700r4 with 4.10s 31in tall tire

im throwing a 700r4, 4.10 gearing and i run a 31 inch tall tire in the rear. What are my highway rpms going to look like?

 

Is there a reason you are going with a 700R4 compared to a 2004R4 The 200R4 makes a much easier swap.

 

and has better od and is stronger

 

What does "better od" mean? Where is your proof a 200 is stronger than a 700? Here's a good article where they compared the internal parts between a 700 and 200--> http://www.webrodder.com/article.php?AID=426&SID=6

Size does matter sometimes.

 

well there is more overdrive with 200 is lighter less rotating mass to turn so it will net more fuel milage and in built form will hold more power even a 4l65e built wont hold but 650 hp. last but not least it also will shift in to od at full throttle.

 

just for reference some built 200s are capable of 800 hp

the best built 4l60e ive seen was about 650 hp

 

Good theory but real world experience trumps theory anytime. The 700 is a .70 OD and the 200 is a .67 OD which equals about an extra 3 MPH at any given RPM but thats not something that IMO is any big deal and in my case the .70 works better---> With a 700 and 3.42's in the rear and the convertor locked @ 2200 RPM my speed is 75 MPH which is about where I need to be. Due to the cam size if I get much below 2200 RPM's the motor starts bogging/jerking due to the lack of RPMS..in this case the extra RPM's is a help.

Gas mileage? I don't get that at all? I'm not going to build a 455 CI motor with high flow heads, 11 to 1 CR and a large rumpity cam then worry about gas mileageou:

I think torque is a bigger killer of these OD trannys than HP and the 700 in my car has shifted perfectly for 2+ years.

 

well being that is takes less power to turn equals mpg which your not worried about as you posted but some are but also less power loss in the drive train so more power being put to the ground. as for durabilty of the 700r4 ive broke a few 4l60es that had some hard parts added with a truck that just had about 50hp over stock and half the torque of most of the buicks.

so how is it not correct in a real world rather than theory just cause you dont care about mpg or driveabilty. not everyone builds a car to just run down a dragstrip. also your only running a 3.42s hes running a 4.10 so he will be cruising at 70 at higher rpm even with 200 than you will with a 700.

 

Thats odd. Both of Mine do.

You need to get someone that actually knows how to rebuild a 700..I rebuilt both of mine and they have lasted thousands of miles with zero issues. My cars are all street cars. Since you are so worried about proving the superiority of the 200---->Heres another car with a 700 in it 5 years now and thousands of miles no problems..Hmm 2 700's behind stout 455's and no problems..are we seeing a trend?

 

U have a 200? Why would you put in a 700 ? A 200 is easier to install and a properly built 200 should last a long time with a 340.

 

So you've built a 651 hp car car with a 200 then swapped it out with a 700 and the 700 went boomuzzled: You got any videos or pics to back up your statement? Lets see em..or do 700's blow up at 651 hp just because "you say they do":error: :TU:

 

Nobody in this thread said the 700 is easier to install. Post #3 said the 700 is more work and no one disagreed with it. Why would you want the "extras of installing One" Its pretty simple, you've got a good 200 so use it

 

no i blew up a 4l60e built in a ls truck that made about 400 hp. i dont know of anybody with a 200 that is built doing that. it was supposed to hold 650 hp it didnt.

 

or way can agree the 700 is stronger just cause you say so

 

Thats what happens when Mo, Larry and Curly rebuilds your tranny:error:

Can you point out anywhere I said the 700 is strongeruzzled: ??

You however did say the the 200 is stronger, I will quote it for you in case you have forgotten:TU:

Its obvious the 200 is stronger just because you say it is