I didn't watch the whole video Just saw this comment turbo 350 and 400 3sp had kick down shift cable. 700r OD has the throttle valve pressure cable. TV cable
I remember attending a Chevy/GM event at the Indy 500....all the new cars were on display including engineering cutaways. At the automatic transmission display, I made a comment that my BMW had a GM transmission..if I recall my E46 3 Series Touring used a version of GMs 5L50E..a GM employee at the display said..."well that is one thing we do well." The one clinker we had was on our 1979 Cutlass with the 260 V8....we had the THM-200 which dropped reverse at 78,000 miles. That was a month to remember....the transmission went out in the Cutlass...then my Dad had a heart issue and was hospitalized at the age of 49. So I remember visiting dad at the hospital and talking with the transmission shop and arranging for the transmission to be rebuilt. Some months later, we did get a class action lawsuit notice about a settlement involving the THM-200...but we apparently exceeded the mileage cap. Some years later, on an episode of the Simpsons, Homer pulls into a gas station and asks the attendant if he is hearing a funny noise...the attendant responds, "I think you're having a heart attack." Homer response, "Phew, for a moment there, I thought it was my transmission." I thought of Dad as he had both in the same month. He recovered....and to celebrate, he ended up buying a new boat the following month.....and towed it home using the Cutlass.....
Had a Friend who had a Cutlass with the 260 V8 and the TH200. The transmission went out. So he took it to a local Austin, TX Transmission Shop. The Shop Owner told him that yes, they could rebuild the transmission. But why rebuild a p.o.s. For the same cost they put a TH350 and geared it for the speedometer. It was like night and day when he got the car back.
I bought my wife a used 78 Cutlass with about 25K miles it was loaded sunroof and all. Both the Chevy 305 eng and the TH200 failed. I got a check from GM and bought a Targetmaster 350 and a rebuilt TH350 and we kept that car for almost 20 years
I am a service manager for a national used car retailer, and the 14 up 8 spd transmissions are crud. The "Magic Fluid" flush can stave off internal repairs for a time...but the 1-2 upshift and 2-1 downshift clunks come back and destroys internals. Nice vid!
I work at a GM shop and I HATE the 8spd. I can always immediately tell when a truck has it because of that 1-2 shift and of course the plague torque converter shudder problems.
I helped my dad rebuild the Roto-Hydramatic in my grandmothers 62 Olds around 1968 or so. Man that thing had a lot of parts! But when we put it back together it seem to be fine for the 6 or 7 years she continued to drive it. They did have a very odd method of operation though. I will confess to having a real soft spot for the post 1956 Buick Dynaflows which I thought were great transmissions after they started using the dual stators with the switch pitch.
i think the variable pich torque converter is 👍idea add in a way of freewheeling the stator or change its rpm speed compared to the case/shell RMP. why its not use more im not sure ( as most i know about is fixed piched with drawback's and a sprag that can be design replaced with something better to change its speed & torque vs all or nothing and it might be a way of doing over drive gearing too boot ) but modern jet engines use that trick a lot so it should work in oil just as good as air. rc-car's is right the TC solenoid does go bad in the 90's-mid 2000's caddy's i got more complaints of it not engaging ( nocking 34 mpg to about 16mpg @ 65MPH~ 1800engine rpm normally to 2500~ and yes it's more wair and tair so it does need tlc or run the risk of Windows 😉 as i have seen someone do that after putting it off for 90+ morning's commute/trips ) then lock-up/failed TC as heavyweight loads ( some people still use big sedans for towing and gardening and i probably will be forced into to doing that with my 2-gen charger as well as my 80's 1-ton K15 truck needs heavy TLC/restoration work or house stuff and my car right now is getting my TLC first 😑) or hot days can make it over heat and fail and id remove the transmission case to replace the TC ect but not to bad % of R&R money wise/reputation and using a better trans cooler and R&R-maintenance at fairly reasonable regular intervals will help and im glad i skipped using the 8-speed automatic as RC-car's was saying its not great and in a hotrod/charger more money and headache from turning the TCM ect. even if there's a kit to do it with a BBM/hemi makes my TR6070 a better choice ( evan if it's more work upfront but rewarding later on ) thanks for warning / reminding me
@@michaelbenardo5695 The 4 speed Dual Coupling Hydramatic will not fit in a 61 - 64 Catalina or Grand Prix. Only the Bonnevilles and Star Chiefs. Reason being the floor hump for the trans is smaller for the Catalina and Grand Prix. I tried it, the big hydramatic hit the floor board and the trans needed another 3 inches before the crossmember could be installed. You would have to change or modify the floor pan.
Who will touch it? LOL I will---any of those (except the stamped planetary carrier THM 200) is simpler and better than the newer electronic POS transmissions. Just rebuilt 2 old Fordomatics, both in 1957 Thunderbirds. Next one up is a Ford AOD upgraded with 4R70w wide ratio planetary set, and then a C6 with extra clutches AND an E4OD wide ratio planetary set. We used to chuck the THM 200s into the scrap pile and replace them with THM 350s
The THM200? Garbage. My mom had one in a new ‘78 Malibu Classic with the 305, and it had problems from the word go. It was in and out of two dealer’s shops even before it was a year old. One dealer suggested annual fluid changes (!). After a few years of dealers dinking with it (and the class action lawsuit which got her something like $50), the case support (the planetary carrier?) broke, then it wouldn’t shift from second to third unless you backed completely off the throttle. A conversion to a rebuilt Turbo 350 by a local indy transmission shop (they were covered up with THM200 problems, and performing 350 conversions) finally fixed it.
Being an old Pontiac man, I had a 62 and a 63 Catalinas. If you lived in a flat area, it was almost ok. But I lived in a hilly state and they were total crap. When I got a 70 Cat with a measally 350 2 bbl, I could not believe what a night and day difference. It ran circles around the 389's.
I don't know why I like your videos but you have a real talent with the spoken word. No hype, just communication. I had a 1980 Malibu with the Metric 200 ? transmission. It was a fleet car. It had the lockup issue which I fixed by unplugging it. When it was time to get a new car, at 50,000 miles, the leasing company asked me when the transmission was replaced. I told them it had not been. The lady said, "you must be mistaken. ALL of these cars have had the transmission replaced." I had a 1979 Malibu before that one and it had a transmission replaced at 35,000 miles. That car was driven by another person before I got it. Having said that, the Malibu Classic hardtop was a great car otherwise. No power but I live in flat country.
Had a 1980 Buick Century with the 231 V6, THM200 and no lockup. Also a fleet car... lots of highway miles... 62,000 in two years. Transmission survived, barely.
Back in the late 80's, a guy in our city that had retired from the GM plant in town and started a used car lot. Being a GM retiree, he wanted to concentrate on GM cars, but everything he was buying was giving him transmission problems, so he started buying more of the Taurus and Sables, and was not having those problems with them, so he started to concentrate on those. He said he had to keep a couple of GM's on the lot, because it was a GM town, but began to favor the Ford front wheel drive cars. I bought an 89 Mercury Sable off of him, and was the first front wheel drive car I had ever owned, and really liked it. That thing would drag itself through snow so deep, it would drag the whole bottom on it, and keep going.
I have had a Taurus and a Stable. One had the 3 liter and the other the 3.8. they were both rusty beyond belief after 7-8 years. It is a shame as I loved both cars. I would like to head down south to find a nice wagon to bring home. I kind of liked the early '90s refresh.
@Nathaniel's TPS Report I went to sell it, when it was about ten years old and was asking a thousand dollars for it. Several people looked at it and said it had to much rust for that money, and never drove it. One guy stopped and drove it and said that as good as it run and drove, he would buy it, aside from the rust. I had moved up to a 97 dodge intrepid, which was a great car, with a huge amount of power in their 3.5 engine, but it didn't get around nearly as well, in deep snow. I believe it had to much power, and broke traction, to easily. My Sable had the 3.0, and had plenty of power, but nothing like the Intrepid. Have a great day.
Especially the SHO's unfortunately. The 5-Speed had too small of a Clutch(1989-1990 came with 8.25" Clutches but later dealers received replacement 9" Clutches to help the issue). The 9" Clutches were better but were still too small. For example, the same year 5-Speed Ford Ranger with the 2.3L Lima 4-Cylinder had a 13" Clutch and it only made 88HP. Eventually, in 1993 Ford offered the SHO's with a 4-Speed AXOD-S Automatic transmission with an increase in displacement from the 3.0L found in 5-Speed SHO's to 3.2L specifically for the Automatics. This netted a nice gain of 15ft/lb of Torque but no reported HP gains. The 1993 AXOD-S's had some issues with clutch packs wearing out that got better in 1994 and 1995 respectively. The 93's would make it around 80k-120k miles before needing changed, but I've seen a lot of 94's and 95's make it 150k-200k+ if maintained properly. Some have gotten 300k+ out of their SHO's, so it's all in how well you know your car. If you get an SHO with the Automatic, a transmission cooler is probably the best possible upgrade you can buy and should be the 1st thing to get. @@Transient901
4T60E was notorious for destroying the reverse reaction drum or "stove pipe" so much that aftermarket companies were offering hardened versions of it. This really was a big problem when mated to the LQ1 3.4L DOHC engine in the GTP and Lumina possibly due to the high torque the engine could deliver at high RPMs. In fact, I remember reading about the development of the LQ1 saying GM initially intended it to deliver 250 HP or something crazy like that but had to scale it back due to transmission reliability issues.
Ah, the 4t60 and the 65, the weak point of the platform I love dearly. I'm trying to build my GTP up for more power and I already know that glass transmission is going to give me some trouble.
Another very compelling video. Having rebuilt and destroyed a number of GM4L70E transmissions and spent way too much time in the Transtar and Sonnax catalogs, it's a topic near and dear to my heart.
Very educational and enjoyable, Adam! You have definitely created a very watchable channel appealing to many of us who fondly remember daily drivers of the past. Thank you! 👍👍👍
We had a ‘62 Pontiac with this transmission. You are right about the 1-2 shift. Some times it felt like you were lugging the engine on the take off. The fluid coupling was midship in the transmission and was small. Sometimes it was called Model 10.
GM is famous for letting the customer sort their problems out for them, Then they perfect it and the next year they kill it. Same can be said for their Engines!
Great chat. I remember driving a 63 Starfire and being disappointed with the upshift to second gear. Also, your comment on the C6 shift is very true. My 428 powered T-Bird would chirp the tires between both upshifts during hard acceleration.
I had a 63 Olds Starfire it was rough shifting , it had super drive , on flat ground it was fast it weighted in at 4200 pounds , my father bought this for me as my first car at 17 , l drove it from 1970 - 75 great car , great memories thanks for your videos 😎👍 Doug
As I recall when the Roto Hydramatic AKA Jetaway Hydramatic was released. I red an article probably in Popular science, or Popular mechanics in the late '60s that GM would not provide repair kits or detailed manuals, as the new transmission was so reliable that in the most unlikely event of a failure that you would have to use a factory rebuilt unit. Seems that it was one of the worst up to that point. In the late '50s there was the Turbo Powerglide. (I think that is what it was called). JC Whitney used to sell a conversion kit to install a regular 2 speed Power Glide. A neighbor teenager had a lawn service so he could save enough to buy every teen age boy's dream in '55 to have a '55 rocket 88 Olds. When it was finally delivered after a long wait it had a Buick Dyna-flop. Did not accept delivery. Although not GM I think that Packard with their "Ultramatic" had probably the most un reliable transmissions. From what I understand it was a factory philosophy of NIH. Depended on precision bushings with no seal rings, the clutch steels were burnt blue like a hand from an antique watch.. Ford had the 70s C4 Clutches fail just out of warranty at 12k. Then the C5 which would suddenly just stop working. I have no idea what the problem was. It was so bad that my employer, Motorola at the time forbid us from buying a vehicle with a C5.
The jetaway 315 is the last revision of the old hydramatic 4 speed. Dual coupling 4 speed used in Cadillac up to a few units in 64’. The slim Jim is the turd you’re describing. Olds and Pontiac.
Adam, you did my old heart good by giving the Slim Jim "worst of all time" honors! I learned to drive on our 1963 Olds Super 88, and all these years later, I can still feel dying fall of the shift from first to second. But it never left me stranded. That Olds was traded on a new 1972 Pontiac Catalina. Two weeks after we got it, the transmission literally fell out of the car at 35 mph.
"Gliding" from one gear to another WILL shorten transmission life. That "glide" is SLIPPAGE that shortens clutch and band life. A proper shift SHOULD be firm, but not hard.
I seem to remember the TV & modulator were standard design for most of GM's autos (powerglide, th350, 400, etc). Only later did they try to simplify with a TV only, which is one reason the TH200 has poor shifts. Also, owners should be careful if disconnecting the TCC valve as a long term solution. On some models lockup does play a role in cooling. If the TCC is slipping on the highway you could end up cooking the fluid.
Dealing with something like that in my 1981 Bonneville with the 200-4R. The Lock up isnt working because according the the code the vehicle speed sensor is not working so the computer wont lock the torque converter. I'm currently until I can deal with this better driving it in 3rd for the very reason you just mentioned. I dont want to ruin the transmission by overheating it by running it in overdrive.
With any automatic transmission, use of an auxiliary aftermarket transmission cooler will extend the life of the transmission. The cooler it runs, the less fluid degradation there is, even with modern synthetic fluids such as Dexron VI or Mercon V or LV Some vehicles are equipped with auxiliary coolers from the factory, but installation of a larger capacity aftermarket cooler is just added insurance against premature failure, especially behind a high performance engine or when a vehicle is frequently used for towing or hauling heavy loads.
@@markschommer7407 Pretty sure the 2004r wasn't being equipped in '81, I bet yours is a 3-speed th-200c. The speed sensor would be on the back of the speedometer, senses rotation of speedo cable. Not a big deal really if it's a th200c, th250c or th350c, these were all 3-speed. The 4-speed (overdrive) WILL overheat if tq converter lockup isn't working. Lockup occurred above either 35mph, or 45mph in the case of california emissions. The th-200c is sensitive to tv cable adjustment, make sure it's right else it'l burn the clutches in just a few miles.
The th350 had a kickdown cable, it wasn't a tv cable and misadjustment didn't lead to immediate damage. Th400 had electric kickdown, from a switch on the throttle cable.
I bought a 63 F-85 with the baby slim-jim- it quit working soon after I got it-I had an opportunity to rebuild an auto-trans for the first time in my life, including an aluminum part that was a part of the shift mechanism that had broken, possibly from an oil-pressure problem.The small alum-block V-8 was a beautiful motor, and the transmission worked, but it had lots of little parts and seals,(I worked on it on my coffee table in the living room.).I sold it soon after fixing it. I hope it kept running
Many years ago, I owned a 1979 Buick Regal with a 301 Pontiac engine and a TH200 transmission that I bought with less than 13K miles. Without abuse, the transmission failed at approx. 40K miles, and the 301 failed at approx. 65k. AN absolute garbage drive train! Replaced it with a junkyard 350 Pontiac and BOP TH350, and absolutely no problems afterwards.
My Dad had that exact car and power train ... He kept breaking flex plates in the thing, but the transmission never failed. But I have to be honest, the man had two speeds: on, and off. He’d always roar away from stop light like his arse was on fire. That 301 wiped a cam at about 100k miles, but that was par for the coarse with those late 70’s GM cars. I had a ‘78 305 Chevy engine in a Cutlass that did the same thing, right at 100k. Anyway, he gave that Buick to my brother, who drove it until he got too fat to fit behind the wheel. When he sold it, at over 160k miles, it still ran great.
