4L60E Information Thread

[351FUN]

Ive come across 4L60Es manufactured in 1992 probably for '93 MY trucks but my dates refer to the year when the transmission was manufactured not necessarily the vehicle's as model years often differ from calendar year of manufacture, especially when there's a major body style or chassis change and new model year vehicles are sold in Q4 of the preceding year.

That's what I assumed you meant, and that's why I recommended clarifying it, because all the other posts about the subject go by MY.

 

[NickTransmissions]

That's what I assumed you meant, and that's why I recommended clarifying it, because all the other posts about the subject go by MY.

Its a good point but unfortunately I can no longer edit the first post (after a certain amount of time, you lose the ability to edit your posts). But the above should suffice...

 

[L31MaxExpress]

I did see a bit of bad information. An 80E takes about 3-5% more power to turn, not 15% more. I saw about 10 rwhp loss going to an 85E from a 60E at the ~300 rwhp range. My 0-60 was actually quicker with the 85E. The stock V6/Small Block 80E torque converter is looser than the 60E unit.

Also many 4L60E vehicles came with the 093 servo much earlier than indicated above. I have seen many L31 applications with them from the factory. My 97 Van had one in the OEM 60E that blew up with 38K miles on it. My 99 Tahoe also had one. The 60E I have from a 2002ish 5.3L Tahoe also had one. Come to think of it I have not seen many of the heavier GVW vehicles after 1996 that did not have one. The Vette servo does nothing for 4th gear. I use the Sonnax Billet 2nd and 4th gear servos. A little more $ but much more apply area.

 

[NickTransmissions]

I did see a bit of bad information. An 80E takes about 3-5% more power to turn, not 15% more. I saw about 10 rwhp loss going to an 85E from a 60E at the ~300 rwhp range. My 0-60 was actually quicker with the 85E. The stock V6/Small Block 80E torque converter is looser than the 60E unit.

What bad information and where 'above' do you see it?

If you're simply referring to the power consumption margin between the 60 and 80, I understood it to be closer to 10-15% more power but will further research and have it corrected if need be. I don't recall posting about the specific stall speeds for the TCs between those two transmissions if that's what you're referring to as 'bad information'. Besides a looser stall will multiply torque for a longer duration along the RPM curve than a tighter one so vehicles with higher stall converters will generally be quicker, all other things held largely equal (as I'm sure you already know).

I did see a bit of bad information. An 80E takes about 3-5% more power to turn, not 15% more. I saw about 10 rwhp loss going to an 85E from a 60E at the ~300 rwhp range. My 0-60 was actually quicker with the 85E. The stock V6/Small Block 80E torque converter is looser than the 60E unit.

Also many 4L60E vehicles came with the 093 servo much earlier than indicated above. I have seen many L31 applications with them from the factory. My 97 Van had one in the OEM 60E that blew up with 38K miles on it. My 99 Tahoe also had one. The 60E I have from a 2002ish 5.3L Tahoe also had one. Come to think of it I have not seen many of the heavier GVW vehicles after 1996 that did not have one. The Vette servo does nothing for 4th gear. I use the Sonnax Billet 2nd and 4th gear servos. A little more $ but much more apply area.

Also, please indicate where I posted about the vette servo's intro date(s) and applications. Most every 4L60E that I have seen and know to be original to the vehicle and never worked on had 553 second gear servos other than vettes, F-bodies, GTOs and some of the higher end sub-model truck and SUVs but 093s make their way into a great many 700R4s and 4L60Es after the fact. My own 5.3 Z71 Tahoe came from the factory with a 553 servo, not an 093. My neighbor's 2001 Tahoe (original owner, never touched transmission other than fluid changes), also a 4x4 that I rebuilt last week had a 553 not an 093 installed.

I know full well the Vette servo has nothing to do w/4th gear so not sure if that's in response to a post of mine or someone else's. If it's mine, please indicate the post number and/or thread if different than this one and I'll take a look and edit (or ask moderators to edit if I cannot) to clarify if the wording is confusing...Take the below screenshot of post #5 in this thread as shown below. Notice I mention the undersized 2nd gear servo apply piston in the third bullet down - clearly I'm referring to the fact that servo only applies to 2nd gear. And when I mention 'later' I don't give a date or date range here, just allude to the fact that the 093 servo started w/the vettes then migrated across other makes/models.

Perhaps there's another post you're referring to?

You must be registered for see images attach

Are you the original owner of all of those vehicles mentioned that came with a Vette servo in the transmissions?

Do you know for a fact they have never been worked on previously?

Perhaps you are and perhaps they did come w/an 093s from the factory but an overwhelming the 5.3L equipped 4L60Es and even some of the 4L65Es in trucks/SUVs that I have ever seen had the 553 servo - I know as I tore one down this past weekend and it had a 553 servo in it. Was surprised but the unit was otherwise untouched. Maybe it was apart of one or more option packages but never specified - who knows.

