# Chevy 200-4r into 67 lemans convertible



## Neal67Lemans (Dec 3, 2021)

I’d like to eventually put a 200-4R into my lemans. It has a 326 2bbl with the the 2 speed and I won’t be racing it but I might build the 326 eventually. Found this while browsing some local adds. Seems like if it holds up it’d be a deal and if not I’m out a couple hundred more than you would normally pay for a core. The guy bought it from someone who had used it for awhile. He doesn’t know anything about it or the torque converter except it was all built to handle up to 500hp. No idea what he used it in or how long. I’m assuming an adapter plate from summit will allow me to fit this bell housing to my 326. I know I’ll need to move the crossmember as well. Any issues with this or red flags in the pictures? Is it not worth the risk. Any advice would be appreciated.
Also, if it does break eventually and I use it for a core to have another built do the companies allow you to trade a Chevy core for a bop tranny, So I can get rid of the adapter plate. 
“Built 200-4r with torque converter $700”
Bought for a project but didn’t use. Built 200-4r 4-speed auto with 30% overdrive, can take 500hp no problem.


----------



## Neal67Lemans (Dec 3, 2021)

Looking at this again I’m thinking this is the 700r4 not a 200-4r.


----------



## LATECH (Jul 18, 2018)

Its a turbo 350 for a CHEVY it wont fit a pontiac
It also looks like it is JUNK
Dude is likely BSing you

Run away forest run ........


----------



## Neal67Lemans (Dec 3, 2021)

LATECH said:


> Its a turbo 350 for a CHEVY it wont fit a pontiac
> It also looks like it is JUNK
> Dude is likely BSing you
> 
> Run away forest run ........


Thanks man. I was having lots of doubts. I’ll probably eventually end up just ordering a built 200-4R from bowtie or through butler performance since they aren’t too far away from me.


----------



## AZTempest (Jun 11, 2019)

Defiantly be patient on looking for a tranny. My son and I wanted to try a TH350 in the 67 Tempest, replacing the ST300. We just waited but kept our eyes open. We live in the Phoenix area so we know it was just a matter of time before something would turn up. Sure enough my son ended up finding BOP one for 50 bucks. We did nothing to it, cleaned it up and installed it. We've been running it for about two years now with not one issue. Do wait for a BOP. It literally bolted right in except for the kick down cable. 

We can't leave well enough alone and have since picked up a 200r to try. We're going to move the TH350 over to the convertible and run the 200r in the hard top. 

Jim


----------



## NOS Only (Nov 14, 2017)

Good luck running 200's. You're gonna need it or a lot of money to keep it in one piece.


----------



## Neal67Lemans (Dec 3, 2021)

That sounds like a good plan. I'll be patient, might pick up a th350, if I can get one cheap, till I can spend the money to get a 200-4r built to handle the torque.


----------



## PontiacJim (Dec 29, 2012)

Neal67Lemans said:


> That sounds like a good plan. I'll be patient, might pick up a th350, if I can get one cheap, till I can spend the money to get a 200-4r built to handle the torque.



From the Forum Reading List:

*GM Automatic Overdrive Transmissions: Builder's and Swapper's Guide *by Cliff Ruggles. This is a must for those who are looking for more knowledge and info on selecting and putting a late model overdrive behind their Pontiac engine. The book covers the 700-R4, 4L60 and 4L60E overdrives. A nice history and transmissions types and years used along with the differences pointed out between the types for identification.For the do-it-yourselfer there is a list of needed tools to do the disassembly, modifications, and rebuild. A ton of photos of individual parts so you can see what is what. Has a section on shift-kits, which appears to be the Trans-Go brand by another name. Has a section on torque converters and how to select one for your car. The last section is the removal and installation of an overdrive into a Pontiac, step by step. I have never gotten into trans rebuilding as the prices for the old TH-400's, poweglides, & Mopars I had rebuilt were not all that expensive back in "the day." Prices today can still be reasonable for the old school 3-speed automatics, but if I were to go with a 4-speed automatic OD, I would buy one already set-up with matching converter. Ihave installed a couple shift kits in my TH-400's and a Mopar 904 to improve things. NAPA used to sell kits cheaper than the B&M kits and they did the same thing. The GTO TH-400's came from the factory with raised line pressures and snappy hard shifting with their His/Hers option. If your TH-400 is not original, then you aren't experiencing the true shifting fun of an original factory TH-400 and barking tires on a good 1-2nd all out banzai shift.

https://www.amazon.com/s?k=gm+autom...Automatic,stripbooks,169&ref=nb_sb_ss_fb_1_12


----------



## An0maly_76 (Dec 25, 2021)

+1 on LATECH - good eye. The rear-facing modulator is a dead giveaway, as is the bellhousing. Def doesn't look like BOPC, and 200-4R / 700-R4 never had modulators - they use a cable-operated throttle valve setup.

First, while I hadn't initially investigated whether this is a 200-4R or 700-R4 (even now that I have), I wouldn't buy parts or components you can't vet from anyone on Craigslist for anything other than a rebuildable core in the first place. Too many scammers out there. And every one of those photos looks like something that's been sitting out in the weather and can't really be vetted until purchased and installed.

It definitely isn't what they say it is, and the pics showing a loose converter showing rust with the input shaft hole facing the sky to collect rainwater, the empty bellhousing with 200k worth of grime and leakage, followed by a pic of that nasty, rusty converter installed on the input shaft tell me all I need to know. I think LATECH is right -- this thing is junk. Personally, I think this idiot just wants someone to buy their junk so they're not bothered with taking it to the scrapyard. Possibly they have more than one posting and uploaded the wrong set of photos, but that just shows how clueless they really are IMO.

I may have missed it if anyone has put any real info about the 200-4R in this thread, but here goes. I happen to be more or less a Buick guy, with some interest in a certain 1969 Judge that my family once owned (my main reason for being here, but I digress). If you're serious about upgrading your car with a 200-4R, CHOOSE WISELY. THEY AREN'T ALL THE SAME, and I can tell you why. Read on.

The 200-4R, as some may know, was more or less introduced as a fuel-saving option for highway-going G-bodies of the 80s, and quickly migrated to nearly every mid and full-size car GM offered with BOPC engines. This transmission WAS offered in different bellhousing patterns -- though most were BOPC only, some were Chevrolet only, and some supposedly had a 'dual pattern' that could bolt to any vintage-appropriate GM engine (60-degree V6 excepted).

But those weren't the only differences. Run-of-the-mill 200-4Rs really weren't that strong in most applications, and a stock run-of-the-mill unit behind anything with more than 140 hp (such as the Olds Y-code 307) or with spirited driving in mind was/is asking for trouble. So even a 'built' run-of-the-mill 200-4R is laughable. Even if this Craigslist posting didn't show obvious signs of being left out in the weather for a long time, I wouldn't touch it unless I could verify its original application, and even then, I wouldn't pay a lot for it. It will likely need a rebuild before getting any good use out of it, and I always say, do it right or do it twice. It's a lot cheaper to do it right the first time. Hot Rod or Car Craft actually did an article on this swap, but I seriously doubt they used a trans that had "the good stuff".