“…you enjoy forms of torture!” 😂 YES, I have rebuilt ONE of those roto-messes and NEVER AGAIN! Very torturous indeed! Took me awhile but I’m finally getting around to watching/listening to this & “best transmissions” porch chat vid’s. So glad you mentioned that incredibly well engineered 425 setup. Was a very interesting combination of tech; I own two 1955 Buick Super Riviera’s, both w/“Switch Pitch” or, as was newly called then, “Variable Pitch” Dynaflow! Also had inherited my grandfather’s 1975 GMC Palm Beach Motorhome with 455 Olds front wheel drive trans setup.. loved that motorhome
Great video fella, one GM transmission that didn’t make the list and was abysmal was the 4T65EV/GT which set fire to many Volvo XC90s with the I6 engine.
Actually, the turbo 350 does have a vacuum modulator valve, as well as a passing gear cable. The difference between a passing gear cable and a throttle valve cable is the transmission with a disconnected passing gear cable will still have a normal life span and shift gears, where the transmission with an unhooked TV cable will not even shift.
The Dynaflow transmission produced from the 1950s to the early 1960s was a two speed that had a huge amount of slippage. Acceleration and fuel economy were both poor with this transmission. It was primarily installed in Buicks until the huge fire at the Hydramatic plant stopped production. It was then installed in various other GM cars until Hydramatic production resumed.
Late in the 1953 model year a number of Oldsmobiles and Cadillacs were shipped with Dynaflow transmissions after a fire at the GM Hydramatic plant. By the beginning of the 1954 model year GM bought another building and was able to restart Hydramatic production.
I had 3 different Buicks with Dynaflow. My 56 was the best one, my 61 was the worst, even worse than my 50. The 56 would actually step out pretty decently. The 61, on the other hand, would ooze forth rather than accelerate. But all three, once they got some momentum, were fantastic cars.
TH 350`s had a modulator, the TV cable was for kickdown/passing gear purposes only. The TH 400 had a modulator as you mentioned but it utilized an electrical kickdown/passing gear, they both performed the same function. The TH 200 was a very good transmission if GM had left it in the Chevette like it was designed for, it was ok even for lightweight V6 applications but they chose to put it in everything across the board which was a very bad decision. Most people aren`t as picky about a silky smooth shift as you are (no offense). Stiffer springs could be added to the servo`s and accumulator`s to soften some of that up if a person wanted to modify things. I never liked any lockup convertor, they only have one tiny clutch disc inside of them. I got old, my memory is starting to fade bad. You`re very knowledgeable and speak pleasantly and your videos are very entertaining. I`m new and have been on a binge watching your content. Thank you for all your efforts. :)
I always had great luck with TH 350's; the older ones would handle more torque than what they typically got credit for. The governors are also pretty simple to modify in order to change the shift points to coincide with more torque once the engine had been modified. TCI shift kit to firm up the shifts, grind most of the weight off the governor spring pads and then start messing with different colored springs... with a little experimenting you could usually get the shift points pretty close to where you wanted them. Great transmission. I'm looking forward to see what Adam has to say when he does GM's best list.
I've got a TH200 in my 82 Camaro. I read about the issues they were having with the larger cars so right after I paid off the car. (4yrs.) I noticed a "slip" and carried it to AAMCO to get it checked. They said a bushing went bad and gave me prices and warranty options. At the top end was $200/lifetime guarantee. Knowing what I had , I went for the lifetime warranty. That transmission has been rebuilt 4 separate times. I asked why we were having so many issues and the mechanic admitted that it was designed for the 4cyl engine and couldn't take the torque of a V8. After the second rebuild asked why we couldn't upgrade to a better transmission. GM stopped installing it in the F bodies but the mechanic refused saying that was the transmission that was warranted and that was the transmission that was going to be rebuilt. So every 4 years or 80K miles they would rebuild it. That was the best $200 I ever spent.
Great presentation again Adam! I don't know what GM was thinking when they began putting the Metric 200 transmissions into larger V8 powered cars. My uncle went through 3 of them in his 81 Caprice coupe back in the day. Even the 82 Trans Am and Camaro had a turbo 200 in it. My high school shop teacher did a transmission swap demo in class on his 82 Trans Am when I was in high school. A Turbo 350 went in it's place. Comparing the size of the output shafts against each other (200 vs 350), it was pretty clear which was the stronger and better choice. Along with the Rotomatic, Chevrolet's Turboglide (1957-62) was complete disaster.
The 58 - 59 Buick Flight-Pitch DynaFlow, similar to Chevy's TurboGlide but larger, was not the greatest either. It wasn't so much unreliable as it was so slippery that it made the "regular" Dynaflop seem fantastic by comparison. GM, unfortunately, has done some pretty stupid things, things that the haters immediately latched onto.
The 82 trans am and z28 with the crossfire engine-th200 trans was an INTERESTING combo. I know it's fiction but a season 1 episode of knight rider kitt towed a car and broke the alpha circuit in the transmission.
It was probably like 87-88 but a buddy got the b+m th-200 to th-350 conversion kit for his 82 firebird,you supply the trans. Can't remember what was in the kit though, maybe a different flex plate and maybe a trans mount and a few other goodies. I fondly installing a few of their shift improver kits that always came with a bent drill bit.
Bought a 2 year old 91 Corsica, it ran fine. Shifted smooth. After 4 months had just got back from a long trip and Trans died. Took it to a local dealer and they had it for about 2 weeks went and picked it up. They showed me the parts and labor and I thought I was going to be screwed, but they said no charge. It was covered by some class action suit
Great video. As a kid growing up I remember the GM Powerglide (2-speed automatic) and the legendary 3-speed Hydra-matic which was the state of the art cutting-edge transmission in any make. I do have a soft spot in my heart for the Chrysler torqueflite however. Keep these wonderful chats coming!
I had a 1970 Bel Air with a powerglide transmission . Never had a problem with it the whole time I had the car. I kept the fluid changed on schedule and it was just fine. The problem was the Illinois winters and the road salt finally did the car in. I do take that back. Shortly after I bought the car I realized that the mechanism that allowed me to put the car in “Park “ wasn’t functioning properly and when I put the car in Park, the car would begin to coast and I had to get a mechanic to fix it. That was the only major problem I had with it. But I did find out that the emergency brake worked. 😐
Learned to drive in a '72 Chrysler Newport with a Torqueflite A727. Not silky smooth, but tough as nails. Lots of trailer towing vacations. Nine years and 136,000 miles later, the original ATF was still as pink as new fluid in the can. Guess it ran pretty cool!
@@billyjoejimbob56 By then did they still have the push buttons to shift the transmission? I remember that Chrysler had the push button transmission in the late 50s and early 60s. I don’t know when they stopped making it.
Agree on the Slim Jim’s but you forgot the two very worst. Buick’s 1961-1963 Dual Paths and the miserable Turboglides that Chevy used from 1957-1961. These were so bad that most were converted to Powerglides. Transmission shops HATED these two transmissions!
In high school I owned a 1961 Impala convertible with the 348. The previous owner had converted it to a three speed floor shift manual, but (as I recall) the original PRNDGr shift quadrant indicator remained on the steering column. I was told this meant that the original transmission had been the ill-fated Turboglide, a transmission that was available in all V8-powered 1957-1961 Chevrolet models except the Corvette. My understanding is that these transmissions were so problematic that they were routinely replaced with Powerglide transmissions.
Yeah the Gr was like a switch pitch converter . It would really rev up if you floored it but you hardly went anywhere untill it switched back to a normal converter and low gear of the two speed trans.
I had a '60 Impala with the 348 and Turboglide transmission. Engine ran strong and the Turboglide was one of the few that actually worked as intended. Not the strongest off the line but had an amazing top end with the "infinitely variable" trans. I could peg the speedometer (120+) and that 348 was just humming along, working no harder than a "normal" car running at 70 MPH. Had a lot of fun playing around with the old TG.
I had several 200 Metric 3 speed automatic transmissions backed behind Old's 307's and Pontiac 301's. The big trick here was upgrading to a newer Dexron fluid and installing an external oil cooler. After those upgrades I never had an issue even with well over 100K miles.
I had a 1977 Pontiac Bonneville with a 301 with a 200 Metric transmission. It was great at first and had 22 mpg highway performance. It went out after 3 years and 30,000 miles. I replaced it with a Turbo 350 and never had another problem, but highway mileage dropped to 18 mpg.
I so agree about the GM THM 200 transmission. I bought new a 1979 Pontiac Grand Am with the 301-4bbl V8. It was rated at 150hp & 240 lb ft. of torque. The "200" number means it is rated for engines "up to" 200 lb ft of torque. Doesn't take a genius to know what will happen when you put it with an engine making MORE torque. At 31,000 miles the transmission did a swan song- of course the car is out of warranty. Because of that incident I have NEVER bought another GM car new again. Let that be a lesson to all the autombile "bean counters" out there who try to cheapen their products to pad the bottom line for investors.
The THM200 was perfectly fine when paired with low output 4s and some of the smaller v6s. The problem is when they placed behind engines it was never designed to handle.
The Slim Jim was awful. I owned a ‘64 Grand Prix with one. The spectacular drop in RPM on the 1-2 upshift is jarring, as is the jump in RPM on the 2-1 downshift. Even in the ‘70s, it was hard to find a transmission shop that would work on them (and knew how to).
I have a 62 Grand Prix with a slim Jim. I live in a town with about five or six guys in their 70s who used to drag race Pontiacs back in the day. They loved the slim Jim because of that one- two shift you didn't break the tires loose when it shifted because there's such a huge RPM drop.
The issue with lockup solenoids you’re describing is one I’m familiar with. My friend had a 2004 GMC Envoy which ended up getting totaled last year. There were a few times when that car would stall out in drive, even from normal-ish driving (he is hard on his cars).
I had a 1992 Lumina coupe with the 3T40 and the lockup solenoid got stuck on it. I replaced it myself and it was a surprisingly easy fix! I only paid $400 for the car at the time so I didn't care if it was successful or not. But anyways the 3t40 coupled with the 3.1L MPFI V6 was decent. Good passing power for he most part but man was second gear LONG!
I had a 92 Beretta with a lockup solenoid that started sticking. When I looked at the procedure for repairing it, it seemed like the whole left side of the car would have to come apart! I just unhooked it and drove it like that until it finally went to the scrapyard. I put more than 100,000 miles on that car over 7 years, it really did me right even though it completely fell apart by the end. I never got a Check Engine light and only lost 1 or 2 mpg for disconnecting the solenoid.
I'm surprised the TH180 (or as it was known here in Australia as the Tri-Matic) didn't make the list. Fine behind a four cylinder or weak 6 cyclinder but as soon as it was put behind even a low output v8 it became a Traumatic rather than Trimatic!
And still " Traumatic " behind a 202 , especially if towing , and when combined with the sixes reputation for , blowing the tops off pistons, shearing the gear off the distributor, the fibre camshaft gear falling apart, the harmonic balancer rubber disintegrating , axles snapping , and thirsty with lackluster power , what a great deal .😂
@@garycamara9955 Trimatic's were used in Australian Holdens , but it would appear from the comments that they were also in America under a different name T180? , I'm not sure.
@@barrycuda3769 never heard of s T180 either. But I generally ignore automatic transmissions. I like a more performance car. Performance cars need sn actual transmission.
The lockup transmissions were not unreliable, only the lockup solenoid that would stick & fail to release. The cure was free & easy. Unplug the solenoid. Now you're left with a rather normal transmission. I did it a lot. Cost about 1 mpg.
My dad bought a 1961 Pontiac Catalina 4-door with 389 2-barrel and the Slim Jim automatic in 1961. He is dead now, but my mom still owns the car. It has only ~58,000 miles on it. Still has the plastic protective covers on the seats that came on it at delivery. Original wiper blades. Original radiator and heater hoses. Been garaged it's entire life.
Spot on with regards to the slim Jim. The main reason 61-64 Olds and Pontiac are so rare to see. Most got scrapped after owners got tired of the transmission troubles. It’s a shame because they are beautiful cars. Talked to a transmission rebuilder who was around back then and he said they didn’t work right when they were new.
My dad ordered a '63 Catalina with a three-on-the-tree... maybe the only one ever built! When he traded it four years later, a used car shopper paid the dealer a deposit for it and was there to pick it up a month later when we got the new car. That didn't make sense to me at the time... but reading about the dreaded Slim Jim decades later... now it makes sense!
My two worst. 1978 Grand Prix. It had to exceed 45 mph to upshift from 2 to 3. The dealer insisted that was normal. I got really pissed around the 4th visit to the dealer and insisted they show me the service bulletins. One bulletin said the cure was to remove a valve (I don't remember what precisely). After that its shifts were reasonable. The other was in a 1979 Cutlass. Tranny failed at about 60,000 miles. The rebuild was rough and failed in month 13. The replacement for the rebuild had to exceed 20 mph to shift from 1 to 2. After those two I stayed away from GM for a decade. Neither of these was abused. I've always driven like an old man, and I've never had another transmission problem among 20 new cars across half a dozen makes.
I really enjoy your vids! Over the years many various collector cars have passed through my hands. When I think of the Slim-Jim I am reminded of a '64 Cutlass Convertible. Had terrific torque out of first, and a lousy up-shift. Thanks for sharing your experiences!
At 16, I inherited my dad's low-mileage 1963 Grand Prix with Roto-Hydramatic.The transmission was exactly as you describe. Fortunately, my much older half-brother told my mom that was "too much car" for me at that age. It was sold, and I managed to con my way into a '64 GTO 4-speed. (Hint: those cars were titled as Tempests.) The GP's have always held a soft spot in my heart (and head), and I've owned a second '63 and a '64. Out of those 3 cars, I replaced 3 transmissions. I had a friend with a breathed-on 394 in a '64 Olds Jetstar I. He went through innumerable transmissions. At 68, I'm a life-long muscle car guy, but would love one more '63 GP with a 421 and 4-speed manual. BTW, another glaring fault of the roto was the ratio spread between 1st and 2nd. Between the lockup and the gear spread, at half throttle or more the engine would lug and rattle (knock), no matter how good the gas, etc. A shame, because I particularly like the Pontiac and Olds "personal luxury cars" between '61 and 64. Another well-informed video on your part.
Another great video Adam. Some of these have been mentioned below, but don't forget the '58-'59 Buick Triple Turbine Flight Pitch Dynaflow (MUCH less reliable than the standard twin-turbine Dynaflow that was available at the same time). The '57-'61 Chevy Turboglide was based on the same principles (variable pitch stators instead of shifts). Many of the Turboglides got replaced with Powerglides. The Buick Dual Path Dynaflow used only in the '61-'63 Special/Skylark was strange in that it had planetary gears inside of the torque converter. Not sure about reliability on those, but it is a strange design.
It was designed for the Special of 1961-1963. When the Special became an intermediate in 1964 they decided Dual Path was too weak and got a version of the Powerglide for the Special. My Dad's 1963 Special never had a problem with the Dual Path. I think they had trouble with service for Dual Path because it was such a rare transmission.
My parents had the dubious honor of owning cars with one of the best GM transmissions and one of the worst. A 1960 Oldsmobile 88 with the Hydramatic and a 1964 Oldsmobile 88 with the Slim Jim. Mot sure if you're aware of it but the Hydramatic had 4 forward gears. The first gear only got the car moving and then shifted immediately. You could not manually shift to first.
