That'* wrong too. There was no L36 from 92-94. It was the L27. But it did have the 4T60E.

You have the 60. You don't want the 65, and no, they're not interchangeable without a new PCM and wiring harness.

ya ya....my mistake

What'* the disadvantage of the 65?

it depends who you talk to :?

We have been collecting data on the average miles of the first failure of transmissions for a LONG time on this Forum.

jr's3800 and I took this on as a task. The 4T60'* have fewer problems and last an average of 40k miles or so longer than the 65'* before their first problem. Some things were fixed in the design of the 65, but other problems were introduced.

So it depends on who you 'ASK', Pat? We've collected this data from the MEMBERS of this fine forum. We asked for the mileage of the first problem with their transmissions. Remember?

When I had the transmission on my 93 rebuilt, I asked them the same question. My trans builder laughed. He had 3 65'* in the shop, and only my 4T60E. All 3 65'* had half the miles I had, and were all mated to NON-supercharged engines.

You can argue and defend the 65 in this case all you want, but we have the numbers on this Forum to back it up. The 60'* are less troublesome.

Well, that makes me feel good about mine.

Mine too! Oldsman'* 95 Rivi went over 200,000 before the tranny finally died and needed a new rebuild by the new owner !

Ive had nothing but nightmare'* with the 4t65, with the I just got, I went back to a 4t60e (better sucess)

Bill W i was not commenting on the Factual data that was collected, i was around for that and im FULLY aware of the stick that was up for a long damn so dont take my comment the wrong way....cause i always get ****** hammered for my comments from you when you read them the wrong way

i am saying that some people believe the 60 is better and others believe the 65 is better, that is all and nothing more