I've heard bad things........

[94CuttySL]

I sold my 94 Cutlass for a few reasons..one thing I will miss is the way it drove...the tranny was smooth, shifted high and seemlessly. I love the 4t60-E, and the 3.33 gearing.

I have heard though that the tranny on the GA's 3400 (4T40?..if I'm not mistaken...sorry if I am) is not that great. I don't remember any specific problems, but I know the 4T60 is better. Can anyone elaborate on this?...I am looking at a car with the 3400 and I want to know if I should expect problems. I know that it does not shift as smooth from 1st to 2nd gear as my Cutty did. I test drove it and it was 'bumpy.'

Thanks!

[sharkey]

RE: I

http://www.60degreev6.com/index.php?...ewtopic&t=5252 read through all that.

[imported_germ]

for what its worth........ both tranny's are fine for most people.

when you start adding some big HP #'s to each tranny is when you start to have the debate on which is better.


if you never plan to run a turbo, s/c, or n2o, the 4t40 and 4t45 should be just fine

[geoffinbc]

4T40's are great. Goto a dealership and ask them how many they fix. Its next to nothing.

I bet they fix a 4T60 every week. Even on a bone stock vehicle.

[imported_germ]

lets not even start the "which tranny is in for more work" debate.

there is NO WAY you can compare that info.

why cant you???? well, the simple fact is this.... the 4t60's have been around for how long and how many cars have they been produced in? lets just say, they have been around for a bit longer than the 4t40/45 tranny's.

what cars are they in???? the 60 was always put with the larger and heavier cars for the most part, the 4t40/45 was rarely ever used in GM's bigger cars and mostly for the mid size/compact car.

what engines are they mated to? the 60 has always been used for the 3.1 and newer V6's (3100, 3400, 3800, L67, DOHC), some cadilac v8's. how often did you see the 4t60 lined up with a 4 banger? once that i know of, and for one year. the 4t40 and 4t40 only see's duty on the 3400, 3100, and most 4cyl's and you never see them mated to the more powerful engines like the 3800, DOHC, and L67,




so you cant compare the failure rate of the two trannies and have ANY valid points.

[sharkey]

the 4t40/45e is designed to go behind engines with less than 200hp in smaller vehicles. the 4t60/65e is designed to be behind motors with more power.

as for failure rate, i see a lot of 4t60/65e in the shop, mostly 97+. ive seen mabey 2 4t40/45e since i have been there (a year and a half). both of them were very high mialage. i see 4t60/65e with 120-150k km on them, and they are toast.

my boss was at a franchise seminar, and the franchise said the most trouble free domestic trans is the 4t40e.

now this is stock for stock comparisons, you start putting more power through either transmission, and you will have a failure. yes the 4t65e will take more power than the 4t45e, but they are rated for different power levels. if you put 30hp more through either trans, they would likely be ok, but if you go with a lot more power, or more power than they are designed for, either will break.

[94CuttySL]

The car I WAS looking at getting was an 02 Alero GLS 4 door, loaded, 3400. I heard from a friend that he had tranny problems with his Alero, but he wasn't sure what the problem. Anyway, here's a quote:

Car was in shop 4 times about the transmission, first time they said it was fine, i got down the road, warning lights came on, took it in, they correced that problem..known Alero issue wiring in steering column going to the trans QBDM input, kept screwing up, would NOT shift out of 1st, infact just puttin it in gear is comparable to putting a car in nuetral, reving it WAY up then nuetral bombing it. It went in the third time for tranny issues, they replaced the valve body. As of now, the fluid is Black and burnt. It went in again for about 2 weeks while they tried diagnosing the transmission warning light and why it was shifting so bad...cleared the codes, sent it back to me.

Now I've read a lot of bad things about the Alero, and many are huge problems, so I decided not to go with the Alero...but I thought, if Aleros have transmission problems and starting/stalling problems..why wouldn't Grand Ams with the same 3400 engine/trans....

Basically I want a reliable, affordable car asap, and am exploring all my options. I was looking at Grand Ams as well, but hope they do not have engine problems beyond the already common intake gasket failure. BTW, my friend with the Alero had an intake gasket failure at 25,000 miles!