What made these transmissions somewhat desirable for performance daily drivers is that the T-types, Grand Nationals and GNX used a specially modified version of this transmission with their turbocharged 3.8 V6 Buick. And this version was well-suited to take even occasional drag strip thrashing in modded GNs running in the 12s. However, a standard 200-4R from a Pontiac Safari wagon or Monte Carlo SS is NOT the same internally and is NOT suited for spirited driving even in stock applications. The good news is: any of them CAN be modified for such use.

The secret was mostly in the valve body and a couple other bits that were decidedly different in the turbo Buick application. Translation: Unless it can be proven to have come from a turbo Buick, get it rebuilt to turbo Buick specs with the correct performance valve body and appropriate stall converter for your application. Otherwise, you are in for a rough time.

Don't forget also that these use a throttle valve arrangement to control line pressure, which is very sensitive and can easily burn up the trans if not properly adjusted. Lokar sells aftermarket bits for these swaps, and Art Carr and Ken Duttweiller are two very respected names in the turbo Buick community.


----------



## An0maly_76 (Dec 25, 2021)

One other thing. If you go four-speed auto, whether 700-R4 or 200-4R (the 200-4R has a lower first gear for holeshot), do NOT drive with the linkage in OD (4th gear) full-time. A very good transmission guy in my area told me that kills these 4-speeds quicker than anything else. Basically, most, if not all will have a problem holding 4th gear at lower cruising speeds, especially if the converter clutch locks up.

Basically the trans will constantly be hunting between locking and unlocking the converter, jumping back and forth between 3rd and 4th, trying to find some happy medium that it can't achieve. And it greatly accelerates trans wear to boot. Third gear is much better for any cruising speeds below 45 or so. I generally say 4-speed autos should be left in third ('3' or 'D' versus 'O' or '4') unless you're on the interstate.

Another helpful tip in such a swap -- I seem to recall the CC - HRM article I read indicating that the stock ST300 crossmember worked fine, but had to be inverted, turned 180 degrees, something like that to line up with the 200-4R's trans mount. Otherwise, they said it was a near-direct bolt-in. But for the love of God, don't install an unknown and don't forget to get the throttle valve setup right or it will all be for nothing.


----------



## Neal67Lemans (Dec 3, 2021)

Will do. I know I saw somewhere that there are mounting holes for the crossmember that are back a little from the st300 mounting point, and they will work for the 200-4R. They also said the convertibles don’t have the second set of mounting holes so I’m out of luck there unless I want to drill through the body. I’ll probably get an adapter crossmember just to make it easy. Might go with a th350 if I find one cheap and see if I’m happy with how it runs. Be a lot cheaper, cause if I do go 200-4r down the road I’m going to do it right and get one built to handle anything I might do with this car. Going to be awhile though. Decided to pull the engine and work through that for now, also needs a bit of body work. This is turning into a full blown project that I don’t really have time for. I’ll get it sorted eventually….


----------



## NOS Only (Nov 14, 2017)

Look at all your high end custom builds. They won't have 200's. Why? It's been explained. You want simple terms? They're junk. The people that push them are either people that want you to make the same mistake as they did or they still think that the 200 is a badass tranny because GM used it in the Grand National. The latter is laughable. Here's some food for thought...… The 200 was never used in any severe duty vehicle and the baddest Grand National, the GNX, only had 276 horse and that didn't come in at the hit of the throttle due to it being turbocharged and turbo lag. As far as the "old excuse" about 1st gear in a 700? Blown out of proportion. But if you buy into the haters, they make a 1-2 gear swap that will eliminate the nay sayer's problems. Remember, the 700R4/4L60/4L60e are basically a Turbo 350 with an extra gear, the 4L80 is basically a Turbo 400 with an extra gear, the puny 200's are not.

You're been warned.


----------



## An0maly_76 (Dec 25, 2021)

NOS Only said:


> Look at all your high end custom builds. They won't have 200's. Why? It's been explained. You want simple terms? They're junk. The people that push them are either people that want you to make the same mistake as they did or they still think that the 200 is a badass tranny because GM used it in the Grand National. The latter is laughable. Here's some food for thought...… The 200 was never used in any severe duty vehicle and the baddest Grand National, the GNX, only had 276 horse and that didn't come in at the hit of the throttle due to it being turbocharged and turbo lag. As far as the "old excuse" about 1st gear in a 700? Blown out of proportion. But if you buy into the haters, they make a 1-2 gear swap that will eliminate the nay sayer's problems. Remember, the 700R4/4L60/4L60e are basically a Turbo 350 with an extra gear, the 4L80 is basically a Turbo 400 with an extra gear, the puny 200's are not.
> 
> You're been warned.


Which trans are you actually talking about? Because you're simply saying 200, and 200Cs and 200-4Rs are completely different transmissions. Except for the handful of 1982 models that weren't actually supposed to exist, NO turbo Grand National EVER used the 3-speed 200C, only the 4-speed 200-4R. And those 82 models were carb'd hot-air cars and really were lackluster. But I digress.

The 200C IS a weakling, but can be strengthened with upgraded internals, though a TH350 is cheaper to build after these upgrades. I was involved with a minor resto on an '82 Cross-Fire Z28 whose very fussy owner insisted on keeping it #s matching. So the 200C was upgraded with steel internals -- to the tune of $1400 as opposed to a $600 TH350 build.

As to the Grand National that put these transmissions in the limelight, turbo 3.8s can be built to 900 horses, but I wouldn't put a 200-4R behind such a build. However, a 200-4R, properly built with the correct valve body, IS indeed suitable for most folks, including street/strip. What kills these transmissions is everybody drove them with the linkage in 4th gear all the time, and that makes them hunt gears and wear out prematurely.

I agree that everything has its breaking point, but anyone with common sense should realize that a fire-breathing 400-600 horsepower 461 needs something stronger in the first place, and as you stated, a 4L80(E) would be a better choice. BUT - it's all about how much torque and hp the internals can handle, and the 200-4R is fine for up to 300 hp with the correct parts. A stock 4L80E probably wouldn't do any better in the same application.

It's all about bang for the buck, and while the 4L80E may indeed be tougher from the get-go, it, too, will need more money thrown at it for higher-horsepower builds. I feel the definition of severe duty has changed slightly over the years. 300 hp cars waned for some time, but they have made a comeback, and I maintain that a properly built 200-4R is fine for that as long as it's not driven in 4th gear at low speeds and doesn't see the track every weekend. Now, if you're building a mean and nasty 400-600 hp thumper with 90% track and light-to-light use, no, I wouldn't use a 4R for that, the 4L80 would be a better choice, yes. But 4L80Es aren't cheap to build either. And you still have to adapt them to the BOPC bellhousing, where you may run into alignment issues with crossmembers, mounts, etc. The 200-4R, by contrast, is a direct bolt-in.

Monster may list 4L80E's as quick-ship for $2300, but while it may be fine for upgrading a weak stock trans, I doubt that's a build that will last very long in a 400 hp trailer queen drag car with a 250 shot of nitrous. A car like that will need one of the more expensive $3500-$4000 builds, and it's simply not necessary for an average street car, it's like going after a fly with a bazooka.


