Gears & Axles Driveshafts | Rearends | Differentials | Gears | 12 Bolt | 9 Inch | Dana

Stock or Built transmission: Which lasted longer?

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 03-06-2003, 04:56 PM
  #1  
TECH Veteran
Thread Starter
 
PlowTown Missile's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 349
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts

Default Stock or Built transmission: Which lasted longer?

From what I've seen, stock trannies are lasting longer(miles) than built ones. You guys tell me what lasted longer for you in terms of miles.
Old 03-06-2003, 07:06 PM
  #2  
LS1Tech Administrator
iTrader: (3)
 
RPM WS6's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Schiller Park, IL Member: #317
Posts: 32,348
Likes: 0
Received 1,785 Likes on 1,273 Posts

Default Re: Stock or Built transmission: Which lasted longer?

If it appears that stock trannies are lasting longer, it's probably for one of these reasons:

A) Most of the A4 cars out there that have stock transmissions are not raced and/or abused as much as cars that have built trannies (hence the reason for it being built)

B) Most cars with stock transmissions don't have nearly the power that cars with built transmissions have, and are therefore less likely to break anything.

If you are going to use a built tranny with the same moderate power levels that you would expect a stock trans to hold up to, and if you don't race/beat the car often, than I don't see why a built trans wouldn't hold up as long or longer than a stock one???

Thing is, you have to have a comparison where there are no variables, meaning both trannies (stock and built) are used under the same conditions (whether it be race or cruise).
Old 03-06-2003, 09:03 PM
  #3  
TECH Addict
 
It'llrun's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: N. FL
Posts: 2,708
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts

Default Re: Stock or Built transmission: Which lasted longer?

From what I've seen over the years, there's no question, a well built transmission will always outlast a stock one. It's the simple fact that auto manufacturers aren't willing to spend the needed money to build the best transmission they can for all their vehicles. A transmission that shifts gears harder (automatics, of course), is definitely going to last longer.
Old 03-06-2003, 10:00 PM
  #4  
9 Second Club
iTrader: (5)
 
badass 2002 z28's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: St. Louis, MO
Posts: 1,300
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default Re: Stock or Built transmission: Which lasted longer?

It's not a fair comparison when u think about it..

Stock tranny's start out by only having to hold 300hp and gradually as people add mods start to suffer more. a Built tranny has to handle a large amount of power being fed through it from day one.

If someone fed a stock tranny 500hp right away it wouldn't last long at all.
Old 03-06-2003, 10:34 PM
  #5  
Teching In
 
Dave Rockwell's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Denton,Texas
Posts: 49
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default Re: Stock or Built transmission: Which lasted longer?

An automatic is only as good as the builder building it, espically in the after market. I've taken stock trannies with little more than 300 miles on them put 400-500 hp in front of them with nothing more than a billett servo and band, and have gotten 60-80 thousand miles, hard miles. Face it guys heat kills trannies, when you don't belive this; remember, heat kills trannies, slipping causes heat, stop the slipping ,stop the heat!!! The biggest part of slipping is knowing when it happens....... These 4L60e's are some good units, alot of aftermarket goodies,to really make em come alive, but more heat related failures than anything else, some bad input drums secound. Just my two cents <img border="0" title="" alt="[Smile]" src="gr_stretch.gif" />




All times are GMT -5. The time now is 06:33 PM.