[Quinky]

Germ are we gonna get into this again.. One of colins friends for a dealership even mentioned in the last post that STOCK for STOCK a 40/45e is a longer lasting and more trouble free transmission then a 60/65e... IF you are looking for something truely reliable and affordible there aren't to many used domestics I would buy... I'd be looking at a smaller toyota..

[geoffinbc]

My moms 94 Grand Am has to be one of the most reliable cars I have whitnessed. Granted it has exceptional maintainence it has never been un reliable.

My mom got the car in 95 she was the only driver for quite a while until I got my lincence. Man I drove that thing so damn hard. Constant full throttle runs freeway speeds up to the governor and a drag race from time to time. I used to rip corners do burnouts and everything. That thing took it all and never complained. I even took it camping and drove it like a rally car.

Then my brother got his licence 2 years later and it had to take on both of us for about 6 months until I finally bought my truck. Then he drove it a few years until he got his truck.

So for doing the daily commute for my mom and the going through hell between my brother and me and never breaking a sinlgle part I would have to say it is a freaking sweet car. It went through several oil changes a tranny oil change or two a couple sets of tires and ignition components at 100,000kms. Car is still going strong and my mom drives it every day. My mom and dad just took it to Whistler and it got 28MPG

[imported_germ]

betterthanyou, the grand am you speak of had the 4t60e tranny


quinky, no, we are not going to get into it. no matter what someones OPINION is, doesnt make it correct, we should know that by now, ESPECIALLY people that work for a dealer

look at the facts i posted above and you will see why the 4t40/45 isnt in the shop as often as the 60e

if you cant at least agree to what i said above, then well, im sorry, i wont even try to explain in further detail why you cant compare the two.

[geoffinbc]

Yes the old GA did have the 60E. The 4T40 is a better transmission by design and it is as simple as that. Even though it may not be rated for the same power levels.

[Doubt_Incarnate]

so is he worried about the power it can take or its reliability, dont forget the guys looking for a car not a tranny. the 4t60's have been in service forever, so of course more of them have broken, ther's like 4 times as many.

[sharkey]

actualy, the 4t60e has only been around since 92 (before that it was the 440t4, or 4t60, non electronic)and the 4t65e came out in 97. the 4t40 came out in 95, so there arent that many more of the 60/65 than 40/45s.

the 4t40e is a better design. we are talking technology from 95 (4t40e) compared to 80s tech thats been revamped through the years to suite changes (not saying its a bad thing). this is just like the l67, its nothing but early 80s technology, just revamped to be "better" (when its not realy)

i can honestly say that if i was going to buy a new gm fwd vehicle as a driver (not something to mod) it wouldnt have a 4t60/65e in it. if i was going to get a vehicle to mod and put down some serious power, it would have a 5 speed.

[imported_germ]

design and execution are two different worlds.


i can design my shit to float, but that doesnt mean it will.



just because its "supposed" to be better by design and "new" technology doesnt mean its better.

again, i will point this out....

4t60e has been in production longer so there are a lot more 60e's on the road than the 4t40/45's

the 4t60e was placed in more cars than the 4t40/45

more cars are on the road with the 60e than the 40/45

the cars the 60e are in are GM's large sedans and higher HP output cars. the 40/45's are in the compact/midsize cars which are coupled with low HP 4cyls and a few v6's.




so PLEASE explain to me this.... if your going to use claim of the 40/45 being a better and stronger tranny, then why are they STILL used on the compact/midsize cars that have 180hp or LESS? and if the 65 is so shitty, then how come they are STILL used on the higher HP and heavier cars?


honestly, i could give a fuck less which is better, i just find it really funny how some people think.

if it were a better tranny, the 4t40/45's would be in grand prixs, impalas, monte carlos, bonnivilles, luminas, century's, regals, etc......

but wait, they arent because they are on grand ams, alero's, cavilers, sunfires that dont weigh over 3500 lbs and dont have 200+ hp.

besides you saying that they "are built better", what other reasoning do you have to claim they are better?

proof is in the pudding.

[geoffinbc]

WTF who said the 4T40 can take more power? I said it was a better design.

Progressive shift design (like the 4T80E) and larger hardened high stress internals versus the 4T60E. The 65E always breaks at the high stress areas because they are just not large or hard enough to handle what they are put up against.

The 4T45E is rated at 325 lb-ft
The 4T65E is rated at 400 lb-ft

As far as power the 2 take the 65E maximum torque it sees is 60LBS more that the 45E