RegisterSearchFAQMemberlistUsergroupsLog in
Reply to topic Page 1 of 1
700R4 VS 4L60E VS 4L80E
Author Message
Reply with quote
Post 700R4 VS 4L60E VS 4L80E 
I've noticed a ton of dislike for the 4l60e here and just wanted to add my 2c. I've been a tranny guy for years now and the 700r4/4l60e has become one of my favorites. I think alot of the problem stems from bad builders. Alot of the "builders" I've known were really just parts changers with the ability to put the trans back into proper working order, but not really understanding how it works, where the weak spots are, and how to fix them. Yes, the 4l80e/400 are much stronger transmissions, in most cases I don't even consider the 400 due to the lack of overdrive and converter lock-up. (for people that actually want to drive their car/truck on the street) If you have a 5000lb 4wd with 500 lb/ft torque, or 2wd that your going to run sticky tires on, then the 4l80e may be the way to go. There are some down sides to the 4l80e however. The overall size/weight, 13" converter vs 12" for 4l60e (both stock) which is added reciprocating weight (added lbs of converter and extra fluid it holds), worst 1st gear ratio of the GM O.D. tranny's (2.48 for the 400/4l80e, 3.06 for the 700/4l60e), and if you want to run it in an older car/truck (4l80e) you have to go manual valvebody or with a somewhat costly (in my opinion) controller.

It may be that I've been a little lucky with my 700/4l60e's. I currently own 4 cars and 1 truck with 700/4l60e's. The wife's 96 camaro with 200k w/ only valvebody mods, my 86 corvette with a fairly stout 400 ci sbc and 150k w/only a converter upgrade(a non aux small input 700 at that), my 91 caprice(vet servo,valvebody mods,converter upgrade 110k), and the 98 K1500 w/whippled 5.7 and 120k all stock. Some more notable customer cars: 70 Chevelle w/ strong BBC (highly modded 700r4) but will never see slicks, 12 sec 97 T/A, 11 sec 383 SS Monte, just to name a few.

Oh, by the way, 4l60e.com has tons of cool stuff for the 60's and the 80's.

View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Reply with quote
Post Re: 700R4 VS 4L60E VS 4L80E 
I didn't like my 60e, maybe I was unlucky, but it needeed 2 rebuilds by 125k, and was taken care of, just a daily driver, and never saw the strip. I don't think its a bad trans, but in its stock form, the power handling leaves much to be desired, especially behind a modified engine, even a fairly mild engine build can do in a stock 60e. in its stock form the 60e is rated (quite liberally IMO) at 360lb/ft, whereas the 80e is rated at 440lb/ft, and IMO I think that rating is on the conservative side. most of the guys here that have swapped trans' have done the 60e to 80e swap, however, remember most of them are running boosted setups that put out a boatload of power in full size trucks that typically weight 5k lbs and over. I however ditched the 60e in favor of a built t56, nothing like rowing through the gears yourself, and it should handle whatever my daily driver can throw at it with ease.

here's some good info on the trans differences with all the 60e, 65e, 70e, 80e, 85e....etc, for anyone who is interested:
http://www.pacificp.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=39111&highlight=&sid=5097fdfdb7825ea8e5f9ecd6e62dfb70

View user's profile Send private message
Reply with quote
Post  
The 60s do a lot better in cars than trucks due to vehicle weight, and center of gravity angle. Cars are lighter and the center of gravity is right down the center of the driveline, so thrust goes straight and not at an angle. On trucks and SUVs the center of gravity is over the driveline center, so it puts a twisting force on the driveline. At least, this is how it was explained by NJCKZ71 many moons ago when we were trying to figure out why 4L60Es last way better in cars than in trucks and SUVs. I'd still rather have a 700R4 in anything over a 4L60E though, with the 4L80E being top dog.