----------



## An0maly_76 (Dec 25, 2021)

Neal67Lemans said:


> Will do. I know I saw somewhere that there are mounting holes for the crossmember that are back a little from the st300 mounting point, and they will work for the 200-4R. They also said the convertibles don’t have the second set of mounting holes so I’m out of luck there unless I want to drill through the body. I’ll probably get an adapter crossmember just to make it easy. Might go with a th350 if I find one cheap and see if I’m happy with how it runs. Be a lot cheaper, cause if I do go 200-4r down the road I’m going to do it right and get one built to handle anything I might do with this car. Going to be awhile though. Decided to pull the engine and work through that for now, also needs a bit of body work. This is turning into a full blown project that I don’t really have time for. I’ll get it sorted eventually….


I should have asked this before. Is your car stock? Mildly modded? How much hp / tq? All this should be taken into consideration. As I replied to someone else's post here, the 200-4R solves a few install headaches by being a more direct bolt-in. However, as I mentioned, they do take some money to strengthen over stock, and they aren't all the same.

The mounting situation I referred to, if memory serves, doesn't rely on the other body-crossmember mount holes you mention. My understanding, the guys simply flipped the crossmember or turned it 180 degrees, and everything lined up.


----------



## Neal67Lemans (Dec 3, 2021)

I have the 326 2bbl. Going to switch to a 4bb or most likely just add efi so I don’t have to fool with a carb. Also I may get the heads rebuilt and put a cam in it. I’ll probably swap a th350 into it just for a better first gear ratio and to see if that will meet my needs before spending a ton on a custom built tranny. I have been toying with the idea of putting a bigger engine in sometime down the road so I’m trying to change stuff that’ll work with the larger engines. Doubt I’d want more than 350-400 hp because I don’t plan on taking it to the track, but who knows how I’ll feel 5 years from now.


----------



## An0maly_76 (Dec 25, 2021)

Can't really go wrong with a TH350, though the 200-4R does round out city driving and highway manners nicely. Carbs really are nice in that if you know what you're doing, you can easily tune or adjust any hiccups, as opposed to having to buy sensors when something goes wrong with EFI. It doesn't happen often, but it does. And where will you be if your EFI controller craps out? All things to take into consideration. I understand FI and DIS, and I still would prefer the simplicity of a good old carburetor and HEI distributors.


----------



## 64Original (Jun 21, 2017)

NOS Only said:


> Good luck running 200's. You're gonna need it or a lot of money to keep it in one piece.


I am running a 2004r in a 64 GTO with no problems. They ran them in the Turbo Grand Nationals and are good transmissions. If you are building big horsepower and torque you will probably need to beef it up but there are plenty of parts available to make them strong enough to handle over 800 hp.


----------



## PontiacJim (Dec 29, 2012)

64Original said:


> I am running a 2004r in a 64 GTO with no problems. They ran them in the Turbo Grand Nationals and are good transmissions. If you are building big horsepower and torque you will probably need to beef it up but there are plenty of parts available to make them strong enough to handle over 800 hp.


Like all things, you can have a high HP build which will mean many custom pieces used to replace the factory parts.

So it depends if you are looking for a Pull-A-Part trans you are thinking of slapping in the car, a stock rebuild and slap in the car, a "few" extra parts to replace the weak factory parts that won't stand up to bigger HP/TQ engines, or flat out racing.

Here is one rated for 900 HP, but will only set you back $3,795.00









LEVEL 3 - INVINCIBLE 200-4R... supports up to 900HP | PerformaBuilt Transmissions | Racing-Offroad-Hauling


Our INVINCIBLE Series is our extreme offering in our street/strip performance transmissions. It's rated at 900 RWHP




dev.performabuilt.com





Here is another company that builds them, 3 different HP levels. 400HP- $3,995.00; 550HP - $4,495.00; 750HP - $5,995.00





__





GM Performance Transmissions - Gearstar Performance Transmissions


Gearstar specializes in custom, hand-built GM performance transmissions with converters designed to handle up to 1200 hp and 1000 ft-lbs of torque.




gearstar.com


----------



## An0maly_76 (Dec 25, 2021)

64Original said:


> I am running a 2004r in a 64 GTO with no problems. They ran them in the Turbo Grand Nationals and are good transmissions. If you are building big horsepower and torque you will probably need to beef it up but there are plenty of parts available to make them strong enough to handle over 800 hp.


Got a witness... I think NOS Only has seen too many people try to slap a bone-stock 80k-mile 200-4R from a heavy car like a Pontiac Safari wagon or something of the like into a vehicle with a bit more get-up-and-go, only to have it fail. Their thoughts based on that scenario are correct, something I have already alluded to.

Common sense dictates you can't put a $500 stock rebuild trans behind a $6000 performance race engine and expect it to last. Cost of reliable transmission performance is directly proportionate to the cost of the engine, and I'd say conservatively, if you spend less than half your engine cost on the transmission, you're asking for a hard time.

What NOS Only fails to understand is that, as I mentioned previously, 200-4Rs are NOT all the same internally, and that quite a few BOPC folks are running these in anything from daily drivers to weekend cars to mild street/strip and drag cars without issue. Laugh all you like, there are plenty of people using these without a problem.

NOS Only's screen name alone suggests that they are all about hardcore, balls-to-the-wall, all-out, heads-up drag racing with high-horsepower/high-torque builds using nitrous that can send even the toughest TH400 running home with its tailshaft tucked between its legs. ie "If you're not breaking stuff, you're not making enough power." But let's be real here -- I'd say that is less than 15-20% of owners in general, and less than 5-10% of users here. And as I said, everything has its breaking point.

The 200-4R had a few things working against it from the start, even though it was a decent trans with a lot of performance potential.

1) Owners not understanding or caring how to get the best service life and function out of their transmission. As I stated earlier, a very good transmission guy here told me that people ran these 4-speeds in 4th gear full-time, which caused a ton of unnecessary hunting and back-and-forth, promoting premature wear -- the biggest thing to kill them. Mostly because no one bothers to read manuals past figuring out what the 32 buttons on the radio do and how to set their cruise control.

Even when they are told, they don't listen. I have a friend right now with an otherwise nice Buick that is falling apart, because he won't listen to me about ANYTHING, ESPECIALLY this, and uses a jack### mechanic who overcharges for half-a###ed work to boot. Also, most folks just seemed to forget about regular maintenance in the 80s, many never even opening the hood to check fluids, and many never had fluids changed. AND, lest we forget, there was a sharp uptick in aggressive driving starting in the 80s also, which is hard on anything.

2) Tightening emissions and fuel economy standards forced auto manufacturers to think outside the box, reducing drag and fuel consumption wherever they could. The 200C and 200-4R were just two of many ideas brought to the table to address these issues. Many ideas looked good on paper, but ultimately were a failure as produced, mostly owing to the next item.

3) The 200-4R also was introduced in a time of heavy cost-trimming and corner-cutting at GM. It showed in the quality of most of their products and continues to be a problem today. Not that GM didn't build some great vehicles still in the 80s and 90s, but most all of them had at least one major design flaw, and it's only gotten worse with each reinvention of the wheel. And I'd wager that this was a major factor in the issues with certain components. The 700-R4 was plagued with two common issues, TC hubs snapping off in the front hub, and internal casting flash causing clutch failure from insufficient fluid pressure / flow. And that's before the known sensitivity to TV cable misadjustment or disconnection.

