Can a linkage shift transmission be made compatible with a cable shift transmission? Alternatively, is it possible to put the guts (mainly the gearsets and clutches) of a 80s vintage 904 into a 1960 vintage 904?

I am on the hunt for a slant powered 60 Belvedere and would like to be able to use the 83 904-HD wide ratio transmission I have in my garage.

Thanks!

_________________
Casually looking for a Clifford hyperpak intake for cheap.

although B blockand iron TF related, there is a lot of data on this in the Imperial owners club site. Why, I don't know.

Settting up PB and valve body issues are talked about, but not 904. some parts may be the same? Must be, same push puttons used in 6 and V8, 57 to at least 63 . Problem for big block users is swap to aluminum trans 727 happened (62), using same with PButtons, ebrake on trans issues, no park system, u joint changes..lots of mix and match.. Another way might be whole A block 727 out of 62, 63 dart 318 poly with PButtons, I understand there is an adapter 727 A block to slant six in some trucks?

Good questions, although what you gain over a killa pro rebuild on your 904 for all that, I might question???

I don't see it for a '60 transmission shifter, but Imperial Services has a conversion for later pushbutton shifters with later transmissions.

www.imperialservices.net

_________________
"When you find a big kettle of crazy, it's best not to stir it." - Pointy-haired Boss

1964 Valiant V200, 225/Pushbutton 904
BBD, CAI, HEI, LBP, AC, AM/FM/USB, EIEIO

Well, the 1960 Belvedere came with a slant six, and that is what I am going to be putting in whatever one I find. I want to use the 1983 transmission due to its lockup tranny and wide ratio gearing. I am hoping to get better MPG.

I will checkout the imperial services conversion. If I can find a conversion for a 62 pushbotton to hook up to a later linkage shifter trans I think i will be in business.

Thanks!

P.S. imperial services does the conversion for 1960 A-bodies, so i assume it would apply to 1960 full size, but the conversion costs $260!!!

_________________
Casually looking for a Clifford hyperpak intake for cheap.

The conversion service from Imperial Services is the one and only way to do what you want (control a rod-shift transmission with pushbuttons). The guts from the '80s trans cannot be put in the '60 trans.

Note that the wide-ratio gearing won't help you get better MPG unless you change to a significantly taller (numerically lower) rear axle ratio than the car currently has, and the lockup torque converter is worth about 5% at speeds above 50 mph. Do the math and figure out if this is really the best way to improve MPG in your case...I don't think that it is.

_________________
一期一会
Too many people who were born on third base actually believe they've hit a triple.

I agree with Dan; like a prius, you may feel good, but won't ever get your $ back;

I think most full size car sixes in those days ( 57-61)came with sticks..gas fanatics bought them, everyone else was talking about latest HP on which V8, 20 cents a gallon, Studebakers were the best for gas. No one knew 348 chev tri power was a pig yet. ( I beat one regularly, as in every day after high school with my 318 phoenix hdtp stick 2 bbl.).... and 1960 was first year for slant I think. I remember looking into a brand new 59 dodge engine bay and seeing what looked to me to be a 50 plymouth motor (knew them well...) (flattie) ( almost barfed) ;' Those flatties were good reliable engines though.

Where am i going? If you want gas mileage,, buy a stick. Changing first and 2nd gears won't do anything for you; maybe you want that to run a low ratio out back? That is what matters , but it is not like TF ratios are going to turn a dog in first into a screamer. And wide ratios burn more gas as rev's are higher diuring accell. I bet it is a wash; they only did it to make it a little more peppey with 2:73 or something. And a 60 plymouth is no lightweight....

JG is right.

The wide-ratio TF was introduced for a couple of reasons:

1) It enabled the installation of ridiculously tall rear axle ratios (2.45 and 2.26) in order to get cars with grossly inefficient engines past the Corporate Average Fuel Economy tests while not making the cars completely unable to get out of their own way.

2) The planetary gearset was cheaper to build (and it really shows! Regular planetary set is nice machined aluminum and 1st is quiet. Wide-ratio set is sloppily-welded steel and 1st is noisy.)

I did the work to retrofit wide-ratio into my '65, about a decade ago. I wound up wishing I hadn't, and eventually went back. This is not a magic bullet for better fuel economy in the real world.

_________________
一期一会
Too many people who were born on third base actually believe they've hit a triple.

Okay, thanks! I appreciate the honest answers. I may just skip the wide ratio 904 route since I am also kicking around the idea of installing an A-500 with the adapter plate.

I am just playing around with configuration ideas right now while I search for the right project car. I know I want a slant, and I know I am more interested in gas mileage than performance.