I'm not trying to be argumentative but at the same token, I want to fully understand what exactly you're referring to in your post, especially when you say things like

I did see a bit of bad information

Apart of the horsepower consumption figure for the 80 vs 60 which I mentioned on the first page in post #5 and can have corrected if this is not accurate, I'm not seeing anything else you've implied was wrong, either here or elsewhere. So if there is in fact some stuff that's either wrong or confusing, please be specific about where so that I can correct it or ask the staff to do so on my behalf.

This way everyone benefits and no one is led astray.
I'm not perfect, no one is so if some of my information is wrong, I will acknowledge and correct it (or have it fixed) asap.

TIA

 

[L31MaxExpress]

What bad information and where 'above' do you see it?

If you're simply referring to the power consumption margin between the 60 and 80, I understood it to be closer to 10-15% more power but will further research and have it corrected if need be. I don't recall posting about the specific stall speeds for the TCs between those two transmissions if that's what you're referring to as 'bad information'. Besides a looser stall will multiply torque for a longer duration along the RPM curve than a tighter one so vehicles with higher stall converters will generally be quicker, all other things held largely equal (as I'm sure you already know).



Also, please indicate where I posted about the vette servo's intro date(s) and applications. Most every 4L60E that I have seen and know to be original to the vehicle and never worked on had 553 second gear servos other than vettes, F-bodies, GTOs and some of the higher end sub-model truck and SUVs but 093s make their way into a great many 700R4s and 4L60Es after the fact. My own 5.3 Z71 Tahoe came from the factory with a 553 servo, not an 093. My neighbor's 2001 Tahoe (original owner, never touched transmission other than fluid changes), also a 4x4 that I rebuilt last week had a 553 not an 093 installed.

I know full well the Vette servo has nothing to do w/4th gear so not sure if that's in response to a post of mine or someone else's. If it's mine, please indicate the post number and/or thread if different than this one and I'll take a look and edit (or ask moderators to edit if I cannot) to clarify if the wording is confusing...Take the below screenshot of post #5 in this thread as shown below. Notice I mention the undersized 2nd gear servo apply piston in the third bullet down - clearly I'm referring to the fact that servo only applies to 2nd gear. And when I mention 'later' I don't give a date or date range here, just allude to the fact that the 093 servo started w/the vettes then migrated across other makes/models.

Perhaps there's another post you're referring to?

You must be registered for see images attach

Are you the original owner of all of those vehicles mentioned that came with a Vette servo in the transmissions?

Do you know for a fact they have never been worked on previously?

Perhaps you are and perhaps they did come w/an 093s from the factory but an overwhelming the 5.3L equipped 4L60Es and even some of the 4L65Es in trucks/SUVs that I have ever seen had the 553 servo - I know as I tore one down this past weekend and it had a 553 servo in it. Was surprised but the unit was otherwise untouched. Maybe it was apart of one or more option packages but never specified - who knows.

I'm not trying to be argumentative but at the same token, I want to fully understand what exactly you're referring to in your post, especially when you say things like

Apart of the horsepower consumption figure for the 80 vs 60 which I mentioned on the first page in post #5 and can have corrected if this is not accurate, I'm not seeing anything else you've implied was wrong, either here or elsewhere. So if there is in fact some stuff that's either wrong or confusing, please be specific about where so that I can correct it or ask the staff to do so on my behalf.

This way everyone benefits and no one is led astray.
I'm not perfect, no one is so if some of my information is wrong, I will acknowledge and correct it (or have it fixed) asap.

TIA

Was not doing it to be argumentative either, just informative.

My main objection was more toward the power difference it takes to turn a 4L80E vs 4L60E. My statement on the stall speed was merely to explain a possible reason that I saw a quicker 0-60 time with a 4L80E than a 4L60E. It also does not hurt that the shift recovery after the 1-2 shift puts a 4L80E equipped vehicle at a much higher rpm going into 2nd than a 4L60E.

Then the minor detail on the 553 vs 093 servo useage. I have seen more trucks, suburbans and vans with the 093 than I have the 553. Perhaps GM swapped at some GVW or as part of a tow package. When you state "later" I naturally took that as you meant a 4L65E or 4L70E application such as the TBSS or Escalade, but I have seen them in far more than those applications.

The 97 van was untouched until I pulled the transmission with 38K on it after it failed. I had a Vette servo to replace the stock servo and found it was already there. I found other damage that made me start over with a 4L65E on that. Both transmission failures on the 97 were actually transmission case related. The 99 Tahoe, I was not the original owner of, but it was a well-maintained stock truck and no signs that the transmission had ever been opened in any way. Same for the 5.3L/4L60E combination I have, it was a wrecked stock truck with no signs of having ever been pulled apart. I have seen the 553 servos in the older TBI era 4L60Es, but not in many newer ones, minus the V6 S-trucks. I guess it is one of those mysteries as to why GM used what they used.