I think both the C and the 4R got a undeserved bad rep because the manufacturer was more interested in meeting economy and emissions standards and 'good enough to get out of warranty' than whether consumers got their money's worth. My father, a longtime GM diehard, traded his neurotic '16 Impala LTZ for a Hyundai in 2019. I followed suit soon after, trading my '16 Malibu LT for a Toyota. Neither of our trades had over 60k before showing signs of major looming trouble.

As a severe asthmatic, I'm not a fan of diesel power, but even in the 80s, with the Oldsmodiesel, GM doomed what could have been a great idea by not including the one thing EVERY diesel needs -- a fuel / water separator. GM has been cheapening their products for years, and it has finally caught up with them. Which brings me to the next item.

4) The 200-4R's little brother, the 200C, was essentially built entirely of aluminum from the factory. They, too, were installed in vehicles that were really heavier than they were built for. These started dropping like flies with as little as 50k miles, giving the 200-4R a bad rep, as many did not differentiate the two. GM simply did not push the envelope to build anything to last much past warranty, even when they could have. Since about 1979, it's been all about saving $10 per car here, $4 per car there. And today, they crow about JD Power initial quality awards, because that's all they can really stand on when 90% of their new car sales are traded off once the warranty is up because they are falling apart.

But in the case of the 200C, especially the 200-4R, I think GM is to blame, not the transmission. More often than not, someone spends countless hours designing a truly great idea, only to have it watered down to junk by corporate bean-counters who don't care about quality, only profits. The 200C certainly could have been a lot better with steel innards -- I know because I've seen it -- the fussy owner of the Z28 I mentioned still owns that same car today, twenty years later, and the transmission has not been touched since it was put back in the car other than fluid changes. And I'm sure the 4R was similarly watered down from its original design.

Simply put, GM more than sufficiently proved the 200-4R was a good transmission with the turbo Buicks, they were simply too cheap to build them ALL that way. People really need to stop blaming lackluster performance and longevity on the components -- time has clearly shown that the manufacturer cheaped out and left the consumer with the bill to correct the results of their cheapness. And GM is not the only manufacturer to do so. But more often than not, people would rather condemn machines and other equipment for failure when it was really their own abusive operation or other lack of care or maintenance that caused them to fail in the first place.


----------



## pontrc (Mar 18, 2020)

An0maly_76 said:


> Got a witness... I think NOS Only has seen too many people try to slap a bone-stock 80k-mile 200-4R from heavy car like a Pontiac Safari wagon or something of the like into a vehicle with a bit more get-up-and-go, only to have it fail. Their thoughts based on that scenario are correct, something I have already alluded to.
> 
> Common sense dictates you can't put a $500 stock rebuild trans behind a $6000 performance race engine and expect it to last. Cost of reliable transmission performance is directly proportionate to the cost of the engine, and I'd say conservatively, if you spend less than half your engine cost on the transmission, you're asking for a hard time.
> 
> ...


Great post AnO, If I was going to do this it would be the 200 because of its bolt pattern.You triggered my memory about shifting the early overdrive as I remember how they use to shift in and out.On my old GTA I had that quite regularly and left it in drive in city driving


----------



## PontiacJim (Dec 29, 2012)

Well, I think it boils down to what people have in experiences with specific products, or what stories they hear locally or from others, be it in person or the internet.

Often, it may not be the product itself, but the person who installs or uses a specific item and isn't really qualified to do the work or have a full understanding of how to break-in, adjust, or modify the item in question, but is simply a hobbiest trying to save himself/herself a few extra dollars in not paying another to do the job or feels that they can do the job with the mechanical skills and tools they posses. I know I learned most all I know by working on cars and manuals or how-to books when available. I screwed things up, it cost me, but I learned. BUT, *I realized that I screwed up*, and it was not the item/product I was dealing with, or I simply did have the knowledge about the item/product. I can relate this to the Holley carbs which back in my time everyone, and the magazines, tooted as the carb to have. I bought/installed a spread bore and was not impressed nor found any improvement over the factory Q-jet. Off it came, and back on went the Q-jet. Was it a bad carb? Maybe not, but I knew how to adjust/tweak the Q-jet and not the Holley - so I am not a fan of the Holley to this day and never ran one since. So, *this stems out of my experience *and I today don't recommend, nor care for a Holley carb. Q-jets and AFB's work fine for me and that's what I use/recommend.

I feel the same way about camshafts and all the failures blamed on "Chinese" knock-offs when my guess is that most failures are due to the hobbiest who installed it without the needed break-in lube, didn't prime the engine prior to break-in, didn't break it in correctly once the engine fired, or used an initial spring pressure that was far too heavy for the initial break-in.

Trends are also how a "new" product is introduced and tooted by the magazines and others to be far better that the "old traditional" parts, like flat tappet cams versus roller cams. Make sure a bunch of stories get put out on the internet of all the flat tappet cam failures, use the "Chinese" card, and then use testimony on how great the roller cam is with "NO" break-in issues. Note that the "no-break-in" is the real hook here because most flat tappet cam failures are during break-in, ie the hobbiest didn't know how to properly break-in the cam. How bad can a flat tappet cam be when Hughes Engines offers a guarantee that the flat tappet cam won't go flat *IF you purchase the associated items required for the cam break-in.* Further proof that if you don't know how, or don't use the correct products to break-in the cam, you may be the one who is responsible for the cam failure, not the Chinese.



https://www.hughesengines.com/TechArticles/ourcamsareguaranteednottogoflat.php



So my point is that bad reputations on a product/item is often because the hobbiest/installer didn't have enough skills/knowldege about the product and its use, was trying to save money, or was using the product/item that was not up to the task - which includes the driveline components when putting together an engine that has been upper in HP/TQ and were not designed for such. Some of these items, like transmissions & rear ends are known by the hot rod community to have weaknesses or don't hold up well in stock form to bigger HP/TQ engines. These items are manufactured or built by outside companies who know of the weaknesses in the design and throw custom made parts into the product to make it reliable at big HP/TQ levels if it is soemthing you plan to use. BUT, this means $cost that some owners may not want to spend and then figure if I get a similar trans/rear end, add a few upgrades, have my local guy rebuild it, that it will be cheaper and still hold up. Well, not always true.

So as I have pointed out, you can have a transmission custom (or rear end) built that will hold up to the Pontiac HP/TQ, but it is going to cost you. If you don't purchase a trans with the improvements and think you can simply get a same type trans off craigslist, facebook, or Pull-A-Part and install it with the hopes "I'm just going to use the car around town," then go for it. If it pops, then you have been warned - but I would rather install something that I know will hold up behind the HP/TQ of a Pontiac so I don't waste my time/money and have to do it a second time.


----------



## An0maly_76 (Dec 25, 2021)

pontrc said:


> Great post AnO, If I was going to do this it would be the 200 because of its bolt pattern.You triggered my memory about shifting the early overdrive as I remember how they use to shift in and out.On my old GTA I had that quite regularly and left it in drive in city driving.





