Register now to get rid of these ads!

216/235 with 200-R4 and 3:42 posi

Discussion in 'The Hokey Ass Message Board' started by Kool49, May 16, 2011.

  1. Kool49
    Joined: Mar 14, 2010
    Posts: 297

    Kool49
    Member

    Just wondering how this will work in my 49 Fleetline . Picked up the 200-R4 very cheap and it is drop in ready once cleaned up . Picked up a 91 S10 blazer 4x4 rearend GU6 gear code 3:42.1 , also picked up at a very descent price .
    I will be using my 216 for the time being until i get the 1957 235 rebuilt.
    Has anyone ran this set up in a 49-54 car and what was the pros and cons .
    I have searched quite abit here and read alot about using 3:73 to 4:11 s , will the 3:42 not work well ?

    Last questions , any "known" drop in drive shafts from a donor car with out mods ? If so what year and make . I understand already i can get one and have it shortened but i would like to know if there is a straight bolt in no mods shaft.


    Thanks
    Chris
     
  2. need louvers ?
    Joined: Nov 20, 2008
    Posts: 12,906

    need louvers ?
    Member

    My first thought is that without an adaptor, a 200-R4 is not going to "drop in". Very different bell housing patterns than "modern" Chev stuff. Adaptors can be had from a company north of Seattle called Buffalo machine. Other than that it sounds like an absolutely great idea.
     
  3. The S-10 used a 3.06 low gear trans with the 3.42's ,as opposed to your 2.74 , with a more powerful V 6 engine.
    No, I don't think the 3.42's are enough rear gear to get that combo rolling.
    Just my opinion....
     
  4. chevyfordman
    Joined: Oct 4, 2008
    Posts: 1,158

    chevyfordman
    Member

    I ran a 250 with a 700R4 and 3:25 rear, your 200R4 has an even slightly higher o.d.. The 250 liked running in the 2100 to 2500 rpm range which it didn't with the 700R4 and lock up converter. Running an hei dist helped the cruising speed a lot but the engine was always sounded like it was loaded and laboring. Original set up of the engine in the original car was a 350 turbo and 3:08 rear so I would say to run the 200R4 but would definitely run a lower rear or you won't have any throttle response at 60 or 70 mph. This is how it was for me, good luck
     

  5. Kool49
    Joined: Mar 14, 2010
    Posts: 297

    Kool49
    Member

    Well thanks for thew inputs so far , i guess i need to start looking for a set of 3:73 gears for my s10 rearend now .

    As far as the adapter goes im working on that now , going to try to make my own before i give in and pay for one .

    Just a thought how would the 3:42 s run behind my 216 or 235 with a TH350 trans , that may be a cheaper way to go than redoing my gears ?

    Thanks
     
  6. That'll make the situation worse, with a 2.52 first gear.
     
  7. Kool49
    Joined: Mar 14, 2010
    Posts: 297

    Kool49
    Member

    Ok i see , so what would be the best gear to buy for my set up then ?
    3:73s or the 4:10 i think speedway even has a 3:90 gear for the s10 rearend .
    This is a 10 bolt ,i am asking is it the 7.5? (91 s10 4x4 blazer).
    Speedway , GM 10 bolt 7.5 dia ring gear and 1.438 dia pinion .
    I hope to only do this once so i want the best bang for the buck .

    Thanks
    This is all going in my 49 fleetline and i plan on keeping it with the inline 6


    Added, So would a 700R4 work better with the 3:42 gears ? This means i would be shopping around again for a tranny and having a extra in the garage .Which i really dont want to do , or just swap gears in the rearend and be done with it .

    What is the most reasonable thing to do at this point ?
     
    Last edited: May 17, 2011
  8. The Stig
    Joined: Oct 13, 2009
    Posts: 15

    The Stig
    Member
    from The Moon

    The 700r4 has a much larger bellhousing, you may have to cut the floor just to fit it, also 3.73's are what you want out back, with my 235 and and t-5 (.72 OD) it"s the best combo off the line and top end cruising.
     
  9. Kool49
    Joined: Mar 14, 2010
    Posts: 297

    Kool49
    Member

    So the 700R4 is larger in size compared to the 200R4 ? I knew it was longer , will the 200R4 fit without cutting the floor ? Its not a big deal but it would be nice not to cut it up . So for me i guess the 235 with the 200R4 and 3:73s in the rear is my best setup? I thought about the T5 buit i am a bit tired of shifting , had a lot of muncies in the day . I simply want to cruzzzzz.

    Thanks
     
  10. Snarl
    Joined: Feb 16, 2007
    Posts: 1,639

    Snarl
    Member

    Ever change gears in a rearend like that before?

    the reasonable thing to do is find a different rearend. You shouldn't have any trouble unloading the 3.42 to someone using a non-OD trans or a V8.

    run the numbers through a gear calculator. 2200rpms @ 65mph works pretty good for a stock 235...
     
  11. You are going to need a deeper gear like about a 4.11 or so. The little inline 6 isn't a torque monster and isn't going to like OD at all with that tall a gear.
     
  12. 29woodie
    Joined: Apr 7, 2009
    Posts: 93

    29woodie
    Member
    from boston, ma

    You could try to find a early 80's Monte Carlo rear end. I'm pretty sure they came with a 3.73 and are the same width as the 4x4 s10 axle.
     
  13. 49ratfink
    Joined: Feb 8, 2004
    Posts: 18,255

    49ratfink
    Member
    from California


    the 700R4 fits without floor mods, so the 200 should fit even better. not sure about the 200, but the 700 has the trans mount about a fooot behind the original trans crossmember so you got to do some figuring to get it all in.
     
  14. melsfine39
    Joined: Apr 24, 2009
    Posts: 235

    melsfine39
    Member

    Check out Langdon's www.stoveboltengineco.com He sells the adpater plate you need and the site has info on what drivetrain set-up to use with it. Mel:D
     

Share This Page

Register now to get rid of these ads!

Archive

Copyright © 1995-2021 The Jalopy Journal: Steal our stuff, we'll kick your teeth in. Terms of Service. Privacy Policy.

Atomic Industry
Forum software by XenForo™ ©2010-2014 XenForo Ltd.