More on Big Cad in '79-'85 Eldo/Seville
I just got off the phone with a performance transmission rebuilder. They said that the 325 spins backward to the 200. Very few parts interchange-I was surprised, and will get a second opinion. He said the 325 will only handle 350 lbs of torque, a stock 472/500 would destroy it on a hard launch, but in high gear, like doing top speed runs ect. the stock 325/324-4R should be fine. He said go with it if your building a daily driver that won't be drag racing much at all, but if you want to build a drag Cad, then spend the time and drop in a 425 from an earlier Eldo, he said you won't be able to hurt one of those even in stock form. I thought about putting one in my '82 when I started to build, but I wanted to keep the overdrive, because mine is to be a daily driver, and my goal is to cruise at 25 MPG at 70 MPH. I was already close with the stock 472. It had TCC problems keeping it out of overdrive, so I was in third only, and was running a fan spacer - not fan clutch at the time while I was troubleshooting an overheating problem -that costs a lot of MPGs. Anyway, even in third with the fan spacer, I was at 20 MPG at 50 MPH and 16MPG at 70MPH. Going back to a fan clutch would make those numbers 23.5@50 and 19.5@70 in third gear. I'm hoping with just the addition of fourth, it picks up to 26.5@50 and 22.5@70 then I can fine tune the engine to get the other 2.5 MPGs by finishing the cold air box, adding slick 50 to the engine, and diff, upgrading to 300+ race wires and a 45,000 volt coil, split fire plugs, K&N air filter, getting a needed front and rear end alignment, ect. I am excited about the progress that has been made so far, and will be glad when I can put a working engine in the car again.
> >I saw your email on the Cad BB, I hope you dont mind if I ask you a swap
> >question. Ive found both an 82 eldo with a bad 4100, and a 80 seville with
> >good 368. I guess that the 425/472 will fit in place of the 368 ( exhaust
> >manifolds different?) , but I wondered if you had any experience with
> >transmission durability? The THM325 may not be up to all the power...do you
> >think a shift kit and a tranny cooler is enough, or did you do something
> >more serious. Is the '82's THM325-4r any better...
> >hmmm...whats the best swap combo?
> >anyway, if you have any thoughts on this, Id be happy to hear them.
> >John S.
MSN Photos is the easiest way to share and print your photos: Click Here
- --- In Cadillac_Performance_Association@y..., "Cody Carson"
>Cody, I was reading your post and I saw that your gonna be adding
Slick 50 to your engine. Let me give you a little warning before you
do it. Some years ago, I worked for a company that was marketing a
product called Militec. Militec is a synthethic based metal
conditioner (It does have a link to the military by the way, hence
the name). What it does is create a molecular coating of oil on metal
surfaces. Militec was used in many applications from Kyle Petty's
stock car and general auto and aviation engines to a lubricant for
guns. I became somewhat familiar with products like Slick 50 due to
the fact that we were trying to compete with them. As you may know,
or not, Slick 50 uses PTFE, better known as "Teflon by Dupont" to
work it's magic. When it first hit the market, Dupont had it's name
all over it, but over time they removed it due to the problems that
it brought them. Now teflon is good for pots and pans but not for
engines. It actually takes a considerable amount of heat to bond to
it's metal surface and as your wife probably has noticed it
eventually falls off too. Well that's exactly what happens when you
put this kind of stuff in to your engine, only it's worse. Your
engine temperature never reaches the point that the teflon needs to
bond it correctly to the metal surfaces. So what happens is all that
gunk will be removed rather quickly and find it's way into your oils
passages and filter. This as you know can be extremely dangerous. I
seen many testimonials that proved this. If you read on a bottle of
Slick 50 it warns you to not use it in a new engine. That's because
the teflon fills the tight tolerances in a new engine and that can
lead to severe engine damage. Now teflon based products apparently
work great on worn engines but again it's because the teflon
temporarally tighten tolerances. The teflon will eventually fall off
due to the moving parts in an engine and end up in places you don't
want it to be. I would recommend using products that are metal
conditioners. I believe DuraLube is one of them. I'm sure there are
others but I just can't think of any right now. So with that my
brother, all I can say is be wise and don't believe everything that's
touted on the marketplace, but you probably know that.. LOL
Good Luck, Partner
I hope I made some sense with all this..
Thank you Juan, I was not aware that Slick 50 posed any danger to the engine;I will stay away from it from now on. This gives me an idea for a new topic. I will put it in the next post so that the title of the subject makes it easier for readers to find when searching the message topics. I will also post it on the MTS message board. Thanks again
Join the world�s largest e-mail service with MSN Hotmail. Click Here