PontiacJim said:


> Well, I think it boils down to what people have in experiences with specific products, or what stories they hear locally or from others, be it in person or the internet.
> 
> Often, it may not be the product itself, but the person who installs or uses a specific item and isn't really qualified to do the work or have a full understanding of how to break-in, adjust, or modify the item in question, but is simply a hobbiest trying to save himself/herself a few extra dollars in not paying another to do the job or feels that they can do the job with the mechanical skills and tools they posses. I know I learned most all I know by working on cars and manuals or how-to books when available. I screwed things up, it cost me, but I learned. BUT, *I realized that I screwed up*, and it was not the item/product I was dealing with, or I simply did have the knowledge about the item/product. I can relate this to the Holley carbs which back in my time everyone, and the magazines, tooted as the carb to have. I bought/installed a spread bore and was not impressed nor found any improvement over the factory Q-jet. Off it came, and back on went the Q-jet. Was it a bad carb? Maybe not, but I knew how to adjust/tweak the Q-jet and not the Holley - so I am not a fan of the Holley to this day and never ran one since. So, *this stems out of my experience *and I today don't recommend, nor care for a Holley carb. Q-jets and AFB's work fine for me and that's what I use/recommend.
> 
> ...


Again, got a witness! PRC and PJ are more or less making the same points, but they are good points worth reiterating. The kind words are appreciated, when people will listen. From what I know about these, five things are key when upgrading from a two / three-speed auto to a four-speed auto for best results. All of these are more or less to counter the old saying "for want of a nail". Remember what I've said about if you think you can get reliable trans performance spending less than half of what your engine cost, you'll often get what you paid for.

1) Don't stop at a completely stock rebuild if you're using a local shop. Chances are, most cores will not have the heavy-duty bits from the turbo Buick applications. Ensure the correct valve body and other heavy-duty bits are used. Also, the sprag is your weakest link in ANY auto, not just the 200-4R. Get a hardened one if possible. NOTE: Though I'm not sure if this was a thing with the 200-4R as well, the 700-R4 was known for cracking sunshields, and there are HD parts for this too, usually for Corvette applications. Hardened ones were available for the 700-R4, I would guess someone makes them for the 200-4R also.

2) The speed will vary based on your gearing, but I would say shift to 'D' or '3' below 45-55 mph. General rule, if the trans is constantly jumping between 3rd and 4th, or keeps locking / unlocking the converter, it's trying to tell you something. They're not a 3-speed, don't treat them like one. Think of it as the same thing as lugging your engine in too high a gear, except it is your transmission that will pay the price, not the engine.

3) Use a new throttle valve cable and ensure that it is properly set up and adjusted. Next to leaving the linkage in 4th gear full-time, this is the biggest killer of these transmissions.

4) Use an auxiliary trans fluid cooler, especially if spirited driving or drag racing are in your plans.

5) If your driving habits don't include drag racing and you're simply looking for fuel savings so you can enjoy your car more often, maximum highway economy will be achieved by enabling the torque converter lockup. In vehicles without a factory computer, this will have to be wired up with a relay and switch for manual activation, and kits exist for this. However, I believe there are ways to enable this to control itself.

One such way involves using electrical current. Though digital speedometers were not yet common in the 1980s, many vehicles still used cruise control that employed a speedometer-cable-driven speed sensor. These sensors were usually located underhood, some were in the dashboard or behind the cluster. They are a simple generator that produces more current as it spins faster. The cruise control system and ECM would use this to control speed by sampling the produced current at engagement, then matching the live current to hold a certain speed when engaged. I believe there may be a way to automatically control a torque converter clutch in the same manner -- I'll have to think on it.

As I've said, the stock crossmember is likely to need reorienting, or in some cases, relocating, but all my info shows that it CAN be reused.

Here are the gear ratios for the TH350 and 200-4R, respectively.

TH350 1st 2.57 2nd 1.57 3rd 1.00 4th 0.67 Reverse 2.07

200-4R 1st 2.52 2nd, 1.52 3rd 1.00 Reverse 1.92

As you can see, first is 1.98% lower, second is 3.29% lower. While it may not seem like a huge difference, with most axle gear ratios, this could improve city fuel economy as much as 5-10%, and a 33% overdrive combined with a lockup torque converter could improve highway economy as much as 15-25%, even more over an ST-300.

I will say this, OP, with a convertible, I'd be careful about getting too wild with any engine modifications. Convertibles are by nature missing a key structural portion present in a hardtop, and while they do receive certain floor and frame reinforcements to make up the difference, they are still a bit more susceptible to the frame twist that comes with a high-horsepower, high-torque build.

Should you decide to go with the TH350, keep in mind there are two different tailshaft lengths, 6" and 9", I believe. Most midsize cars such as the A and G bodies will need the shorter of the two.


----------



## NOS Only (Nov 14, 2017)

An0maly_76 said:


> Again, Blah..... Blah.... Blah.... Blah.... Blah.


Would you STOP pushing YOUR AGENDA!

200's are SCRAP! That is a well known FACT, even by GM. It had numerous issues and full of warranty claims. That is why GM only produced them for a very short while and NEVER were in ANY heavy duty application. Take your BS and your 3 to 4 THOUSAND DOLLAR trannys over to some Buick forum. All your BS is just that.

PERIOD!


----------



## An0maly_76 (Dec 25, 2021)

NOS Only said:


> Would you STOP pushing YOUR AGENDA!
> 
> 200's are SCRAP! That is a well known FACT, even by GM. It had numerous issues and full of warranty claims. That is why GM only produced them for a very short while and NEVER were in ANY heavy duty application. Take your BS and your 3 to 4 THOUSAND DOLLAR trannys over to some Buick forum. All your BS is just that.
> 
> PERIOD!


Agenda? I never said anyone MUST use 200-4Rs. I have given advice on what not to do, and how to get the most out of it. And when has GM made an official press release that they were scrap? Never seen one. If GM did say that, it was only to avoid admitting that they cheaped out in production without passing the savings on to the consumer, leaving the consumer with the bill to correct those results, as I said earlier. Again, blaming the product, not the way they built it. They still do this today, which is why my daily driver is a Toyota after 25 years of loyalty to the Big Three, mostly GM.

More than one person here has agreed with me, and said that they have used this transmission without issue, even corroborating the points I've made. You are the only one naysaying, now to the point of being rude to someone else who has not been rude to you, about a simple difference of opinion. Who's pushing an agenda now? Really, if the 200-4R is really that bad, why does Monster Transmission continue to offer it right alongside the 4L80E?

The 200-4R was the last non-electronic BOPC pattern RWD trans to be offered, making it the only choice for a truly bolt-in upgrade to overdrive. I might also add that when the 200-4R was cancelled, all remaining factory RWD BOPC engines, and their unique bellhousing were all but cancelled with them. The RWD Buick 3.8 and Olds 307 were cancelled the same year, and it would be nearly a decade or more before the 3800 was briefly used in the F-bodies, using the 60-degree V6 "corporate" bolt pattern with a 4L60E. The 3800 technically was no longer a BOPC, or even technically a Buick engine, and the 4L80E was never used in a factory BOPC application, technically making it a Chevrolet transmission. So, eye for eye, tooth for tooth, should you take your 4L80E cheerleading to a Chevrolet site? Of course not, when the shoe is on the OTHER foot.

