[kisertl]

Any one have any idea's on using the 200R4 with a tripower, wondering if there's any brackets for the TV cable hookup or do I need to use some universal and modifie it?
And to all that's done the swop, what kind of fuel savings have you found?

[Scarebird]

Usually the universal kits are worthless. When I did mine first it had a Carter AFB; I grabbed a few brackets from the boneyard, did some measuring and welded up my own - I suspect you will need to do the same.

[Carl A]

For tri power.
. v\http://www.tvmadeez.com/tri-power/
. http://www.tvmadeez.com/tri-power_sbc/

[gtome]

That looks like a nice set-up!

[jakeshoe]

200-4R can be relatively easily built for 400 HP/TQ. No fancy billet parts at that level.

You will need a factory GN or aftermarket servo (or early 200 3 speed large servo) if it's right at the 400 HP/Tq level.

A deep pan is also a very good thing to use on a car that will see hard runs from a standing start, street or strip. For a pure cruiser it's not necessary.

We build one for that level as a Stage I. My Stage 1 is the equivalent of a BTO Stage III.

I use HP/TQ ratings interchangeably. For the most part we are dealing with American V8's. If the engine is making 450 HP, it is probably somewhere around 400-500 lb/ft of torque. So the numbers are pretty interchangeable for the purposes we typically build for.

A 450 HP turbo'd combo is easier on parts than a 450 HP NA combo. Simply because of the way the power comes on, even though it likely makes more torque (the turbo combo).

I build the 200-4rs for the TurboBuick guys pretty often. I've ran them deep into the 10's with multiple seasons on a trans and have had ZERO friction or hard parts failures with my builds.

We have also learned that the GN valve bodies are NOT the best core to use. We have some other cores we prefer that are more common and are currently doing some testing using the most common and least desirable core. So far we are making progress with these and may be able to make them work better than the GN core with cost effective mods.

We also currently have a sale on the 200-4Rs until we run out of cores on hand. Check out the website for info.

[madokie]

Webrodder has good article on this debate, in transmission/drivetrain section,pics that show difference in size of parts.you cant down load or print it out but its a good read.seems most parts from 700r4 are bigger and look stronger,gears, shafts, carriers,etc.the GN guys dont use 4th OD in a 10 sec run do they?

[Old Goat 67]

Good article.

http://www.webrodder.com/article.php...6&SID=6&CID=17

[Cliff R]

the GN guys dont use 4th OD in a 10 sec run do they?

Not that I've ever seen. They do however, at least most of them we've worked with, lock the TCC when the transmission makes the 1-2 shift. This ceases all torque multiplication, which is a good thing with turbocharged set-ups. The problem they see doing this, is that the high torque production will kill the converter, as most are just a stamped steel shell and single friction sandwiched between an apply plate and a backing plate (part of the converter shell).

The aftermarket has stepped up with multiple disk converters, and much stronger shells to help them survive being locked-up at full power.......Cliff

[jakeshoe]

Originally Posted by madokie

Webrodder has good article on this debate, in transmission/drivetrain section,pics that show difference in size of parts.you cant down load or print it out but its a good read.seems most parts from 700r4 are bigger and look stronger,gears, shafts, carriers,etc.the GN guys dont use 4th OD in a 10 sec run do they?

Pics can be decieving. I haven't read the article but just because the parts are bigger doesn't make them stronger, and in some cases it can create more stress.

Here's a few thoughts on the WHY a 200-4R will handle more power IME.

First,
The 3-4 clutch pack of a 700. There simply isn't enough apply area. It uses a relatively small piston to apply those clutches, which don't have adequate friction area. There is no easy way to increase this apply area on a 700. There is on a 200-4R.

There are 3 ways to make increase the torque capacity of a clutch. Increase friction area, increase hydraulic apply area, or increase hydraulic pressure.
Increasing friction area is common but you are limited within the bounds of the available space. Typically you use thinner steels, thinner apply pistons, and/or thinner pressure plates/snap rings to do this.
Your steel plates are a heat sink in a clutch pack, somewhat like a brake rotor. If you make it thin it warps, when it warps, then it kills the frictions in short order.

On a 200-4R we usually use stock friction count in the 3rd clutches. On a 700 we are typically using a 7 count or 8 count. We run about the same pressures 260-275 psi line at full TV on both units.

The advantage goes to the 200-4R because we have approx the same friction area, same pressures, but considerably more apply area and thicker steels.

Input shafts..
The 700 uses a steel shaft with multiple feed holes splined into an aluminum drum.
Common failure points are the shaft splitting where the fluid feed holes are, the drum failing at the splines, or in some cases when the drum is sleeved, the entire front of the drum breaking.
It looks more robust but is much weaker than the 200-4R input shaft. We have ran the stock 200-4R input shaft in mid 10 second combos reliably. There is a 4340 input shaft available that is what we use above the 550-600 HP level usually.

