New commercial mount for 2004R transmission

-
2004R does not require the entire cross member to be cut away,only trimmed. Less work and less messing with the structural integrity of the chassis and especially the front end. I guess I could see it on a rust resto rebuild,But on a decent or rust free,,No. Good luck though.
 
@jbc426 - Yes, it's an Extreme Automatics Stage 3 transmission along with an FTI SRL-series 9.5" converter. Mike at MRL Performance built the 422ci stroker (see link below). I've got P295/45R17 Mickey Thompson ET Street Radial II's in the rear. Thanks for the info about the pan. The car will be run primarily on the street, so I've been worried about that. We'll see how things go. I may indeed look for a slightly shallower pan.

http://www.forabodiesonly.com/mopar/showthread.php?t=305015
 
Dart Vadr,
Thanks for the info, and pics. I'm am gonna do an extreme automatics stage 2 this winter with luck, and this will save me tons of time and energy... Looks like quality stuff to me, and I run torsion bars still. I think if guys are worried about reduced strength they could just cut away what is necessary for the swap, and weld up the crossmember like so many have. Or just Weld in a thick hoop like most guys do for the 42rh or a518 swap.

Thanks again, this is good news for those of us without major fab tools, or time to pull it off.

Joe
 
joeboy said:
Dart Vadr,
Thanks for the info, and pics. I'm am gonna do an extreme automatics stage 2 this winter with luck, and this will save me tons of time and energy... Looks like quality stuff to me, and I run torsion bars still. I think if guys are worried about reduced strength they could just cut away what is necessary for the swap, and weld up the crossmember like so many have. Or just Weld in a thick hoop like most guys do for the 42rh or a518 swap.

Thanks again, this is good news for those of us without major fab tools, or time to pull it off.

Joe
Click to expand...

@Joeboy - you make a great point. I suppose there's nothing stopping folks from either leaving a portion of the original mount in place or reinforcing that area in some other way if they're not comfortable with the strength of the replacement part.
 
Dart Vadr said:
@Joeboy - you make a great point. I suppose there's nothing stopping folks from either leaving a portion of the original mount in place or reinforcing that area in some other way if they're not comfortable with the strength of the replacement part.
Click to expand...

There you go!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Less work also...........
Treblig
 
I just pinged Chris at US Car Tool and he provided the following info: "We have to come to the conclusion that we will have these available for sale on the 16th. They will sell for $199.00."

In my mind, the price is quite reasonable based on the amount of work it'll save you.
 
It would have been nice if the price was less than $150 but it will save folks a lot of work. Anyone who has built this trans mount will tell you that it takes a bit of work and besides, some people either don't have the skills or prefer to save a little time knowing that what they buy has already been installed and tested. I'm not sure how buyers will "locate" the mount on their car to get the trans in the right place (vertically) but I guess that's going to depend on the particular build!! Did US Car tools leave space for shims so that people can raise (or lower) the trans tail by shimming the rubber mount??

treblig
 
Yes, the mount is vertically adjustable with shims, but I don't recall by how much. I have to call them in a bit to discuss other issues, so I'll ask and post their response.
 
Dart Vadr said:
Yes, the mount is vertically adjustable with shims, but I don't recall by how much. I have to call them in a bit to discuss other issues, so I'll ask and post their response.
Click to expand...

You kinda have to think of every possible problem someone might have installing and using this new mount or you'll end up having to answer numerous questions after the sale. Centering left to right is another small issue but that can be easily solved by shifting the new mount left to right as long as the installer left enough material on the original cross member (on the inside "cut" surfaces). I think that I would have probably welded a 1/8" plate to cover the hole (opening) on the old cross member. This 1/8" plate would be large enough to extend into (onto) the new mount ensuring that the "twisting motion" is transferred to the new mount (and the seam welds). But what do I know???

treblig
 
I just spoke to Chris at US Car Tool. The mount on my car was fabricated specifically for my particular situation (Alterktion and 2004R with Reid bellhousing). As such, it has no downward adjustability, but it has roughly 1/4" to 3/8" of vertical adjustability. It's important to note that there may be minor changes in transmission mount positioning due to the use of a stock k-member vs RMS Alterktion, Reid bellhousing vs. Wilcap adapter, etc. That being said, the bolt-on portion of the mount is CNC cut and bent, so it is super easy for him to customize at the touch of a button. Chris asked me to relay to interested buyers that he'd be happy to customize the bottom mount to anyone's specific requirements (up, down, forward, and aft from the location on my car) at no additional cost until such time as he is able to gather sufficient measurements to be able to supply the correct bottom mount for your application by asking you a few basic questions about your configuration. So, basically, he would supply you with a mount based on the initial design and if it doesn't work out for you, you can return it along with requested modifications and he'll send you a modified lower mount at no cost (except maybe shipping -you'll have to ask him about that).
 
