TH200 Metric
- Thread starter Riggs
- Start date
- Status
Riggs said:
Call advanced auto or another local parts supplier....
I'd "GUESS" about 5-6 without draining the torque converter but DO NOT QUOTE ME ON THAT! :?
DelOhio said:
A parts store isn't gonna know how much transmission fluid a TH200 takes.
If you have an owners maual it should be in there, if not, a Haynes or Chiltons manual would have it.
outsider_27 said:
Actually, most parts stores will have notes like that in the computer where they look up the part numbers for filters and such.
'80 manual says 7 pints also. Considering the basic transmission was the same from 77-up, I'd take my chances and start there.
A little history- I was at Hydra-matic Product Engineering during the initial development of the THM-200. It was an assignment to engineering to give some of the salary employees something to work on during the GM strike of 1970. Our original development mule was a '70 Nova sedan with a 4-cylinder, since the Vega, which was the chassis the trans was intended for, was not yet available for us to test. Nobody ever dreamed at the time that the 200 would get bolted to a V-8 in a larger car. Later on in 1977, when the 200 found its way in the then-new B-body cars behind a 350 Buick or Olds engine, I wasn't surprised at all when they started to break, since the original designers never anticipated the stress of V-8 torque in a 4000lb car.
Bill
A little history- I was at Hydra-matic Product Engineering during the initial development of the THM-200. It was an assignment to engineering to give some of the salary employees something to work on during the GM strike of 1970. Our original development mule was a '70 Nova sedan with a 4-cylinder, since the Vega, which was the chassis the trans was intended for, was not yet available for us to test. Nobody ever dreamed at the time that the 200 would get bolted to a V-8 in a larger car. Later on in 1977, when the 200 found its way in the then-new B-body cars behind a 350 Buick or Olds engine, I wasn't surprised at all when they started to break, since the original designers never anticipated the stress of V-8 torque in a 4000lb car.
Bill
Riggs said:
Actually, the 200 had a unique reliability curve. Most transmissions had a somewhat linear failure curve, with the number of failures increasing with miles. The 200, however, had a high number of failures in the first 30,000 miles, and a very slow rise in the curve after that (mid-80's data). If you have one with 100K it will likely deteriorate gradually rather than succumb to catastrophic failure ( assuming a sensible right foot, LOL) It was a serious concern to the GM Product Service folks at the time, since we were rebuilding an extraordinary number of 200's under warranty, and then having them last almost forever. Sadly, back in those days long term reliability wasn't the primary concern. It was more of a priority to get it thru the warranty period without breaking. If it only lasted 50K-75K that was OK, since the company didn't have to pay a dime to fix it. Quite a different attitude back then, compared to today's 100K powertrain warranties.
I maintain that the 80's are what hurt the US Automakers the most. We were so damn concerned about keeping costs down, that we built a lot of garbage, and our customers, in frustration, decided give a Japanese car a try. Now, Ford and GM can never get the customers back, even though today's cars are as good as anything in the world.
Bill
- Status
