Trans controller? where did you here bout that ? part number ? lol
>From: Gary Hedlin <garyhedlin@sbcglobal.net>
>Reply-To: dakota-truck@dakota-truck.net
>To: dakota-truck-moderator@bent.twistedbits.net
>Subject: Re: DML: 1993 V6 to V8 Conversion
>Date: Sun, 14 Nov 2004 00:15:42 -0600
>
>
> > That true - but I would not use the stock tranny that was behind a V6,
> > with a V8 in front of it. The 42RH/E is NOT strong enough for even a
> > stock 318 or 360. The "strength" rating is in the 2nd number.
> >
> > 42RH is what comes behing the V6.
> >
> > the 4 denotes the number of forward gears
> >
> > the 2 is the strength rating (higher the stronger)
> >
> > R is rear wheel drive (primary)
> >
> > H is for the Hydraulic or E for Electronic on newer trannys
> >
> > Going with a V8 engine conversion? Go with a V8 tranny conversion too.
>
>Depending on what truck it's going in, he might need a trans controller too
>if you're going with an electric controlled trans. But really, If I was
>swapping engines and needed a hydraulic trans, I would look into a 727
>instead of a 44/46. 727 would be a very nice transmission, and could
>easily
>take any abuse dished out to it.
>
>And yes, I have seen 318's bolted up to a 727 in some of the 80's rams &
>ram
>chargers. Not saying its the way to go, but definitely worth looking into.
>:)
>
>
>--
>
>Gary Hedlin
>www.garyhedlin.com
>2005 Dakota SLT CC 4.7 5spd
>1998 Dakota Sport RC 3.9
>
>
_________________________________________________________________
Is your PC infected? Get a FREE online computer virus scan from McAfeeŽ
Security. http://clinic.mcafee.com/clinic/ibuy/campaign.asp?cid=3963
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sat Jan 01 2005 - 11:47:52 EST