Heavy-duty applications would be trucks over 3/4 - 1-ton. Those of the era had 6.2 / 6.5 diesels, 5.0 / 5.7 small-blocks, and 7.4 big-blocks. All Chevrolet bolt pattern. I've said only a few 200-4Rs were built with the bowtie bolt pattern (only bowtie application was the Monte Carlo AFAIK, maybe some Caprices used them also), even fewer with the so-called 'dual' bolt pattern. What you fail to mention is that GM's 3/4 - 1-ton trucks DID come with 700-R4s, an overdrive auto of similar design, which were very hit-and-miss with their own issues, some even similar to the 200-4R, for the same reasons I've mentioned.

While we're talking about warranty issues, since you make them such a federal case, that tells me one thing, you've only ever dealt with these transmissions in bone-stock base model form, or heard scuttlebutt from those who have. And have I or have I not stated that they are not all the same? Have I or have I not stated that a top transmission builder in my area said most failures were due to owners driving with the linkage in 4th gear full-time?

I have even agreed with you on the point of 700-900 hp applications, because even a TH400 can break under that kind of abuse. And that's exactly what it is -- ABUSE. 700-900 hp is way, way beyond severe duty. Severe duty is towing, high-temperature, stop-and-go, more short trips than long trips, that kind of thing. Look it up in the owner's manual for any vehicle, and that is how it defines severe duty. The 4L80E you've mentioned (agenda anyone?) will need $3000-$4000 put into it for that sort of use also. I might also mention that comparing a 4L80E to a 200-4R is apples to oranges, and it has not been without its issues either.

But it's cool. I know where I'm not welcome. I actually have high-functioning autism, more commonly known as Asperger's Syndrome, and quite frankly, do not need this drama and negativity. In fact, it is a great many people like you who unnecessarily go on the attack, that on the wrong day occasionally make me wonder if my life is worth living, with people constantly telling me to shut up simply because they don't agree with me. Have fun with the sandbox to yourself when you run others off of this forum who don't bow down to your negativity, because that is what you are doing. I'm pretty sure that's not what this site is supposed to be about, but that is what you are displaying. Peace.


----------



## goat671 (Apr 13, 2019)

NOS Only said:


> Would you STOP pushing YOUR AGENDA!
> 
> 200's are SCRAP! That is a well known FACT, even by GM. It had numerous issues and full of warranty claims. That is why GM only produced them for a very short while and NEVER were in ANY heavy duty application. Take your BS and your 3 to 4 THOUSAND DOLLAR trannys over to some Buick forum. All your BS is just that.
> 
> PERIOD!


Tell Art Carr https://cpttransmission.com/ that the 200s are SCRAP. I think we all can have our opinion I did not see anyone pushing a certain tranny just some info on the different models


----------



## pontrc (Mar 18, 2020)

Don’t worry about it AnO. This is a good forum with good people including NOS. He just gets pissed off by the 200 4R for some reason. To me for a “street application “ it’s a good choice for BOP owners👍


----------



## 67ventwindow (Mar 3, 2020)

I can testify about those 80s over drive transmissions. 700-R4 (4L60) in my 88 Camaro only lasted 50K before it came apart not like the 5.7 TP was a strong motor. It would not shift out of overdrive unless the pedal was on the floor. That was the down fall. In 92 the dealership said it was common, the OD put too much stress on the transmission at low speed. They had enough parts from warranty fixes I only had to purchase an accumulator spring,fluid and labor. The owner was a vet so he gave us lowly enlisted a break when he could. That was the last automatic transmission car I bought, until this Le Mans*.* I don't have anything against them I don't get to drive that much so I would rather drive a manual transmission.

I have managed to break the 4L80E in my trucks as well. I am looking forward to breaking my top loader and T56 Magnum. I am sure my kids will get an assist in that department.


----------



## AZTempest (Jun 11, 2019)

Come on now. Someone gives their opinion and gets jumped on, this isn’t the Mopar forums. People are entitled to give their success stories as well as failures. We are grown ups here and are quit capable of reading and deciding which way to go on their cars. People on here may laugh at, and a few of my friend have, on what I do with choices I make on my cars. The example I gave on my 50 buck TH350. My friends would not have touched it with out a full rebuild. I could have just sent the cash and went that route. But for me it all about my son and I working together on a project for the day, having a good time, then downing a few beers at the end of the day. We knew the risks and this one payed off. If the tranny gives out, we’ll dive in and have some more fun going another route. We are putting in a 200r in the future. If it works for us it works. If it don’t it don’t. You can find both pros and cons on line of success and failures. Individual experience should be welcome here whether we like the choices or not.
Jim


----------



## 64Original (Jun 21, 2017)

PontiacJim said:


> Well, I think it boils down to what people have in experiences with specific products, or what stories they hear locally or from others, be it in person or the internet.
> 
> Often, it may not be the product itself, but the person who installs or uses a specific item and isn't really qualified to do the work or have a full understanding of how to break-in, adjust, or modify the item in question, but is simply a hobbiest trying to save himself/herself a few extra dollars in not paying another to do the job or feels that they can do the job with the mechanical skills and tools they posses. I know I learned most all I know by working on cars and manuals or how-to books when available. I screwed things up, it cost me, but I learned. BUT, *I realized that I screwed up*, and it was not the item/product I was dealing with, or I simply did have the knowledge about the item/product. I can relate this to the Holley carbs which back in my time everyone, and the magazines, tooted as the carb to have. I bought/installed a spread bore and was not impressed nor found any improvement over the factory Q-jet. Off it came, and back on went the Q-jet. Was it a bad carb? Maybe not, but I knew how to adjust/tweak the Q-jet and not the Holley - so I am not a fan of the Holley to this day and never ran one since. So, *this stems out of my experience *and I today don't recommend, nor care for a Holley carb. Q-jets and AFB's work fine for me and that's what I use/recommend.
> 
> ...


If you spend 10-12,000 dollars building an engine and put a 500.00 transmission behind it expecting it to hold up then shame on you. Yes you have to have the 200r4 built up to handle the horsepower and torque and should plan on spending the money if that is what you decide to run. Like I said I am running one with no issues but I had it built with better parts to handle the load. In saying that when I get my new engine built I am sure that I will eventually have to have it beefed up even more for the new horsepower and torque and when the time comes I will do just that. You need to plan your build around your budget and include all of the driveline components in that cost.


----------



## An0maly_76 (Dec 25, 2021)

67ventwindow said:


> I can testify about those 80s over drive transmissions. 700-R4 (4L60) in my 88 Camaro only lasted 50K before it came apart not like the 5.7 TP was a strong motor. It would not shift out of overdrive unless the pedal was on the floor. That was the down fall. In 92 the dealership said it was common, the OD put too much stress on the transmission at low speed. They had enough parts from warranty fixes I only had to purchase an accumulator spring,fluid and labor. The owner was a vet so he gave us lowly enlisted a break when he could.


I'd like to point out here that the F-body's 700R4 had the same low-quality internals used in any other non-Corvette 700R4, putting it in the same realm as the non-turbo application 200-4R. I might also add the F-body's base L03 V-8 made 170 hp for 1988, a far cry from the TPI L98's 230, and GM's bean-counters likely convinced management the same transmission option would suffice for the F-body's three V-8 options. Meanwhile, the Corvette's L98 boasted 245 hp, with better transmission internals than the F-body, more than likely those were the parts sourced in your rebuild.

