That right!! its absolutely not out of the question..a big block olds TQ in that rpm range is perfect. i would go with a 425 crank, offset for BBC rod journal and stick a long aluminum rod in it...it will run at that rpm all day no problem with a lite piston

No way will an LS make the TQ in that rpm a big olds can... its all TQ you need in that range

 

I drove my 6.0/4l80e swapped Cutlass from San Francisco to LA and back. I was following 2 new Camaro and a C6 Corvette and a GTO. During our trip we went on a spirited run through the desert and hit triple digits for extended period of time. When I say extended, I mean 7-8 minutes at the time, nothing like Autobahn.
Car felt great, once the converter locks up, engine was spinning around 3700-3800rpm at 130mph. 3.42 gears. I do have QA1 suspension, new body bushings, new steering linkage, wildwood brakes, and bunch of other upgrades.
For that trip I was on 18" wheels with Nitto tires on all 4. I was able to keep up with (stock) GTO with no problems felt like Cutlass was faster, but never tested it as I was driving behind everybody and didn't wanna overtake at that speed. For the most part it kept up with Camaros, but the Vette is incredibly fast.

6.0 dynoed 463 WHP and 444ft-lb at the wheels through 4l80e. That's mid 550ish at the crank, more HP but slightly less TQ than the 463 it replaced.

 

A stock 2004R can only handle about 275-300 LB-FT of torque before it reaches its failing point.
A stock 4L85e can handle 685 LB-FT of torque.

It takes a lot of aftermarket parts to make a 2004R handle the extra torque. Billet parts that never were factory available. It also takes someone who knows how to put a 2004R together, correctly, so it lasts.

If starting from scratch, I would go with a 4L85e. Unless you want the lower OD and lighter trans but there is only like 2 or 3 builders in the USA that I would trust with a performance 2004R build.

 

They used to race Olds iin Nascar back in the day and would be at speeds greater than 160. Mind you they were highly modified.
I say roll bar it, great brakes, lower it, aerodynamic improvements, great suspension and don't forget the seat belts. Going fast in old car is always more thrilling
than a new one. I call it scary fast

 

Art Carr 200 for up to 850hp $3100.00

way lighter and doesn’t eat as much hp. Nice low first and second

 

Have you used one of the online calculators to figure out your coefficient of drag and frontal area for the HP required to run 160?

 

I would NOT get an Art Carr 2004R for a high performance application. The race Buick GN guys know their 2004Rs and they don't recommend Art Carr. I would stick with Extreme Automatics (Lonnie Diers). The Art Carr has a "heat treated" drum which will shear and fail. One has to get a billet drum and billet input shaft. Heat treating does nothing for an engine making 500 LBS-FT or more of torque.
http://www.extremeautomatics.com/pro...romc=17&fromt=

Dave Husek out on the east coast is also a recommended 2004R builder from the Buick GN guys.
https://www.turbobuick.com/threads/n...et-one.436468/

It's not HP that kills the 2004R, it's sticky tires, torque, a heavy car and heat. Even in a Stage 3 build with all billet parts, around 850 LBS-FT of torque is max for the 2004R. In a heavy car (4,000 lbs), drop that max torque to around 700 - 750 LBS-FT

The 2004R is not like the TH400, where pretty much anyone can rebuild it without issues. The 2004R is very finicky and complex compared to a TH400. If it's not done 100% right, you will have problems & the trans will fail.

So if you have an engine making a lot of power, in a heavy car, with sticky tires, that is why the 4L85e is the way to go. In modified form, it can easily handle over 1,000 LBS-FT of torque (some claim as high as 1,500 LBS-FT). It's basically a TH400 with overdrive and billet parts. It's almost bullet proof. I'm not knocking a properly built 2004R with billet parts but it has it's limitations while the 4L85e is already brute strong in stock form (685 LBS-FT) and when you add better clutches and billet parts, it's basically bullet-proof.

 

The point is they can be built to handle all this guy would put to it….no where near 750 or 850 TQ

Art Carr, does do good stuff. He points out that there are a couple places that were using his name and sold inferior trans. If you get it directly from him, they are more than ok.

It’s not that hard. I have a couple big block Olds running out there now with the 200 done by a local good tranny guy here. 550 hp and 600 TQ they have been driven thousand of street miles and some track runs. Work like a charm.

that Extreme Automatics looks good too.

do you know the difference in hp loss through the 200 and the other trans?

 

The problem is the OP is looking to do sustained high-speed driving while in OVERDRIVE. A 2004R has only TWO clutch packs for overdrive. How long do you think those 2 clutch packs will survive with sustained high speed/high torque? The 2004R was never designed to do that while in overdrive. Overdrive on a 2004R was engineered for 70mph at 2,000 RPM, locked converter, cruising down the highway. The 2004R trans will have 5 or 6 clutch packs for every gear except overdrive. Overdrive was designed with only 2 clutch packs.

