What's new
CK5
Register an account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members.

4th 700r4, going sm465

C

Camaronate

Registered Member
Joined
Jun 24, 2007
Posts
76
Reaction score
0
Location
Bastrop, TX
Man, 4th 700 in 3 months, Forget the 700, going sm465.
I found one today, complete setup from a 1988 burb, crossmember pedels and all.
I just did the 6.2 swap a few months ago and havent been able to get 300 miles out of the transmission.
Is there anything I should know before getting into this swap?
From what I have read I will need the driveshafts reworked but eveything else looks like it would be a direct swap into my 83 k5. Will also need a new flywheel and clutch.

Am I missing anything?

Nate
 
I hate these threads. You think after the first or second tranny, maybe you`d spend the dough to build it the right way.

Sorry, I got nothing to add :rolleyes:
 
Well, I did pay big to have it built right after the used one I put in, had zpak, shift kit, upgraded servos and hard parts, the works, even new torque converter, pump, and everything else in between. It was not cheap.

First one went out after 250 miles, rotor broke into about 6 pieces. Pulled it and they warrantied the pump and fixed it again, put this one in today and it only had 25 psi oil pressure. Bad pressure control from new pump. Seems parts supplier has a quality issue.

Anyway, Thanks for the help NEK5.
thats that, now if I pull the 700 again its going in the trash.
 
SM 465 behind a 6.2 is an great combo in my opinion. When I swapped the 6.2 into my k5 it got mated to an SM 465 right away.

If your rig is newer than '85 it'll already have the dimples in the firewall where the clutch master needs to go. I hope you got the complete pedal hanger assembly, because it's a ton easier.

You'll obviously need a flywheel, pilot bearing, clutch and pressure plate.

Drivelines will get shorter (front) and longer (rear)

Tranny hump is easy if it unbolts.

Overall I loved the manual tranny behind the 6.2. It made better use of the available power...and I never had to worry about it.

I have a 700R-4 in my '83 pick-up behind a 6.2. It has about 140,000 miles on it and it still works fine. I do worry about it though as it tends to hunt a lot...

Rene
 
Am I the only one who repeatedly beats his 700r4 and lives to tell about it ( knocks on wood ) :laugh:

Towing , wheeling , larger tires than gears for years , lockers and barking shifts into second from a left turn arrow , using OD a lot more than people think you should ..............................and one oil change between 2001 and 2008 :pimp: ( knocks on wood again ) . Shes actually got it easy now , lower gears in axles , and a couple thousand pounds lighter .
 
In another thread someone informed me that the 88 465 from the suburban should swap right in with no driveshaft changes. If this is the case I will be going this route for now. He is only asking 400 for the complete setup, trans, bell, clutch/brake pedals, master cylinder, transfer case, crossmember and anything else I can yank from it for the trans.

The 700r4 can be a great trans. I just have a few issues with this one. Instead of sinking more money into it I am just going to cut my losses now before I end up sinking another 1500 into it. I am also pretty sure a refund is impossible.

Thanks for the help.

Nate
 
I just hate seeing people say that a 700r4 is junk because of issues like this. Should be pretty obvious it's not an issue with the trans itself, but rather the quality of the rebuild or issues with the installation.
 
Never said they were junk, I think they are great if built properly.
I am just not going to put anymore money in it.

Nate
 
Camaronate said:
Never said they were junk, I think they are great if built properly.
I am just not going to put anymore money in it.

Nate
Click to expand...
My subtle point in my original point was, you should have built it right the second or third time around, because as you say, it can be done.
 
They are 'OK' for an automatic...however, if they were a great tranny how come they are so fincky and or sensitive that so many fail so quickly after a build and or install? You can't honestly say the same for any TH400 or TH350.

It seems to me all the stars must be perfectly aligned, a blood sacrifice made, and Einstein's ghost consulted when building or installing a 700R-4.

Too fussy and persnickity for my liking. When the 700R-4 dies in my '83 (and it will one day) it'll be replaced with a manual tranny.

Rene
 
NEK5 said:
My subtle point in my original point was, you should have built it right the second or third time around, because as you say, it can be done.
Click to expand...


If I would have built it that would be easy to say. Kinda hard to make someone do it right. Especially if he can't give you a refund. Just have to cut losses now.

Nate
 
tRustyK5 said:
They are 'OK' for an automatic...however, if they were a great tranny how come they are so fincky and or sensitive that so many fail so quickly after a build and or install? You can't honestly say the same for any TH400 or TH350.

It seems to me all the stars must be perfectly aligned, a blood sacrifice made, and Einstein's ghost consulted when building or installing a 700R-4.

Too fussy and persnickity for my liking. When the 700R-4 dies in my '83 (and it will one day) it'll be replaced with a manual tranny.

Rene
Click to expand...

The exact same argument was used against fuel injection when it first came out, and Quadra-jets before that.

Not knowing how to do it, or doing it half-assed, is not the same as the part being "finicky" or "sensitive"......it's just an excuse people use.
 
Let's see, the 700R-4 has been around since 82 or 83. I can understand some teething problems the first few years, and even a few extra years for the tranny builders to get all learnt up on it.

So, how is it that 25 years after it's intro there are still so many unsuccessful builds and installs? Common sense says it's poorly engineered as far as repairs, maintenance and adjustmant.

In my opinion the only thing it has going for it is overdrive...and that is one of the 700R-4's weakest areas. Frankly I feel it's just typical GM-think. Add something to the product line that is underengineered for the application. Then make some almost insignificant changes to the design over a 10 year period, just so you can claim it's "improved" and keep selling more crap. When even that doesn't work...rename the tranny. :rolleyes:

Do I need to mention how expensive they are to rebuild versus a TH350 or TH400?