Planetary sets.
The 700 planets probably are stronger than the 200. The fact that they are lower geared makes them weaker, but by design they are more robust.
HOWEVER,
You occasionally see failures of the 700 planets. These are almost never power induced, they are caused by lube flow. GM updated them with the oil slinger for this reason.
You don't see these failures on the 200-4R.
My theory is twofold.
The 200 is a shorter package. Less distance for the lube to have to flow, and fewer bushings for lube flow loss.
Secondly, the 700 being longer and having those more "robust" (read heavier) parts actually has very little support to keep those parts running on center. They have a relatively weak bushing design, and wear the bushings because of this.

The 200-4R has a very solid center support between the OD section and the fwd/direct drums, and another between the input planet and the rear planet. It has two center supports to the 700R4's one support. Their fit to the case is tighter as well.

This keeps the parts running on center, allowing better (virtually no) wear of the bushings, and long term keeps the lube flow going to the planetaries.

In either case the planets of either unit are capable of handling 800 HP. The 200-4R is proven to do so, and the 700 planets are similar to the TH350 which has proven the planets to the 800HP level.

On the issue of planets.
The power flow of a 200-4R and 700 are profoundly different. This is a major reason the 200 is a better candidate than a 700 IMO. A 200 has the same power flow as a 4L80E. Other than the completely seperate OD unit, it has the same power flow as a TH350 or TH400.

You have 2 sets of planetaries in a 700, you have 3 sets in a 200-4R.
In a 200-4R, in OD, the rear section of the transmission is locked in direct drive, exactly like a TH350, TH400, or 4L80E. No planetary wear, lube flow isn't as critical to the planets, centrifugal forces slinging the oil off the planets isn't such a problem because they isn't any pinion to ring gear or sun gear motion.
Only the OD planet is in action and it is up front where the lube flow comes in.

On a 700 the rear planets are acting in OD. It has a split sun gear design. Once again more wear on bushings.

Most of the GN guys lock the trans up in 3rd, not 2nd. Some have experimented with 4th gear but as stated the turbo likes to be loaded, so running a really deep rear ratio and using 4 gears doesn't work as good as running the stock 3.42s and 3 gears on those cars.

A 200-4R WILL make a WOT shift from 3rd to 4th stock, a 700 won't. If modified to do so, it kills all detent downshifts and makes it a pig to drive on the street.

All the weaknesses of the 200-4R have been addressed in the aftermarket. Many of the weaknesses of the 700 have been as well but there are some that simply cannot be fixed without a complete redesign.

The 700 has some good features, the packaging of the clutches in the input drum makes it pretty efficient compared to a TH350/TH400 with it's heavy drums stopping and changing directions on gear changes.

My personal opinion is that the 200-4R is always a better choice for a BOP application simply because it bolts up without any adapters.

In a Chevy application the 200-4R is a better retrofit in many cases because it takes the place of a Glide or TH350 with the same driveshaft, it fits the chassis better (floorpan clearance).

However from a pure power-cost ratio, the 200-4R is cheaper to build and install at anything under the 400 HP level PERIOD. From 400-500 the 700 is a cheaper choice. It can be built at that level very cost effectively and reliably.

Above 500 HP/TQ the 200 will come out on top. It get's spendy to build at that level but the reliability is excellent using the proper parts.

I will build a 200-4R for a 700 HP application (although I prefer a 4L80E) and can put it out there and not worry about it. I wouldn't even consider a 700-R4 at that level.

There are many builders who are afraid of the 200-4R. They usually have had a bad experience with them, or "heard from so-and-so" that one failed.
I will say that most of the guys who know how to make them live build them within the GN community and are known vendors.

An otherwise excellent builder can really mess up a 200-4R build because they don't know the tricks to the hydraulics. Internally they often don't require anything fancy but the hydraulics have to be RIGHT. Particularly the 2-3 shift. Same deal on the 700 but it's different, what works there doesn't work on a 200-4R.

The builders who have a proven reputation on 200-4Rs have experimented with their calibrations to get them perfected and the truth is, it takes a few set of clutches to get there. Some builders aren't willing to do the testing to figure it out.

We have actually transferred the theory of what we use on the 200-4Rs to the 700 and it works great but with some changes

[Goathead]

Originally Posted by gtome

This is exactly why I hated to post this question! I really appriciate all the info.... but the question isnt if it will hold up or not... or to what hp/tq.
That debate has been covered multiple times.

I went with the 700r as well, and it is pushing 485hp and 530 lb/ft thru a Ford 9" with 389 gears, no issues in 6 years...

[goquick]

The 200r4 in my 85 Delta has been thru 4 engien combos. I am replacing it now with a fresh all the updates 200R4 to put behind the 403 going in the Olds. There was about 600 in parts on it plus paying for the rebuild. The convertor I haven't decided on yet.