In addition, the 2004R shifts & prevents the clutches from burning up based on trans line pressure. When in the lower gears, the trans sees 250psi + line pressure to shift and to hold the gear to prevent the clutch packs from burning up. While in 4th gear, line pressure will drop to 70-90 psi. Which is fine for cruising down the highway at 2,000RPM with the converter locked but not designed for sustained 140MPH+.

 

Then why does Extreme Automatics rate them for 850tq and 1000hp if they can’t handle anything like that?

 

That is a general and approximate estimate. In a 3,300 LB car that will see daily driving or 1/4 mile rips, is one thing. Once you change the parameters of doing sustained high speed driving and/or in a heavy vehicle, those rating numbers will shift.

These are the nuances the 2004R has and there are more.

The stock 2004R pan is junk. The filter pickup is in front and upon heavy acceleration, the trans fluid sloshes back and uncovers the filter, the trans then sucks air and clutches get burned up. Most Buick GN race guys run a deep trans pan with a 700 filter and they go 1 quart over fill to prevent the pickup from sucking dry on acceleration. Some will even relocate the pickup to the back of the trans pan for really hard launches.

In the C6-C7 Corvette owners manual GM recommends running 1 quart over fill on the non-dry sump LS engines when performing high speed auto cross racing. It then recommends draining the 1 quart when going back to normal driving. The reason is simple, the non dry-sump engines can see the oil slosh and actually uncover the oil pickup tube and possibly spin or rod or main bearing in the process. The dry sump LS engines don't have to worry about that since it is not affected by lateral G's.

My advice to the OP is to call the trans builder, tell them what they plan on doing and see what they recommend. Maybe the trans shop will say not to run the 2004R or maybe they can modify it to be able to handle sustained high speed driving. Or they will just recommend a different trans, like the 4L80e or 6L80e, etc.

 

Today i stumbled over the fact that my buddy's 1990 lincoln mark VII has a Ford AOD transmission
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ford_AOD_transmission

Basically the same design (3 speed auto + overdrive) like the 200-4R or 4L80E.
Even the same overdrive ratio like the 200-4R

"
First: 2.47:1
Second: 1.47:1
Third: 1.00:1
Overdrive: 0.67:1
Reverse: 2.00:1
"

The thing is that car is a dog with the overdrive engaged (which you can manually engage or disengage with the shifter).
I mean the car isn't a rocket with 225 hp and 300 lb⋅ft anyway but my 89 mercedes 560 sec with a "true" 4 speed automatic pulls way stronger in 4th gear.
1:1 vs. 0.67:1 4th gear but they are relatively similar otherwise.
Benz has 2.65:1 rear axle ratio, 238hp & 287 lb-ft torque.
The lincoln's axle ratio however should be 3.08:1 since its a bill blass edition.

But i think with 650hp instead of 225hp i do not have to be afraid of slow acceleration when in 4th gear/overdrive?

 

A lot of factors at play. Aerodynamics of the vehicle at speeds above 100mph+ make a huge difference on how much HP is needed to keep accelerating. The RPM power range of the engine also plays a role.

A car with a 3.73 rear gear and a trans with a 0.67 overdrive will result in a final drive ratio in OD of 2.49 (3.73 x 0.67)
So with a 3.73 gear and NO overdrive ratio but in the final trans gear, the final 1:1 drive ratio is 3.73. The torque multiplication/acceleration is noticeable between a 3.73 gear pull vs a 2.49 gear pull.

That is probably why the Mercedes pulls harder as it has a final drive ratio of 2.65 vs the Lincoln which has a final drive ratio of 2.06 (3.08 x 0.67). Along with probably some of the other factors mentioned.

 

If you go with a big block Olds I think you need to get your RPM’s up into the 4800 to 5200

down around 4K is to low

 

There are a few misconceptions here, I’ll try a d clear a few things up.

First, no factory converter will handle WOT lockup. The converter clutch was never designed with enough friction area, that’s why multidisc converters were developed.

Secondly, the 4L80 snd 4L85 are basically identical. The 4L85 has upgraded planetary gearsets with 5 pinion gears, as opposed to the 4L80 and 400 4 pinions. There may be other changes, I don’t know for sure. I haven’t built a4L85 yet.

The 2004R has 2 clutch discs for overdrive, but it’s simple to machine the piston to fit a 3rd clutch plate. You will break input shafts/overdrive carries long before slipping the overdrive clutch with 3 friction discs.

As much as I dispose LS engine swaps, if your serious about sustained high RPM in a Olds, first liquid cool your credit card. This is one application where the LS might be the better choice.


The only way I see this working snd being reliable is to use a rear gear of 2.41- 2.56, overdrive with a lockup converter, and let the BBO torque pull the car Luckily, the 455 excels at low torque.

 

I agree on the torque converter. One has to get a billet multi-disc converter. Around $1K. A built 4L80E would be able to handle 1,000 LBS-FT of torque

The machining from a 2 clutch plate overdrive to a 3 clutch plate overdrive is possible and would help.