Common issues in that era when most were still under 100k miles were TV cable stretching or otherwise misadjusted, or the sunshield cracking. Also, are you one of those folks who didn't read the manual and drove with the linkage in 4th all the time? I don't say that to be insulting, but it is a matter of fact that this was a major killer of 700R4s and 200-4Rs alike. These transmissions were a new thing for the 1980s and all new technology has hiccups. The biggest hiccups for these were manufacturer cost-cutting and owner ignorance, and time has proven that sufficiently.


----------



## 67ventwindow (Mar 3, 2020)

An0maly_76 said:


> I'd like to point out here that the F-body's 700R4 had the same low-quality internals used in any other non-Corvette 700R4, putting it in the same realm as the non-turbo application 200-4R. I might also add the F-body's base L03 V-8 made 170 hp for 1988, a far cry from the TPI L98's 230, and GM's bean-counters likely convinced management the same transmission option would suffice for the F-body's three V-8 options. Meanwhile, the Corvette's L98 boasted 245 hp, with better transmission internals than the F-body, more than likely those were the parts sourced in your rebuild.
> 
> Common issues in that era when most were still under 100k miles were TV cable stretching or otherwise misadjusted, or the sunshield cracking. Also, are you one of those folks who didn't read the manual and drove with the linkage in 4th all the time? I don't say that to be insulting, but it is a matter of fact that this was a major killer of 700R4s and 200-4Rs alike. These transmissions were a new thing for the 1980s and all new technology has hiccups. The biggest hiccups for these were manufacturer cost-cutting and owner ignorance, and time has proven that sufficiently.



Yes like you say it was a weak transmission.


----------



## An0maly_76 (Dec 25, 2021)

67ventwindow said:


> Yes like you say it was a weak transmission.


Weak as it was offered in THAT application. The Corvette internals were better suited for such use. What most fail to understand is that the L98 F-bodies were forced to make do with the weaker L03 version of the 700-R4. Think about it -- an engine with 230 hp and more torque, using a lesser version of the transmission intended for a smaller engine with 60 less hp and a good bit less torque.

As I've said, the sprag is the weak link in any automatic, and I'd bet dollars to doughnuts the F-body was given a weaker sprag and other components than the Corvette, as the L03 generally didn't need them. Simply put, if you expect a slingshot not to break when you start shooting bigger rocks, you need a bigger rubber band.

Essentially, GM set the stage for problems by refusing to offer the transmission the more powerful engine required in a different application, simply because it would have cost another, say, $20 per car. And with GM's cockeyed way of looking at things, this led to big savings in production with the F-body's production numbers in relation to the Corvette, which was a decidedly more expensive car. As I said earlier, you get what you pay for.


----------



## 67ventwindow (Mar 3, 2020)

I bought it for my winter car. I wouldn't call it a beater it was a nice looking car. Just far less expensive than my Chevelle ended up to be. They gave me a 1yr warranty on the rebuild of the transmission by the time that was up I was sent over seas. It sat for over a year and the Top coat separated. That was the last straw sold it for a 1995 B4C Camaro,


----------



## Lemans guy (Oct 14, 2014)

Anomaly, in your search, talk to Performance Torque Converter PTC in Muscle Shoals Alabama. Good shop, good prices, they can supply you with different rebuilt trans at good prices or rebuild yours and they build the converters on site, mostly for drag and race cars.

very nice give them a call, they put a ratchet diode in my TH350….said it would take 1000 ft lbs of torque….anyway they may be close to you and worth checking out.


----------



## Lemans guy (Oct 14, 2014)

Sorry, Neal was the original poster….


----------



## An0maly_76 (Dec 25, 2021)

No worries, however, FYI for the future, you can edit your post if you made a mistake. Took me a few to figure it out myself. Here's how, click on the three dots at the upper right corner of the post in question and you'll see this (highlighted in yellow for easier viewing).


----------



## Neal67Lemans (Dec 3, 2021)

Lemans guy said:


> Anomaly, in your search, talk to Performance Torque Converter PTC in Muscle Shoals Alabama. Good shop, good prices, they can supply you with different rebuilt trans at good prices or rebuild yours and they build the converters on site, mostly for drag and race cars.
> 
> very nice give them a call, they put a ratchet diode in my TH350….said it would take 1000 ft lbs of torque….anyway they may be close to you and worth checking out.


Thanks, I actually have family in Florence right down the road from there. I'll probably go with a th350 at least for now. My rear axle is a 2.78 so I could get away with not having overdrive. I'll just have to see how it drives when I get it all together.


----------



## An0maly_76 (Dec 25, 2021)

Neal67Lemans said:


> Thanks, I actually have family in Florence right down the road from there. I'll probably go with a th350 at least for now. My rear axle is a 2.78 so I could get away with not having overdrive. I'll just have to see how it drives when I get it all together.


2.78? That's an interesting one. I've heard of 2.73s, 2.75s, never a 2.78.


----------



## 67ventwindow (Mar 3, 2020)

2.73 teeth 41/15

2.78 teeth 39/14





__





Ron's Pontiac Page: Pontiac Rear End Gear Codes






ronspontiacpage.com


----------



## Neal67Lemans (Dec 3, 2021)

An0maly_76 said:


> 2.78? That's an interesting one. I've heard of 2.73s, 2.75s, never a 2.78.


Haven’t counted teeth but it’s a 1967 WC stamped axle. The chart I found said it’s a 2.78. That’d be 2500 rpm’s at 70 with the th350.


----------



## An0maly_76 (Dec 25, 2021)

Neal67Lemans said:


> Haven’t counted teeth but it’s a 1967 WC stamped axle. The chart I found said it’s a 2.78. That’d be 2500 rpm’s at 70 with the th350.


More relaxed than most, to be sure, but still at or near 50% of redline. One point most miss in the pros of overdrive transmissions is that it's not just about saving fuel, it's about increasing the life of the engine. This post got a lot longer than I planned, but to illustrate...

In 2016, I bought a 2005 Impala 9C1 (police package) for a beater / daily driver. A city unit that I presumed likely had not been abused. Listing stated 130k miles and "runs good, was turned in for newer vehicle". I was three hours away and didn't have time to check it out, so this is also a good lesson in inspecting anything prior to bidding on it. My bid of $1200 won the car, but when I took possession expecting a serviceable vehicle to drive home, I discovered that contrary to the listing, the engine knocked like a diesel, even with semi-regular maintenance.

Reason being, first-responder vehicles accumulate lots of idle time, making hours more important than mileage. For two reasons -- heat build-up that cooks the fluids, and revolutions the odometer doesn't show. And here's where all this comes into play. Presumably the engine idled 12 hours a day, likely 5 days a week, possibly 7 if multiple officers used it.

At 12 hours a day, 6 days a week, the engine ran 72 hours a week. At 72 hours a week, it ran 288 hours per month. At 288 hours per month, it ran 3,456 hours per year. Assuming this is accurate (and it's more accurate than you might think), it likely ran 38,016 hours in the 11 years prior to my ownership. And less than 20% of that was mileage. To break it down...

