Slant 727 WIW

-
I got zero problem with dead threads bein brought back to life. The part that's stupid is for them to be brought back just for the sake of an argument.

In this case, we ALL know Chrysler made the slant six 727 for a reason. That's not in debate. What is in debate is the 727 behind a slant is totally overkill. I think the engine would fail before the transmission gave it up.

The 904 will handle everything a slant six can ever dish out in any configuration. Period. End of discussion. That's the point that's trying to be made here.

Nobody said to scrap the transmission. It is what it is. A power robbing blob of aluminum. It will sap at least 25 HP more than a 904. A slant does not need that power loss.

Argue it however you want. "Chrysler had a reason blah blah bullshit bullshit" but it was totally unnecessary. The 904 was plenty capable to handle everything the slant could throw at it in anything it ever came in.

Similarly, the 904 had everything a stock 340 could ever throw at it, yet, all they got besides the 4 speed was the 727. How much faster would factory 340 cars been with a 904? A good bit. But again, Chrysler decided to use the 727, when the 904 couldda and wouldda done the job using less power.

Those are the facts, regardless of how you want to argue it.
 
805moparkid said:
modify it for what? small blocks and big blocks have there own trans and the 904 can be built to handle 8 second hemi's so i dont see where the 727 behind a slant is anywhere relevant... and then the weight!
Click to expand...


Read post #15. That was the only thing that bringing up this WIW thread might slightly almost nearly be worth.
 
RustyRatRod said:
I got zero problem with dead threads bein brought back to life. The part that's stupid is for them to be brought back just for the sake of an argument.

In this case, we ALL know Chrysler made the slant six 727 for a reason. That's not in debate. What is in debate is the 727 behind a slant is totally overkill. I think the engine would fail before the transmission gave it up.

The 904 will handle everything a slant six can ever dish out in any configuration. Period. End of discussion. That's the point that's trying to be made here.

Nobody said to scrap the transmission. It is what it is. A power robbing blob of aluminum. It will sap at least 25 HP more than a 904. A slant does not need that power loss.

Argue it however you want. "Chrysler had a reason blah blah bullshit bullshit" but it was totally unnecessary. The 904 was plenty capable to handle everything the slant could throw at it in anything it ever came in.

Similarly, the 904 had everything a stock 340 could ever throw at it, yet, all they got besides the 4 speed was the 727. How much faster would factory 340 cars been with a 904? A good bit. But again, Chrysler decided to use the 727, when the 904 couldda and wouldda done the job using less power.

Those are the facts, regardless of how you want to argue it.
Click to expand...

X-2... what he said... all of it!
 
RustyRatRod said:
I got zero problem with dead threads bein brought back to life. The part that's stupid is for them to be brought back just for the sake of an argument.

In this case, we ALL know Chrysler made the slant six 727 for a reason. That's not in debate. What is in debate is the 727 behind a slant is totally overkill. I think the engine would fail before the transmission gave it up.

The 904 will handle everything a slant six can ever dish out in any configuration. Period. End of discussion. That's the point that's trying to be made here.

Nobody said to scrap the transmission. It is what it is. A power robbing blob of aluminum. It will sap at least 25 HP more than a 904. A slant does not need that power loss.

Argue it however you want. "Chrysler had a reason blah blah bullshit bullshit" but it was totally unnecessary. The 904 was plenty capable to handle everything the slant could throw at it in anything it ever came in.

Similarly, the 904 had everything a stock 340 could ever throw at it, yet, all they got besides the 4 speed was the 727. How much faster would factory 340 cars been with a 904? A good bit. But again, Chrysler decided to use the 727, when the 904 couldda and wouldda done the job using less power.

Those are the facts, regardless of how you want to argue it.
Click to expand...

See if that guy wouldn't have brought it back to life for the sake of argument, we wouldn't have been able to read all this good information :toothy7:
 
I guess. But it's nothing that hadn't already been said.
 
I have a slant six Dodge truck as well, and a 904 is NOT going to hold up as well in a truck if you work it as the 727 will. I agree that in an A body it is extra weight, but there are people besides A body owners too.