As for FI and the Q-jet...a few years of teething, and both have proven their worth. Both of those examples show the learning curve. I see so many 700R-4 failure stories and it's not always a backyard build either. Just as often it's a big name place like Bowtie Overdrive, or Raptor...

Rene
 
My opinion is that many failures are do to improper installation, particularly adjustment of the TV cable. The tranny itself is not very different, internally, to a TH350, except that the planetaries are larger. However, the TV cable directly affects line pressure, and if misadjusted the clutches will slip excessively and go south. That is really the only thing somewhat finicky on the trans, and is one reason why the "E" version is more durable - there is no TV adjustment to screw up.

Personally, I adjust the cable so it shifts a tad late and a tad firm. That way, I know there isn't a bunch of excessive slip going on.
 
tRustyK5 said:
Let's see, the 700R-4 has been around since 82 or 83. I can understand some teething problems the first few years, and even a few extra years for the tranny builders to get all learnt up on it.

So, how is it that 25 years after it's intro there are still so many unsuccessful builds and installs? Common sense says it's poorly engineered as far as repairs, maintenance and adjustmant.
Click to expand...

That perception is only because 95% of the posts talking about the 700R4 rebuilds are from the handful of people who had bad experiences (mostly because of a shoddy rebuild, improper installation, or simply the fact they are using it behind some combination of a high power engine and big tires with poor gearing). How often does somebody make a post that says "I had my 700r4 rebuilt and it's lasted 90,000 miles so far and works fine"........no, people almost only post to bitch about it. Just think about it, there has been a handful of people post on here with bad experiences where in reality there are probably millions of rebuilt 700r4's running around (simply because they have tons of miles on them and any automatic needs rebuilt at some point in time). I talked to the local tranny shop a few years ago to get a price to rebuild a 700r4 and the guy says he can't count the number of ones he had rebuilt and rarely ever gets one back because of issues.
 
If the 700R4 was a good tranny it wouldn't cost so much to correct the original design flaws... GM would have figured it out and done it by the 3rd year it was out. Where I can put a stock TH350, TH400 or SM465 in the same application and run it 250K without a blip. $300 to rebuild a TH400 vs $1500-2500 to "build" a 700R4 is going to make up for the loss of OD in my book.

My '83 K20 came with a 700R4... the original owner put a "crate" GM replacement tranny with all the upgrades available in it 2-3 years before I got it. It was installed at the Chevy dealer too to the tune of $2000+. I bought the truck less than 20K miles later and it was going out again. The truck has 240K on the clock now with the original 6.2L, 10 bolt front axle, 14SF rear axle, yet a "built" 700R4 didn't last 20K with light use?

The truth is the 700R4 is a weak tranny for use in a truck that some aftermarket companies have had success at beefing up the weak points on it. But it comes with a high price $$ wise and still can't compare to the durability of other commonly available tranny's for use IN A TRUCK.
 
What hard parts were "upgraded"? If you got 5 pinion planets. I'll take them off your hands if you trash it.
 
I didnt get the full list of upgraded parts, But I am not going to trash the tranny. I am going to try and replace the pump myself and put it in something else. If I change my mind I will let you know.
Nate
 
kennyw said:
If the 700R4 was a good tranny it wouldn't cost so much to correct the original design flaws... GM would have figured it out and done it by the 3rd year it was out. Where I can put a stock TH350, TH400 or SM465 in the same application and run it 250K without a blip. $300 to rebuild a TH400 vs $1500-2500 to "build" a 700R4 is going to make up for the loss of OD in my book.

My '83 K20 came with a 700R4... the original owner put a "crate" GM replacement tranny with all the upgrades available in it 2-3 years before I got it. It was installed at the Chevy dealer too to the tune of $2000+. I bought the truck less than 20K miles later and it was going out again. The truck has 240K on the clock now with the original 6.2L, 10 bolt front axle, 14SF rear axle, yet a "built" 700R4 didn't last 20K with light use?

The truth is the 700R4 is a weak tranny for use in a truck that some aftermarket companies have had success at beefing up the weak points on it. But it comes with a high price $$ wise and still can't compare to the durability of other commonly available tranny's for use IN A TRUCK.
Click to expand...

Wow, I'm not the only one. My experience with GM vehicles goes back 27 years. 90% of what I've owned and driven has been GM. Up til the 80's GM tranny's had a rep for being damn tough and damn reliable...and when they did need a build they were cheap to rebuild. Powerglide, TH350, and TH400...all great and reliable.

I have read countless consumer reports going back to the mid 80's regarding these trucks, and various other platforms that got the 700R-4. Each and every one gave a variety of opinions for each vehicle except for one point they all made. Weak automatic tranny. It's not just here at CK5...the anecdotal evidence is everywhere, they are a weak tranny, or the design for correct set-up allows for such a narrow operating range of adjustmant that it's just terribly easy for them to fail. Even aside from adjustmant issues the overdrive portion of the tranny is still a known weak area. So the alleged selling feature is it's weakest point?

As I said, I own a vehicle with a 700R-4...but I'll never waste a single cent when it fails. For the cost of a rebuild I can fund 90% of an NV4500 swap and be that much ahead.

Rene
 
IIRC the main problem with the OD was lack of lube to the OD planetary set. This has been addressed in later models.

I'm not saying the 700 is perfect, but it gets an undeserved (IMO) bad rap. I haven't personally had any real issues with them.

That said, I plan on using an SM465 behind my diesel when I get it completed. Not because I think the 4L60 is too weak, but because I know ANY automatic is going to blow chunks eventually, and often without warning. There is no question that a manual is more reliable and durable than any auto tranny, and I don't want to have to worry about a tranny dying when I'm a long way from nowhere. Manuals generally don't just blow up, and clutches give a LOT of advanced warning when they wear out.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest Posts

Top Bottom