Great stuff . I attended 440T4 Training in Clarence NY at the GM training center . We drove a Buick C around some and also monitored full throttle upshifts ....and they were horrible . I repaired and replaced countless 440T4 trans-axles . Also the TH350 has a modulator valve and a detent cable , not a throttle valve cable . The 4T60E was a better trans-axle but I also repaired or replaced many of these . My favorites are TH350 , TH400 and Powerglide . Love your content
Agreed to all. We had an '87 Cutlass Ciera Brougham with 3.8 liter engine and 440 T4, overall great car which went 280,000 miles before I gave it to a neighbor. After the second trans I installed a cooler and did fluid changes every 12,000 miles. Trans was always good after that, still miss that car, all accessories still worked and interior was beautiful.
@@genehart261 A bodies with the 3.8 were great cars and fun to drive . The 3.3 variant was a good choice too . I had a 3.3 Cutlass Ciera with a 125C transaxle and loved it .
Here on Oz, GM Holden had the Tri-Matic, which I believe was our own evolution of the TH180. It gained the nickname "Traumatic" for a reason. They were found behind anything built here by GM except the imported small block (which got the TH350). The list includes: Isuzu/Holden Gemini (ie Chevette) Holden 6 Holden Starfire (a Holden 6 with 2 cylinders removed) Holden 253 and 308/304 V8s And... Toyota Corona These were originally designed to work behind 4-cylinders, but were pushed into service with 5.0 V8s and had a hard time dealing with that torque. Over the years, trans shops worked out ways to hotrod them and could be built into a decent trans, and were often preferred on drag cars over TH350s for their lower internal losses.
You are correct about the 440T4. I had a family member that bought an 1985 Oldsmobile 98 in the spring of 1984. The first transmission did not last a week. That car went through seven transmission's under GM warranty. The latest version, number seven lasted a while. Number eight was done at a tranny shop and he got rid of it shortly afterwards. It soured the relationship with the buyer and GM as he went to Ford products and never left Ford. Plate C
@@andrewdonohue1853 Absolutely!! The front drive Olds was replaced with a Crown Victoria. Prior to the front driver, he had always had rear drive Olds and Chevy's and never had a problem.
I purchased a 1980 Buick Electra diesel at a GMAC auction in 1981, and was surprised to find it equipped with the THM 200. The lockup converter ceased locking up about a year later - to the slight detriment of highway economy and serenity - and I was told that this was an early sign of impending failure, but fortunately that didn't materialize in the few additional years I owned it. The shifts were indeed more noticeable than expected from a Turbo Hydra-matic. I was told it had been specified for the car to keep it in a lower EPA weight class.
At worst the slippage at highway speeds might... MIGHT cause extra wear to the clutches. In general these days all new transmissions use a table in the TCM (Transmission control module) to apply slip in all gears. They clutches wear sooner but the shifts are far softer since the transmission isn't under constant load when it shifts.
4L60? Surprised I don’t see that on here. I’ve had a few. They work fine, until it decides it’s “break time” and you suddenly have multiple neutrals. Also, disabling TC lockup will also run you slightly higher RPMs at highway speeds, so if you’re someone that flies down the roads, keep that in mind.
I had an Aussie Toyota Lexcen (Australian market Holden Commodore rebadge -due to a model sharing agreement) with 3800 Buick based V6 and 4L60e and it gave sterling service up until 308,000km (totaled in an accident) despite driving it on low fluid for a little while -your could hear it sloshing
@@shannonwilkerson3919 my friend and I have had a few used trucks and gone through a few 4L60s. Granted, we do drive them hard, but we’ve had other vehicles that have held up to the hard driving much better than those transmissions did. Most recent one was sometime last year. Went to pass a semi, and suddenly we have several neutrals.
Worst trans I ever had was a slushbox. It was built for racing in my 66 big block Impala. I went through 3 of them and finally installed a Muncie M-22 rock crusher. No more problems. Very fast.
I’ll go ahead and guess that your favorite is the Switch Pitch Turbo 400.. Which was behind one of my favorite anachronistic engines of all time, the Buick Nailhead.. The Nailhead of course, was let down for years by a transmission that could have made this list, the DynaSlush.
Great Video , the T 200 we used to call the Beer Can transmission . We just had to replace the torque converter on a 2017 Colorado because it was slipping at 75,000 miles . Also another crappy transmission is the old Turboglides on late 50s early 60s Chevrolets.
Interesting. I've owned many GM cars over the past 40 years, and my dad owned many before that, but we somehow managed to avoid all these "worst" GM automatics. We had a 1971 Biscayne with the Turbo350, we had 1992 and 2000 Bonnevilles with the 4-speed, and I've had several Chevy pick-ups with 4- and 6-speed THM, and they've all been great. Just lucky, I guess!
I have one to add to your list. The automatic in the 56 Cadillacs was notorious for unreliability- I had one and in the course of several years had to have it rebuilt at least twice. I should also point out the 56 Caddy was notorious for engine failure- again personal experience
Holden came out with the Trimatic in the 70s and it was used from 1.6 litre Geminis (similar to Chevette) to 5.0 V8 Premiers, Kingswoods and early Commodores and were sometimes called the traumatic because of their reputation for being fragile. I've been told they were not as bad as some made out and were fine for regular driving but would fall apart if you modified the engines too much. Higher end models here like the Statesman used imported TH400s and 350s from the USA.
The Holden Trimatic was used in the South African Chev Kommando which was based on the Australian Kingswood. That box was a dog compared to the Chrysler Torque Flite in the Valiant.
My understanding (which may be wrong) is that the Holden Trimatic is the same as or related to the GM Turbo Hydramatic 180. It was used on Holdens with 4,6 and V8 engines. The shifts were very clunky in my dad's new '74 HQ 308 Premier, in fact he hated the transmission. Apparently though over time it was modified and improved so much that drag racers preferred it over TH400's. Mind you it was probably for the stoutness and strength rather than smoothness.
About the lock-up solenoids, I used to have to shift into neutral while coasting towards a light in order to stop, and would often have trouble dropping into drive and pulling away without killing the engine in one of my parent's GMs, back in the day.
The story of the GM 8 speed 8L45 and 8L90 transmissions is an ongoing soap opera. I have a GMC Canyon with the 8L45 so I watch every episode and have developed a lot of new forum friends who have these transmissions. The best I can determine is that these transmissions were originally released with Dexron 6 fluid and which was an immediate disaster. Mobile 1 developed Mobil 1 Synthetic LV ATF HP fluid that had a black label and was GM Part Number 19355656 that seemed to be somewhat successful in solving the problems, but not completely in some instances. Mobile 1 researchers later determined that the root cause of the problem was the torque converter’s inability to tolerate any moisture in the transmission fluid. They then developed Mobil 1 Synthetic LV ATF HP transmission fluid (Blue Label - GM Part Number 19417577) and recommended that use of the black label Mobil 1 Synthetic LV ATF HP fluid (GM Part Number 19355656) be discontinued. I am sure this story is not over.
That fluid change as mentioned for those transmission shift quality issues, reminds me what was happening to the transfer cases GM was using in their mid-late 90's full sized, mid-sized SUV and pickups. K, T models. With the 4 button electric shift ( Auto 4WD) and AWD units. New Process 136, 236, 246 models, as the fluid aged it would allow the center drive clutch to "shudder " causing a slip-grab feel when the vehicle (Auto 4WD) would take off from a stop, with AWD models they too had that same issue, but also when making very tight turns either left or right ( parking, drive-thru, etc ) felt as if the vehicle was binding up not wanting to move very easily because that center front drive clutch was not slipping as if was designed to do in those situations. Turns out that concern was caused the fluid (Auto trak 1) which was red in color, breaking down losing its friction modifying properties. GM had released a TSB (i dont remember the number) stating that flushing out of the transfer case with the new fluid (Auto Trak 2, which at that time was only available at the dealers for about $15 a qt and took a minmum of 4 qts for the repair, still relativity inexpensive compared to a unit replacement) was blue in color and have better friction modifying properties allowing for the necessary slippage to occur in certain situations and improving the overall drivability. Some of those repairs were done under warranty or customer satisfaction policies.
My first car was a 1977 Chevy Impala 2-door with a transplanted 350 c.i. 4-bolt main/4-bbl Quadrajet engine from a van, but they didn't change the transmission, which happened to be a TH200. Being an 18-year-old kid, I did not treat it kindly, so in the almost 4 years I owned it, I went through 2 of those transmissions. I later learned that a short-tail TH350 is the exact same length and is a direct swap. I kind of wish I would have known that in the early 1990s. It was still a fun car, as I could smoke Mustangs of the era off the line, but it did only get 10 MPG on a good day. Thankfully, this was the time of sub-$1 gas, so no big deal.
My parents bought a new 1964 Pontiac Grand Prix in late 1963. Yes, it had the Roto Hydramatic, and my parents used the car to tow travel trailers. The second vacation we went on with the car towing a trailer, the transmission got so hot that it would blow seals out of the transmission. After that, we would haul utility trailers or a boat with it. That transmission kept on working however. It started slipping quite badly when the car had over 200,000 miles on it. I am amazed that it lasted so long.
The 1961 Buick Invicta was the best looking car that year. Even today, I look back and most cars from that era look dated, but that Invicta is fresh and modern looking ... IMO, of course ...
That was great to watch and learn. G.M.H. in Australia used the Hydramatic in the EK/EJ/EH series cars from about 1961 to 1964. They could have been the Roto version someone out there may know. My family had an EJ Hydramatic bought new in 1963, it was trouble free but certainly not smooth and seemed to have enormous drops in torque between changes it was 3 level or 3 speed. Do you know or have heard of this transmission Adam? It was also used in some English Vauxhalls of the same era.
If you search "old car brochures" there should be some old Holden material out there to view. Holden apparently did use the smaller light duty version of the "Roto" (the one that would have been used in the "compact" F-85 line) from about 1961 to perhaps as late as '65, even though the smaller unit was not used in American GM vehicles beyond '63 & the larger unit was dropped after '64 in the big cars. I believe you will also find they went into Vauxhalls & Opels. It seems that by about 65 (66 for sure) that Holden revamped their engine line-up with new engines derived from the new generation of Chevy "6s" that were introduced in the early 60s & they backed those engines with, you guessed it, Powerglide! (On the American Hydra-Matics the "S" range on the selector was billed as "Super" range. Holden liked to call it "Special Intermediate" range. I recall Holden extolling the virtues of performance & control provided by that intermediate range. Funny how when they switched to Powerglide having that intermediate gear was no longer something of significance!) That's advertising for you... By late '60s or early '70s Holden introduced Tri-Matic which I believe was Australian built but I'm not sure if it was their design or derived from US THMs. By '69, Opel, at least for the smaller "Kadett", was using a small lightweight THM 180 built in France. Probably easy shipping to England or Germany. Hardly anyone in US is even aware of it's existence. Never went in any American cars that I know of. So in 1971 if you bought an Opel from a Buick dealer you could get a 3spd THM, but if you got a Vega from your Chevy dealer you still had to settle for 2spd Powerglide!
@@DejaView Hi Dennis that about sums it up. I do know Holden dropped Hydramatic with the introduction of The HD series in 1965 Holdens, which had the larger 149 cubic inch and 179 cubic inch blocks, these engines were also introduced in the previous EH series but were then using Hydramatic The HD and HR series, this series had an increase of capacity to 161 and 186 that followed changed to Powerglide. The Vauxhalls of that era imported in CKD kits to Australia from the U.K. were 2.6 litre six cylinders and Hydramatic was standard on the top line Cresta, they were not big sellers.Thank you for your input great to share this knowledge with the great unwashed lol.
@@DejaView An interesting bit of trivia about the THM180. When the markets moved to 4-speed ATs, GM took the overdrive sub-assembly from its THM200-4R and adapted it to the 180, thus creating the 4L30-E. I believe it went into some Isuzu built compact trucks. It was also purchased by BMW and installed in 3 series cars for the US market.
We had a '92 Cavalier with sticking lockup solenoid. Dealer seemed stunned that I would ask them to simply disconnect it. The car was worth $500 at best and I think they quoted at least that to fix it.
My parents had a 92 grand am, when we started having problems with the lockup selinoid we wired it to a switch so we could manually turn it on and off.
Pontiac even put that damm ROTO in my GranPrix; the shifter got so hot pulling a boat trailer had to use a glove. Life span ? very short. Now my '62 Bonneville had the latest and greatest 4-S Hydramatic and it moved that big cruizer around with precision.
The 700 won't stay in overdrive towing, as a matter of fact they kicked down too easily in my opinion. And in overdrive, there's no torque converter heat to kill the tranny, but in fourth gear, the torque converter slippage does heat up the tranny, and they weren't given sufficient cooling to account for this. The actual problem was the shift was too soft 3-4, and the hunting while Towing and going up and down hills, that's what actually killed the tranny, that shift and too small clutch plates. You should watch Richard at precision transmissions on ytube. He's the expert
I have been building transmissions for 25 years, I have built a few hundred 700s. There is nothing wrong with pulling a trailer with the trans in overdrive. The problem is the wheezing engines they put in front of the early 700s. The engine barely has the torque to pull a heavy truck empty, put some weight behind it and the trans constantly upshifts/downshifts, overheating the fluid. Another problem is the soccer mom, girlie man shift quality designed into the transmission. For maximum durability, you want a transmission to shift with a solid “thud”. You don’t want it to slide into gear, you need to actually FEEL the shift. Too many people think if can feel the transmission change gears, it shifts too hard. You don’t necessarily need a trans that shifts hard enough to knock the dash out of the truck, but the slippery-sliding shifts book the fluid, glaze the clutches, it’s all downhill after that.
@@mattrodgers4878 I just drove a 2019 Suburban to Florida. The 1 2 shift takes about 3 seconds, no joke! It literally sliiiiiiidesssss into 2nd, a simple reprogramming the computer would help soooooooo much. It doesn't exhibit any of the shudder bump lockup issues associated with the allegedly contaminated oi, that GM replaces with Mobil 1 full syn oil. I'll be changing it for Amsoil. The '19 got 30.3mpg thru Georgia @ 70-75, egg under toe. My last '95 6.5TD 2500 4x4 4L80E has 309k and still shifts well, aside from a 3 second delay into reverse, NotWithStanding lengthening the reverse band apply pin with a 3/16th blob of weld. 700s, like ALL tranny's need to be firmed up, including lockup! LONG LIVE THE SHIFT KIT!
THANKS FOR POSTING I always learn something. 67 years old and have owned some of the cars you show started driving 1972 first car 67 Ford Fairlane station wagon
Nobody likes to bash gm's shortcomings more than GM lovers. For all the great guys they made, there sure were a fair share of misses. Do you have any experience with the late 50s, early 60s Chevy turboglide? I've heard it's a bit of a stinker, but I'm interested if you have any insight. Also, while I hope the winter weather breaks soon and we can get back to the reviews, but I'd enjoy videos going over some of the cars you've previously owned and talking about the pros and cons. Sort of like a post-ownership review from the porch. Just an idea. These list videos have honestly been great and I've learned from each one!
As I understand, Chevrolet gave up on the turboglide and wouldn't service them or sell individual replacement parts. Their recommended service part was a brand new Powerglide.
The Turboglide was probably the worst of the worst in GM transmissions during the late 50s. It was so bad and so prone to failure that GM dealerships would purposefully break during servicing to generate warranty revenue. It was very easy to do; rev the engine in neutral, slam the shifter into the Grade Retard (GR) position and then into reverse and accelerate. Those transmissions were replaced under warranty with the much more dependable 2 speed Powerglide. The Turboglide was failure prone and very difficult to fix and I think GM was glad to see it disappear. The Turboglide was produced from 1957 to 1962.