If you are going to pull a trailer that is true as well. People do not realize that the loads on a transmission come more from the inertia of the vehicle than the crankshaft.

As I said I'd really like to have a 518 for the fourth gear, but there is no G pattern 518 and the UltraBell people will not make one so that route is out.

On an A body the Australians routinely put various five and six speed Japanese manuals behind slants, the Hemi Six and LA motors and they can't tear them up. I've never seen that here. Maybe someone down under will chime in here.
 
RustyRatRod said:
I got zero problem with dead threads bein brought back to life. The part that's stupid is for them to be brought back just for the sake of an argument.

In this case, we ALL know Chrysler made the slant six 727 for a reason. That's not in debate. What is in debate is the 727 behind a slant is totally overkill. I think the engine would fail before the transmission gave it up.

The 904 will handle everything a slant six can ever dish out in any configuration. Period. End of discussion. That's the point that's trying to be made here.

Nobody said to scrap the transmission. It is what it is. A power robbing blob of aluminum. It will sap at least 25 HP more than a 904. A slant does not need that power loss.

Argue it however you want. "Chrysler had a reason blah blah bullshit bullshit" but it was totally unnecessary. The 904 was plenty capable to handle everything the slant could throw at it in anything it ever came in.

Similarly, the 904 had everything a stock 340 could ever throw at it, yet, all they got besides the 4 speed was the 727. How much faster would factory 340 cars been with a 904? A good bit. But again, Chrysler decided to use the 727, when the 904 couldda and wouldda done the job using less power.

Those are the facts, regardless of how you want to argue it.
Click to expand...

I don't believe for a minute a 904 would hold up behind a 340 or 360 in a heavy vehicle like all those vans and trucks or the heavier cars. Not for sustained abusive use.

I said the SLANT 6 727 was made for a reason and that reason was that it would not be the weak link in a heavier vehicle. Chrysler engineers actually knew what they were doing and when management allowed it did excellent work. The 904 was entirely adequate behind G/RG and LA engines in lighter vehicles and it did cost less to build. I accept it sinks less power too but I am skeptical about 25 hp.

Chrysler management was engineering oriented up until the very early 60s and after that suffered from MBA mentality and lack of balls. Where the engineers could they got in some superb designs but corporate management hobbled them badly. Still the better Chrysler products were robust as hell and inspired a lot of loyalty.
 
hefty lefty said:
I don't believe for a minute a 904 would hold up behind a 340 or 360 in a heavy vehicle like all those vans and trucks or the heavier cars. Not for sustained abusive use.

I said the SLANT 6 727 was made for a reason and that reason was that it would not be the weak link in a heavier vehicle. Chrysler engineers actually knew what they were doing and when management allowed it did excellent work. The 904 was entirely adequate behind G/RG and LA engines in lighter vehicles and it did cost less to build. I accept it sinks less power too but I am skeptical about 25 hp.

Chrysler management was engineering oriented up until the very early 60s and after that suffered from MBA mentality and lack of balls. Where the engineers could they got in some superb designs but corporate management hobbled them badly. Still the better Chrysler products were robust as hell and inspired a lot of loyalty.
Click to expand...

The factory started putting 904's in various heavier cars sometime around the middle of the 1970'a... my daughter at the time, had a 360, 4-bbl-powered Cordoba that had come from the factory with a 904. I asked my transmission friend Len Schneider about it (he has built drag racing transmissions for a living for the last 30 years) and his response was, "727'S have so much rotational inertia, that the sheer mass and weight of the internal parts wears them out and causes catastrophic component failure; they do it to themselves... it's not the torque you put through them that tears them up... it's self-inflicted."

The fact that the Hemi Challenge NHRA racers choose to run ProTrans Torqueflites (which are based on 904 internals) in their 900 horsepower race cars tells me that a 904 can be built to take anything a small block 340 or 360 can dish out.
 
Bill Dedman said:
The factory started putting 904's in various heavier cars sometime around the middle of the 1970'a... my daughter at the time, had a 360, 4-bbl-powered Cordoba that had come from the factory with a 904. I asked my transmission friend Len Schneider about it (he has built drag racing transmissions for a living for the last 30 years) and his response was, "727'S have so much rotational inertia, that the sheer mass and weight of the internal parts wears them out and causes catastrophic component failure; they do it to themselves... it's not the torque you put through them that tears them up... it's self-inflicted."