View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Reply with quote
Post  
i wont even get into the 60E lol

but dont forget about the 200, especially for the older cars - probably the strongest (if built right) of the overdrives (except the 80E), but the nice thing is, its all mechanical, no controller needed, and has backed a many blown big blocks upwards of 1k hp and more.

ive actually been contemplating using one in my truck and setting the computer up as a manual - not sure if it will work, and would need to figure out a speedo, but its a thought.

im looking at going that route in the chevelle (200)

View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Yahoo Messenger
Reply with quote
Post  
I would love a 200r4 in my truck. My 89 Caprice tbiā„¢ 305 has a 200r4 with a 2.42 rear gear. Highway cruiser for sure.
I like the 2.74:1 1st gear and the deeper .67:1 OD.
I wish the 80e/85e had these ratios.

peace
Hog

View user's profile Send private message
Reply with quote
Post  
Speedo shouldn't be an issue, they make a number of adapters to put electric in mech, mech in electric, and both ways for vehicles that use a mech speedo and require computer input. A quick net search should turn up several. I'd suggest starting at jagsthatrun.com, only because I know they offer a number of them including a neat VSS that bolts to the rear diff yoke.

I once used a 4L60E as a doorstop on a hollow core closet door. Didn't work, the door kept swinging shut anyway because the 4L60E wasn't strong enough to hold it against that mighty 5MPH wind.

View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Reply with quote
Post  
I haven't heard of the center of gravity driveline angle idea. I could see where an extreme driveshaft angle could wear the rear bushing on a 2wd, but in a 4wd with the t-case bolted to the trans this would not seem to be applicable. Wouldn't this apply to any trans that was used in both car and truck applications like the TH350/400?

The 2004R is a great trans, just not as versatile as the 700/4L60e(never made as a 4wd,no removable tail housing). I guess if you had the room you could fab up a little driveshaft and run a divorced t-case...hmmm, the wheels are turning Smile

Speeder, maybe you shouldn't use hollow core closet doors OUTSIDE where the wind is.... Laughing

View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Reply with quote
Post  
The center of driveline stress issue has to do with the effect of total force on the vehicle and driveline. I can picture the effect in my mind but can't explain it properly, but I'm sure a physicist could. It's harder to push weight at an angle to the direction of movement than it is to push weight in line with the direction of travel. This puts an angular stress on the innards of the whole driveline, not just the mounting points. I don't understand it completely, but (the late?) NJCKZ71, a mechanical engineer, was the one that originally came up with this theory and was able to both understand and explain it.

Never did find out what happened to Rob, he was having some health problems, then just quit posting one day.

Trans03, in Oklahoma it's possible to have a 30MPH wind inside the house just by opening the windows. I like open windows. Very Happy

View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Reply with quote
Post  
What I think speeder's referring to is the lateral loading of the transmission or transfer case output shaft with high driveline angles. For a 4WD transmission, this is not applicable. All of those forces are resolved by the output shaft bearings and slipyoke sleeve bearing of the transfer case.

I wish we did know what happened to Rob.

View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Reply with quote
Post  
Nope, not driveline angles. I refer to angle of thrust vs weight. A truck/SUV has far more of the weight over the direction of thrust than a car does. The effect would be the same even if you used a hub assembly to drop the thrust down so the driveline angle was in a straight line. The weight would still be over the angle of thrust, and it's this angle that induces the stress that breaks the transmission.

View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Reply with quote
Post  
Miss Rob too and wonder what happened to him.

I think it has more to do with the U-Joints than anything.

U-Joints 'must' have some angular displacement, otherwise the
bearings will *NOT* rotate the rollers 'enough' and will either
Brinell (denting or working a hard spot) or False Brinell (wiping
away of the lube, then go 'dry' and wear that spot because there
is less than a full rotation of the roller).

On trucks, there is room to have this vertical while on a car,
it is horizontal.

This is different from high angles and the 'off center' loading that
Speeder speaks.