What's great about these porch chats is that you are covering topics that are interesting and are not talked about on other auto sites and you do so with some amazing depth of knowledge. Maybe it didn't have problems but I sure hated the two speed powerglides. I had a 69 Camaro with a 307 and a two speed powerglide, what an awful engine-transmission combo.
With these transmissions mentioned, a manual transmission (if offered) would be the way to go. I have always contended a truck isn't a truck ULESS it has a manual transmission!
A manual trans, to me, is better suited for trucks. Better engine braking, less chance of problems PROVIDED the operator(s) know how to drive it properly.
@@michaelbenardo5695 Yes. Back when I was 17 or so, I had to sometimes drive the small tow truck associated with the family business. It was a 1949 Ford Duelly 1 ton. My step father took out the flat head and installed a 292 Y-block. The transmission did NOT have synchro-mesh so one had to double clutch with every shift. That trained me well on how to drive a manual transmission. Try pulling a load up a 7% grade from a dead stop while having to double clutch it all the way up the hill.
Car manufacturers know how to mess up manual transmissions too--too small,too light duty,clutch too low a capacity to hold full engine torque at low RPM--(a weak clutch might have been used in the hope of not overloading the transmission internals when the clutch was released too fast
@@davidpowell3347 True, Japanese cars used to have really bad clutches - 50,000 miles and gone, whereas a good clutch can last close to 100,000 miles. 56 Mercurys had a weak manual transmission, the few that were built with one.
Oh i disagree! Just take any of the newer mid sized suvs from GM. 50-60k miles and they are cooked. Check the salvage/ recyclers and you will see many of these junked because of the transmission and because they are often not rebuildable owners just scrap them for steel price. Lots of gm customers are getting burnt so bad that I do not see Gm moving into the 2030’s.
Love your Channel. I had a 64 Dynamic 88 and a 61 Cadillac both with the slim jim transmission. They were both terrible Transmissions I replace the one on the Catalina and the Oldsmobile used to Ping the engine would knock going from first to second because the second gear appeared so much taller in 2nd gear than first. The engine in the Catalina went through two timing chains before I got rid of it and it was probably the worst car I ever owned
Our '62 Pontiac would spill transmission fluid on the exhaust manifold when in passing gear. That beautiful 2 door Catalina caught fire and burned up because of that transmission.
The 61 cadillac used the same 4 speed dual coupling hydramatic as my 58 cadillac. I know, because we owned a 61 cadillac Deville for about 10 years. The 58 cadillac has a 365 v8, the 61 had a 390..maybe, your 61 cadillac had a power train swap??
The Cad only had the 4 speed HydraMatic. If your's had the Roto Hydra, somebody swapped it in. It wasn't built that way, as it was no good, just as you said.
You're very entertaining and knowledgeable without being judgy, it's a great lunch break for me to enjoy your posts! I am in the middle of rebuilding my C6 this week.
Thats an easy job. You can use the planetary gearset from an E4OD if you want to get wide ratio with a lower first and second gear. It slips right in but you will also need to use a 1977 or newer forward clutch drum.
Can anybody tell me the reason why quite a bit of auto transmissions in 60s used 1:1 fluid couplings instead of torque converters? Mercedes also did the same in 60s but then went to a TC Auto in 70s. I always wondered the pros and cons of using fluid coupling over a torque converter
@@Adrian-mq5ld They are NOT magic or voodoo, and yes..you CAN learn to build them. Ive been building them since the 80s. Not sure if this is out of print now but its a good reference "Automotive Transmissions and Power Trains"...McGraw-Hill Book Co. I learned auto and manual trans rebuilding from 2 people..an old school transmission builder and my ex-girlfriend who had a degree in automotive technology. Unfortunately, she could also single handedly cause Anheuser Busch stock to rise.
@@donreinke5863 Correct, they are not magic or anything else other than mechanical/hydraulic. I started back in the 80's as well. Stop doing rebuilds for most general cars and started only doing racing transmissions and Engines. My first experience was with engines with my Dad back in the mid 70's. It wasn't until we build a 64 dodge 330 polara for racing that i began to work on transmissions. Keep it clean and in order and you will do fine. Also just like Engines, once you have worked on one, the principles will work on any of them. Nice to see other builders out here.
Basically any automatic transmission before they managed to figure out how to get four or more gears out of them were pretty bad. They may have been robust and smooth shifting, but in terms of practicality, they were terrible. Your engine had to be massively over-powered to cope with the poor power band optimization, so you ended up needing to burn way more fuel than you would have liked and you needed pretty large engines that then had to scream at highway speeds because you just didn't have enough gearing to make them usable at those speeds. Some people got really clever by basically tacking an extra gear or two onto the end with overdrive, but that's not really a great solution either, because they frequently relied on manual activation. I remember being so surprised the first time I drove my Mercedes with a 5-speed auto after having a VW golf with a 4-speed auto and realizing that it could happily cruise at 80MPH at only around 3200RPM instead of screaming at nearly 6k RPM. Nowadays I have a Ford Fusion AWD with a 6-speed auto and it doesn't even break a sweat at 80MPH because it's got gearing for days. Even at over 100MPH it's barely into the 3.5k RPM range. The 5-speed in my Mercedes ran out of gearing and torque at around 136 and I still haven't had a good opportunity to find out how fast my Ford will go, but it's definitely faster than that. It has absolutely no problems hitting that speed and is far from running out of torque or gearing. I just don't have a long enough abandoned stretch of highway in my area to really hammer it. I suspect it'll have a governor to keep it under either 155 or 165. As for terrible transmissions within my lifetime: Ford's 6-speed that they used on the Focus and Fiesta during the 2010's; Nissan's early attempts at a CVT, particularly those used in the Murano; the transmission that Volkswagen used on their 2.5L and some 2.0L variants from the mid-2000's on to around 2018; and pretty much any of the clutchless manual transmissions. Ford still hasn't adequately addressed the known problems associated with that transmission, nor the CVT used in the Ford 500 or the transmission issues that many of their vehicles from around 2008 suffered. If you've got a Ford from around that time and the transmission goes, unless you are really attached to that car, just write it off. You'll spend more than the car is worth to fix it or replace the transmission. As for the Nissan CVTs, the early models are trash and destroy their pulleys quite readily, particularly if you drive aggressively, though newer revisions are significantly more reliable and can offer some decent fuel savings by keeping the vehicle in the power band effectively. As for VW's transmission woes, as far as I can tell, the transmissions tend to become noisy and less prone to shifting perfectly at higher speeds, but they don't necessarily fail catastrophically. The clutchless manuals are just a nuisance and tend to have weak syncros because they're a weird amalgamation, but if you want to shift yourself without needing to learn how to heel-toe a clutch, then they do still work. Just be gentle with them and don't try to short-shift or they'll complain and die. I think Toyota, Honda, and Mercedes probably make some of the most reliable automatics that I've had any experience with, though Nissan's actual gear-shifted automatics were also very good. I also really like the newest generation of 10-speed automatics, since they are a completely different design to the old 5 and 6-speed behemoths that were frequently larger than the engine itself.
I had a 78 Grand Prix which I grew to hate, partly because the first transmission, a TH 200, failed after about 20,000 miles. Foolishly, after the Grand Prix, I gave GM one more chance and bought an 89 Olds Cutlass Ciera, which was my third GM car. It had a number of problems too. After that, I swore I would never buy a GM vehicle again, and I have stuck to that oath. In listening to Scotty Kilmer every day, I'm thinking that if I buy another vehicle, it just might have to be a Toyota.
Way back I had a 1980 Olds Cutlass 5.7L Diesel. The previous owner rigged a foot operated dimmer switch to control the torque converter lockup. That was a nice improvement. Sometimes I would forget to unlock the converter when coming to a full stop. The locked up converter would actually stall the diesel. I guess that the TCC was FUBAR. As long as I remembered to unlock it, everything was good. I only paid $500 for it.
20:12 To fix this problem I used a on/off switch, that I put in the dashboard. On the highway, I turned the switch on. Around town I turned the switch Off. Was a beautiful Oldsmobile Delta 88.
One that you overlooked is the 4L60E, they functioned and that is about it. This is a typical GM setup, the transmission was JUST built to handle the power attached. If attached to a 4.3 you were OK but if you had a 5.3 sorry about your luck. If you kept out of it would function for a long time, but if you for example pulled a 2K trailer or put your foot in it with a 5.3 you got familiar with the transmission shop. I generally stay away from GM vehicles simply because of their automatic transmission issues, even their best transmissions are inferior to that of Ford or Chryslers. Yes both of the other brands have made some not so good transmissions, but it seems that GM has a reputation of marginal is good enough.
TH350 andTH400 are tough transmissions that will go the distance and take heavy use. The th200 is popular amongst drag racers because it's very light. They replace the internals using hardened billet parts to strengthen them.
I managed to screw up the Powerglide in my grandmother's '65 Impala 283 V8 by driving like an idiot. My first car was an '65 Oldsmobile Dynamic 88 convertible with the 425 High Compression V8 and Turbo Hydramatic. That drive train was impossible to kill, because I abused the crap out of it and it never failed.
@@jamesfrench7299 Probably because I drove it like it was a manual tranny and I was at the drag strip. Never underestimate the ability of a teenager to destroy anything.
@@jamesfrench7299 Yeah, it's not like it was destroyed because it wasn't in the shop too long and was fixed good as new. Unfortunately she had an accident and totaled it, then she got a '68 Caprice with a 327 V8 that was pretty nice too.
I watch all of your videos. Keep up the technical discussions. They are very educational. My dad owned a number of Oldsmobiles from the mid fifties to the mid seventies. He had a 1962 Dynamic 88. They were all awesome cars.
I had to figure out that tcc on my 1987 caprice with the 200R4 with a custom after market vacuum switch I installed on the intake manifold,it had a small Allen key for adjustment,after plugging off the break pedal vacuum tcc switch the transmission worked awesome just with this vacuum/electric switch.
An honorable mention to this list has to go to the THM125. Many a N car had them repeatedly fail on the Milford transmission test hill when we ran them both in pre-production prototypes and later early production durability testing. They ran exceptionally hot. We called them our modern day slush boxes because of their sloppy, very slippery shifts. In later years, much like many other GM malaise era products/components they improved greatly. Again, learned a lot from another one of your porch chats.
In 1983, I rented a Cavalier (Cadavelier?) in California. Thought it would be fun to climb the infamous Grapevine Hill. The THM125 downshifted to 2nd and at nearly full throttle the 2nd gear band began slipping. The engine would runaway up to redline, trans would upshift to 3rd, engine would bog down, and the whole cycle would repeat, over and over and over. A miracle that I didn't toast the transmission before reaching the top. Some used Cavalier buyer got screwed.
Interesting comments! I have a 1982 6000 with a thm125c (45k). It shifts well enough but is not as nice as my 1985 6000 with 235k. Both are all original still having only had fluid and filter changes.
I have to agree with you about the Roto-Hydramatic. A real dog. I never saw a early 60’s Oldsmobile with one those catastrophes in it that didn’t need a new tranny. Loved the early Hydramatic!
The fluid change helped my 2015 Yukon Denali. It solved the washboard condition but It still had rough shifts. Really hard for my 16 year old to learn with. That was the main reason I traded it. It did seem durable though and towed trailers really well.
Adam - very interesting topic - held my interest in learning more about the behind the scenes shenanigans lurking in the automotive industry. Looking forward to the next one!
I grew up in the early 70's and, my father being a Chevy man, I had a lot of ride time with the Turbo Hydromatics, and yes, when you're used to those transmissions, the Ford C4 shifts are, to put it mildly, noticeable.
The key to success with the 440T4 is the use of an auxiliary cooler and regular fluid changes. I have 4 GM cars with them. Keep them cool. I also welded on a drain plug since the filter doesn’t need to be constantly changed. New fluid every 10,000 miles or so and no messy pan removal.
The 6-speed 2014 Silverado transmission also suffered from poor initial fluid quality. I had the local Chevy dealer replace the fluid at 70,000 miles and glad that I didn't wait longer.
The Chevrolet Turboglide was used for 5 years. They should have incorporated an interlock to prevent throttle input while selector was in Hr (1st part of 57) and Gr. By the time the engineers had chased all the problems the damage was done as far as sales.
To clarify, the TV cable on the TurboHydromatic 350 is only for kickdown, not shift points. The vacuum modulator controlled that.
Or as palooka joe admin. say
..."let me be clear" as mud 😶
The tv cable controls line pressure.
Governor pressure as well.
@@garyelkhorn2116< The 350 cable controls down shift only. The modulator controls shift points.
I didn't watch the whole video
Just saw this comment turbo 350 and 400 3sp had kick down shift cable. 700r OD has the throttle valve pressure cable. TV cable
Been a mechanic for 25 years really enjoy your videos great information
Thx!
I remember attending a Chevy/GM event at the Indy 500....all the new cars were on display including engineering cutaways. At the automatic transmission display, I made a comment that my BMW had a GM transmission..if I recall my E46 3 Series Touring used a version of GMs 5L50E..a GM employee at the display said..."well that is one thing we do well."
The one clinker we had was on our 1979 Cutlass with the 260 V8....we had the THM-200 which dropped reverse at 78,000 miles. That was a month to remember....the transmission went out in the Cutlass...then my Dad had a heart issue and was hospitalized at the age of 49. So I remember visiting dad at the hospital and talking with the transmission shop and arranging for the transmission to be rebuilt. Some months later, we did get a class action lawsuit notice about a settlement involving the THM-200...but we apparently exceeded the mileage cap.
Some years later, on an episode of the Simpsons, Homer pulls into a gas station and asks the attendant if he is hearing a funny noise...the attendant responds, "I think you're having a heart attack." Homer response, "Phew, for a moment there, I thought it was my transmission." I thought of Dad as he had both in the same month.
He recovered....and to celebrate, he ended up buying a new boat the following month.....and towed it home using the Cutlass.....
Excellent!
At one time, Lincoln used a Hydra-matic as did Rolls Royce and a few others.
Had a Friend who had a Cutlass with the 260 V8 and the TH200. The transmission went out. So he took it to a local Austin, TX Transmission Shop. The Shop Owner told him that yes, they could rebuild the transmission. But why rebuild a p.o.s. For the same cost they put a TH350 and geared it for the speedometer. It was like night and day when he got the car back.
I bought my wife a used 78 Cutlass with about 25K miles it was loaded sunroof and all. Both the Chevy 305 eng and the TH200 failed. I got a check from GM and bought a Targetmaster 350 and a rebuilt TH350 and we kept that car for almost 20 years
Was he a smoker? That's kind of early for heart issues.
I am a service manager for a national used car retailer, and the 14 up 8 spd transmissions are crud. The "Magic Fluid" flush can stave off internal repairs for a time...but the 1-2 upshift and 2-1 downshift clunks come back and destroys internals. Nice vid!
I work at a GM shop and I HATE the 8spd. I can always immediately tell when a truck has it because of that 1-2 shift and of course the plague torque converter shudder problems.
I helped my dad rebuild the Roto-Hydramatic in my grandmothers 62 Olds around 1968 or so. Man that thing had a lot of parts! But when we put it back together it seem to be fine for the 6 or 7 years she continued to drive it. They did have a very odd method of operation though. I will confess to having a real soft spot for the post 1956 Buick Dynaflows which I thought were great transmissions after they started using the dual stators with the switch pitch.
I suspect Boz Scaggs would agree with you, assuming "Dinah Flo" wasn't actually a woman.
