Olds powered cadillac

Will this trans hold up? If so what needs to be done to it so it won't go out? If not what trans would be best for daily driving and weekend fun?.

jensenracing77

is the 455 stock? they can be built to hold up to 400 torque without any trouble but it will run you over $1500 to get it built right.

Olds powered cadillac

No most likely a cam carb intake and headers. I know monster transmission makes a performance rebuild but not sure of the torque it holds I all ready have a torque converter and shift kit in it just need to know of what to get to keep it or use that money to get something else.

jensenracing77

the input shaft, drums and sprag are just some of the parts you will have to have changed.

i'm not trying to sound like an expert on this because i'm not. i just went through all this with my transmission guy. he is among the best builders in the country in my opinion.

bigoldscruiser

Sometimes, the big guys are not always the most reliable source of information. You could touch base with John Kozak in Richmond, KY. He is a retired GM employee who now specializes in 200R4, 700R4, 350 and 400 transmissions. His prices are very reasonable as compared the Monster, etc. kougar172@gmail.com 859-623-1883

Aceshigh

Absolutely. Just has to be built up from stock.

I just built a nice 2004R myself with about $1,000 in parts upgrades to handle upwards of 600hp.
$400 billet input shaft on a forward drum, + Super Servo (or similar) +
Plus everything you see here in the Master Rebuild kit #2
http://www.ckperformance.com/resourc...BUILDKITS.html

Call Chris and talk to him or call Jake whose site I listed below.
http://www.jakesperformance.com/200-...uild_Tech.html

Olds powered cadillac

Thanks for all the help. Glad to know theres a chance to keep my 200

Redog

The 200 is a better tranny for drag racing anyway. Lower 1st gear and lighter.

Remember the Buick GN?

Olds powered cadillac

Yea I remember the gn just never knew what upgrades they did or if they swapped to another transmission.

therobski

I just picked up my highly modified 200R4 and converter, and I believe it is a BRF coded trans. The early base model 200R4 I brought in initially he said was no good for what I wanted to do. I did not know there was a difference in 200R4's thinking that they are going to take in totally apart anyway. But this trans needed to be built to handle 500HP plus down the road. Right now that's overkill for the 400E but when I build the 425 all I need to do is match a converter to my cam selection. Had mine built locally in Dallas by a highly recommended Master Technician, the Buick Grand National racing people know him well and send a ton of trannys to him. $1,800 including the converter. This is all going into my 64 F-85 post car.

bigD

$1800 with the converter isn't bad... did he explain why the early models aren't desirable? i have a first year 200 4r that i was planning to have built up. not for all out max effort or racing, more hi po street type of use...

therobski

All I can remember is that my core trans was an early model off of maybe an 88, Impala. He said that not much of the parts inside are good for the build and would cost more. Starting with BRF series 200R4 has much better parts to work with.Came out of a Grand National. He supplied that trans in the total cost for me also. That maybe why some of these trans builders don't require and core charge because the shipping cost of the exchange out weighs what some of these trannys are initially worth.

therobski

I don't want start the typical pissing contest like they do on ROP.alot of times. However that maybe why I got such a good price on the build. No doubt the BRF is a better trans to start with than the junk I had. Plus he had it in inventory too. I'm happy with the results.

70Post

Turbo Regal and GN are the same car/drivetrain...just different colors, trim, etc. BRF is a GN trans as well as Turbo Regal. BRQ may be also but is the 84-85 version I believe. Adding some clarification (or maybe confusion).

Regardless.....great potential behind a nice V8.

therobski

No you are not. Thank you 70Post....

70Post

Sorry Rob...I meant maybe I was confused, not you I'm not 110% sure on this but I feel the info is correct.

Aceshigh

I think I screwed that up, yeah the BRF is the more well known GN trans.

That's what happens when you try to go off memory without verifying it first.

Either way yes, great trans.

therobski

No problem guys, it's all good. I will be on vacation during the Holiday season and should get more done and will post the results.

therobski

The 200R4 is installed.
IMG_1224.jpg
IMG_1229.jpg
IMG_1230.jpg

68conv455

Did you go with a rebuilt "D5" style convertor? I notice from the pictures it is not a high performance smaller diameter unit.

therobski

68conv455 it's a D-5.

