Will this 71 a833 work in my 68?

-
Revoke36

Revoke36

Active Member
Joined
Nov 9, 2021
Messages
41
Reaction score
37
Location
Sf Bay Area
Will this tranny (see pics) fit in my 68 barracuda with a 68 340? Is a 71 a833 any good? Thanks! I might jump on this if it works. Only $500!

2B7F04DC-8393-4F82-828C-8A1B9B4BF292.jpeg


AFE42348-D5C0-4E6E-9954-5E60A627361C.jpeg


F750C230-6BBD-4687-87E3-6221527CA755.jpeg


66EE0D28-8431-474F-94BE-476BDB7EA836.jpeg
 
Yes. It has a higher first gear (lower numerically) than the '68 transmision would, 2.47 rather than 2.66. Otherwise it's pretty-much identical, although it has better synchronizers and an arguably-worse side cover (just a bit more of a pain to service).
 
NoCar340 said:
Yes. It has a higher first gear (lower numerically) than the '68 transmision would, 2.47 rather than 2.66. Otherwise it's pretty-much identical, although it has better synchronizers and an arguably-worse side cover (just a bit more of a pain to service).
Click to expand...
Would it be “better” than a 68 with that ratio difference?
 
Revoke36 said:
Would it be “better” than a 68 with that ratio difference?
Click to expand...
The 2.66 would give better acceleration in first gear, but it's not a massive difference. I had no worries in my '73 Challenger 340 with the 2.47 first. It certainly wasn't worth changing the transmission. It's about the same difference (in first gear only) as a 3.23 v. a 3.55 ring & pinion.
 
NoCar340 said:
Yes. It has a higher first gear (lower numerically) than the '68 transmision would, 2.47 rather than 2.66. Otherwise it's pretty-much identical, although it has better synchronizers and an arguably-worse side cover (just a bit more of a pain to service).
Click to expand...
I have one in my 340/4 speed with 3.91 rear. I thought I would run out of gear quick in 1st but it really is nice. Only issue I ever had was broken fork (brass) I swapped it out in car and drove home.
Good street transmission.
 
You're least likely to run out of gear with the 2.47:1 gearset. It'll wind out more quickly with the 2.66 first. My '69 Valiant is also a 340, but it has a 3.09:1 first gear (1964-early '67 A-body Slant Six close-ratio, sometimes wrongly called the "Commando" gears) with 4.10s and 25.8"-tall tires. It's all done with first gear in about 150 feet, but damn it leaves hard.

First-gear torque multiplication:
2.47 x 3.91 = 9.658
3.09 x 4.10 = 12.669, i.e. how your first gear would feel with 5.13 gears. Weeeee!
 
Ad says clutch parts and linkage included for $500 . I think that's a very good deal. If you pass I doubt you will find that again. Is it close to you and you can pick up local?? Another bonus if it is. Just my thoughts.
 
Buy it , Its a better choice of transmission. I like the higher first gear. Also the steel forks and stronger synchronizer rings. I have always thought they shifted better due to the new side cover. And the close ratio made less RPM change 1st - 2nd. I am using the same trans for my build with several to choose from.
 
Last edited:
Bennoel 10 said:
Ad says clutch parts and linkage included for $500 . I think that's a very good deal. If you pass I doubt you will find that again. Is it close to you and you can pick up local?? Another bonus if it is. Just my thoughts.
Click to expand...
agreed. i just sold one with a V8 bell, inspection cover, fork and Z for $400

if i was in need, 4~6 is about going rate and what i'd expect to pay
 
the ratios are;
2.47-1.77-1.34-1.00, splits of .717-.757-.746 (the T/A)
2.66-1.92-1.40-1.00, splits of .722-.729-.714 (the regular)
3.09-1.92-1.40-1.00, splits of .621-.729-.714 (the Commando)

I like a second Roadgear of around 6.70. To get that;
the T/A requires 6.70/1.77=3.78 rounds to 3.73s
the others take 6.70/1.92=3.49 rounds to 3.55s .

I like a First Roadgear of not less than 9.5 with a 360, 10.0 with a 340.
To get that;
10/2.47=4.05 rounds to 4.10s, and
10/2.66=3.76 rounds to 3.73s, and
10/3.09=3.23..............

Pick your poison.

I run the Commando with 3.55s
10.97-6.82-4.97-3.55
Cuz 65= 5520 in Second gear.... on a power-peak of about 5200
 
Revoke36 said:
Would it be “better” than a 68 with that ratio difference?
Click to expand...
What rear gear are you looking? 3.23? Yes. It would be deeper to get you going. 4.10? Might be a little too deep.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
-

Back
Top