Treblig said:
I think that I would have probably welded a 1/8" plate to cover the hole (opening) on the old cross member. This 1/8" plate would be large enough to extend into (onto) the new mount ensuring that the "twisting motion" is transferred to the new mount (and the seam welds). But what do I know???

treblig
Click to expand...

Quite a lot from what I've gathered by reading your numerous posts on this subject!
 
Aww man. That mount looks great. I already decided to stay with the auto in my '71 Gt instead of converting it to a 833OD like I was planning, and had considered a 2004r already. That mount would make the whole thing a lot easier.

Decisions, decisions.
 
Dart Vadr said:
I just spoke to Chris at US Car Tool. The mount on my car was fabricated specifically for my particular situation (Alterktion and 2004R with Reid bellhousing). As such, it has no downward adjustability, but it has roughly 1/4" to 3/8" of vertical adjustability. It's important to note that there may be minor changes in transmission mount positioning due to the use of a stock k-member vs RMS Alterktion, Reid bellhousing vs. Wilcap adapter, etc. That being said, the bolt-on portion of the mount is CNC cut and bent, so it is super easy for him to customize at the touch of a button. Chris asked me to relay to interested buyers that he'd be happy to customize the bottom mount to anyone's specific requirements (up, down, forward, and aft from the location on my car) at no additional cost until such time as he is able to gather sufficient measurements to be able to supply the correct bottom mount for your application by asking you a few basic questions about your configuration. So, basically, he would supply you with a mount based on the initial design and if it doesn't work out for you, you can return it along with requested modifications and he'll send you a modified lower mount at no cost (except maybe shipping -you'll have to ask him about that).
Click to expand...

You see....there's something I hadn't addressed yet!! The different adapter plates (TCI, Wilcap, etc) are different thicknesses. I know because before I bought my adapter plate I researched all of them and found that TCI had the thinnest plate. The thinner the plate the less you have to cut off the cross member because your not "pushing" the 2004R transmission as far toward the rear!!
That will definitely make a difference in the location of the trans mount holes in the US Car tool mount. We're talking about "front to back" positioning of course!!

Treblig
 
@Treblig - Absolutely! I haven't taken a close look at how much front to back adjustability is built into the lower mount. The first few folks who place an order and have a configuration other than mine will need to be willing to provide measurements to US Car Tool if the mounting location is off by a bit. This will allow US Car Tool to gather the data required to offer made-to-order kits for each configuration. Who knows, this mount with a modified lower bracket might also be suitable for other (perhaps manual?) transmissions as well.
 
Dart Vadr said:
I just posted the best pic I could find that shows the bottom bracket before it was enclosed. Looks like there's a significant amount of material fore and aft of where the transmission mount bolts to the lower bracket - could be enough to compensate for differences in the transmission configurations.

http://s827.photobucket.com/user/Da...member/DSC_0049-5-Large1_zpsjgretleb.jpg.html
Click to expand...


Those are EXCELLENT pics!!! I imagine all that US Car tool would have to do is something very similar to what GM did. GM slotted out the Trans mount bolt hole to compensate for any variations in the GM bodies. If US Car Tool slots the trans mount holes 1/4" fore and aft then it shouldn't be an issue!!
Every GM trans mount lower bracket I've ever seen has a slotted hole (front to back) !! It doesn't hurt the dependability or strength.
treblig
 
Am I missing something? Isn't the 200R4 swap for playing concessions to those too scared or too rare to hack the floor? Hell, if your gonna hack the floor, just put in a 42 or 46RH and call it a day! Or do a T56 or something, the possibilities open up to anything within reason at that point..

This 200r4 stuff is getting out of control. If your getting US car and tool to do a 200r4 bracket, they need to start making one for the transmissions stated above also, all it would take is a bob instead of a weave with the CNC machine. We need a T56 bracket that isn't $600.... :roll:
 
PoisonDart74 said:
Am I missing something? Isn't the 200R4 swap for playing concessions to those too scared or too rare to hack the floor? Hell, if your gonna hack the floor, just put in a 42 or 46RH and call it a day! Or do a T56 or something, the possibilities open up to anything within reason at that point..