Think this size tranny is okay for most cars and some trucks up
to 6.2K GVWR and/or towing anything more than a 5K trailer.
Much more and it is undersized. Worse for a 'built' engine and it's
higher torque going through the tranny.

View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Reply with quote
Post  
From a mechanics perspective, if you analyzed the forces acting on the transmission, this "angle of thrust" has no effect on it. The only thing the transmission sees is the amount of torque passed through it. I'll do some more thinking on this later, don't have time now (VACATION!!)

View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Reply with quote
Post  
I don't even have a 4L80 yet and already I like it. I did a water pump on a 2000 K2500 6.0L 4L80E
Even though first gear is much higher it's the RPM drop that really hurts you. This is why big diesel
trucks have a six speed trans and a splitter ( 12 spd ) because they have a narrow power band.
What good is it if you launch first and bog second.

View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Reply with quote
Post  
L31Sleeper wrote:
I don't even have a 4L80 yet and already I like it. I did a water pump on a 2000 K2500 6.0L 4L80E
Even though first gear is much higher it's the RPM drop that really hurts you. This is why big diesel
trucks have a six speed trans and a splitter ( 12 spd ) because they have a narrow power band.
What good is it if you launch first and bog second.


In my opinion it would seem harder to get a heavy vehicle moving from rest than to overcome a larger ratio change once you are in motion. The big-rig trucks also have the power to weight ratio of a riding mower

View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Reply with quote
Post  
1 reason the 4l80e has the 2.48:1 1st gear is because it is very much related to the 3l80e and turbo 400 trans. They use the same gear ratios.

And yes, the 4l80e's 1st gear ratio would make accelerating from a stop more dfficult than the 4l60e. The 4l60e is the trans with the larger rpm drop during upshifts, not the 4l80e. There are quite a few guys that get 1-3 tenths better ET's in teh 1/4 mile due to the engine staying in the power/torque band rather than the acceleration bog the 4l60e causes. Esp. with stock torque converters.

peace
Hog

View user's profile Send private message
Reply with quote
Post  
Well the street/strip, strip and road race people that I have payed attention to all go for the smallest RPM drop
and use the rear gear to get the acceleration that you are looking for.

View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Reply with quote
Post  
Yeah, most the stuff I've built was not designed for high rpm peak horsepower, where I could assume the bigger rpm drop could hurt you more. I like messing with the TPI motors that make so much low end grunt that they seem to like the bigger drop. My Vette gets flat out stupid on the 1-2 shift. For the short time I've had the Whipple on my truck, It seems to have more down low and starts to fall off as you get near 5500.

The 1st gear ratio difference is even bigger if you look at overall ratio's, but it also makes the drop bigger. This example would be with 4.11's and the only variable being the trans.

4l80e....1st..10.19 4l60e....1st..12.57
>4.11 >5.88
2nd..6.08 2nd..6.69
>1.97 >2.58
3rd..4.11 3rd..4.11
>1.03 >1.24
4th..3.08 4th..2.87

So, using the same math, ( trans ratio x rear ratio = overall ratio) if I ran 3.08's with a 4l60e I would have an 1st gear overall ratio of 9.42, 2nd of 5.02 which is a drop of 4.40, and a 4th overall of 2.156.

If you ran the same truck with a 4l80e, you would have to run 3.73.s to get a close 1st at 9.25, 2nd of 5.52 which is a drop of 3.73, and end up with a 4th ratio of 2.79.

I dunno, I guess I'm just happy we have options. Smile

View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Reply with quote
Post  
L31Sleeper wrote:
Well the street/strip, strip and road race people that I have payed attention to all go for the smallest RPM drop
and use the rear gear to get the acceleration that you are looking for.

Yup, I agree. You want the smallest rpm drop during WOT upshifts(which the 80e has the advantage of vs the 60e/65e/70e transmissions), then use the rear gear to trap at peak hp or slightly above peak hp.

peace
Hog

View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:
Reply to topic Page 1 of 1
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum