Results 1 to 19 of 19

Thread: 4l80 vs 4l65

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    Holmes Hollow, Ontario Canada
    Posts
    985

    4l80 vs 4l65

    Okay, I'm going to try this from a different direction. Given that I'm hoping to make around 500 (450 easily) at the flywheel and the trans is going in a 68 firebird behind an ls2 that was a stick and that transmissions are voodoo to me which way should I go? I need to know if one or both can handle it and which fits better. I've actually read the 80 fits with minimal massaging where the 60 series needs a bit of work but I've also read the opposite. Which is true? The 80 weighs more - how much more with the fluid and convertor in it is still open for debate. Is the power capability worth the parasitic loss at my level of hp? If you have one in your car I would really like to hear from you.
    thanks
    Scott

    ____________________________________________
    Scott


  2. #2
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    Central Minnesota
    Posts
    19
    The 80 is a larger trans then the 60. The 60 or 65 is basically a electronic version of the 700R4. The 80 needs just a little tunnel work like you said but the 60 should fit without any work. Both will need cross member work to fit.

    Danny
    Danny

    1969 Camaro and the start of my Pro touring project!

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    Holmes Hollow, Ontario Canada
    Posts
    985
    I'v actually read by a person who has one that the 80 didn't require slicing the tunnel. I've also read the 65 can get a little sticky. Do you have either?
    Any thoughts on the trade offs of power vs parasitic loss?
    ____________________________________________
    Scott

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Los Angeles, CA
    Posts
    1,313
    65 mounted up very easily on my 69 Camaro, very little clearancing needed. 80 would require a lot of beating. I think if you do a search you can find a couple pics of the trans side by side. The tunnel just needs to get beat on in a few areas to make it fit for a 80.
    Last edited by 1969CamaroRS; 02-17-2011 at 06:38 AM. Reason: typo

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    Holmes Hollow, Ontario Canada
    Posts
    985
    So they both fit but the 65 is easier. Easier to come by too. Would I be walking a thin line as far power with the 65? I'm wondering if it would be cheaper to get the 80 then to have a 65 built or perhaps the 65 would take it.
    ____________________________________________
    Scott

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    Greenwood, SC
    Posts
    2,317
    A quick google search indicates a lot of guys start to have trouble at 400rwhp and kill it at 450rwhp. So 480 and 540 at the crank, give or take. In other words, you'll be at the limit.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Los Angeles, CA
    Posts
    1,313
    I think some vendors can build a 65 to handle the power. I am looking at 500-550 RW hp/tq and talked to Mark Bowler at Bowler transmissions about what he would recommend. Told him it would be mostly a street car but I did want to run slicks for occasional track use. He recommended his 65 rated at 550 ft/lbs. I was interested in engine braking and going with Paddle shifters so it wasn't the cheapest option. If on a budget I'd probably go the 80 route but 65 is an option depending on budget.

    http://bowlertransmissions.com/products/Transmissions

    Mark was very helpful and answered my many questions.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Posts
    201
    We have installed 4L80E transmissions into 1st gen Camaros and Firebirds without cutting the tunnel. It is a little tight around the cooler lines, but nothing a rubber mallet can't fix. Just as Ed mentioned, a 4L65-E can be built to handle up to 550 Ft lbs of torque. But the problem is by the time you build a 4L65-E to honestly handle the power, you can be into a complete 4L80E package for the same money or less. Our entry level 4L80-E starts at 650 Ft lbs. So it is usually my recommendation at your point to go towards the 4L80-E. Unless you are looking for engine braking, then as for now, you would have to go with the 4L65-E. The 4L80-E package with engine braking is not available, yet I know everyone has been patiently waiting....

    As far as being concerned that the 4L80-E is going to rob too much power. Yes a 4L80-E weights more, but, as far as what it may rob for power is well worth it. As long as you have a quality 4L80-E built with the correct planets, drums & converter you can get get rid of some of the extra weight. I have many customers that have swapped from a 4L60-E to a Bowler 4L80-E and have had the same or better times in racing applications.

    I hope this helps.

    Mark

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Houston Texas
    Posts
    368
    Quote Originally Posted by MarkB View Post
    As far as being concerned that the 4L80-E is going to rob too much power. Yes a 4L80-E weights more, but, as far as what it may rob for power is well worth it. As long as you have a quality 4L80-E built with the correct planets, drums & converter you can get get rid of some of the extra weight. I have many customers that have swapped from a 4L60-E to a Bowler 4L80-E and have had the same or better times in racing applications.

    I hope this helps.

    Mark
    I agree. The 80e has a bit more parasitic power loss but because of the closer gearing it makes up for it when really driving. Also the higher first gear ratio helps traction on the street.
    68 Camaro - never to be finished
    06 Silverado - Forged 370, L92 Heads, big cam, 4l80e ect. eventual donor for the above
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KmB2y7uX38I

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Den Helder, the Netherlands
    Posts
    1,149
    Country Flag: Netherlands
    Quote Originally Posted by MarkB View Post
    We have installed 4L80E transmissions into 1st gen Camaros and Firebirds without cutting the tunnel. It is a little tight around the cooler lines, but nothing a rubber mallet can't fix.
    Mark
    If you still doubt Mr. Bowler; I also had a 4L80e installed behind a BBC and a LS-engine in my 67 Camaro. It really doesn't need a lot of work to get it to fit. Just a couple of blows near where the cooler lines end up and you're done! Oviously you still need to fabricate a transmission X-member but that also goes for the 60/65e.