_________________
Casually looking for a Clifford hyperpak intake for cheap.

Buy a 60 Plymouth slant/stick combo and 5 speed it....drop the thing in the weeds....paint it like the Hot Rod Magazine Bonneville project car....moon discs...

http://blogsimages.skynet.be/images/002 ... 6a7964.jpg

_________________
Yeah....Im the one who destroyed this rare, vintage automobile.....

Yep, if you're going to put any money/effort into a non-factory trans configuration, definitely the 4spd unit would be the way to go. Should work fine in your '60 with the following recipe:

-A500 transmission with TransGo fix kits to address the weak areas such as O/D bearing feed

-Imperial Services shifter conversion to keep your pushbuttons

-Adaptor plate intended to run an LA V8 A727 behind a slant-6

-'62 or later starter motor ('60-'61 won't work unless you have a particular ring gear put on the torque converter)

-A switch arrangement to control the lockup torque converter. I have it in the back of my mind that standalone torque converter lockup controllers can be had for those who want to install a GM 700R4 trans into an earlier non-computerised application. No reason such a box couldn't be made to work with the Chrysler trans. You'd have to put a vehicle speed sensor in, but that's not hard.

You will definitely wind up spending money on this project, but it will be much better spent than the previous idea. The results will be cool, for sure (a pushbutton-shifted overdrive automatic behind a slant) but you've certainly got the car for it (floorpan hump nice and big to accommodate the cast iron TF used behind V8s). Only you can decide if it's a cost-effective mod, though.

_________________
一期一会
Too many people who were born on third base actually believe they've hit a triple.

I'm not in this hobby to make money, and cars are really my only vice, so I don't mind spending money on it. I can't drive a stick, nor would I want to since there are lots of hills where I live.

Besides, I already know that this will be expensive simply because 60 belvederes are hard to find. If I could fabricate an OD button that mounted next to the stock pushbuttons and looked stock that would be REALLY cool.

_________________
Casually looking for a Clifford hyperpak intake for cheap.

Are you certain about that? Have you checked into the A&A Trans setup I've mentioned three times now on this website?

http://www.slantsix.org/forum/viewtopic.php?t=18273
Dan, you might be right, it might be the only way. But, it almost seems like everybody gets a blank look if you mention anything but Imperial Service's conversion.

If the A&A Trans setup still exists (I will check into it), it seems like it would be the better deal (cheaper, and you don't have to send in the shifter).

_________________
'15 Chrysler 200S V6
'74 Duster 360, factory 4 speed car

Per my phone call with A&A Trans, their $150 AACCP is a replacement cable for the conversion. The conversion itself costs $265 through A&A, requires you to send in your pushbutton shifter...

...and they send it to Imperial Services for the conversion work.

(This only stands to reason, BTW...there is no way that a simple cable swap could make a rod-shift trans compatible with the pushbutton shifter. Modification is required.)

_________________
一期一会
Too many people who were born on third base actually believe they've hit a triple.

Maybe that's why I'm still waiting to hear if they even have the cable. You probably talked to Alan right after I did, so he may have thought he didn't need to call.

My concern was that the cable was discontinued, and thus was not posted on the website.
I didn't get the chance to ask any more questions than if they even had it (wife was waiting to go to lunch). Figured if they had it, I would order it, for the future.
Funny thing is, the catalog doesn't indicate anything like "a replacement". I may be remembering it incorrectly (stands to reason if the people selling it say it is a replacement), but it seems to me that the picture even showed a shift lever. Why would a replacement cable come with a shift lever? I guess I need to go back and look at the catalog again.

I will agree that you have more experience in this, Dan, and try not to argue too much.

I figured it was a ratio thing, the pushbutton shifter moved the trani shift lever the wrong amount to make it work. I assumed that the A&A piece had a lever with the correct ratio, while the Imperial Services changed the ratio in the shifter. I will admit, thought, this was based on theory and supposition in regards to how a pushbutton trani shifter setup worked.

_________________
'15 Chrysler 200S V6
'74 Duster 360, factory 4 speed car

They didn't return my call because of a mixup in the phone number, not because of confusion.

I think they are still slightly confused. When I look at the Imperial Services website, they have a cable for column or console shifters for $150, and a pushbutton conversion for $265. I wouldn't be surprised if the picture in the A&A catalog is the same as the on on the Imperial Services website.

My bet is the AACCP cable is for the column or console setup, and is not a replacement cable.

When I get home, I will have to look at the catalog again. I know I looked at it a couple of times (each time I posted the part # ), and I feel pretty certain they played it up as a conversion.

I guess it doesn't matter, either way. Sounds like it isn't what I understood it to be.

_________________
'15 Chrysler 200S V6
'74 Duster 360, factory 4 speed car