[connman]

I owned a 66 GTO since 1968. It rusted so bad that it was unsafe to drive about 20 years ago. During that time I had 12/13 motors in the car, from 326/389/455. And 350/400 SBC and 454 BBC. Transmissions ranged from 350/400 and the 4 speed muncie and a TKO600 5 speed OD. [ In my present 66 Lemans with a Ford 3:50 9". The 350 is an easy swap. It will bolt right in. Course a different flywheel is needed. The drive shaft will bolt right in. Watch out for a BOP case as chevrolet bolt pattern is different if you are buying one used. Also watch out for the ones with a lock up converter as they are not built to take the horsepower as the early ones. Also watch out because someone may try to sell you a 200 transmission as they look close to the same. The 200 has no modulator if I remember right. Rear trans mount bolts right in. The 2 speed rear mount is the same if I remember right. If you only go 40 miles out of town then the 350 is the way to go. If not I would put a 200R4 in it. I have never done that swap, but from what I read, [ I use to get every performance GM andHot Rod magazine. I still get 8/10 ] it is also a bolt in. Remember, they used it in the Grand National Turbo's. Example 3:55 rear gear 70 MPH 350/400 3200 RPM 4 speed 2900 RPM 5 speed OD TKO 600 2400 RPM and 1200 RPM at 40 MPH. I haveto hit 42 MPH before I put it in OD. Since you are stayig stock on the motor, You do not need a high horsepower transmission . I hope this info helps you.

[Carmine]

Good info. Thank you, Carmine.

[Chief of the 60's]

Originally Posted by connman

I owned a 66 GTO since 1968. It rusted so bad that it was unsafe to drive about 20 years ago. During that time I had 12/13 motors in the car, from 326/389/455. And 350/400 SBC and 454 BBC. Transmissions ranged from 350/400 and the 4 speed muncie and a TKO600 5 speed OD. [ In my present 66 Lemans with a Ford 3:50 9". The 350 is an easy swap. It will bolt right in. Course a different flywheel is needed. The drive shaft will bolt right in. Watch out for a BOP case as chevrolet bolt pattern is different if you are buying one used. Also watch out for the ones with a lock up converter as they are not built to take the horsepower as the early ones. Also watch out because someone may try to sell you a 200 transmission as they look close to the same. The 200 has no modulator if I remember right. Rear trans mount bolts right in. The 2 speed rear mount is the same if I remember right. If you only go 40 miles out of town then the 350 is the way to go. If not I would put a 200R4 in it. I have never done that swap, but from what I read, [ I use to get every performance GM andHot Rod magazine. I still get 8/10 ] it is also a bolt in. Remember, they used it in the Grand National Turbo's. Example 3:55 rear gear 70 MPH 350/400 3200 RPM 4 speed 2900 RPM 5 speed OD TKO 600 2400 RPM and 1200 RPM at 40 MPH. I haveto hit 42 MPH before I put it in OD. Since you are stayig stock on the motor, You do not need a high horsepower transmission . I hope this info helps you.

Are you aware that the top dog GN was the GNX? And are you aware that the GNX only had 276 horse and that did not come in at the hit of the throttle? Even low horse GTO's had considerably more horse than that. And are you also aware that no 200 GM tranny was ever used in any heavy duty or other performance application? Are you also aware that GM killed off the 200 in short fashion due to warranty claims? Why? Because they simply do not hold up. Unless you sink $3000.00+ dollars on one, changing almost every internal part, they are junk.

Only fools and those that have already wasted their money on one believe in them. And using the "drops right in" excuse is lame at best.

[242177P]

Originally Posted by Chief of the 60's

Are you aware that the top dog GN was the GNX? And are you aware that the GNX only had 276 horse and that did not come in at the hit of the throttle? Even lowy horse GTO's had considerably more horse than that.

Bwahaha! My cheekbones hurt now.
Armchair quarterback.

[Chief of the 60's]

Originally Posted by 242177P

Bwahaha! My cheekbones hurt now.
Armchair quarterback.

Okay. How about you explain? Did the GNX have more that 276 horse? NO. Did Pontiac make a GTO with less than 276 horse? Not that I am aware of unless perhaps a '73 or '74, but this thread is about '66 and '67. I will wait for your enlightenment of the day.

[242177P]

Originally Posted by Chief of the 60's

Okay. How about you explain? Did the GNX have more that 276 horse? NO. Did Pontiac make a GTO with less than 276 horse? Not that I am aware of unless perhaps a '73 or '74, but this thread is about '66 and '67. I will wait for your enlightenment of the day.

Explain? Not a chance. You clearly have NO clue, and that's hilarious.
(BTW, 255 horse in 67 but that isn't even the funny part )