The 'booze' comment was a JOKE! Why are you taking it so personal? Remember I also specialize in psychology, so I already know the answer. But let's not dwell on that. Show some respect. I already show you more here than you have me, so who's the one who needs to reciprocate?
No where have I accused you of posting drunk, except for where I turned what you wrote back on you. If you think I am bullying you, let me know. But I didn't think having a opinion different than yours would be considered bullying. o No: Anyway, I don't have anything but respect for your opinion even though it differs from mine from time to time. Don't confuse passion to bullying, I can get passionate with my opinion from time to time but was never intended to be bullying. And how is that basically accusing me of posting drunk "cry when their bs gets turned back on them"? That is a totally different bs right there! I don't do that to you, plus the other back handed bitch comments from the other posts from you as well, what's up with those? Like this comment for example like many others; "I'll give you an "E" for effort on your creativity, but your embellishments are all over the place." This was from me simply pointing out that you generalized your opinion to include the TH350 because you swapped in basically a light duty TH400, the TH375 with the same gearing as the TH400 with the same HP usage as the TH400. How is pointing that out being an "embellishment"? You could removed yourself from having the same opinion with a TH350 because you didn't have an experience with that trans at that time. o No: No need to bully your way out of something like that right? I didn't think that was a big deal. What's wrong with saying you can verify by your experience that the SuperTurd300 in your opinion performs better that the TH375/TH400 transmissions and because you read that the TH350 would only use 8 HP less than the TH375/TH400 that you would conclude that results could possibly be the same, instead of getting offended? I have NO opinion on a Dyna Flow transmission because I have never driven a car that has one in it, why would anyone compare a trans that they haven't tried? Derek
I don't think anyone really gives a rat's ass about our disagreements, Derek. Let's keep them to PMs or emails if we have to. It's plugging up the thread. P.S.--your inbox is full, and check your email! lol
It wasn't funny, and you meant it to make fun more than to be funny(is this the answer you already knew?). I am actually not taking it personal, I was worried you were starting to spiral out of control yet AGAIN. I'm not going to touch that psychology comment, WAY to easy. I will not only show you respect, I will not reply to any of your posts ever again, and I would appreciate you reciprocating. How's that? It would seem you can't have an intelligent discussion where someone disagrees with you, sorry I'm not a yes man here to stroke your ego, I'm out. Derek
Another aspect about the ST300 that may be less known is the low band needs to be adjusted as it wears in, every 60,000 miles according to the manual (or 30,000 under heavy duress use), as is recommended in the service manual. It has a steel spacer between the opening of the band where the low gear engaging piston presses against it to enable low gear, and if it isn't adjusted in to keep that metal spacer intact, the spacer can eventually fall out into the transmission pan, and low gear will be neutralized (had this happen to me before I learned better). A simple fix is to just put it back into place and adjust the low band (or keep the low band adjusted and it would never happen). Something else is that there is no known 'shift kit' for these transmissions, but harder shifts can be achieved with other tricks. There are no 'performance' upgrade parts for the ST300 last I checked, since the stock parts are plenty strong enough for most applications. Some parts on the ST300 are interchangeable with the TH350 and vice-versa, and both have similar dimensions so one could be swapped out for the other if so desired. Putting a low powered engine in front of one will net less impressive results, as would be expected out of any low power engine no matter which transmission was used, but particularly with the ST300, which performs best when there's a substantial amount of torque pushed through it. The ST300 has one forward clutch pack for high gear with a band wrapped around it to engage low gear, and one reverse clutch pack. A pretty simple transmission to rebuild. Sorry everyone for the thread derail. Afterthought: many aftermarket cams are designed to squeeze more power out of the engine by narrowing the powerband. In this case, more gears would make it faster (not only in the 1/4, but overall), since the multi-geared transmission would keep the engine in a more desirable RPM range. For OEM or wider powerband engines, the ST300 can and does outperform multi-geared transmissions, in all areas except for taking off from a dead stop, and this can be altered with better torque converters and/or gearing.