Boz Skaggs? I’m a bit corn-fuzed..... would that not be Frank Zappa and the infamous “Dinah-Mo-Hum”?
You got it to last? Congratulations. Many replaced it with the older 4 speed Dual Coupling HydraMatic.
i think the variable pich torque converter is 👍idea add in a way of freewheeling the stator or change its rpm speed compared to the case/shell RMP. why its not use more im not sure ( as most i know about is fixed piched with drawback's and a sprag that can be design replaced with something better to change its speed & torque vs all or nothing and it might be a way of doing over drive gearing too boot ) but modern jet engines use that trick a lot so it should work in oil just as good as air. rc-car's is right the TC solenoid does go bad in the 90's-mid 2000's caddy's i got more complaints of it not engaging ( nocking 34 mpg to about 16mpg @ 65MPH~ 1800engine rpm normally to 2500~ and yes it's more wair and tair so it does need tlc or run the risk of Windows 😉 as i have seen someone do that after putting it off for 90+ morning's commute/trips ) then lock-up/failed TC as heavyweight loads ( some people still use big sedans for towing and gardening and i probably will be forced into to doing that with my 2-gen charger as well as my 80's 1-ton K15 truck needs heavy TLC/restoration work or house stuff and my car right now is getting my TLC first 😑) or hot days can make it over heat and fail and id remove the transmission case to replace the TC ect but not to bad % of R&R money wise/reputation and using a better trans cooler and R&R-maintenance at fairly reasonable regular intervals will help and im glad i skipped using the 8-speed automatic as RC-car's was saying its not great and in a hotrod/charger more money and headache from turning the TCM ect. even if there's a kit to do it with a BBM/hemi makes my TR6070 a better choice ( evan if it's more work upfront but rewarding later on ) thanks for warning / reminding me
@@michaelbenardo5695 The 4 speed Dual Coupling Hydramatic will not fit in a 61 - 64 Catalina or Grand Prix. Only the Bonnevilles and Star Chiefs. Reason being the floor hump for the trans is smaller for the Catalina and Grand Prix. I tried it, the big hydramatic hit the floor board and the trans needed another 3 inches before the crossmember could be installed. You would have to change or modify the floor pan.
Fascinating. Keep up the Porch Chats™, Adam, loving this "Best & Worst" series.
Who will touch it? LOL I will---any of those (except the stamped planetary carrier THM 200) is simpler and better than the newer electronic POS transmissions.
Just rebuilt 2 old Fordomatics, both in 1957 Thunderbirds. Next one up is a Ford AOD upgraded with 4R70w wide ratio planetary set, and then a C6 with extra clutches AND an E4OD wide ratio planetary set.
We used to chuck the THM 200s into the scrap pile and replace them with THM 350s
Agreed
The THM200? Garbage. My mom had one in a new ‘78 Malibu Classic with the 305, and it had problems from the word go. It was in and out of two dealer’s shops even before it was a year old. One dealer suggested annual fluid changes (!). After a few years of dealers dinking with it (and the class action lawsuit which got her something like $50), the case support (the planetary carrier?) broke, then it wouldn’t shift from second to third unless you backed completely off the throttle. A conversion to a rebuilt Turbo 350 by a local indy transmission shop (they were covered up with THM200 problems, and performing 350 conversions) finally fixed it.
These are great!
@donreinke5863 TH200s I've heard being referred to as "GM Coffee Can Transmissions". Lol that's accurate 😆
Being an old Pontiac man, I had a 62 and a 63 Catalinas. If you lived in a flat area, it was almost ok. But I lived in a hilly state and they were total crap. When I got a 70 Cat with a measally 350 2 bbl, I could not believe what a night and day difference. It ran circles around the 389's.
I don't know why I like your videos but you have a real talent with the spoken word. No hype, just communication.
I had a 1980 Malibu with the Metric 200 ? transmission. It was a fleet car. It had the lockup issue which I fixed by unplugging it. When it was time to get a new car, at 50,000 miles, the leasing company asked me when the transmission was replaced. I told them it had not been. The lady said, "you must be mistaken. ALL of these cars have had the transmission replaced." I had a 1979 Malibu before that one and it had a transmission replaced at 35,000 miles. That car was driven by another person before I got it.
Having said that, the Malibu Classic hardtop was a great car otherwise. No power but I live in flat country.
Had a 1980 Buick Century with the 231 V6, THM200 and no lockup. Also a fleet car... lots of highway miles... 62,000 in two years. Transmission survived, barely.
Back in the late 80's, a guy in our city that had retired from the GM plant in town and started a used car lot. Being a GM retiree, he wanted to concentrate on GM cars, but everything he was buying was giving him transmission problems, so he started buying more of the Taurus and Sables, and was not having those problems with them, so he started to concentrate on those. He said he had to keep a couple of GM's on the lot, because it was a GM town, but began to favor the Ford front wheel drive cars. I bought an 89 Mercury Sable off of him, and was the first front wheel drive car I had ever owned, and really liked it. That thing would drag itself through snow so deep, it would drag the whole bottom on it, and keep going.
I have had a Taurus and a Stable. One had the 3 liter and the other the 3.8. they were both rusty beyond belief after 7-8 years. It is a shame as I loved both cars. I would like to head down south to find a nice wagon to bring home. I kind of liked the early '90s refresh.
@Nathaniel's TPS Report I went to sell it, when it was about ten years old and was asking a thousand dollars for it. Several people looked at it and said it had to much rust for that money, and never drove it. One guy stopped and drove it and said that as good as it run and drove, he would buy it, aside from the rust. I had moved up to a 97 dodge intrepid, which was a great car, with a huge amount of power in their 3.5 engine, but it didn't get around nearly as well, in deep snow. I believe it had to much power, and broke traction, to easily. My Sable had the 3.0, and had plenty of power, but nothing like the Intrepid. Have a great day.
The Taurus and sable line also had transmission issues, I rebuilt a bunch of them in the late 80s and 90s.
Especially the SHO's unfortunately. The 5-Speed had too small of a Clutch(1989-1990 came with 8.25" Clutches but later dealers received replacement 9" Clutches to help the issue). The 9" Clutches were better but were still too small. For example, the same year 5-Speed Ford Ranger with the 2.3L Lima 4-Cylinder had a 13" Clutch and it only made 88HP. Eventually, in 1993 Ford offered the SHO's with a 4-Speed AXOD-S Automatic transmission with an increase in displacement from the 3.0L found in 5-Speed SHO's to 3.2L specifically for the Automatics. This netted a nice gain of 15ft/lb of Torque but no reported HP gains. The 1993 AXOD-S's had some issues with clutch packs wearing out that got better in 1994 and 1995 respectively. The 93's would make it around 80k-120k miles before needing changed, but I've seen a lot of 94's and 95's make it 150k-200k+ if maintained properly. Some have gotten 300k+ out of their SHO's, so it's all in how well you know your car. If you get an SHO with the Automatic, a transmission cooler is probably the best possible upgrade you can buy and should be the 1st thing to get. @@Transient901
@@Transient901 The AXOD was a horribly unreliable transmission.The AXOD-E was an improvement.
4T60E was notorious for destroying the reverse reaction drum or "stove pipe" so much that aftermarket companies were offering hardened versions of it. This really was a big problem when mated to the LQ1 3.4L DOHC engine in the GTP and Lumina possibly due to the high torque the engine could deliver at high RPMs. In fact, I remember reading about the development of the LQ1 saying GM initially intended it to deliver 250 HP or something crazy like that but had to scale it back due to transmission reliability issues.
I think it's the same box in Volvo s80s too ..
@@Low760 Volvos use the 4T65E, which isn't that much better when used behind higher revving/higher power engines.
Ah, the 4t60 and the 65, the weak point of the platform I love dearly. I'm trying to build my GTP up for more power and I already know that glass transmission is going to give me some trouble.
@@notsogrand2837Just get a custom built one from Monster Transmission and problem solved.
@@extremedrivr Huh, never heard of them. I was gonna go for a Triple Edge but I'll give Monster a look.
Another very compelling video. Having rebuilt and destroyed a number of GM4L70E transmissions and spent way too much time in the Transtar and Sonnax catalogs, it's a topic near and dear to my heart.
Very educational and enjoyable, Adam! You have definitely created a very watchable channel appealing to many of us who fondly remember daily drivers of the past. Thank you! 👍👍👍
Why remember? Buy and drive a car from 60’s-80’s. Live.
We had a ‘62 Pontiac with this transmission. You are right about the 1-2 shift. Some times it felt like you were lugging the engine on the take off. The fluid coupling was midship in the transmission and was small. Sometimes it was called Model 10.
GM is famous for letting the customer sort their problems out for them, Then they perfect it and the next year they kill it. Same can be said for their Engines!
Great chat. I remember driving a 63 Starfire and being disappointed with the upshift to second gear. Also, your comment on the C6 shift is very true. My 428 powered T-Bird would chirp the tires between both upshifts during hard acceleration.
I had a 63 Olds Starfire it was rough shifting , it had super drive , on flat ground it was fast it weighted in at 4200 pounds , my father bought this for me as my first car at 17 , l drove it from 1970 - 75 great car , great memories thanks for your videos 😎👍 Doug
As I recall when the Roto Hydramatic AKA Jetaway Hydramatic was released. I red an article probably in Popular science, or Popular mechanics in the late '60s that GM would not provide repair kits or detailed manuals, as the new transmission was so reliable that in the most unlikely event of a failure that you would have to use a factory rebuilt unit. Seems that it was one of the worst up to that point.
In the late '50s there was the Turbo Powerglide. (I think that is what it was called).
JC Whitney used to sell a conversion kit to install a regular 2 speed Power Glide.
A neighbor teenager had a lawn service so he could save enough to buy every teen age boy's dream in '55 to have a '55 rocket 88 Olds. When it was finally delivered after a long wait it had a Buick Dyna-flop. Did not accept delivery.
Although not GM I think that Packard with their "Ultramatic" had probably the most un reliable transmissions. From what I understand it was a factory philosophy of NIH. Depended on precision bushings with no seal rings, the clutch steels were burnt blue like a hand from an antique watch..
Ford had the 70s C4 Clutches fail just out of warranty at 12k. Then the C5 which would suddenly just stop working. I have no idea what the problem was. It was so bad that my employer, Motorola at the time forbid us from buying a vehicle with a C5.
The jetaway 315 is the last revision of the old hydramatic 4 speed. Dual coupling 4 speed used in Cadillac up to a few units in 64’. The slim Jim is the turd you’re describing. Olds and Pontiac.
Adam, you did my old heart good by giving the Slim Jim "worst of all time" honors! I learned to drive on our 1963 Olds Super 88, and all these years later, I can still feel dying fall of the shift from first to second. But it never left me stranded. That Olds was traded on a new 1972 Pontiac Catalina. Two weeks after we got it, the transmission literally fell out of the car at 35 mph.
Never owned a GM car...their reputation precedes them.
"Gliding" from one gear to another WILL shorten transmission life. That "glide" is SLIPPAGE that shortens clutch and band life.
A proper shift SHOULD be firm, but not hard.
I seem to remember the TV & modulator were standard design for most of GM's autos (powerglide, th350, 400, etc). Only later did they try to simplify with a TV only, which is one reason the TH200 has poor shifts.
Also, owners should be careful if disconnecting the TCC valve as a long term solution. On some models lockup does play a role in cooling. If the TCC is slipping on the highway you could end up cooking the fluid.
Dealing with something like that in my 1981 Bonneville with the 200-4R. The Lock up isnt working because according the the code the vehicle speed sensor is not working so the computer wont lock the torque converter. I'm currently until I can deal with this better driving it in 3rd for the very reason you just mentioned. I dont want to ruin the transmission by overheating it by running it in overdrive.
With any automatic transmission, use of an auxiliary aftermarket transmission cooler will extend the life of the transmission. The cooler it runs, the less fluid degradation there is, even with modern synthetic fluids such as Dexron VI or Mercon V or LV
Some vehicles are equipped with auxiliary coolers from the factory, but installation of a larger capacity aftermarket cooler is just added insurance against premature failure, especially behind a high performance engine or when a vehicle is frequently used for towing or hauling heavy loads.
@@markschommer7407 Pretty sure the 2004r wasn't being equipped in '81, I bet yours is a 3-speed th-200c.
The speed sensor would be on the back of the speedometer, senses rotation of speedo cable. Not a big deal really if it's a th200c, th250c or th350c, these were all 3-speed. The 4-speed (overdrive) WILL overheat if tq converter lockup isn't working.
Lockup occurred above either 35mph, or 45mph in the case of california emissions.
The th-200c is sensitive to tv cable adjustment, make sure it's right else it'l burn the clutches in just a few miles.
The th350 had a kickdown cable, it wasn't a tv cable and misadjustment didn't lead to immediate damage. Th400 had electric kickdown, from a switch on the throttle cable.
@@thisisyourcaptainspeaking2259 On many GM vehicles with a Turbo 400 the switch was actually on a bracket which supported the accelerator pedal
I bought a 63 F-85 with the baby slim-jim- it quit working soon after I got it-I had an opportunity to rebuild an auto-trans for the first time in my life, including an aluminum part that was a part of the shift mechanism that had broken, possibly from an oil-pressure problem.The small alum-block V-8 was a beautiful motor, and the transmission worked, but it had lots of little parts and seals,(I worked on it on my coffee table in the living room.).I sold it soon after fixing it. I hope it kept running
Many years ago, I owned a 1979 Buick Regal with a 301 Pontiac engine and a TH200 transmission that I bought with less than 13K miles. Without abuse, the transmission failed at approx. 40K miles, and the 301 failed at approx. 65k. AN absolute garbage drive train! Replaced it with a junkyard 350 Pontiac and BOP TH350, and absolutely no problems afterwards.
My Dad had that exact car and power train ... He kept breaking flex plates in the thing, but the transmission never failed. But I have to be honest, the man had two speeds: on, and off. He’d always roar away from stop light like his arse was on fire.
That 301 wiped a cam at about 100k miles, but that was par for the coarse with those late 70’s GM cars. I had a ‘78 305 Chevy engine in a Cutlass that did the same thing, right at 100k.
Anyway, he gave that Buick to my brother, who drove it until he got too fat to fit behind the wheel. When he sold it, at over 160k miles, it still ran great.
“…you enjoy forms of torture!” 😂 YES, I have rebuilt ONE of those roto-messes and NEVER AGAIN! Very torturous indeed! Took me awhile but I’m finally getting around to watching/listening to this & “best transmissions” porch chat vid’s. So glad you mentioned that incredibly well engineered 425 setup. Was a very interesting combination of tech; I own two 1955 Buick Super Riviera’s, both w/“Switch Pitch” or, as was newly called then, “Variable Pitch” Dynaflow! Also had inherited my grandfather’s 1975 GMC Palm Beach Motorhome with 455 Olds front wheel drive trans setup.. loved that motorhome
Great stuff not a bunch of music or flash just a porch an the day an something to talk about.... simply great stuff 👍👍👍👍
Great video fella, one GM transmission that didn’t make the list and was abysmal was the 4T65EV/GT which set fire to many Volvo XC90s with the I6 engine.
Actually, the turbo 350 does have a vacuum modulator valve, as well as a passing gear cable. The difference between a passing gear cable and a throttle valve cable is the transmission with a disconnected passing gear cable will still have a normal life span and shift gears, where the transmission with an unhooked TV cable will not even shift.
There's no such thing as a "passing gear." It's just a downshift to a lower gear.
