just wondering what people think of the FLAT-O Products bell housing kit? i like that its a bell housing and not just an adapter plate.

I put a Flat-O adapter and C4 in my Thunderbird about 3 or 4 years ago, the install was pretty straight forward and Gene at Flat-O was a big help.  He was very knowledgeable about the C4 and gave advice on the rebuild as well as installation tips that helped the process go more smoothly.  I also like that it changes to a later 60's style starter. I also had ordered a torque convertor from Gene which he modified so I know it was done right.  I wouldn't hesitate to recommend Flat O.

As far as the C4 holding up, if you're worried check out some of the aftermarket additions available.  Apparently they can handle a large amount of horsepower stock and much more with mods.

That said, if I were to do it over again, I would really consider an AOD, which would hold up just fine behind my lightly modded 292.  I didn't realize when I was building it how many longer trips I would take and it gets old watching the tach sit at around 3000+ for hours at a time after being spoiled by new cars cruising at 2000 rpm.  A quick check of the web shows several companies selling AODs that can handle huge HP levels.

Don

1955 Thunderbird, 1956 F100 in progress.

It is a major part of any transmission change to mate it to correct rear end ratio, thus would be running at similar rpm to those other cars if done, i have 3 man cars with 3.25 r/end which suits them, this latest change from 3 sp o/d to C4 now has 3.00 and havent run it yet but should be close .



  AussieBill            YYYY    Forever Y Block     YYYY

 Down Under, Australia

I changed my 56 Bird to a C4 and kit from Flat-O and I am very happy with the conversion.  The instructions were very clear and everything fit.  The only problem I had was a minor one with the starter.  The spacer was too thin and the starter was too close to the flywheel and hit it on acceleration.  A thin washer at each mounting bolt solved the problem.  I'm running the stock auto rear (3.37) .


54 Victoria 312;  48 Ford Conv 302, 56 Bird 312
Forever Ford
Midland Park, NJ

A stock automatic rearend in a 56 Bird  would be 3.31, Ford car was 3.22

OK I blew the last number.  Didn't check the book. Never could keep numbers straight in my mind.


54 Victoria 312;  48 Ford Conv 302, 56 Bird 312
Forever Ford
Midland Park, NJ

About the strength of the  C4, I use a Broader C4 in my race Car. Jay says  the one  I use is good for 800 hp. He said a stock C4 is good to handle 350 hp
The main things he  does is lower friction  by use of roller thrust bearings,  add clutch discs and improve  oiling as well as a good valve body.    PA claims  there  C4 will handle 1000 hp!

Plus the C4 is a lot lighter than the fordo


54 Victoria 312;  48 Ford Conv 302, 56 Bird 312
Forever Ford
Midland Park, NJ

Oh yeah, I rebuilt the C4 and it was easy to carry and work on.  While I'm not a big guy, the Fordo was a drag, not a carry.  Even my much stronger son didn't want to pick the whole thing up.

Don

Just did the Gene Benson C4 conversion thang on my 292. Mummert supplies additional well detailed instructions with this kit - better instructions than Bensons. Parts all fit well and went together slicko. I just started a project photo thread in the "Street" section. Good luck with whatever you decide.



Bill C

Drag it home, figure it out.