Rob,
The usage of the 700 R is almost as you say.. There is excellent
aftermarket support for such.. Minor problem.. COST.. The cost to
mate to a Mopar is not cheap.. And yes, they have electronic lock-up
which can be operated from a toggle.. However, that toggle is wired to
a 'brain-box' <OE calls it a computor>.. A wiring nightmare in MY
opinion... I looked at doing this on a GM I have and decided not to
because of the agravation..And that is in a GM.. To even give any
thought to doing a 700 in a Mopar would be even worse..
To answer another posters question as to the gear seperation.. Look
at it as a gear split, not a multiplier.. You would start out with
first,std.. then go to first O/D, the switch O/D back to std as you
go to second. Now you are in second std, then switch to second O/D.
And so on/etc.. And yes, it even works in reverse.. It will not lower
any existing gear ratio, but rather increase the ratio.. So your 2.45
first would now be a 2.45X.78 = 1.91...
Robb
At 08:27 PM 1/28/02 -0500, you wrote:
>Ok:
> I'm considering this for my car too. One other possiblity is the G*
7004r. I read about somebody converting an a-body mopar to this w/a
conversion kit. It has more aftermarket support, supposedly is physically
smaller, so it fits better, has a lower first and similiar o/d ratio, and
an electronic lock-up that you can work with a toggle switch.
> Robb, if you still think the gv is better for me, let me know.
>ROb(1b)
>
>
>
>
>>From: mopar@xxxxxxxxxxxx
>>Reply-To: mailing-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>To: mailing-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>Subject: IML: 1st/OD/final drive ratio
>>Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2002 14:17:05 -0600
>>
>>
>> There is a lower first gear, gearset avalable for 727 use. However
>> it is not cheap. But then again, neither is an aftermarket OD unit.
>> In the '60s the lower first gear was used for the heavy cars for good
>> off line response in drag racing.. As such a sturdy trans is required
>> as noted by D2, the spacing is radical and slamming a high powered
>> motor into a higher gear at high RPM was a strain on them.. However,
>> for our use in Imperials I think the use of the lower gearset would
>> be a great addition.. I realise not many would wish to make that type
>> of outlay in funds tho..
>> D2, being as you have a '68 Imperial,which means an 8 3/4 rear axle
>> ass'y, there is no 3.73 gear aval.. 3.23 3.55 3.91 4.10 etc..
>> I would be curious as to what you call a "big" cam.. If you have cam
>> specs aval I would be interested in seeing them.. If you have part
>> number and manufactor I can look it up myself.. :)
>> Thanks,,
>> Robb
>>
>>At 01:53 PM 1/28/02 -0600, you wrote:
>> >At 11:26 AM 1/28/2002 -0800, you wrote:
>> >>Another alternative would be a deeper 1st gear that'll give me easier
>>off
>>the line starts for city and still the direct drive for the fwy.
>>
>> >Although this is up to personal preference, I would not like this that
>> >much. There would be too much spacing between 1st and second for a
>> >continuous acceleration. Also, the tall 1st gear can often be used as
>> >passing gear at low speed, and you would loose this advantage with the
>>"low
>> >1st gear", although this conversion would be much cheaper than the GV.
>>One
>> >day, I will probably add this OD to my 68 sedan, along with 3.73 or 3.55
>> >rear gears. This would be a perfect match to this car's "big" cam...
>> >D^2
>>
>>
>>
Back to the Home of the Forward Look Network