C6 "wide ratio" mod...worth it?

Before me, I have a very toasty and well used C6 behind a code H 390. I want to do a good build on the C6, and have been wondering what peoples' experience has been at using an AOD (or equivalent) front
gear set in a C6 to give a 2.78 first vis vis 2.46. I understand it's a "drop in" mod but the valve body has to be worked at bit (softer 1-2 and 2-3 springs) to get the shift points right. Anyone done this?
If so, and furthermore, has anyone replaced most of the thrust washers in a C6 with Torringtons to reduce drag? I hear that setting proper clearance can be tricky and that while lessening drag, the Torringtons have a finite service life.
I've talked to local shops, and I usually get a blank stare when these ideas are posed. 'Net sellers gladly hawk the parts, but give a paucity of info.
All comments welcome.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

that is because most trans shops have employees that were not even born when the C6 was in use, let alone worked on one.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Thu, 17 Jan 2008 22:18:10 -0800, DeserTBoB

I have built a few C6's but, it has been severl years. I routinely used the Torringtons instead of the OEM's - never had one go down with them and never had to replace one during rebuild even after a season of dirt tracking. Thrust setup is done just like the OEM's. I usually set them up on the tighter side of the clearance but made damn sure it was never less than minimum since they do not give like the plastic stuff. You may notice a bit louder thunk when engaging since they don't absorb much noise especially if you decide to go loose. Once you get it back tigether, don't forget to check the overall thrust. You should do that before you tear it down. Ford recommends you shoot for the same setting when you are done. The only thing I concerned myselt with was the min/max's when using the Torringtons.
As far as the gearset, I never did one since the AOD was fairly new when I did my last one. If I ever go back into my old Torino again, it think I would give it a try to help the 351CJ off the line a bit. If you come up with the right combo to make it shift just firmly - not hard - please pust it back for my info.
LAstly, you are reading from my very old memory. Always double check everything by the Book. ATSG has a good manual on the C6. If you are going to use AOD gears in it, I suggest you also get that manual. Find yourself a good trans parts house. The one I use here in Atlanta has a parts guy that isdamn close to being an encyclopedia of trans knowledge and builds a few units for their companies dirt cars and a few others. He always seems to know what fails and how to fix it.
Good luck
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

Thanks for that. I figured that the Torringtons would set up just like the flat washers, but I would think you have to really make sure all the slack is taken up when taking thrust readings. I'll just shoot for what it came out of the vehicle with by using the right selectives. I've heard that with Torringtons, you should go just a TAD tight, but not by much.

I'll let you know what happens. I haven't decided whether to go with a TransGo or Superior kit and just keep adding "stages" until I get the right shift feel. I've read here and there where a firm band apply is a must for the AOD mod, as the increased torque will make the usual C4/C6 "flare" on part-throttle 3-2 even worse, and stock C6s, unless they had the R option, weren't very good on band apply, anyway. The big issue here is that the 1-2 and 2-3 points have to be reprogrammed to prevent redlining, since the bigger ratios will wind up quicker. No one's got a "kit" for that, so it'll be an engineering exercise.

I have a local guy who's getting the gear set for me, and according to him and a couple of others, the AOD drum is a drop in...same clearances, dimensions, etc. I do have a Ford and an ATSG manual on the C6, and I've certainly done more complicated transmissions, the Dual Coupling HydraMatic being one. The worst nightmare ever was the Chevy Turboglide...yeeesh, what WERE they thinking??? Fords, I've done FMs, an FMX, 2 speeders and a few C4s, only a couple of C6s, nothing newer than that.
The C6 was evidently good enough to stay into production into the '90s behind International diesels, and for every day small truck use, they hold up well, if factory or done with a good kit. I think Torqueflites are a better machine, but...everyone's got an opinion, you know. Either's better than anything GM cooked up after around '64 or so, the THM400 being the last "good" GM box. Why people like 350s is beyond me, and it just got worse from there after GM shut down Detroit Gear Division and let Chevy start making transmissions for the whole bunch. Cadillacs with Chevette trannies...what a joke!
Thanks again for your input, and I'll get back to the group with the results.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Fri, 18 Jan 2008 12:16:19 -0800, DeserTBoB

One more thing you may want to look at. IIRC, there was/is a large bore servo available for the 2 band which may help in lockup with a lower pressure. You may have to bore an orifice to get it to apply quickly enough to prevent flare along with a little extra pressure to really hold tight. Another thing that can help lockup is using bands and clutches from a post 76 trans and filling it with type F fluid if you can still get it. The friction material is different. You may have to play with the second accumulator to help smooth it a bit. I think for an allout performance build, I would go with the Transgo kit. It seems to be timed a bit quicker on the shift which may help flare. Regular heavy duty builds work well with the Superior. I don't know if he is still in the shop at Transgo but, Gil Younger was still taking tech calls at Transgo a few years ago for unusual buildups or problems.
Lugnut
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

There are a myriad of after market clutch/band options for all C6s now, but the general direction is to do just what you said, using the later discs/bands.

I'm looking into the Type R servo, as I think I'd need the extra area of that piston to get the pressure I'd need with a higher (numerical) gear ratio. Most say it's a performance-only mod, but for truck/hauling/towing, it's also a must on a C6, as 2 band apply is always on the weak side at part throttle in them. Most CJs came stock with the R option and the longer band strut, if I remember correctly.

Gil isn't in the shop all the time anymore, but still consults and handles oddballs. He helped me out on a Chrysler A-904 modification to add part-throttle TCC release to an earlier case and knew exactly how to set up the "cheese plate" bores to get exactly the right apply force. He's even a wiz at old cast iron HydraMatics, even though he hasn't touched one for decades.
I had the truck version (bigger case, heftier gear sets) in my '62 GMC P1500...no better truck auto box ever produced until the Allisons came out in pickups, and even that's debatable. Only problem was that the tranny weighed in almost as heavy as the 305D V6, making the total power plant/tranmission package tip the scales at a hefty 1100 lbs! I had put a Brownie on the back of mine, making it even heavier, but I had 8 forward speeds (actually 6...some overlapped). With only 145 BHP, I could easily haul a loaded four horse trailer up a stiff grade at the speed limit while the 4 bbl Chevies were throwing rods and overheating trying to keep up. The secret there was that 4 5/16" bore and 2" stroke...unlimited torque.
The crank in the V6 couldn't be turned by any but diesel shops, it was so large. Helluva engine for pulling, though...as long as you never went above 3400 RPM! If you did, things would start to come apart fairly fast. Operated properly, the old V6s (and the V12s, as well as the Chevy-only 45 V8) would last at least 300-400K miles without much attention. Big design goof was the pot metal rocker shaft end stands; if they didn't fit snug, oil would drool onto the end cylinder intake valve guides and you'd have an oil burner, even with snug guides and good seals. I used to pack them with Permatex #3 on assembly and never had a problem.
Back to Fords, the GMC V6 and the Ford FE have one common design factor that made them great for truck use...the Y block and all that cast iron. Most Ford FEs in pickups and medium trucks would easily outlast a small block Chevy in the same usage about 4 to 1. Mine ran 250K before tear down and it was still running well, while a friend had put that many short blocks into his Chevy in only 175K. Experience does tell! Biggest problem was throwing rods in the Chevy if used for heavy towing, even with their overrated "4 bolt mains." I personally think small block Chevies make great doorstops, not much else. People like them because parts are cheap and there's a galaxy of aftermarket performance stuff for them. As far as being a long lived workhouse, fahgeddaboudit.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Motorsforum.com is a website by car enthusiasts for car enthusiasts. It is not affiliated with any of the car or spare part manufacturers or car dealers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.