General GM Chat When starting new posts, please specify YEAR, MAKE, MODEL, ENGINE type, and whatever modifications you have made. Chat about all things GM (and related cars). Off-topic stuff should be in the Lounge, and all Model specific mechanical problems should be posted in the proper forum.
Sponsored by:
Sponsored by:

258mm TC compatibility?

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 12-28-2014, 04:13 PM
  #11  
Member
Posts like a V-Tak
Thread Starter
 
ehall's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2014
Posts: 45
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
ehall is on a distinguished road
Default

Originally Posted by Mike1995
I think everything after 97 got the 65-E. The L67 models got the 65-HD. I doubt any L36 got the larger flexplate.

The TC does not make the trans HD or non-hd. It'* the internals. The flexplate size has an effect of how much torque is applied to the trans.
I got that, what I was hung up on was the larger TC being mandatory for the HD and I was under the impression (until your previous post) that it was mandatory both ways, that only the HD could use the larger TC. I see cars with 258mm TC but without SC so that is what had me confused.

I actually don't want an HD, I don't need it for this build and its just additional cost and complexity (having to drill the flexplate, different axle inners, etc). Looking at trans tags for 1998, the two best matches for subset of [comfort, gears, tire size, weight, stall] are probably the 8FFB for the 3.8 NA Park Avenue and the 8TNB for the 3.8 NA Regal. The Park Avenue is probably the better fit, but it shows the large TC, hence my questions--is this an HD trans on an NA motor, or is it the stronger TC on a regular 4T65E.
Old 12-28-2014, 05:18 PM
  #12  
Retired



Certified Car Nut
 
Mike's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Dark Side, AZ
Posts: 17,920
Received 1,780 Likes on 1,304 Posts
Mike has a reputation beyond reputeMike has a reputation beyond reputeMike has a reputation beyond reputeMike has a reputation beyond reputeMike has a reputation beyond reputeMike has a reputation beyond reputeMike has a reputation beyond reputeMike has a reputation beyond reputeMike has a reputation beyond reputeMike has a reputation beyond reputeMike has a reputation beyond repute
Default

I think its just a larger TC. Strength doesn't play a factor, but probably stall speed would.
__________________
Retired Administrator
2002 *-10 5.7 V8
2023 Jeep Rubicon Diesel

Old 12-28-2014, 09:00 PM
  #13  
Member
Posts like a V-Tak
Thread Starter
 
ehall's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2014
Posts: 45
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
ehall is on a distinguished road
Default

According to this page the 8FFB from the Park Avenue is non-HD (text search for 8FFB). That would mean the TC is the only difference between the luxury Park Avenue and the cheaper cars that used the 8TNB. Might be comfort factor--longer spoolup time, different stall, more PWM slipping programmed into the TCU requiring larger TCC clutch or improved heat shedding or something, etc.

Last edited by ehall; 12-28-2014 at 09:01 PM.
Related Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
RPSSEI
1992-1999
0
03-26-2005 01:19 AM
RPSSEI
1992-1999
15
03-15-2005 04:25 PM
randman1
Performance, Brainstorming & Tuning
18
09-28-2004 12:44 AM
Foghorn
1992-1999
9
04-30-2004 07:49 PM
bobcaller
Everything Electrical & Electronic
1
01-31-2004 09:47 PM



Quick Reply: 258mm TC compatibility?



All times are GMT -4. The time now is 03:10 AM.