This 200r4 stuff is getting out of control. If your getting US car and tool to do a 200r4 bracket, they need to start making one for the transmissions stated above also, all it would take is a bob instead of a weave with the CNC machine. We need a T56 bracket that isn't $600.... :roll:
Click to expand...

Yeah, I think you missed the point. The floor isn't getting hacked. The floor pan doesn't change at all. All of the changes needed to use this crossmember occur under the stock floor pan, so from the topside the car would still appear stock.

As far as concessions to the guys with "rare" cars, it's not numbers matching no matter what, so, who cares?

Cutting and re-contouring the floor pan is a pain, and changes all sorts of things- which seats will work, whether or not the stock console can be used, etc. Changing the crossmember is only visible from under the car, and really, no more damaging to the value of the car than not having the numbers transmission anyway.

What would be interesting is if this crossmember would be of any use to a T56 swap. I'm sure some of the cars that originally had 200r4's have been converted to T56's.
 
@PoisonDart74 - Totally understand where you're coming from. Personally, I wanted the lower first gear of the 42RH in a heavier duty transmission. I decided to go with an EA Stage 3 2004R, which is rated to 1000HP/850TQ. Others in the same situation might decide to either beef up a 42RH or forego the lower first gear and mod their floor pans to support a 46RH or Gear Vendors overdrive unit. I think that there are positives and negatives to each configuration. YMMV
 
PoisonDart74 said:
We need a T56 bracket that isn't $600.... :roll:
Click to expand...

Agreed. I'm just a customer, so I certainly don't speak for US Car Tool, but they seem to be up for any work that will appeal to a broad audience - especially if the work will provide substantial drivability benefits to our cars. Problem is, they don't get a lot of A-Bodies in their shop, let alone folks wanting them to do custom fabrication work like a T56 bracket. I would imagine that all it would take is for someone to approach them with a car and a T56 transmission...
 
PoisonDart74 said:
Am I missing something? Isn't the 200R4 swap for playing concessions to those too scared or too rare to hack the floor? Hell, if your gonna hack the floor, just put in a 42 or 46RH and call it a day! Or do a T56 or something, the possibilities open up to anything within reason at that point..

This 200r4 stuff is getting out of control. If your getting US car and tool to do a 200r4 bracket, they need to start making one for the transmissions stated above also, all it would take is a bob instead of a weave with the CNC machine. We need a T56 bracket that isn't $600.... :roll:
Click to expand...

It may have started out that way, but with a steady stream of performance and durability improvements allowing it to handle over 1000 horsepower and bolt on to any Mopar small blocks, big blocks and Gen II & III Hemis with an SFI rated bellhousing WITHOUT cutting the floor pan; the 200R4 is finding its way under more and more Mopars.

Sure you have to alter the torsion bar crossmember, but that is hardly irreversible given a few hours with a mig welder and an angle grinder. Look what guys can do with rusted out cars using these tools. A guy could make these modifications, and then put the car back to stock and most people would be hard pressed to tell anything had been done.

Another nice feature is that with the flip of a switch, you can lock-up the converter up in 4th making it virtually an automatic 5 speed that takes less power to drive than either of the Mopar options.

It's nice to have options. I love the functionality my 200R4 brings to my a-body. Well worth the swap.

You are right, It would be nice if US Cartool adapted this concept to the other transmissions you mention too.
 
jbc426 said:
It may have started out that way, but with a steady stream of performance and durability improvements allowing it to handle over 1000 horsepower and bolt on to any Mopar small blocks, big blocks and Gen II & III Hemis with an SFI rated bellhousing WITHOUT cutting the floor pan; the 200R4 is finding its way under more and more Mopars.

Sure you have to alter the torsion bar crossmember, but that is hardly irreversible given a few hours with a mig welder and an angle grinder. Look what guys can do with rusted out cars using these tools. A guy could make these modifications, and then put the car back to stock and most people would be hard pressed to tell anything had been done.

Another nice feature is that with the flip of a switch, you can lock-up the converter up in 4th making it virtually an automatic 5 speed that takes less power to drive than either of the Mopar options.

It's nice to have options. I love the functionality my 200R4 brings to my a-body. Well worth the swap.

You are right, It would be nice if US Cartool adapted this concept to the other transmissions you mention too.
Click to expand...

And AMD makes a replacement torsion bar crossmember. So, if it really came down to it you could just remove the modified crossmember entirely and weld in a reproduction. Has been done plenty of times because of rust or damaged torsion bar sockets.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
-

Back
Top