[Willshire]

So I started the process of removing the engine and slim jim. 6 hrs to get it all out! I will attach some pics of the removal.

[Willshire]

pics attached

[Willshire]

more sorry guys can't get more than one loaded at a time

[Willshire]

more

now we are cooking! getting 3 loaded at a time LOL

[Willshire]

here are a couple showing the difference between the slim jim and the 200. not a whole lot of difference in physical gerth. 4" difference in length from nose to tail

[Tim Younker]

Good Luck with your swap. You will be glad you did.

[Willshire]

Thanks Tim

[pfilean]

Not sure exactly what year you are replacing. But as it is a Slim Jim I presume 64 or earlier. Will you need a adaptor or are you lucky enough to have a block with provisions for a block mounted starter? The adaptor will tend to move the trans further back but the pictures look like the 200 is a little shorter that the Jim even in the critical area of the case.
There are a number of web sites that give lengths of various transmissions but all seem to have conveniently forgotten the Old Jim. Can you get a measurement of the Face-to-Mount length of the Slim Jim and also the overall length so we can compare to the given lengths from the web sites? Also if possible a centerline to top of case measurement for both the Jim and 200? That might be a little harder to measure accurately and unfortunately where dimensions can be found it is not usually given for the "modern" transmissions either. But it is kind of critical for these cars where floor hump clearance is a concern.
Thanks in advance and keep us posted on your progress.

[Willshire]

The face to mount length will likely not be an issue but the center-line to top measurement should be the same as the input shaft and case top holes need to be in the same location on both. I think that is what you are asking. I will take many measurements to assist others in their swaps.

[pfilean]

Looks like you got a BOP pattern 2004R so maybe your installation won't require an adaptor. At least if you have provision for the block mounted starter. I think some 64's did and some didn't. Or maybe they all had the provision and it was only used on manual transmissions. Don't remember.
But I was looking for dimensions to compare to what is posted online in comparison to other transmissions. Your pictures look like the 200 is quite a bit shorter than the Jim in overall length and also in the face to mount dimension. If someone was to swap to the 700R4 they would find a transmission longer then the 200 but maybe a little shorter in face to mount distance. Unless the 700 had the long tail shaft in which case it is longer in face to mount distance. In any case I was hoping to get as much comparative dimensions as possible. And the centerline to top of case dimension would help in judging how much floor pan clearance there might be as that is always a concern on these cars.
But anything you can get is appreciated. There have been a lot of discussions about this over the years but you can never have too much information.

[gregneun]

Nice looking trans swap there. My engine is stamped 26K and it has the starter mounts on the block.

Greg

[Willshire]

Mine also has provisions for a block mounted starter 3/8" or 7/16" fine thread i believe. From fasce to tail (aluminum case not output shaft) is 31" in the slim jim. Same measurement on the 200 is 27". Yes the 200 is a BOP. From another py member. It was in a GTO with a 455. Originally built by Jakes.

The trans mount is a different story. The mount for the 200 is right at the end before the output shaft and, the mount is straight through. T
The mount for the slim jim is back a few inches from the output shaft and therefor creates a shorter variation of mount location and in turn less modification of the cross member. Where the transmissions differ in length by 4" the mount to face distance will be less than 2". I will confirm all measurements requested and post them here.

Thanks for subscribing guys!

[Willshire]

BTW, that is the trunk of my dads 51 ford custom, flat head v8 in the transmission pics. His arm too!

[gregneun]

I put a th400 in and used a newer (1970?) crosssmember from an Olds. This had to be moved rearward about 3-4 inches. Also the crossmember was shorter and plate steel was used on each side to bridge the gap. Then a driveshaft from a 77 Nova was used and I eventually had to have that shortened.

If you have that bonded with rubber driveshaft, or whatever it is, now might be the time to get that changed also.

Greg

[Willshire]

Originally Posted by gregneun

I put a th400 in and used a newer (1970?) crosssmember from an Olds. This had to be moved rearward about 3-4 inches. Also the crossmember was shorter and plate steel was used on each side to bridge the gap. Then a driveshaft from a 77 Nova was used and I eventually had to have that shortened.

If you have that bonded with rubber driveshaft, or whatever it is, now might be the time to get that changed also.

Greg

It seems like your th400 may have been longer than my 200. from what i can see i may be moving mine forward as the 200 is a lot shorter than the Jim. Perhaps your 400 is the long tailshaft at 33+" but your mount may be 24+" from the face. My mount on the 200 is definitely forward of the slim jim mount location. All will be confirmed when i get home. LOL

i also picked up a driveshaft from a 64 bonneville which may make the difference in just being able to put it in or having to chop it up.

[Willshire]

Here are a couple more pics of the trans.

Slim Jim - Face to mount length 27-3/4", Add the 2-1/8" for the offset mount and mounting from face to crossmember is 29-7/8" +/-1/4"

2004R - face to mount is 26-1/2" +/-1/4"

my trouble is going to be moving the crossmember forward as it will interfere with the shift linkage. Ideas?

[pfilean]

Your dimensions seem to agree closely with what is available for the 200. Which is supposed to be 27 3/4 overall and 26 3/4 face-to-mount. The short 400 is supposed to be 28 1/4 overall and 26 3/4 face-to-mount. I would have thought from your pictures that the Jim was longer than that in relation to the 200. But the tape measure should tell the tale.
To bad you need to move the cross member forward. If you were moving it back I think you will see alternate holes in the frame which I think were intended for the heavy duty three speed if a car came so equipped.
If you expect interference with shift linkage when the cross member is moved could you weld an extension of the mounting plate on the cross memberand leave the member where it is? I wonder if all that along with some improvised mounting pad will leave the end of the transmission at or near the original elevation so as to keep the u-joint angles correct.

[Willshire]

I thought about extending the mounting plate as well i am just not sure if that 3" extra would put undue torsional stress on the crossmember by cantilevering in the mounting points. i also tossed around the idea of notching out the crossmember so the shift rod would go through a void or hole in the crossmember. i will have to mock it up and find the best solution. I will report back with my findings.

[pfilean]

How is this gong Wilshire? How did you solve the mount problem? How much transmission hump interference did you find with the 200?

[Willshire]

Originally Posted by pfilean

How is this gong Wilshire? How did you solve the mount problem? How much transmission hump interference did you find with the 200?

Pf, i am currently in class every saturday to get my master electricians licence. Was in the shop yesterday to start the cam change (comp deh275 to 068). Once the cam is installed i can work at getting the trans in. I will certainly post progress and pics it progresses. I am down to one day a week in the shop so i am assuming closer to the end of the month. For the mount, i am looking at possibly extending the mount with 1/4" plate.