Roto-5 Tranny ……… Your Out of There!!!!!

[jensenracing77]

I think the correct term is 200-4R….

Every 200-4R I have ever seen were the dual bolt pattern bell housing. I don’t think they make a Chevy only or BOP only 200-4R?

[911pilot]

What about my current 2-piece drive shaft? Whether I go with the 200-c or the 200-R4, will I keep, modify or have to replace my drive shaft? Are there changes to the differential that is also required?

[62cutlassconvert]

(There is a discussion on driveshaft shortening and 1pc vs. 2 pc shafts from July 4 2015 that may be of interest to you. The Post is titled 62 Cutlass Flywheel Lightening but it moves into driveshaft shortening and two different methods.)

Currently we are going to keep the 2 pc shaft at this point. We have set the angle of the eng/transmission to form a straight line from trans tail shaft to the Center support bearing as recommended by the driveshaft shop and as the original is set up. This is typical of 2-piece shafts with a ujt at one end of the front shaft. No offset of angles is desired for the front shaft since it only has a ujoint at one end. Note that the Roto 5 has a fixed UJt yoke at the rear of the trans while the 200C or 200R4 has a splined shaft for the rear UJt which moves on the trans output shaft. We are leaving the rear shaft alone. We will be setting this up in the next couple of weeks so I’ll report on results.

[joe_padavano]

[quote quote=12151]I think the correct term is 200-4R….

Every 200-4R I have ever seen were the dual bolt pattern bell housing. I don’t think they make a Chevy only or BOP only 200-4R?

[/quote]

Actually, the early 200-4R cases were BOP-only. Most, however, are unisex.

Attachments:

You must be logged in to access attached files.

[911pilot]

Your right, the only option is to stay with a BOP and go with the 200–4R AND the stock carb will not work with the cable linkages………I’ll have to update with an Eddlebrock .

[62cutlassconvert]

Here’s a pic of the TH200c attached to my eng. It’s almost ready to go in. Much smaller and shorter case than the 2004R. Was able to push out the tunnel to provide enough room. Top pic with eng and trans installed with the TV/kickdown bracket and cable mounted to an Edelbrock 1403.

Attachments:

You must be logged in to access attached files.

[mikepoe59]

That looks really good…can’t wait to hear how it performs with the TH200c.

[911pilot]

So given the choice between the 200R4 and the 200C you recommend the 200C for its size thus requiring less modifications to the tunnel?

[911pilot]

I decided however to go with the 60 degree 700R4 (4L60), using a 1986 or newer (prefer the 190/1991) model; the 200R4 and the 200C are excellent choices but again I feel for my application the 700R4 is best suited because of its smaller size; I don’t have to change the flywheel; mates nicely with the adapter from D&D fabricators and I can realize significant mileage benefits as well. I hope to see as much as a 30% drop in fuel consumption. I like that it will be a 4-speed with overdrive. I’ll let you know how things go in the process.

[62cutlassconvert]

Whichever of these trans you go with I think you’ll enjoy the change.

When compared with the 700R4,4L60, and 2004R we went with the 200C as it is much lighter, smaller, takes less horsepower, has all the interfacing benefits you describe above, requires significantly less tunnel mods(which we heavily weighted), and will work with the stock linkage and console with miinor mods..

Good luck with your mod, look forward to some pics.

[Author]

Posts