I never stated you claimed the Vette servo did anything for 4th gear. I was merely stating that it did not help there so that people would know given the information commonly floating around on various forums stating that it does.

 

[NickTransmissions]

Was not doing it to be argumentative either, just informative.

My main objection was more toward the power difference it takes to turn a 4L80E vs 4L60E. My statement on the stall speed was merely to explain a possible reason that I saw a quicker 0-60 time with a 4L80E than a 4L60E. It also does not hurt that the shift recovery after the 1-2 shift puts a 4L80E equipped vehicle at a much higher rpm going into 2nd than a 4L60E.

Then the minor detail on the 553 vs 093 servo useage. I have seen more trucks, suburbans and vans with the 093 than I have the 553. Perhaps GM swapped at some GVW or as part of a tow package. When you state "later" I naturally took that as you meant a 4L65E or 4L70E application such as the TBSS or Escalade, but I have seen them in far more than those applications.

The 97 van was untouched until I pulled the transmission with 38K on it after it failed. I had a Vette servo to replace the stock servo and found it was already there. I found other damage that made me start over with a 4L65E on that. Both transmission failures on the 97 were actually transmission case related. The 99 Tahoe, I was not the original owner of, but it was a well-maintained stock truck and no signs that the transmission had ever been opened in any way. Same for the 5.3L/4L60E combination I have, it was a wrecked stock truck with no signs of having ever been pulled apart. I have seen the 553 servos in the older TBI era 4L60Es, but not in many newer ones, minus the V6 S-trucks. I guess it is one of those mysteries as to why GM used what they used.

I never stated you claimed the Vette servo did anything for 4th gear. I was merely stating that it did not help there so that people would know given the information commonly floating around on various forums stating that it does.

Your comment about the Vette servo only applying to second gear, when read in combination with your opening statement, " I did see a bit of bad information" combined with not specifying that you only intended to emphasize the second gear servo was meant to correct some generally held common misconceptions vs something I specifically said would lead any reasonable person to believe you were trying to correct me specifically.

Additionally, your differing personal experience/first hand observations about what 2nd gear servos you have seen and where/when is literally just that - different...Ive built over 3,000 4L60Es from every year they were produced and the overwhelming majority of those units that were installed behind V8, 4.3L V6 or the In-line 5 engines were equipped with the 553 servo. That's my personal experience with them...So it's not 'bad information', just different than yours (Im not going to make any assumptions around how many you have done, other than to give equal weight to your personal experience). And if there was any confusion as to what I meant by 'later', please ask before assuming. Later can be 5 minutes later or 5 years later...please ask.

In reality, there's no "bad information" in anything I have written and I take issue with you saying so without providing/citing specific examples and locations (ie thread links/post numbers to support the statement and give me the opportunity to correct it. So now, anyone reading that would potentially begin to question anything and everything I have in this thread and on the entire forum. It's especially problematic as I CANNOT EDIT the OP any longer - I have to ask moderators or administrators to do it for me. My credibility is important to me and I'll do everything and anything to maintain it. Whether that means acknowledging and correcting an error or refuting statements like, "I did see a bit of bad information."

Here's what I would have done if I saw one of your posts - I would have sent you a PM so that we can clear up any misunderstandings amongst ourselves as SMEs before discussing in public...That's how I roll, though I get not everyone is the same way.

Its always easier to destroy than it is to build, especially when it's not yours.

 

[Joe Dirte]

So.swapped back to a 60 for couple months. Need to know the cooler line part numbers. One of my 80 lines looks like it'll work but the other is way too long. Thanks.

 

[NickTransmissions]

So.swapped back to a 60 for couple months. Need to know the cooler line part numbers. One of my 80 lines looks like it'll work but the other is way too long. Thanks.

You'll likely need both (one of the '80's cooler lines may work but I'd have both on hand. Google the part numbers for whichever year your trans is as there's two different sets of cooler lines, depending on whether you have quick disconnect (late) or traditional thread-on fittings (early).

 

[Joe Dirte]

You'll likely need both (one of the '80's cooler lines may work but I'd have both on hand. Google the part numbers for whichever year your trans is as there's two different sets of cooler lines, depending on whether you have quick disconnect (late) or traditional thread-on fittings (early).

Gotcha. Forgot to mention it is quick connects on a 98. That's more info that FB gave me. They all wanted to know if I got driveshafts crossmembers etc.

 

[NickTransmissions]

Gotcha. Forgot to mention it is quick connects on a 98. That's more info that FB gave me. They all wanted to know if I got driveshafts crossmembers etc.

LOL, yea you get some odd responses on the net sometimes.

How come you're going back to the '60 for a while? Are you rebuilding your 4L80E?