  11. #11
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Los Angeles, CA
    Posts
    1,313
    Quote Originally Posted by neki67 View Post
    Oviously you still need to fabricate a transmission X-member but that also goes for the 60/65e.
    Not sure about the 80E but for the 60/65E behind my BBC I didn't have to make I bought a G-Force cross member which fits beautifully:

    http://www.transmissioncenter.org/fb...rossmember.htm

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    Holmes Hollow, Ontario Canada
    Posts
    985
    Well that's cool, didn't expect to hear directly from Bowler on this one. Now to try to find a low milage 80 in Ontario. I asked a guy advertising new GM transmissions on kijiji if he had a 4l65e and he told me he didn't know and that I would have to give him my VIN number to see if he had it. That's either a scam or a stupid guy. I told him it wasn't a stock application and he told me he wouldn't know if he had one without the number. I told him I would rather not deal with someone who didn't know what transmissions he actually had. Then over here you get Mark Bowler.
    So what vehicle should I try to find one from?
    ____________________________________________
    Scott

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Arizona
    Posts
    5,395
    Country Flag: United States
    Plenty of good responses here, so I will reiterate: Both fit. The 60/65 series fits a little easier. Most of the weight hype is from people who weighed 80's with the stock, ginormous converter. Much lighter with a proper 10" converter. And speaking of the converter, the right piece, along with a quality HP trans rebuild zero's out most of the "parasitic loss" hype as well. Have engine and chassis dyno'd 4l80E combos right at 20% loss. I'm not saying that there isn't a difference between the two models. Just saying the internet hype about 4L80E weight and parasitic loss is way overblown.

    Required torque capacity, traction and available budget are your biggest concerns.
    ________________
    Steve Chryssos


    Ridetech.com
    Email: stevenATridetech.com

    My PT Garage:
    https://www.pro-touring.com/dto_show...preview&g=1288

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    Holmes Hollow, Ontario Canada
    Posts
    985
    Budget is my first concern. I need to find something in stock form that will handle it and fit in that order. This year the car just needs to get on the road so if I have to have a core it might as well be broken.
    ____________________________________________
    Scott

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Posts
    201
    Personally I do not recommend any stock 4L80E for your application, of course with that said, there are many guys out there that have pulled it off and been very lucky. If your goal is to get it going on a budget, I would look for a low mileage take out from a 1999 - 2003 or 2005 or newer Chevy 3/4 ton 2wd with the 6.0L engine. It will bolt up to your motor. The reason I skipped the 2004 and did not recommend is due to a case casting change, GM had some issues due a cooler line passage in the pump, which caused overdrive planet failure, just would be better off avoiding this year unless you know it has been rebuilt or had been exchanged by GM.

    Good luck!

    Mark

  16. #16
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Posts
    125
    is this a good price for this trans ? http://southjersey.craigslist.org/pts/2181251608.html

  17. #17
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    Melbourne, FL
    Posts
    1,049
    Country Flag: United States
    Quote Originally Posted by 1969CamaroRS View Post
    Not sure about the 80E but for the 60/65E behind my BBC I didn't have to make I bought a G-Force cross member which fits beautifully:

    http://www.transmissioncenter.org/fb...rossmember.htm
    Keep in mind that BBC has the trans mount a little offset from the center. So make sure the crossmember you get is for an LS1. I found out the hard way when I picked up a BBC TH400 crossmember for my 67 'Bird. BBCs are slightly offset to the passenger side to clear the steering gearbox so the trans mount points are a little off center.
    67 Firebird Convert 455 +.060 Johnny Winters TH400 74cc KRE d-port flowed @ 310 cfm heads piston dished 16cc H-beam rods Comp Cam 305-AH-8 cam 108* LSA 253/260 @.050 duration .577/.594 lift w/1.65 rockers Ford 9" 3.55 Detroit Locker M/T Sportsman Radials 31x18x15 on Convo Pro 15x15s

    Honest dad that 455 on the side of the block is a serial number

  18. #18
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    Melbourne, FL
    Posts
    1,049
    Country Flag: United States
    If it's has all the parts, computer, that's not too bad for a 30k trans.
    67 Firebird Convert 455 +.060 Johnny Winters TH400 74cc KRE d-port flowed @ 310 cfm heads piston dished 16cc H-beam rods Comp Cam 305-AH-8 cam 108* LSA 253/260 @.050 duration .577/.594 lift w/1.65 rockers Ford 9" 3.55 Detroit Locker M/T Sportsman Radials 31x18x15 on Convo Pro 15x15s

    Honest dad that 455 on the side of the block is a serial number

  19. #19
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    Holmes Hollow, Ontario Canada
    Posts
    985
    Funny story. I just blew up my 65e that was supposedly built to handle 500hp for the second time and started researching the differences between the 65 and the 80 and this thread came up first. That's karma.
    ____________________________________________
    Scott