in Canada that would build one just because it's a transmission from the 80s - too old!

I wouldn't buy from them again, NOT because of the quality but because of the shipping costs. If there is a problem with the transmission, it will cost an arm and a leg to ship it back and forth. Just not worth it. I would look at a local shop where I could throw the tranny in the van and take it there myself.

 

Is it possible to have the correct flywheel/torque converter gap, have the torque converter spin easily by hand and then have it not engaged properly into the transmission?

 

I don't think that you looked around in Canada to hard, Westrans in Winnipeg rebuilds old Chevy transmissions ,they did a t350 for me last August . It now has 2500 miles and works great . Can't beat the price $715.00 that includes 13% tax a new torque converter and shipping there and back. This summer going to send them a 200 4r for rebuild for my 50 Pontiac .

 

TH350, 700R4, etc.. no problem. But 2004R is, I've looked. And it wasn't a rebuild, as I didn't have a core. Anyways, it doesn't matter as it's after the fact.