The fact that the Hemi Challenge NHRA racers choose to run ProTrans Torqueflites (which are based on 904 internals) in their 900 horsepower race cars tells me that a 904 can be built to take anything a small block 340 or 360 can dish out.
Click to expand...
Perhaps one of the dumbest posts I read all night.....so they started using 904s because 727s had "catastrophic" component failures due to sheer mass and weight? so, a slant needs a 904, cause that 727 is just gonna blow itself up? good god almighty, your trans guy sounds like a dumbass
 
The last /6 727 that I sold, I told the guy it was a core and needed a rebuild. He gladly drove four hours to get it and paid me $150 for it. I believe this was in 2006.

We can go on and on about a 727 vs. a 904. The 904 takes about half the hp to run vs. the 727. It's at least 30 pounds lighter as well. A friend that bracket races his 340 Duster in the 1/8 picked up right around two tenths when switching to a 904.

I know of a couple bad /6's in the 10 sec 1/4 mile range. 904 handling them just fine.
 
ESP47 said:
Why do people get bent out of shape over old posts coming back up?
Click to expand...
I agree. If I am just posting info that will die in 5 minutes, I am wasting my time. If I wanted that I would tweet to all the short attention span 140 char mindless fools. Not every comment needs to be archival, but we shouldn't have to constantly repeat ourselves either. I commend hefty lefty for using the Search and discussing an obviously interesting topic. No need to keep saying "shut up, we already decided what you can use in your car".
 
replicaracer43 said:
Perhaps one of the dumbest posts I read all night.....so they started using 904s because 727s had "catastrophic" component failures due to sheer mass and weight? so, a slant needs a 904, cause that 727 is just gonna blow itself up? good god almighty, your trans guy sounds like a dumbass
Click to expand...

That's because you have no idea who you're talking about.

He is a racer, and has won the Division Seven NHRA Super Stock points championship three times and runner-upped twice, has held multiple NHRA national class records in both Stock and Super Stock, and has his transmissions in at least twenty NHRA west coast Stock and Super Stock race cars, probably more. When Ford debuted the supercharged Mustangs a couple of years ago at the Winternationals, they called HIM for his transmissions... not wanting to chance a factory unit.

His transmission business is a successful one-man operation and includes Torqueflites, Turbo hydros and C-4/C-6 racing automatics. He's no one-trick pony.

In short, he does it all, and the fact that you don't know about him is probably due to the fact that you live clear across the country from him. If you did your racing on the west coast, you'd have seen his "Schneider Performance" decals on the fenders of top runners at all the west coast NHRA meets.

He is very well-known on the coast, and a respected builder of transmissions and converters that are in some of the fastest race cars that are campaigned in NHRA competition. Dan Fletcher won an NHRA World Championshhip in Comp Eliminator driving an Altered for west coast racer Rick Braun a couple of years ago that had one of his converters in it all year... and, the list goes on.

Had his own operation for over thirty years.

Yeah, he's inexperienced, has NO IDEA what he's doing and is a real idiot...

What are YOUR credentials???

And don't put words in my mouth. I never said the reason the factory started putting 904's in 360s was because they blew themselves up; that Was YOUR inference... (look it up.) But, they do self-destruct.

I also never said that "a slant needs a 904, cause that 727 is just gonna blow itself up?" Never said anything LIKE that...

I can't imagine a scenario in which a slant 6 would EVER need a 727. Can you?