Vistabrat72

Time to throw my hat into the ring! I've had a 200-R4 on my '72 Vista Cruiser with a warmed over 350 since the 2009 driving season started. The transmission, having a few, but vital modifications, has stood up so far to what I have thrown at it to a reasonable expectation on a heavy car. This includes stop and go in traffic, with the air conditioner going full blast (heat), full-throttle acceleration, sustained highway speeds, plenty of trips, ETC. There is a large cooler on the car, the converter is a 2200 stall, and the lock-up feature has been retained. It has a Kevlar band, the 'unbreakable' pump rings, decent clutches, 'O'-rings on the filter pickup tube to prevent air getting sucked in under hard acceleration, a shift kit to keep shifts quick without being harsh (a bad thing for the driveline on a heavy car), and a few other things. It does not have the larger 2nd servo though. It has been totally trouble free. I am aware it may need the hardened forward clutch/shaft and sun shell with the eventual fitment of the 455. But I know of a few 200-R4's running around behind some 455's, and are holding out just fine with the mods, called the stage 2 and 3's commonly. The 200-R4 has one of the most desirable and simple power flow routes through the elements contained within an automatic transmission. This makes for a very efficient and non-parasitic loss of the power transfer. As stated, the gear ratios are nice, and with the 3.73 final drive on the wagon, I get about 19 honest MPG on the open road. I sometimes feel the 200-R4 got a sullied reputation, for some of the early ones shifted very soft, and when used on the big wagons, intended to tow trailers in the first place, built up a lot of heat, cooked the fluid, and with that, wore out fast. A few things that could have been done on the factory's part could have prevented many problems. Thank you, Howie

goatwgn

X2 on the post by Vistabrat72. Using on for last 5 years in my '66 pontiac Tempest wagon with a mild Pontiac 455 with 450hp/ 525lbft. Tranny is beefed a little bit with the billet forward drum , Fairbanks servo, good band and clutches, as well as modified Monte Carlo SS valve body. Gets beat mercifully from time to time. Takes off quicker, and cruises at a lot lower rpm than it did with the TH400 I had in there previously. Has a 3.42 rear with 27.5 inch tall tires. Has got up to 19/20 mpg, while running AC on the highway, which is exceptional considering the performance I get out of the car. I plan on installing one in my "daily driver" '74 Cutlass next, so I can install a little more gear in the rear end. I beleive some of the bad rap this tranny gets comes from improperly set up TV cables, builders who are unfamiliar with the unit, and confusion with the old 200 3 speed auto, which had some metallurgy issues the later 2004r doesn't seem to have.

therobski

X3- They have to built for your application. And depending on that application ( most of us on this site are high performance minded) you have to start with the right 200R4 core. 442.com can provide alot of info. Especially for your tranny do-it-yourselfers.

arcee1951

I did have a 200 4r built for my 66 Cutlass with a 330 engine and 456 posi. Nice! I had heard negatives about it, but went to talk to a guy who knows his stuff. He put built a 200 4r to put in his 1970 Chevelle, with a 454 engine. He said that "if I can't hurt it with that engine, it will do just fine in your little Olds." Hmm, he was right.

Vistabrat72

They do hold up, period, and when you see the smaller size of the clutch plates, etc, in comparison to say a Turbo 350 or 400, then the strength of the 200-R4 can really be appreciated. The unit got sullied from the get go by the association with the 200 3-speed. And yes, some early 200-R4's were a little plagued by the GM bugaboo's of the early '80's. Once you have a 200-R4 in a car, you wonder why didn't you do it sooner! Howie.

therobski

Yes indeed and if you want a reference for a 200R4 build in the DFW area I have the guy.

Aceshigh

Is it Jake Shoemaker ??

http://www.jakesperformance.com/200-4R.html

This guys an ex-Ranger / Contractor who started his own business and worked
closely with Chris Kokkanois from CK Performance with alot of things in the past decade.

His screen name is Jakeshoe and if you google his name he's on every hot rod
forum from Camaro's, Chevelles, Turbo Buicks, LS1tech, etc. Highly recommended that you
put him up against any builder and let them talk shop, he'll embarrass them.

His bread and butter is the new 4L80e's he designed a transbrake for IIRC.

nonhog

The guy who did my T350 for my Omega told me he'd go with a 700R4 with an adaptor. I'd prefer 200R4 when I'm ready.
Need to start saving

goatwgn

Jake will do you right.