@@matthewhardy8133 Yes, but we all called it "passing gear" in the old days, because the primary reason for downshifting was to pass.
The Dynaflow transmission produced from the 1950s to the early 1960s was a two speed that had a huge amount of slippage. Acceleration and fuel economy were both poor with this transmission. It was primarily installed in Buicks until the huge fire at the Hydramatic plant stopped production. It was then installed in various other GM cars until Hydramatic production resumed.
Late in the 1953 model year a number of Oldsmobiles and Cadillacs were shipped with Dynaflow transmissions after a fire at the GM Hydramatic plant. By the beginning of the 1954 model year GM bought another building and was able to restart Hydramatic production.
I had 3 different Buicks with Dynaflow. My 56 was the best one, my 61 was the worst, even worse than my 50. The 56 would actually step out pretty decently. The 61, on the other hand, would ooze forth rather than accelerate. But all three, once they got some momentum, were fantastic cars.
TH 350`s had a modulator, the TV cable was for kickdown/passing gear purposes only. The TH 400 had a modulator as you mentioned but it utilized an electrical kickdown/passing gear, they both performed the same function.
The TH 200 was a very good transmission if GM had left it in the Chevette like it was designed for, it was ok even for lightweight V6 applications but they chose to put it in everything across the board which was a very bad decision.
Most people aren`t as picky about a silky smooth shift as you are (no offense). Stiffer springs could be added to the servo`s and accumulator`s to soften some of that up if a person wanted to modify things. I never liked any lockup convertor, they only have one tiny clutch disc inside of them. I got old, my memory is starting to fade bad.
You`re very knowledgeable and speak pleasantly and your videos are very entertaining. I`m new and have been on a binge watching your content.
Thank you for all your efforts. :)
I always had great luck with TH 350's; the older ones would handle more torque than what they typically got credit for. The governors are also pretty simple to modify in order to change the shift points to coincide with more torque once the engine had been modified. TCI shift kit to firm up the shifts, grind most of the weight off the governor spring pads and then start messing with different colored springs... with a little experimenting you could usually get the shift points pretty close to where you wanted them. Great transmission. I'm looking forward to see what Adam has to say when he does GM's best list.
@@remingtonwingmaster6929 I would imagine the 400, 350 and Powerglide will be on that list. We`ll see. :)
Thanks for sharing willy :)
Not related exactly but I like the th350 in my 70 buick lesabre. Smooth and sounds nice too.
I had a bunch of Chevetts.and never had a transmission problem. They were good where they belonged.
I've got a TH200 in my 82 Camaro. I read about the issues they were having with the larger cars so right after I paid off the car. (4yrs.) I noticed a "slip" and carried it to AAMCO to get it checked. They said a bushing went bad and gave me prices and warranty options. At the top end was $200/lifetime guarantee. Knowing what I had , I went for the lifetime warranty. That transmission has been rebuilt 4 separate times. I asked why we were having so many issues and the mechanic admitted that it was designed for the 4cyl engine and couldn't take the torque of a V8.
After the second rebuild asked why we couldn't upgrade to a better transmission. GM stopped installing it in the F bodies but the mechanic refused saying that was the transmission that was warranted and that was the transmission that was going to be rebuilt.
So every 4 years or 80K miles they would rebuild it. That was the best $200 I ever spent.
Great presentation again Adam! I don't know what GM was thinking when they began putting the Metric 200 transmissions into larger V8 powered cars. My uncle went through 3 of them in his 81 Caprice coupe back in the day. Even the 82 Trans Am and Camaro had a turbo 200 in it. My high school shop teacher did a transmission swap demo in class on his 82 Trans Am when I was in high school. A Turbo 350 went in it's place. Comparing the size of the output shafts against each other (200 vs 350), it was pretty clear which was the stronger and better choice.
Along with the Rotomatic, Chevrolet's Turboglide (1957-62) was complete disaster.
The 58 - 59 Buick Flight-Pitch DynaFlow, similar to Chevy's TurboGlide but larger, was not the greatest either. It wasn't so much unreliable as it was so slippery that it made the "regular" Dynaflop seem fantastic by comparison. GM, unfortunately, has done some pretty stupid things, things that the haters immediately latched onto.
The 82 trans am and z28 with the crossfire engine-th200 trans was an INTERESTING combo. I know it's fiction but a season 1 episode of knight rider kitt towed a car and broke the alpha circuit in the transmission.
It was probably like 87-88 but a buddy got the b+m th-200 to th-350 conversion kit for his 82 firebird,you supply the trans.
Can't remember what was in the kit though, maybe a different flex plate and maybe a trans mount and a few other goodies.
I fondly installing a few of their shift improver kits that always came with a bent drill bit.
Bought a 2 year old 91 Corsica, it ran fine. Shifted smooth. After 4 months had just got back from a long trip and Trans died. Took it to a local dealer and they had it for about 2 weeks went and picked it up. They showed me the parts and labor and I thought I was going to be screwed, but they said no charge. It was covered by some class action suit
Great video. As a kid growing up I remember the GM Powerglide (2-speed automatic) and the legendary 3-speed Hydra-matic which was the state of the art cutting-edge transmission in any make. I do have a soft spot in my heart for the Chrysler torqueflite however. Keep these wonderful chats coming!
I had a 1970 Bel Air with a powerglide transmission . Never had a problem with it the whole time I had the car. I kept the fluid changed on schedule and it was just fine. The problem was the Illinois winters and the road salt finally did the car in. I do take that back. Shortly after I bought the car I realized that the mechanism that allowed me to put the car in “Park “ wasn’t functioning properly and when I put the car in Park, the car would begin to coast and I had to get a mechanic to fix it. That was the only major problem I had with it. But I did find out that the emergency brake worked. 😐
The HydraMatic has 4 speeds, unless you mean the Turbo 350 and 400 transmissions.
Learned to drive in a '72 Chrysler Newport with a Torqueflite A727. Not silky smooth, but tough as nails. Lots of trailer towing vacations. Nine years and 136,000 miles later, the original ATF was still as pink as new fluid in the can. Guess it ran pretty cool!
@@billyjoejimbob56 By then did they still have the push buttons to shift the transmission? I remember that Chrysler had the push button transmission in the late 50s and early 60s. I don’t know when they stopped making it.
They used to call me “Hydramatic” because I was utterly shiftless. 😁
Agree on the Slim Jim’s but you forgot the two very worst. Buick’s 1961-1963 Dual Paths and the miserable Turboglides that Chevy used from 1957-1961. These were so bad that most were converted to Powerglides. Transmission shops HATED these two transmissions!
In high school I owned a 1961 Impala convertible with the 348. The previous owner had converted it to a three speed floor shift manual, but (as I recall) the original PRNDGr shift quadrant indicator remained on the steering column. I was told this meant that the original transmission had been the ill-fated Turboglide, a transmission that was available in all V8-powered 1957-1961 Chevrolet models except the Corvette. My understanding is that these transmissions were so problematic that they were routinely replaced with Powerglide transmissions.
Yeah the Gr was like a switch pitch converter . It would really rev up if you floored it but you hardly went anywhere untill it switched back to a normal converter and low gear of the two speed trans.
I had a '60 Impala with the 348 and Turboglide transmission. Engine ran strong and the Turboglide was one of the few that actually worked as intended. Not the strongest off the line but had an amazing top end with the "infinitely variable" trans. I could peg the speedometer (120+) and that 348 was just humming along, working no harder than a "normal" car running at 70 MPH. Had a lot of fun playing around with the old TG.
I had several 200 Metric 3 speed automatic transmissions backed behind Old's 307's and Pontiac 301's. The big trick here was upgrading to a newer Dexron fluid and installing an external oil cooler. After those upgrades I never had an issue even with well over 100K miles.
I had a 1977 Pontiac Bonneville with a 301 with a 200 Metric transmission. It was great at first and had 22 mpg highway performance. It went out after 3 years and 30,000 miles. I replaced it with a Turbo 350 and never had another problem, but highway mileage dropped to 18 mpg.
I so agree about the GM THM 200 transmission. I bought new a 1979 Pontiac Grand Am with the 301-4bbl V8. It was rated at 150hp & 240 lb ft. of torque. The "200" number means it is rated for engines "up to" 200 lb ft of torque. Doesn't take a genius to know what will happen when you put it with an engine making MORE torque. At 31,000 miles the transmission did a swan song- of course the car is out of warranty. Because of that incident I have NEVER bought another GM car new again. Let that be a lesson to all the autombile "bean counters" out there who try to cheapen their products to pad the bottom line for investors.
The THM200 was perfectly fine when paired with low output 4s and some of the smaller v6s. The problem is when they placed behind engines it was never designed to handle.
My 4.3L Caprice used to break them all the time. I got really good at replacing them in record time.
Kevin you had other issues.
The Slim Jim was awful. I owned a ‘64 Grand Prix with one. The spectacular drop in RPM on the 1-2 upshift is jarring, as is the jump in RPM on the 2-1 downshift. Even in the ‘70s, it was hard to find a transmission shop that would work on them (and knew how to).
I have a 62 Grand Prix with a slim Jim. I live in a town with about five or six guys in their 70s who used to drag race Pontiacs back in the day. They loved the slim Jim because of that one- two shift you didn't break the tires loose when it shifted because there's such a huge RPM drop.
The issue with lockup solenoids you’re describing is one I’m familiar with. My friend had a 2004 GMC Envoy which ended up getting totaled last year. There were a few times when that car would stall out in drive, even from normal-ish driving (he is hard on his cars).
For those who didn’t drive a lot, I’d just disconnect it and leave it.
I had a 1992 Lumina coupe with the 3T40 and the lockup solenoid got stuck on it. I replaced it myself and it was a surprisingly easy fix! I only paid $400 for the car at the time so I didn't care if it was successful or not. But anyways the 3t40 coupled with the 3.1L MPFI V6 was decent. Good passing power for he most part but man was second gear LONG!
I had a 92 Beretta with a lockup solenoid that started sticking. When I looked at the procedure for repairing it, it seemed like the whole left side of the car would have to come apart! I just unhooked it and drove it like that until it finally went to the scrapyard. I put more than 100,000 miles on that car over 7 years, it really did me right even though it completely fell apart by the end. I never got a Check Engine light and only lost 1 or 2 mpg for disconnecting the solenoid.
I'm surprised the TH180 (or as it was known here in Australia as the Tri-Matic) didn't make the list. Fine behind a four cylinder or weak 6 cyclinder but as soon as it was put behind even a low output v8 it became a Traumatic rather than Trimatic!
And still " Traumatic " behind a 202 , especially if towing , and when combined with the sixes reputation for , blowing the tops off pistons, shearing the gear off the distributor, the fibre camshaft gear falling apart, the harmonic balancer rubber disintegrating , axles snapping , and thirsty with lackluster power , what a great deal .😂
What is a trimatic? Never heard of it. Do you mean a th 350?
@@garycamara9955 Trimatic's were used in Australian Holdens , but it would appear from the comments that they were also in America under a different name T180? , I'm not sure.
@@barrycuda3769 most cars are V8s here accept for compacts like Falcons (some V8s) Corvairs, Valiants, and Darts.
@@barrycuda3769 never heard of s T180 either. But I generally ignore automatic transmissions. I like a more performance car. Performance cars need sn actual transmission.
The lockup transmissions were not unreliable, only the lockup solenoid that would stick & fail to release. The cure was free & easy. Unplug the solenoid. Now you're left with a rather normal transmission. I did it a lot. Cost about 1 mpg.
Hello Adam, thanks for sharing another porch chat, I'm really enjoying them & learning a lot of interesting facts!! 👍👍
My dad bought a 1961 Pontiac Catalina 4-door with 389 2-barrel and the Slim Jim automatic in 1961. He is dead now, but my mom still owns the car. It has only ~58,000 miles on it. Still has the plastic protective covers on the seats that came on it at delivery. Original wiper blades. Original radiator and heater hoses. Been garaged it's entire life.
Spot on with regards to the slim Jim. The main reason 61-64 Olds and Pontiac are so rare to see. Most got scrapped after owners got tired of the transmission troubles. It’s a shame because they are beautiful cars. Talked to a transmission rebuilder who was around back then and he said they didn’t work right when they were new.
More than a few folks swapped in the 4 speed Hydra. That trans was bullet-proof.
My dad ordered a '63 Catalina with a three-on-the-tree... maybe the only one ever built! When he traded it four years later, a used car shopper paid the dealer a deposit for it and was there to pick it up a month later when we got the new car. That didn't make sense to me at the time... but reading about the dreaded Slim Jim decades later... now it makes sense!
@@billyjoejimbob56 If my memory is right, the senior Pontiacs, the Star Chief and Bonneville, kept the 4 speed Hydramatic.
My two worst. 1978 Grand Prix. It had to exceed 45 mph to upshift from 2 to 3. The dealer insisted that was normal. I got really pissed around the 4th visit to the dealer and insisted they show me the service bulletins. One bulletin said the cure was to remove a valve (I don't remember what precisely). After that its shifts were reasonable.
The other was in a 1979 Cutlass. Tranny failed at about 60,000 miles. The rebuild was rough and failed in month 13. The replacement for the rebuild had to exceed 20 mph to shift from 1 to 2. After those two I stayed away from GM for a decade.
Neither of these was abused. I've always driven like an old man, and I've never had another transmission problem among 20 new cars across half a dozen makes.
I really enjoy your vids! Over the years many various collector cars have passed through my hands. When I think of the Slim-Jim I am reminded of a '64 Cutlass Convertible. Had terrific torque out of first, and a lousy up-shift. Thanks for sharing your experiences!
64 Cutlass had the 2speed Jetaway, maybe you had a pre 1964 car?
@@basilcarroll9729 Yeah, you are probably right. I'm old.
At 16, I inherited my dad's low-mileage 1963 Grand Prix with Roto-Hydramatic.The transmission was exactly as you describe. Fortunately, my much older half-brother told my mom that was "too much car" for me at that age. It was sold, and I managed to con my way into a '64 GTO 4-speed. (Hint: those cars were titled as Tempests.) The GP's have always held a soft spot in my heart (and head), and I've owned a second '63 and a '64. Out of those 3 cars, I replaced 3 transmissions. I had a friend with a breathed-on 394 in a '64 Olds Jetstar I. He went through innumerable transmissions. At 68, I'm a life-long muscle car guy, but would love one more '63 GP with a 421 and 4-speed manual. BTW, another glaring fault of the roto was the ratio spread between 1st and 2nd. Between the lockup and the gear spread, at half throttle or more the engine would lug and rattle (knock), no matter how good the gas, etc. A shame, because I particularly like the Pontiac and Olds "personal luxury cars" between '61 and 64. Another well-informed video on your part.
Another great video Adam. Some of these have been mentioned below, but don't forget the '58-'59 Buick Triple Turbine Flight Pitch Dynaflow (MUCH less reliable than the standard twin-turbine Dynaflow that was available at the same time). The '57-'61 Chevy Turboglide was based on the same principles (variable pitch stators instead of shifts). Many of the Turboglides got replaced with Powerglides. The Buick Dual Path Dynaflow used only in the '61-'63 Special/Skylark was strange in that it had planetary gears inside of the torque converter. Not sure about reliability on those, but it is a strange design.
Reliability of the Dual Path Dynaflow? In production for three years, never to be seen again? There's your answer!
I remember that odd-ball. Never heard anything much about it, but it wasn't made for long.
