I'm putting in a 360 c.i. small block in my 66 barracuda.I heard someone saying they used a different torque converter because it's externally balanced instead of internally balanced.I know the harmonic balancer is externally balanced but I never heard of this other thing. Is there a special converter for this swap?
273 to 360 swap. same converter?
- Thread starter Sreyno
- Start date
-
omahamoparguy
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Feb 19, 2010
- Messages
- 756
- Reaction score
- 32
yes. you have to have weight on both ends of the crank. the factory used weights on the convertors with the 360. there are some other options; weld on weights or special flexplates, but the stock 360 convertor did have weights.
.................then u have a couple of other problems if ur using ur 66 tranny......converter snout register is smaller on the 66 motor, nessitating a spacer ring for the 360.......then u need an old style converter built for that tranny, or just use a 68 up trans......kim...
pishta
I know I'm right....
Crank register adapter ring and a weighted flexplate. There is another option, sort of a big oblong weight that you bolt to the crank instead of a flexplate, someone was selling one recently, called the wonder wheel or something?
grimreaper
Cross Member
b&m 10239 flex plate and an adapter ring from Torqueflite Patty. or go the 68 and later tranny with a converter for an external balance engine.
Who is torqueflight Patty? And where can I find this person or place?
kobra50
Well-Known Member
Am I faving these same issues putting a 318 from a 73 in the 65 with the 904 tranny
No. Just the 360's had this problem.
Dad and I put a new torque converter(from 360) in his 67 273/904 cuda. There was a ring that was tack-welded on that had to be ground off. There might be other "things" but factory converter and the 360 converter was with the car when dad bought it.
Depending which year 360 ci engine you are using, early or late model, there are balance differences between them in addition to the miss match of spline & shaft size to a 67 and older transmission. I think all 1966 automatic transmissions are non-pushbutton controlled? In addition to the shaft size difference between 67 & 68 manufactured transmissions & crankshafts, the 65 904, I believe, is a one year only unit different from 64 down in, and 66 and 67 transmissions. The easiest and probably most economical in the long run solution would be to use a ‘68 and up transmission. Options for custom build and upgrades to the later transmissions, are greater and readily available as are rebuildable cores, as well as off the shelf converters and be used.
As previously mentioned, contact Torqueflite Patty with all your engine & transmission particulars, and he will be able to engineer a solution to making something work.
As previously mentioned, contact Torqueflite Patty with all your engine & transmission particulars, and he will be able to engineer a solution to making something work.
grimreaper
Cross Member
Torqueflite Patty = Pat Blais Transmissions seattle WA (206) 365-1966
Now, what is the purpose of this adaptor ring? If you buy the aformentioned flexplate, What does the adaptor ring adapt? I measured the cranks from both engines and although the newer one had a larger inside diameter than the old one they are basically the same. I don't think there would be a problem if the snout of the older converter didn't fit in the crank as snug as the newer converter. As long as there wasn't a problem of the converter fitting in the end of the crank properly it should work if I just bought the b&m flexplate. tell me where I'm wrong.
To WJAR. 1965 was a freak year where torque flight trannys were concerned. they got rid of the "ball and trunion" front u-joint but it still had dual cable linkage.So it could still have a push button shifter in some models. I always avoided that particular year car because you would play hell finding this trans. The only other wierd one was a 66 charger. It had a short tail shaft so good luck finding one of those cheap! F.Y.I.
...............u need the adaptor ring to keep the converter stable,if it wobbles around it will eat the pump bushing, seal and converter..............kim......
That seems like it only would be a problem if the flexplate became loose somehow. or the converter bolts were loose. in that case nothing would save the bushing or the seal. the converter bolts are the reason it stays in one place. I'll get the adapter ring anyway I was just curious about it's purpose. If I was going to race the car I would worry about it. But, it's going to be a daily driver.
RichardJ916
Well-Known Member
I have a 360 Flex plate if still need one.
PM Me
PM Me
wrong! the pilot is what centers the convertor to the crank. the bolts are just there to hold it in place.
Lonewolf3165
Living the Dream!
Stock flex plates are the same on all LA motors. The weights were added to the torque converter & the harmonic balancer. Mopar performance used to sell a weight kit that came with a template to mark where to weld the weights on the converter. I don't know if its still available or not. Later 904 would be the way to go because of the converter to crank snout fittment.
BillGrissom
Well-Known Member
I bought an adapter ring for $20 from Charlie_S (or such) of Silver Springs, FL on this site. Search posts. As stated, you need it to center the torque converter. Same deal on slant sixes. The year change was around 67-68 and maybe aligns w/ switch to a cast crank (not sure).
1965 A-bodies still had the ball & trunion front joint (Detroit). I think identical to a 64- transmission other than the valve body may differ, since 1965 had the federal-mandated standard shift pattern (P-R-N-D-2-1). C-bodies were the true 1-yr only since a sliding yoke (new) with cable shift and park cable (old), though no push-buttons in the cabin.
1965 A-bodies still had the ball & trunion front joint (Detroit). I think identical to a 64- transmission other than the valve body may differ, since 1965 had the federal-mandated standard shift pattern (P-R-N-D-2-1). C-bodies were the true 1-yr only since a sliding yoke (new) with cable shift and park cable (old), though no push-buttons in the cabin.
on time in my life i knew a guy that changed his stick shift valiant. A 66 to be exact. To an automatic. He got a trans fron the junkyard that wouldn't fit because the converter snout wouldn't fit in the crank. I don't know why he did this, but to make it fit he ground off the nose of the converter. He drove that car for years with that arrangement with no problems. It might have been a later model trans which is the opposite of my problem. I agree that if i you don't do it right don't do it. But, the point i'm trying to make is the converter bolts held the converter just fine. So, even though i'm going to do it right it doesn't mean it won't work the other way. Maybe he was just lucky.
omahamoparguy
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Feb 19, 2010
- Messages
- 756
- Reaction score
- 32
yes he got lucky. all torq convertors that I can thin of have a registor that fits very snug. If you want to use that trans, the B&m flexplate and the spacer ring would work. You may want to say a prayer to the trans before you drive it each time though as the extra torque of the 360 may put the hurt to that tranny in short order. Especially if is bone stock.
Oh, I don't know. Torqueflights are pretty tough. But the 6 cylinder rear end would give me grief long before the trans would fail. I can just hear those spyder gears bang when I nail it from a dead stop sometime! I'm going to need a 8 3/4 rear end before I get a thousand miles on it. This car is like an onion every time I peel back a segment there's another segment. Oh well! I'll finish it sometime.
-