The 2004r has replaced all transmissions above because it is better and I am not drunk (yet) so there. You guys kill me. I have blasted plenty of times with the nitrous coming on at the tromp of the gas so I know it can hold up to anything the 350 can give it. Lower first gear have 4th gear and a lockup Tq convertor, it has been in there for 10 years now. Out with the old and in with the new. and I bet it would beat the ST300
Derek - probably right on all counts.....I can only talk about my own experiences. We may get a better side by side comparison someday, I've got an ST400 on the floor that's calling my name (and I love 400's!) I'm at like a 6.something SLR right now, thats why it launches so hard. Good fun, but not nearly optimized ... it would be interesting to use a 400 to bring it into the 9's or 10's...
Gary - When mine was rebuilt we used high performance clutch packs and steels designed for a racing powerglide. we also used a 66 aluminum 1-2 shift valve (among other Reynolds tricks doumented in the "Blueprinting the Buick" article). Car barks the shift at WOT, docile as a kitten at part throttle.
Put the slicks on it and do a few time runs at full throttle. You will know if it was built well or not. Second gear band will probably be the first to go if not the splines on sun.
Is a $3600 CK performance unit it is perfect after 3 sets of rear tires LOL... was running between 10 and 15 PSI of boost with both slicks and street tires.... Cruised nice at 120-140 MPH on the highway with the 3.42 gear.
So how does the Comp 268h compare to the FM CS-647? Hydraulic-Excellent mid-range torque. Great for towing. Works well with stock manifolds. Smooth idle. http://www.compcams.com/Company/CC/cam-specs/Details.aspx?csid=40&sb=0 Just wondering if it is worth $190??
Depends on your compression ratio. And not the factory rating , it's overrated. If your not over 9.2 compression the comp cam is a disappointment . As the cs 647 if great for the lower compression engine and will have better low end the any of the comp cams. Although I believe this cam is more focused for a lower torque curve, lower rpm range. Would work great with stock gears and 2 barrel. Increase in compression over 8.0 would improve its torque . Excellent stock replacement cam for the price. I prefer the more aggressive crower level 3 cam . Definantly has proven itself and it work good in the low compression engines and bigger improvements with bigger valves and 2500 or bigger convertor . Shave .040 -.050 off heads for about 8.9-9.1 on a 68-75 non hi compression engine for either cs 647 or crower cams with new springs and .050 shorter pushrods. You will like the increased power The comp cam is a straight line cam so really needs header to work.
It depends more on how your heads flow. A higher overlap cam with an advanced position will pull more into the cylinder, making up for a bit of compression...once you are into the cam/top end's powerband (which should be right off idle/below a mild converter's flash point).
Sweet. I thought I remembered some parts being interchangeable from the PG to the ST300, but couldn't remember what all interchanged. To the rest of the readers: I just want to reiterate that the ST300 performs best with good power in front of it. If your engine is weaker, more gears will definitely help it get moving. Pretty simple. I like more transmissions than just the ST300. It holds a special place in my memories because I had such fun with it. If you don't like them, then don't use them! lol No big deal.
Yes but since head work was not mentioned just in comparison of the 2 cams the cs647 with it's higher dynamic would be better in comparison for poster listed stock manifolds. As where the comps cam need more then a 8 to one stock manifolds stock head engine for best results and in my opinion to beat what the cs647 can can do for him at a stock level.
It depends on what you mean by 'compare'... FM cs647 (and the Melling sbc-5) are OEM replica "GS" camshafts. They have wider powerbands and considerations for more than just raw power. Aftermarket cams increase power by creating more intense lobe profiles and tend to have tighter (narrower) powerbands. They also tend to have earlier intake valve closing points, and so will raise dynamic compression over the OEM replica cams when using the same static compression ratios, unless of course you get a super hot aftermarket cam--but then other considerations would need to be addressed in order to make the entire engine best utilize the cam. Many aftermarket cams require extra attention when installing them, breaking them in, and maintaining your engine to get the most out of them. Better hardening techniques permit newer aftermarket cams to be ground on much more intense lobe profiles for maximizing power output, but they will still require tighter valve springs. My assertion that when you increase the strain on any component, you can expect a decreased life expectancy out of it, is warranted; however, there are instances where you can get excellent longevity results from performance parts as long as the geometry isn't too excessive and proper break-in and maintenance is observed.
Take a good look at cam specs Gary . performance cams do not always increase dynamic compression the mostly lower it which is why an aggressive cam need higher compression. Come on Gary your numbers has shown me this. You are stuck on that crower cam ain't you. !!