Idle speed was likely 650 rpm, or 39,000 revolutions per hour. 39,000 revolutions per hour x 38,016 hours totals 1,482,624,000 revolutions. With the car's 3.29 gearing and 26.6-inch tires, 60 mph was just about 1750 rpm in 4th. The presumable 1,482,624,000 revolutions on the engine divided by 1750 at 60 mph totals an equivalent of 847,213.71 miles on the engine, regardless of the odometer reading. Even at half the hours, the engine would have had close to a half-million miles worth of revolutions.

I know, you're asking, "What the hell does this have to do with me or my classic?"

Simple. Engines have a duty cycle of only so many revolutions and so much stress before bearings and other parts start fatiguing. Your classic obviously doesn't have the high idle time factor, but more rpm at highway speed can stress the engine more and wear it out faster too, something to consider in axle gear and transmission choice.

Some quick math shows that at 70 mph, the TH350's 1.00:1 top gear ratio, driving a 26.7 inch diameter tire (215 / 75-14 recommended size) with your 2.78 axle gears would require right at 2,450 rpm. The 200-4R's 0.67:1 top gear, driving the same tire and axle ratio would require just about 1640 rpm at the same speed, which I'd say is a good bit more comfortable cruising RPM, especially with a Pontiac's rated 5,000 – 5,300 RPM redline.

That 810 rpm difference may not seem like much, but look at it this way. Every 500 miles at that speed, the engine will have turned 1,225,000 revolutions with the TH350, vs 820,000 with the 200-4R, a difference of 405,000 revolutions. You could very well see 30-50% longer engine life with the 200-4R, possibly more with the converter lockup. And that's just based on the accumulated revolutions factor, without even accounting for the added heat of higher rpm. As I said, it's something to be considered.


----------



## 4rd4fun (Oct 24, 2019)

An0maly_76 said:


> One other thing. If you go four-speed auto, whether 700-R4 or 200-4R (the 200-4R has a lower first gear for holeshot), do NOT drive with the linkage in OD (4th gear) full-time. A very good transmission guy in my area told me that kills these 4-speeds quicker than anything else. Basically, most, if not all will have a problem holding 4th gear at lower cruising speeds, especially if the converter clutch locks up.
> 
> Basically the trans will constantly be hunting between locking and unlocking the converter, jumping back and forth between 3rd and 4th, trying to find some happy medium that it can't achieve. And it greatly accelerates trans wear to boot. Third gear is much better for any cruising speeds below 45 or so. I generally say 4-speed autos should be left in third ('3' or 'D' versus 'O' or '4') unless you're on the interstate.
> 
> Another helpful tip in such a swap -- I seem to recall the CC - HRM article I read indicating that the stock ST300 crossmember worked fine, but had to be inverted, turned 180 degrees, something like that to line up with the 200-4R's trans mount. Otherwise, they said it was a near-direct bolt-in. But for the love of God, don't install an unknown and don't forget to get the throttle valve setup right or it will all be for nothing.


I have been running 2 x 200 r4 or 4r units for a couple of years now. They were both slightly beefed up by local tranny shop. One is in my 66 gto the other is in my wifes 80 trans am with a 400. They seem to do well- been very happy and has really wakened up the the TA with that lower first gear. I am no expert but so far so good. Love having overdrive- just completed 600 mile run in the TA with the NRCA group and other not having cruise it was great.


----------



## lust4speed (Jul 5, 2019)

Well, two weeks since last post, but I'll still give it a go. Both the 7004R and the 200-R4 need a bunch of work to make them live, and even then it comes down to "when" they break and not "if". My friend and I drag raced our street cars pretty regular and we ran slicks when we did. I had the 200 trans and he the 700. Sometimes I'd break and he would point and laugh, and then a week later the tables would turn. Here's the thing, both of these have clutches and steels about 6" in diameter in very rough rounding sizes and the 400 has closer to 8". Doesn't take a rocket scientist to know that the small parts better be really good to survive. When we were not engaged in mangling parts both transmissions were great on the highway. Every time we'd break, we'd upgrade the part and pretty soon we weren't breaking. Gear spread is closer in the 200 and I think more suited for Pontiac torque while Chevy needed the lower first gear of the 700 with their small blocks.

Low Second Third O.D.
200-4R 2.74 1.57 1 .067
700R4 3.06 1.62 1 .070

I like the fact that there is no adapter plate needed with the 200-4R and the driveshaft only needs the smaller Muncie sized yoke installed to fit if you had a 400 automatic before. In my '67 the existing crossmember mounting holes worked for the 200 so it was basically a drop in process.

I have to repeat a warning that was given above. I'll stop in and visit my trans guy and many times he's standing over a transmission from some snake-oil company that he now has in his shop since the selling mail order shop has declared the customer did something he shouldn't have and their warranty is void. You try and look for all the included billet speed upgrades that were purchased and said to be included and all we see are used stock drums, shafts, and clutches. Shipping a big block of aluminum and steel across the country gets expensive - espcially when you still end up taking it to a local shop to finally get it fixed.

I avoided the 200/700 problems this time around with the '65 Catalina Safari wagon project. Massive vehicle and the 496ci Pontiac stroker will not be kind to drivelines. Went with a heavily modified 4L80e will every billet part available. The initially penalties are an additional 100 pounds over the 200/700 and some tunnel modifications to get it to fit and a new 4" aluminum driveshaft -- not to mention the cost was close to three times what I could have got by with a heavily modified 200/700 trans. Just got the car on the road a few weeks ago and I will say the completely programable transmission is awfully cool. The trans is set to upshift at full throttle at 5,800 RPM with both hands on the steering wheel.


----------



## kszr (3 mo ago)

Recently installed a 200-4R in my 72 Lemans. 400, 16 heads, 3.55 rear and 68 cam. I like the OD, but it did change the personality of the car. Had the trans rebuilt and also added a shift kit. So far it's held up. 

No shifting back and forth between 3rd and 4th.

My first post!


----------



## 64Original (Jun 21, 2017)

NOS Only said:


> Good luck running 200's. You're gonna need it or a lot of money to keep it in one piece.


I have been running a 2004R in my 64 GTO with no problems. Transmissions work great and I think it is a myth that they will not hold up behind a pontiac engine. I am building a 461 stroker with all forged internals and Butler parts and will be running a CPT 2004r behind it that is built for 700hp with a 3 year warranty. Great gear ratio and will be running it with a 3.73 posi rear end ration.


----------



## kszr (3 mo ago)

We just got my governor dialed in. 1-2 shift is now 5000 rpm and 2-3 is 4500.


----------



## lust4speed (Jul 5, 2019)

One of the few downsides of the 200-4R is setting up the governor. Like to hang the guy that buried the thing inside the case where the pan has to be dropped to get to it. I suspect that you might have liked the 2-3 shift to also be 5k, but there's a point where we settle for good enough.


----------



## geeteeohguy (Feb 2, 2008)

The 200R4, set up properly (that TV cable is critical) are my favorite for an OD conversion in an A or F body car due to size and configuration. I don't have one in any of my cars, but who knows what the future will bring.


----------



## kszr (3 mo ago)

lust4speed said:


> One of the few downsides of the 200-4R is setting up the governor. Like to hang the guy that buried the thing inside the case where the pan has to be dropped to get to it. I suspect that you might have liked the 2-3 shift to also be 5k, but there's a point where we settle for good enough.


Yep. I'll take it. Shifting now reminds me of my pickup in sport mode, so I'm happy.


----------