It was designed for the Special of 1961-1963. When the Special became an intermediate in 1964 they decided Dual Path was too weak and got a version of the Powerglide for the Special. My Dad's 1963 Special never had a problem with the Dual Path. I think they had trouble with service for Dual Path because it was such a rare transmission.
My parents had the dubious honor of owning cars with one of the best GM transmissions and one of the worst. A 1960 Oldsmobile 88 with the Hydramatic and a 1964 Oldsmobile 88 with the Slim Jim. Mot sure if you're aware of it but the Hydramatic had 4 forward gears. The first gear only got the car moving and then shifted immediately. You could not manually shift to first.
Great stuff . I attended 440T4 Training in Clarence NY at the GM training center . We drove a Buick C around some and also monitored full throttle upshifts ....and they were horrible . I repaired and replaced countless 440T4 trans-axles . Also the TH350 has a modulator valve and a detent cable , not a throttle valve cable . The 4T60E was a better trans-axle but I also repaired or replaced many of these . My favorites are TH350 , TH400 and Powerglide . Love your content
Agreed to all. We had an '87 Cutlass Ciera Brougham with 3.8 liter engine and 440 T4, overall great car which went 280,000 miles before I gave it to a neighbor. After the second trans I installed a cooler and did fluid changes every 12,000 miles. Trans was always good after that, still miss that car, all accessories still worked and interior was beautiful.
@@genehart261 A bodies with the 3.8 were great cars and fun to drive . The 3.3 variant was a good choice too . I had a 3.3 Cutlass Ciera with a 125C transaxle and loved it .
Here on Oz, GM Holden had the Tri-Matic, which I believe was our own evolution of the TH180. It gained the nickname "Traumatic" for a reason. They were found behind anything built here by GM except the imported small block (which got the TH350). The list includes:
Isuzu/Holden Gemini (ie Chevette)
Holden 6
Holden Starfire (a Holden 6 with 2 cylinders removed)
Holden 253 and 308/304 V8s
And... Toyota Corona
These were originally designed to work behind 4-cylinders, but were pushed into service with 5.0 V8s and had a hard time dealing with that torque. Over the years, trans shops worked out ways to hotrod them and could be built into a decent trans, and were often preferred on drag cars over TH350s for their lower internal losses.
Keep these porch talks coming. Love the best/ worst talks, but do other subjects as well.
Another great video Adam. From my experience, I agree 100% that the Slim Jim Rotohydramatic deserves to be on the top of your list.
You are correct about the 440T4. I had a family member that bought an 1985 Oldsmobile 98 in the spring of 1984. The first transmission did not last a week. That car went through seven transmission's under GM warranty. The latest version, number seven lasted a while. Number eight was done at a tranny shop and he got rid of it shortly afterwards.
It soured the relationship with the buyer and GM as he went to Ford products and never left Ford.
Plate C
Ford had its turds too. P-metric Taurus transmission had allot of problems
@@andrewdonohue1853 Absolutely!! The front drive Olds was replaced with a Crown Victoria. Prior to the front driver, he had always had rear drive Olds and Chevy's and never had a problem.
As as a Ford guy transmissions the best, C4 the C6 the AOD the cruise O Matic and the merc o matic
I purchased a 1980 Buick Electra diesel at a GMAC auction in 1981, and was surprised to find it equipped with the THM 200. The lockup converter ceased locking up about a year later - to the slight detriment of highway economy and serenity - and I was told that this was an early sign of impending failure, but fortunately that didn't materialize in the few additional years I owned it. The shifts were indeed more noticeable than expected from a Turbo Hydra-matic. I was told it had been specified for the car to keep it in a lower EPA weight class.
At worst the slippage at highway speeds might... MIGHT cause extra wear to the clutches. In general these days all new transmissions use a table in the TCM (Transmission control module) to apply slip in all gears. They clutches wear sooner but the shifts are far softer since the transmission isn't under constant load when it shifts.
4L60? Surprised I don’t see that on here. I’ve had a few. They work fine, until it decides it’s “break time” and you suddenly have multiple neutrals.
Also, disabling TC lockup will also run you slightly higher RPMs at highway speeds, so if you’re someone that flies down the roads, keep that in mind.
Eh my 4L60E lasted until 225k miles until I sold my Jimmy
I had a 4L30 in a used Trooper self-destruct on the highway, changed the burned ATF on the side of the highway, barely limped home, and sold the pile.
My 4l60e is on 240,000 miles. Don't tow in overdrive like a dumbass and it'll last
I had an Aussie Toyota Lexcen (Australian market Holden Commodore rebadge -due to a model sharing agreement) with 3800 Buick based V6 and 4L60e and it gave sterling service up until 308,000km (totaled in an accident) despite driving it on low fluid for a little while -your could hear it sloshing
@@shannonwilkerson3919 my friend and I have had a few used trucks and gone through a few 4L60s. Granted, we do drive them hard, but we’ve had other vehicles that have held up to the hard driving much better than those transmissions did.
Most recent one was sometime last year. Went to pass a semi, and suddenly we have several neutrals.
Worst trans I ever had was a slushbox. It was built for racing in my 66 big block Impala. I went through 3 of them and finally installed a Muncie M-22 rock crusher. No more problems. Very fast.
I’ll go ahead and guess that your favorite is the Switch Pitch Turbo 400.. Which was behind one of my favorite anachronistic engines of all time, the Buick Nailhead.. The Nailhead of course, was let down for years by a transmission that could have made this list, the DynaSlush.
the TC is still a better idea in the dyna trans
Great Video , the T 200 we used to call the Beer Can transmission . We just had to replace the torque converter on a 2017 Colorado because it was slipping at 75,000 miles . Also another crappy transmission is the old Turboglides on late 50s early 60s Chevrolets.
Interesting. I've owned many GM cars over the past 40 years, and my dad owned many before that, but we somehow managed to avoid all these "worst" GM automatics. We had a 1971 Biscayne with the Turbo350, we had 1992 and 2000 Bonnevilles with the 4-speed, and I've had several Chevy pick-ups with 4- and 6-speed THM, and they've all been great. Just lucky, I guess!
I have one to add to your list. The automatic in the 56 Cadillacs was notorious for unreliability- I had one and in the course of several years had to have it rebuilt at least twice. I should also point out the 56 Caddy was notorious for engine failure- again personal experience
Holden came out with the Trimatic in the 70s and it was used from 1.6 litre Geminis (similar to Chevette) to 5.0 V8 Premiers, Kingswoods and early Commodores and were sometimes called the traumatic because of their reputation for being fragile. I've been told they were not as bad as some made out and were fine for regular driving but would fall apart if you modified the engines too much. Higher end models here like the Statesman used imported TH400s and 350s from the USA.
The Holden Trimatic was used in the South African Chev Kommando which was based on the Australian Kingswood. That box was a dog compared to the Chrysler Torque Flite in the Valiant.
My understanding (which may be wrong) is that the Holden Trimatic is the same as or related to the GM Turbo Hydramatic 180. It was used on Holdens with 4,6 and V8 engines. The shifts were very clunky in my dad's new '74 HQ 308 Premier, in fact he hated the transmission. Apparently though over time it was modified and improved so much that drag racers preferred it over TH400's. Mind you it was probably for the stoutness and strength rather than smoothness.
About the lock-up solenoids, I used to have to shift into neutral while coasting towards a light in order to stop, and would often have trouble dropping into drive and pulling away without killing the engine in one of my parent's GMs, back in the day.
The story of the GM 8 speed 8L45 and 8L90 transmissions is an ongoing soap opera. I have a GMC Canyon with the 8L45 so I watch every episode and have developed a lot of new forum friends who have these transmissions. The best I can determine is that these transmissions were originally released with Dexron 6 fluid and which was an immediate disaster. Mobile 1 developed Mobil 1 Synthetic LV ATF HP fluid that had a black label and was GM Part Number 19355656 that seemed to be somewhat successful in solving the problems, but not completely in some instances. Mobile 1 researchers later determined that the root cause of the problem was the torque converter’s inability to tolerate any moisture in the transmission fluid. They then developed Mobil 1 Synthetic LV ATF HP transmission fluid (Blue Label - GM Part Number 19417577) and recommended that use of the black label Mobil 1 Synthetic LV ATF HP fluid (GM Part Number 19355656) be discontinued. I am sure this story is not over.
I have done so many flushes on those for shudders I lost count, but most of the time it fixes the issue.
That fluid change as mentioned for those transmission shift quality issues, reminds me what was happening to the transfer cases GM was using in their mid-late 90's full sized, mid-sized SUV and pickups. K, T models. With the 4 button electric shift ( Auto 4WD) and AWD units. New Process 136, 236, 246 models, as the fluid aged it would allow the center drive clutch to "shudder " causing a slip-grab feel when the vehicle (Auto 4WD) would take off from a stop, with AWD models they too had that same issue, but also when making very tight turns either left or right ( parking, drive-thru, etc ) felt as if the vehicle was binding up not wanting to move very easily because that center front drive clutch was not slipping as if was designed to do in those situations. Turns out that concern was caused the fluid (Auto trak 1) which was red in color, breaking down losing its friction modifying properties. GM had released a TSB (i dont remember the number) stating that flushing out of the transfer case with the new fluid (Auto Trak 2, which at that time was only available at the dealers for about $15 a qt and took a minmum of 4 qts for the repair, still relativity inexpensive compared to a unit replacement) was blue in color and have better friction modifying properties allowing for the necessary slippage to occur in certain situations and improving the overall drivability. Some of those repairs were done under warranty or customer satisfaction policies.
My first car was a 1977 Chevy Impala 2-door with a transplanted 350 c.i. 4-bolt main/4-bbl Quadrajet engine from a van, but they didn't change the transmission, which happened to be a TH200. Being an 18-year-old kid, I did not treat it kindly, so in the almost 4 years I owned it, I went through 2 of those transmissions. I later learned that a short-tail TH350 is the exact same length and is a direct swap. I kind of wish I would have known that in the early 1990s. It was still a fun car, as I could smoke Mustangs of the era off the line, but it did only get 10 MPG on a good day. Thankfully, this was the time of sub-$1 gas, so no big deal.
My parents bought a new 1964 Pontiac Grand Prix in late 1963. Yes, it had the Roto Hydramatic, and my parents used the car to tow travel trailers. The second vacation we went on with the car towing a trailer, the transmission got so hot that it would blow seals out of the transmission. After that, we would haul utility trailers or a boat with it. That transmission kept on working however. It started slipping quite badly when the car had over 200,000 miles on it. I am amazed that it lasted so long.
`61 Olds are freakin gorgeous. The whole full-size GM line up is great.
LOVE your channel!!! Especially pre '73 stuff.
The 1961 Buick Invicta was the best looking car that year. Even today, I look back and most cars from that era look dated, but that Invicta is fresh and modern looking ... IMO, of course ...
That was great to watch and learn. G.M.H. in Australia used the Hydramatic in the EK/EJ/EH series cars from about 1961 to 1964. They could have been the Roto version someone out there may know. My family had an EJ Hydramatic bought new in 1963, it was trouble free but certainly not smooth and seemed to have enormous drops in torque between changes it was 3 level or 3 speed. Do you know or have heard of this transmission Adam? It was also used in some English Vauxhalls of the same era.
If you search "old car brochures" there should be some old Holden material out there to view. Holden apparently did use the smaller light duty version of the "Roto" (the one that would have been used in the "compact" F-85 line) from about 1961 to perhaps as late as '65, even though the smaller unit was not used in American GM vehicles beyond '63 & the larger unit was dropped after '64 in the big cars. I believe you will also find they went into Vauxhalls & Opels. It seems that by about 65 (66 for sure) that Holden revamped their engine line-up with new engines derived from the new generation of Chevy "6s" that were introduced in the early 60s & they backed those engines with, you guessed it, Powerglide! (On the American Hydra-Matics the "S" range on the selector was billed as "Super" range. Holden liked to call it "Special Intermediate" range. I recall Holden extolling the virtues of performance & control provided by that intermediate range. Funny how when they switched to Powerglide having that intermediate gear was no longer something of significance!) That's advertising for you...
By late '60s or early '70s Holden introduced Tri-Matic which I believe was Australian built but I'm not sure if it was their design or derived from US THMs. By '69, Opel, at least for the smaller "Kadett", was using a small lightweight THM 180 built in France. Probably easy shipping to England or Germany. Hardly anyone in US is even aware of it's existence. Never went in any American cars that I know of. So in 1971 if you bought an Opel from a Buick dealer you could get a 3spd THM, but if you got a Vega from your Chevy dealer you still had to settle for 2spd Powerglide!
@@DejaView Hi Dennis that about sums it up. I do know Holden dropped Hydramatic with the introduction of The HD series in 1965 Holdens, which had the larger 149 cubic inch and 179 cubic inch blocks, these engines were also introduced in the previous EH series but were then using Hydramatic The HD and HR series, this series had an increase of capacity to 161 and 186 that followed changed to Powerglide. The Vauxhalls of that era imported in CKD kits to Australia from the U.K. were 2.6 litre six cylinders and Hydramatic was standard on the top line Cresta, they were not big sellers.Thank you for your input great to share this knowledge with the great unwashed lol.
@@DejaView An interesting bit of trivia about the THM180. When the markets moved to 4-speed ATs, GM took the overdrive sub-assembly from its THM200-4R and adapted it to the 180, thus creating the 4L30-E. I believe it went into some Isuzu built compact trucks. It was also purchased by BMW and installed in 3 series cars for the US market.
We had a '92 Cavalier with sticking lockup solenoid. Dealer seemed stunned that I would ask them to simply disconnect it. The car was worth $500 at best and I think they quoted at least that to fix it.
My parents had a 92 grand am, when we started having problems with the lockup selinoid we wired it to a switch so we could manually turn it on and off.
I had a ‘69 DeVille convertible with only 57K. The boot was still unwrapped in the trunk. I regret selling it to this day.
Pontiac even put that damm ROTO in my GranPrix; the shifter got so hot pulling a boat trailer had to use a glove. Life span ? very short. Now my '62 Bonneville had the latest and greatest 4-S Hydramatic and it moved that big cruizer around with precision.
One of 700R4's biggest problems was the vehicle owner pulling heavy loads in overdrive.
The 700 won't stay in overdrive towing, as a matter of fact they kicked down too easily in my opinion. And in overdrive, there's no torque converter heat to kill the tranny, but in fourth gear, the torque converter slippage does heat up the tranny, and they weren't given sufficient cooling to account for this. The actual problem was the shift was too soft 3-4, and the hunting while Towing and going up and down hills, that's what actually killed the tranny, that shift and too small clutch plates. You should watch Richard at precision transmissions on ytube. He's the expert
That's probably why they invented the "tow/haul" button.
I have been building transmissions for 25 years, I have built a few hundred 700s.
There is nothing wrong with pulling a trailer with the trans in overdrive. The problem is the wheezing engines they put in front of the early 700s. The engine barely has the torque to pull a heavy truck empty, put some weight behind it and the trans constantly upshifts/downshifts, overheating the fluid.
Another problem is the soccer mom, girlie man shift quality designed into the transmission. For maximum durability, you want a transmission to shift with a solid “thud”. You don’t want it to slide into gear, you need to actually FEEL the shift. Too many people think if can feel the transmission change gears, it shifts too hard. You don’t necessarily need a trans that shifts hard enough to knock the dash out of the truck, but the slippery-sliding shifts book the fluid, glaze the clutches, it’s all downhill after that.