Tell me... :happy1:
 
I think some people are confusing a stock transmission and race transmission. If you build either a 904 or 727 properly, they both hold up just fine. In STOCK configuation, the 727 is heavier duty and will hold up to more abuse than a 904 will. As mentioned, the 727 weighs more and kills more horsepower than a 904 does so it makes sense to build a 904 for RACE or heavy duty use. In STOCK configuration, a 727 might be a better choice in certain applications such as a heavy vehicle that is going to tow or haul something. I have a drag car with a 727 in it behind a small block and it works just fine. It hasn't had any problems at all. Is it the best choice for my car? Nope, but that's what the car came with when I bought it 6 years ago. I figured that when it does need to come out of the car, that's when I'll do the changeover. If I'm running a bracket car, what real difference does it make if I run 2-3 tenths faster with a 904. The idea is to be consistant....which it is.
 
cudamark said:
I think some people are confusing a stock transmission and race transmission. If you build either a 904 or 727 properly, they both hold up just fine. In STOCK configuation, the 727 is heavier duty and will hold up to more abuse than a 904 will. As mentioned, the 727 weighs more and kills more horsepower than a 904 does so it makes sense to build a 904 for RACE or heavy duty use. In STOCK configuration, a 727 might be a better choice in certain applications such as a heavy vehicle that is going to tow or haul something. I have a drag car with a 727 in it behind a small block and it works just fine. It hasn't had any problems at all. Is it the best choice for my car? Nope, but that's what the car came with when I bought it 6 years ago. I figured that when it does need to come out of the car, that's when I'll do the changeover. If I'm running a bracket car, what real difference does it make if I run 2-3 tenths faster with a 904. The idea is to be consistant....which it is.
Click to expand...

Well, I think you're right on all counts.

The Internet has its limitations... and the temptation to generalize is one of them.

When that happens, the truth doesn't always make it to the front...

Thanks for the explanation. It was refreshing.:blob:
 
65 Dartman said:
Local guy has a slant 727 transmission he's thinking of selling. From his description it sounds like a long tailshaft, probably out of a truck. Before making an offer, trying to get an idea of what it's worth. I'm figuring it's a core and needs a rebuild.
Click to expand...

I couldn't get a Gear Vendor O/D with the 904,so I went with the 727 on my /6 !!!
 
6pakattack said:
I couldn't get a Gear Vendor O/D with the 904,so I went with the 727 on my /6 !!!
Click to expand...

I thought gear venders had a unit for the 904. I know a couple of people that used a GV unit, and I thought they used the 904, not a 727. Don't know for sure, will have to ask.

EDIT: Just checked the GV site , and they do have a 904 kit.
 
6pakattack said:
I couldn't get a Gear Vendor O/D with the 904,so I went with the 727 on my /6 !!!
Click to expand...

Dennis,

If it's not for a race car, you'll never see the difference.

My problem with the Gear Vendors unit is the overdrive ratio. It's not really an overdrive in the same sense as the 4th gear in the 500/518 transmissions is because while they reduce rpms 30 percent on the overdrive shift, the gear vendors unit has just a 22-percent reduction. The reason for that difference in ratios, I am told, is that the G/V unit is built and sold mainly as a gear splitter band-aid device to assist towing rigs that need a gear between 2nd and 3rd, when climbing hills with big loads. Second gear is too low and third is too high... but a 22-percent overdriven 2nd gear is just right... splits the difference between 2nd and 3rd perfectly, giving ratios of 1.45:1, 1.28 and 1:1...

But, when used as an "overdrive", it only turns a 3.55:1 gear into a 2.76:, or a 3.91 into a 3.04, neither of which will give you relaxed freeway cruising like you'd get with a 518's .70 overdrive (3.55 X .70 = 2.49:1.)

But, your engine, with its long-duration cam, may actually LIKE a 2.76... we'll see.

Let us know how it works out. A 2.76:1 gear (a 3.55:1 with a 22-percent overdrive) should give you about 2,300 rpm at 60 mph (2,900@ 75 mph.) That is with a 25"-tall tire.

Those figures include a minimal amount for converter slippage.

BTW, I certainly don't blame you AT ALL for not wanting to go through the ordeal of installing a 500 or 518; I wouldn't want to cut up the floorpan in my Valiant for that!
 
abodyjoe said:
??? how long ago? i'm 99.9999999 % sure they make a GV adapter for a 904 trans.
Click to expand...

It's been a little over a year,but that's why I went with the 727, Iwas led to believe it wasn't available for the 904 !! Who knows,I may get tired of trying to figure out the O/D and send my 904 up to JW Trans up the road from me !
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
-

Back
Top