I also agree on the LS engine swap. The LS engine would do much better in that sustained RPM driving than an Olds 455 would. One would have to dump A LOT of money into an Olds 455 to make it live at those conditions. An LS engine would be the better choice.

 

I still say a 425"+ SBO. If you go LS, just buy a new LT Camaro, if it has to be a GM product. Yeah, they are ugly as hell but you don't have to reinvent the wheel and will easily travel at that speed. Pretty sure they are at fire sale prices, nobody is buying the ugly things. The Challenger doesn't require a Richard Nixon mask to drive it in public😁. I personally think the 2004R in it's GN form is a bit better than 300 ft/lbs. I have killed quite a few slightly modded low performance units though to be fair but abused the hell out of them. I pushed the 2 OD clutch pack pretty hard towing a boat with a very mild 403. Will see how long my current one lives, looked to be recent rebuild, I added CK's big boost valves, their improved GN servo, deep pan and bottom feed 4L60E filter with a remote cooler. My 358 will push around 400 ft/lbs, pretty borderline. The 400 ft/lb mark is more like the stock internal ratings due to the foward drum failing beyond that point. Without the line pressure mods, the stock 4L85E is rated at what 450 ft/lbs? I know boost valves push it to around 600 ft/lbs, according to the experts, still very impressive. The stock 4L80 gearing sucks, you need torque to overcome the shitty ratios. The 700R4/4L60E has the same OD issue as the 2004R, among others, also experienced the dreaded weak reverse. I actually made the 3/4 clutch pack fail, pulling a light load on our 03 GMC work truck. My hatred of the LS comes from how shitty they feel in trucks, feel way below their rated power outputs. The LT is a different story, much better.

 

Here is the link to the GM website for factory transmissions: (GM no longer makes/sells the 2004R)

https://www.chevrolet.com/performanc.../transmissions

A stock 4L85e can handle 685 LB-FT of torque. Modified, it can go over 1,000 LB-FT


One can buy a GM crate LS7 engine with 570HP @ 6200RPM and 540 LB-FT @ 4800RPM.

• Cast aluminum block with 6-bolt, cross-bolted main caps
• Crankshaft (P/N 12611649): Forged steel
• Connecting Rods (P/N 12661677): Forged titanium
• Pistons: Hypereutectic aluminum
• Camshaft Type (P/N 19419859): Hydraulic roller
• Cylinder Heads: CNC-ported LS7-style ports with 70 cc combustion chambers
• Valve Size (in.): 2.200 titanium intake, 1.610 sodium-filled exhaust
• Compression Ratio: 11.0:1
• Rocker Arms: Investment-cast, roller-bearing trunnion
• Rocker Arm Ratio: 1.8:1 (offset intake)
• Recommended Fuel: Premium pump
• Maximum Recommended RPM: 7000 rpm
• Balanced: Internal

https://www.chevrolet.com/performanc...s/ls/ls427-570


That right there is a bullet-proof setup. You can high-rev that thing all day long with an internally balanced, cross bolted 6-bolt main, forged crank and titanium rods. Olds 455's with 2 bolt mains and cast cranks, cannot compete with that type of engine unless you get a girdle ($$$) or a Rocket Racing block ($$$) which has a 4-bolt main and much beefier block. Plus that LS is an aluminum block which cuts down on weight. In addition, Chevy LS heads flow SO MUCH better than an Olds head does.

There is a reason GM put LS engines in not only Chevy's but Pontiac's (Late 90's and up to 2002 Pontiac Trans Am had the LS1 engine) and Cadillac's. If Oldsmobile had a rear wheel platform, it was guaranteed that Oldsmobile would have had an LS engine. GM Corporate engines were meant to go into all makes/models that would accept it.

 

Well aware that stock LS heads flow what the Olds Edelbrock heads will flow. Also their block is what you want for boost. The LS just feel super soft down low in trucks. I drove a 03, 04 and 11 5.3L, a 05 and 11 6L, the 11 6L is by far the best but still feel weaker than the couple of 17 5.3L I have drove. It feels like a 100 hp difference between the 11 5.3L LS and the 17 5.3L LT, not 30 hp. I am talking factory, not factory aftermarket, hot rod model for a 4L85E, a big difference. Same goes for the Crate BBC, if they catch a whiff of racing, bye bye warranty. I could not care what a companies corporate engine policy is, especially GM. Their vehicles are either ugly, overpriced or both. Their V8 is lagging behind Ford and Dodge in the power department. They developed the awesome Cadillac Blackhawk DOHC Twin Turbo V8. They made it so expensive to make, it wasn't worth producing, WTF? Ford's 5L is great modern motor with direct AND port injection to keep the intake tract clean. They also put off DOD as long as possible, another good move. The EcoBoost also use both injection now, I believe. A lot of lifetime GMers have bolted due to their incompetence.

 

Love this video

 

Any idea what trans is in that Chevelle?