@@mattrodgers4878 I just drove a 2019 Suburban to Florida. The 1 2 shift takes about 3 seconds, no joke! It literally sliiiiiiidesssss into 2nd, a simple reprogramming the computer would help soooooooo much. It doesn't exhibit any of the shudder bump lockup issues associated with the allegedly contaminated oi, that GM replaces with Mobil 1 full syn oil. I'll be changing it for Amsoil. The '19 got 30.3mpg thru Georgia @ 70-75, egg under toe. My last '95 6.5TD 2500 4x4 4L80E has 309k and still shifts well, aside from a 3 second delay into reverse, NotWithStanding lengthening the reverse band apply pin with a 3/16th blob of weld. 700s, like ALL tranny's need to be firmed up, including lockup! LONG LIVE THE SHIFT KIT!
THANKS FOR POSTING I always learn something. 67 years old and have owned some of the cars you show started driving 1972 first car 67 Ford Fairlane station wagon
Nobody likes to bash gm's shortcomings more than GM lovers. For all the great guys they made, there sure were a fair share of misses. Do you have any experience with the late 50s, early 60s Chevy turboglide? I've heard it's a bit of a stinker, but I'm interested if you have any insight.
Also, while I hope the winter weather breaks soon and we can get back to the reviews, but I'd enjoy videos going over some of the cars you've previously owned and talking about the pros and cons. Sort of like a post-ownership review from the porch. Just an idea. These list videos have honestly been great and I've learned from each one!
Yes Turboglide trans. was one of the worst. I owned a beautiful 60 Impala with one.
As I understand, Chevrolet gave up on the turboglide and wouldn't service them or sell individual replacement parts. Their recommended service part was a brand new Powerglide.
The Turboglide was probably the worst of the worst in GM transmissions during the late 50s. It was so bad and so prone to failure that GM dealerships would purposefully break during servicing to generate warranty revenue. It was very easy to do; rev the engine in neutral, slam the shifter into the Grade Retard (GR) position and then into reverse and accelerate. Those transmissions were replaced under warranty with the much more dependable 2 speed Powerglide. The Turboglide was failure prone and very difficult to fix and I think GM was glad to see it disappear. The Turboglide was produced from 1957 to 1962.
@@codyluka8355 It was much like Buick's Flight-Pitch DynaFlow, just smaller and lighter. Buick only used their's for 2 years.
What's great about these porch chats is that you are covering topics that are interesting and are not talked about on other auto sites and you do so with some amazing depth of knowledge. Maybe it didn't have problems but I sure hated the two speed powerglides. I had a 69 Camaro with a 307 and a two speed powerglide, what an awful engine-transmission combo.
With these transmissions mentioned, a manual transmission (if offered) would be the way to go. I have always contended a truck isn't a truck ULESS it has a manual transmission!
A manual trans, to me, is better suited for trucks. Better engine braking, less chance of problems PROVIDED the operator(s) know how to drive it properly.
@@michaelbenardo5695 Yes. Back when I was 17 or so, I had to sometimes drive the small tow truck associated with the family business. It was a 1949 Ford Duelly 1 ton. My step father took out the flat head and installed a 292 Y-block. The transmission did NOT have synchro-mesh so one had to double clutch with every shift. That trained me well on how to drive a manual transmission. Try pulling a load up a 7% grade from a dead stop while having to double clutch it all the way up the hill.
Car manufacturers know how to mess up manual transmissions too--too small,too light duty,clutch too low a capacity to hold full engine torque at low RPM--(a weak clutch might have been used in the hope of not overloading the transmission internals when the clutch was released too fast
@@davidpowell3347 True, Japanese cars used to have really bad clutches - 50,000 miles and gone, whereas a good clutch can last close to 100,000 miles. 56 Mercurys had a weak manual transmission, the few that were built with one.
When I went to school for the TH125 the instructor stated we were going to learn how to repair..."the biggest POS GM has ever built". It was junk
Oh i disagree! Just take any of the newer mid sized suvs from GM. 50-60k miles and they are cooked. Check the salvage/ recyclers and you will see many of these junked because of the transmission and because they are often not rebuildable owners just scrap them for steel price. Lots of gm customers are getting burnt so bad that I do not see Gm moving into the 2030’s.
Love your Channel. I had a 64 Dynamic 88 and a 61 Cadillac both with the slim jim transmission. They were both terrible Transmissions I replace the one on the Catalina and the Oldsmobile used to Ping the engine would knock going from first to second because the second gear appeared so much taller in 2nd gear than first. The engine in the Catalina went through two timing chains before I got rid of it and it was probably the worst car I ever owned
Our '62 Pontiac would spill transmission fluid on the exhaust manifold when in passing gear. That beautiful 2 door Catalina caught fire and burned up because of that transmission.
Cadillac used the dual coupling transmission, not a Rotohydramatic.
The 61 cadillac used the same 4 speed dual coupling hydramatic as my 58 cadillac. I know, because we owned a 61 cadillac Deville for about 10 years. The 58 cadillac has a 365 v8, the 61 had a 390..maybe, your 61 cadillac had a power train swap??
tony rupp: I'm thinking you typed 61 Cadillac but meant Catalina since the rest of your post refers twice to the Catalina.
The Cad only had the 4 speed HydraMatic. If your's had the Roto Hydra, somebody swapped it in. It wasn't built that way, as it was no good, just as you said.
You're very entertaining and knowledgeable without being judgy, it's a great lunch break for me to enjoy your posts! I am in the middle of rebuilding my C6 this week.
Thats an easy job. You can use the planetary gearset from an E4OD if you want to get wide ratio with a lower first and second gear. It slips right in but you will also need to use a 1977 or newer forward clutch drum.
Can anybody tell me the reason why quite a bit of auto transmissions in 60s used 1:1 fluid couplings instead of torque converters? Mercedes also did the same in 60s but then went to a TC Auto in 70s. I always wondered the pros and cons of using fluid coupling over a torque converter
man for most people automatic transmissions are the work of magic ,what you ask is beyond comprehension for mortals lol
That was in the 50s and early 60s and mostly in GM cars. Ford (actually Borg Warner which was owned by Ford) used torque converters as early as 1951.
@@Adrian-mq5ld They are NOT magic or voodoo, and yes..you CAN learn to build them.
Ive been building them since the 80s. Not sure if this is out of print now but its a good reference "Automotive Transmissions and Power Trains"...McGraw-Hill Book Co.
I learned auto and manual trans rebuilding from 2 people..an old school transmission builder and my ex-girlfriend who had a degree in automotive technology.
Unfortunately, she could also single handedly cause Anheuser Busch stock to rise.
@@donreinke5863 Correct, they are not magic or anything else other than mechanical/hydraulic. I started back in the 80's as well. Stop doing rebuilds for most general cars and started only doing racing transmissions and Engines. My first experience was with engines with my Dad back in the mid 70's. It wasn't until we build a 64 dodge 330 polara for racing that i began to work on transmissions. Keep it clean and in order and you will do fine. Also just like Engines, once you have worked on one, the principles will work on any of them. Nice to see other builders out here.
@@davidmiller9485 you should watch Richard at precision transmissions on youtube. He's the master of Masters
Basically any automatic transmission before they managed to figure out how to get four or more gears out of them were pretty bad. They may have been robust and smooth shifting, but in terms of practicality, they were terrible. Your engine had to be massively over-powered to cope with the poor power band optimization, so you ended up needing to burn way more fuel than you would have liked and you needed pretty large engines that then had to scream at highway speeds because you just didn't have enough gearing to make them usable at those speeds. Some people got really clever by basically tacking an extra gear or two onto the end with overdrive, but that's not really a great solution either, because they frequently relied on manual activation. I remember being so surprised the first time I drove my Mercedes with a 5-speed auto after having a VW golf with a 4-speed auto and realizing that it could happily cruise at 80MPH at only around 3200RPM instead of screaming at nearly 6k RPM. Nowadays I have a Ford Fusion AWD with a 6-speed auto and it doesn't even break a sweat at 80MPH because it's got gearing for days. Even at over 100MPH it's barely into the 3.5k RPM range. The 5-speed in my Mercedes ran out of gearing and torque at around 136 and I still haven't had a good opportunity to find out how fast my Ford will go, but it's definitely faster than that. It has absolutely no problems hitting that speed and is far from running out of torque or gearing. I just don't have a long enough abandoned stretch of highway in my area to really hammer it. I suspect it'll have a governor to keep it under either 155 or 165.
As for terrible transmissions within my lifetime: Ford's 6-speed that they used on the Focus and Fiesta during the 2010's; Nissan's early attempts at a CVT, particularly those used in the Murano; the transmission that Volkswagen used on their 2.5L and some 2.0L variants from the mid-2000's on to around 2018; and pretty much any of the clutchless manual transmissions. Ford still hasn't adequately addressed the known problems associated with that transmission, nor the CVT used in the Ford 500 or the transmission issues that many of their vehicles from around 2008 suffered. If you've got a Ford from around that time and the transmission goes, unless you are really attached to that car, just write it off. You'll spend more than the car is worth to fix it or replace the transmission. As for the Nissan CVTs, the early models are trash and destroy their pulleys quite readily, particularly if you drive aggressively, though newer revisions are significantly more reliable and can offer some decent fuel savings by keeping the vehicle in the power band effectively. As for VW's transmission woes, as far as I can tell, the transmissions tend to become noisy and less prone to shifting perfectly at higher speeds, but they don't necessarily fail catastrophically. The clutchless manuals are just a nuisance and tend to have weak syncros because they're a weird amalgamation, but if you want to shift yourself without needing to learn how to heel-toe a clutch, then they do still work. Just be gentle with them and don't try to short-shift or they'll complain and die. I think Toyota, Honda, and Mercedes probably make some of the most reliable automatics that I've had any experience with, though Nissan's actual gear-shifted automatics were also very good. I also really like the newest generation of 10-speed automatics, since they are a completely different design to the old 5 and 6-speed behemoths that were frequently larger than the engine itself.
I had a 78 Grand Prix which I grew to hate, partly because the first transmission, a TH 200, failed after about 20,000 miles. Foolishly, after the Grand Prix, I gave GM one more chance and bought an 89 Olds Cutlass Ciera, which was my third GM car. It had a number of problems too. After that, I swore I would never buy a GM vehicle again, and I have stuck to that oath. In listening to Scotty Kilmer every day, I'm thinking that if I buy another vehicle, it just might have to be a Toyota.
Way back I had a 1980 Olds Cutlass 5.7L Diesel. The previous owner rigged a foot operated dimmer switch to control the torque converter lockup. That was a nice improvement. Sometimes I would forget to unlock the converter when coming to a full stop. The locked up converter would actually stall the diesel. I guess that the TCC was FUBAR. As long as I remembered to unlock it, everything was good. I only paid $500 for it.
Adam, Did these GM transmission issues arise around the time they stopped using genuine whale oil in the transmission fluid? 😂
Nah. Wasn’t a function of that!
20:12 To fix this problem
I used a on/off switch, that I put in the dashboard.
On the highway, I turned the switch on.
Around town I turned the switch Off.
Was a beautiful Oldsmobile Delta 88.
One that you overlooked is the 4L60E, they functioned and that is about it. This is a typical GM setup, the transmission was JUST built to handle the power attached. If attached to a 4.3 you were OK but if you had a 5.3 sorry about your luck. If you kept out of it would function for a long time, but if you for example pulled a 2K trailer or put your foot in it with a 5.3 you got familiar with the transmission shop. I generally stay away from GM vehicles simply because of their automatic transmission issues, even their best transmissions are inferior to that of Ford or Chryslers. Yes both of the other brands have made some not so good transmissions, but it seems that GM has a reputation of marginal is good enough.
TH350 andTH400 are tough transmissions that will go the distance and take heavy use.
The th200 is popular amongst drag racers because it's very light. They replace the internals using hardened billet parts to strengthen them.
I managed to screw up the Powerglide in my grandmother's '65 Impala 283 V8 by driving like an idiot. My first car was an '65 Oldsmobile Dynamic 88 convertible with the 425 High Compression V8 and Turbo Hydramatic. That drive train was impossible to kill, because I abused the crap out of it and it never failed.
How can that be when Powerglides are used in drag racing for their strength?
@@jamesfrench7299
Probably because I drove it like it was a manual tranny and I was at the drag strip. Never underestimate the ability of a teenager to destroy anything.
@@chrislj2890 you must have really abused that thing. Nothing is infallible.
@@jamesfrench7299
Yeah, it's not like it was destroyed because it wasn't in the shop too long and was fixed good as new. Unfortunately she had an accident and totaled it, then she got a '68 Caprice with a 327 V8 that was pretty nice too.
I watch all of your videos. Keep up the technical discussions. They are very educational. My dad owned a number of Oldsmobiles from the mid fifties to the mid seventies. He had a 1962 Dynamic 88. They were all awesome cars.
I had to figure out that tcc on my 1987 caprice with the 200R4 with a custom after market vacuum switch I installed on the intake manifold,it had a small Allen key for adjustment,after plugging off the break pedal vacuum tcc switch the transmission worked awesome just with this vacuum/electric switch.
An honorable mention to this list has to go to the THM125. Many a N car had them repeatedly fail on the Milford transmission test hill when we ran them both in pre-production prototypes and later early production durability testing. They ran exceptionally hot. We called them our modern day slush boxes because of their sloppy, very slippery shifts. In later years, much like many other GM malaise era products/components they improved greatly.
Again, learned a lot from another one of your porch chats.
In 1983, I rented a Cavalier (Cadavelier?) in California. Thought it would be fun to climb the infamous Grapevine Hill. The THM125 downshifted to 2nd and at nearly full throttle the 2nd gear band began slipping. The engine would runaway up to redline, trans would upshift to 3rd, engine would bog down, and the whole cycle would repeat, over and over and over. A miracle that I didn't toast the transmission before reaching the top. Some used Cavalier buyer got screwed.
Interesting comments! I have a 1982 6000 with a thm125c (45k). It shifts well enough but is not as nice as my 1985 6000 with 235k. Both are all original still having only had fluid and filter changes.
The THM200 was used in the Buick GNs so it must have had something going for it....
The 1957 Oldsmobile 88 had Jetaway Hydramatic. It got replaced by a B&M Street Stick fully manual shift Hydro. Great Trans.
I have to agree with you about the Roto-Hydramatic. A real dog. I never saw a early 60’s Oldsmobile with one those catastrophes in it that didn’t need a new tranny. Loved the early Hydramatic!
The fluid change helped my 2015 Yukon Denali. It solved the washboard condition but It still had rough shifts. Really hard for my 16 year old to learn with. That was the main reason I traded it. It did seem durable though and towed trailers really well.
Adam - very interesting topic - held my interest in learning more about the behind the scenes shenanigans lurking in the automotive industry.
Looking forward to the next one!
I grew up in the early 70's and, my father being a Chevy man, I had a lot of ride time with the Turbo Hydromatics, and yes, when you're used to those transmissions, the Ford C4 shifts are, to put it mildly, noticeable.
Fascinating information and presentation. I look forward to each new edition.
The key to success with the 440T4 is the use of an auxiliary cooler and regular fluid changes. I have 4 GM cars with them. Keep them cool. I also welded on a drain plug since the filter doesn’t need to be constantly changed.
New fluid every 10,000 miles or so and no messy pan removal.
The 6-speed 2014 Silverado transmission also suffered from poor initial fluid quality. I had the local Chevy dealer replace the fluid at 70,000 miles and glad that I didn't wait longer.
The Chevrolet Turboglide was used for 5 years. They should have incorporated an interlock to prevent throttle input while selector was in Hr (1st part of 57) and Gr. By the time the engineers had chased all the problems the damage was done as far as sales.