1967 - 1972 F-100 & Larger F-Series Trucks Discuss the Bumpsides Ford Truck

C4 transmission

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
  #1  
Old 11-21-2010, 03:01 PM
seafire's Avatar
seafire
seafire is offline
Senior User
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Lewiston
Posts: 146
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Wink C4 transmission

I have a question about a C4 transmission that came out of a 66 Mustang. I posted the same question on the transimmision forum. But thought it might not hurt to post it here. I have a 70 F100 2wd with a 74 302 for a engine. I'am new to automatics so I not sure it will mount up. I don't want to purchase this tranny and not have it mount up.
 
  #2  
Old 11-21-2010, 04:48 PM
bmuhlbach's Avatar
bmuhlbach
bmuhlbach is offline
Cargo Master
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: hinckley ohio
Posts: 2,507
Received 5 Likes on 5 Posts
yes it will fit the 6 cyl, 289,302,351w and 351 c will all bolt up the only issues are there is 2 different flywheels one has 164 teeth and one is 157. The other is in 1980 the 302 balanceing changed under 1980 they where 28 ounce after1980 the are 50 ounce.so if you find a 80 or newwer you have to use the older flywheel.
 
  #3  
Old 11-21-2010, 06:34 PM
seafire's Avatar
seafire
seafire is offline
Senior User
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Lewiston
Posts: 146
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Thanks for the infomation.
 
  #4  
Old 11-21-2010, 11:11 PM
cj06's Avatar
cj06
cj06 is offline
Posting Guru
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: CASA GRANDE AZ
Posts: 2,007
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
C-4 trannys are junk for a truck , keep looking for a c-6 !!
 
  #5  
Old 11-25-2010, 06:05 AM
Panski's Avatar
Panski
Panski is offline
New User
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Jakarta, Indonesia
Posts: 8
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by cj06
C-4 trannys are junk for a truck , keep looking for a c-6 !!
Hi cj06, can you elaborate on your statement. I'm thinking of going for AT for my 1970 F-100, myself. I have no experience with either, but so far my reading/assessment: C4 is more durable, light and suitable for street use & C6 is heavy/robs more power, and suitable for off-track use....

Enlighten me, please.

Thanks
 
  #6  
Old 11-25-2010, 09:13 AM
cj06's Avatar
cj06
cj06 is offline
Posting Guru
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: CASA GRANDE AZ
Posts: 2,007
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
c-4s were never put into any trucks and will never hold up to any type of work that the trucks were designed for !
the reason a c-4 uses less power is they are smaller , all the insides have smaller diameter
clutches , drums , bands , less friction material to help the power to get to the rear end !
the mustang weight was around 2600 # ,
F-100: 1/2 ton (5,600 GVWR max) per Wikipedia

now that is twice the weight for the truck and with the increase in weight you also
have to increase the size of the tranny to hold up to it !
 
  #7  
Old 11-25-2010, 11:06 AM
bmuhlbach's Avatar
bmuhlbach
bmuhlbach is offline
Cargo Master
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: hinckley ohio
Posts: 2,507
Received 5 Likes on 5 Posts
they did put the c4 in trucks light duty ones.I had a 77 F100 also had a dana44 rear end in it.The c4 trans are good but in a truck if you plan on big tires, towing or hauling heavy stuff go with the c6 it will take lots of abuse.Thats why they rob horsepower.
 
  #8  
Old 11-25-2010, 11:29 AM
cj06's Avatar
cj06
cj06 is offline
Posting Guru
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: CASA GRANDE AZ
Posts: 2,007
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
the only other thing that i remember having a c-4 was the early style broncos and that may have been because of the shortness of them !
i have never seen a c-4 in any truck that came from the factory , ( i could be wrong though )
the ones i have seen are the FMX , c-6 !
 
  #9  
Old 11-25-2010, 12:09 PM
seafire's Avatar
seafire
seafire is offline
Senior User
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Lewiston
Posts: 146
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I know that it sounds kind of funny to have a small C4 in truck, but Ford did it for some reason. I wish they would have made a C6 for the half-ton. I know that they made them for the FE engines. Has anybody heard of putting a C6 behind a 302?
 
  #10  
Old 11-25-2010, 12:36 PM
bmuhlbach's Avatar
bmuhlbach
bmuhlbach is offline
Cargo Master
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: hinckley ohio
Posts: 2,507
Received 5 Likes on 5 Posts
yes the c6 came in cars, trucks and vans behind 300,302,351w and in cars behind 351Clevelands.
 
  #11  
Old 11-25-2010, 07:50 PM
DavidB's Avatar
DavidB
DavidB is offline
Elder User
Join Date: Jan 2002
Posts: 780
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Small block C6

There were several different cases for the C6. One for FE engines, one for the 429/460 and 351M/400 engines, and one for small block Ford engines. The small block C6 would probably be best for your F100. Ford did put C4s in some pickups. It was slightly different from the Mustang transmission in that it had a heavier output shaft and yoke as well as additional clutches internally. The pickup version of the C4 would be OK, but I do not recommend using the Mustang transmission unless you modify it with the extra clutches. The small block C6 would be the best.
 
  #12  
Old 11-25-2010, 08:03 PM
Panski's Avatar
Panski
Panski is offline
New User
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Jakarta, Indonesia
Posts: 8
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Appreciate the inputs and well noted. I'm looking at TCI's C6, then and mate it with street-use torque converter (Sizzler or StreetiFghter) to a planned 302 engine. Has anyone hear of Proformance Unlimited out of Jersey? Thanks again.
 
  #13  
Old 11-25-2010, 08:29 PM
bmuhlbach's Avatar
bmuhlbach
bmuhlbach is offline
Cargo Master
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: hinckley ohio
Posts: 2,507
Received 5 Likes on 5 Posts
You could check out Summit Racing
 
  #14  
Old 11-26-2010, 08:15 AM
jim collins's Avatar
jim collins
jim collins is offline
Cargo Master

Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: South west Idaho
Posts: 3,038
Received 4 Likes on 4 Posts
Originally Posted by seafire
I have a question about a C4 transmission that came out of a 66 Mustang. I posted the same question on the transimmision forum. But thought it might not hurt to post it here. I have a 70 F100 2wd with a 74 302 for a engine. I'am new to automatics so I not sure it will mount up. I don't want to purchase this tranny and not have it mount up.

It will work,I had a little more of a problem. I had a 84 / 302with the granny gear transmission somebody had put in my 79 f-100 . Transmission was bad and I wanted an automatic. I had a 66 mustang c/4 , pan fill transmission. The engine is 50 oz. balance so i used an AOD flexplate of the right size , changed the standard transmission starter for an automatic transmission starter and it's been operating about 6 months now. I like lots of power ,for no good reason that i can think of ,so my extra 460 with a c/6 will be going in next spring. Yes , to the naysayers,I know my MPG will drop from 18 mpg to 10 mpg, but i don't care,you only go around once . I'm pushing 70 years and plan to have a little fun while i'm still here L.O.L. , my daughter can drive her prius and save enough fuel for me to wast it L.O.L.
 
  #15  
Old 11-26-2010, 08:26 AM
CropDusterMan's Avatar
CropDusterMan
CropDusterMan is offline
Elder User
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Valley Center, CA
Posts: 957
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
I've got the C5 behind a 302 in my 66 F250...works like a charm.
 


Quick Reply: C4 transmission



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 01:55 AM.