[smdellin]

I am in possesion of a good working 2004R, a deal I couldn't pass up.

While I save up for a proper rebuild, would this tranny hold up as is? I am running a 400 with approx 435 HP and 3:42 gears. Also I have a choice of 2800 or 3200 stall converter, which is better?

Is there anything as minimum I should do before installing? I do plan to do some valve body work.

[Cliff R]

What year is the unit? Any unit made prior to 1986 is going to need a few hard part upgrades for any power level. They had "soft" internals, sun shells, stator splines, pump rings, and the direct drum is a bad deal, just to name a few.

We've sat back and watched the 200-4R deal for quite some time now. They can be made to hold up behind some pretty powerful set-ups. They are extremely expensive to build, at least done correctly. Even with the good parts, they ALWAYS break, sooner or later.

The "trend" is that they do pretty good to low to mid 11's in GN's and similiar power/weight set-ups. Quicker than that the life expectancy is considerably reduced. They last just about forever in mid-12 second and slower cars. I woln't touch one here, for SERIOUS applications. We typically use the 4L60's instead when the owner of a street/strip car is dead set on having an overdrive.

I just talked to the owner of a 69 454 powered Chevelle at Norwalk over the weekend. We set one up for his car back in 2000, and he races it just about every weekend running low 12's, not the first hint of trouble anyplace, and he drives it to the track. He did bring it to us about 2 years ago, while the engine was out for repairs. It had a couple of "hot spots" on two or three of the 3-4 clutch steel plates. We installed new steels/frictions in the 3-4 pack, and gave it back to him......Cliff

[smdellin]

I believe the unit is an 1985 vintage, I'll have to verify. As far as my vehical, I haven't ran it on the track but would believe it to be low 13 to high 12 runner. I drive mainly around town to car cruise-ins and shows. I do some street runs when a Mustang gets beside me.

If I ran the track it would be only a couple times a year. I do plan on a stroker motor next year so I guess I need to evaluate what I want to do on the OD.

I did get a list of parts these trannies require to toughen them up, close to $700. I haven't tackled a tranny rebuild myself so probably another $300 in labor. I know a couple guys around town that do rebuilds on the side.

I have a strong TH350 (B&M) now, but would love to have the OD to extend my driving distance. I guess I have some decisions to make.

[Cliff R]

In addition to the upgraded hard parts, you need to find a builder who knows how to upgrade the hydraulics. Those units die miserable deaths quickly if the shift program isn't on par, even with the good parts installed....FWIW.....Cliff

[jakeshoe]

I disagree with Cliff.

In my experience, and Cliff stated it, you MUST know the hydraulics on these units to build one to hold up. A stock one with a deep pan, stock GN servo, and proper VB setup will handle a mid 12 second car.

The sun shell and stators on the early cars were problematic. GM still hasn't really fixed their sun shell issue on the 4L60 series (700, 4L60E, 4L65E, 4L70E). The aftermarket has fixed the issue with the "Beast" sun shell but it's 3 times the price of the hardened sun shell for the 200-4R.

There was never any issue with the direct drum in the 200-4R. The forward drums are where the problem is at in an application over 400 HP.
The design is weak in stock form. Some have tried to weld up the area where the input shaft goes in it, so it isn't so deep, then heat treat the drum. This is OK, but the real fix is a new shaft in the drum. Only a couple of guys make this specialty drum. I use it on most of the 200-4Rs that I build, but most of the units I build are for 500+ HP.

I don't have too many issues in 10 or 11 second cars....

Here's a stock FWD drum compared to the "billet" drum.




The clutches in the direct drum of a 200-4R are the direct or 3rd gear clutches, not the 3-4 clutches like a 4L60.
They are the weakest clutch pack but can easily be modified to handle 800 HP. One of their issues is fluid starvation due to the filter design.
A deep pan setup fixes this.
The other is apply area. When using the billet drum you can make hydraulic modifications that make them bulletproof.
The 4L60 trans have the same issue with apply area, and you can't do the same mods due to the design, all you can do it increase the line pressure, which causes other problems such as increased pump wear.

The 200 isn't extremely expensive to build. The triuck is to find a builder familiar with them.

They do get to a point of diminishing returns like any other unit. I try to talk customers into a 4L80E if they are truly over 600 HP or will be. As a point of comparison, I try to talk them out of the 4L60 trans at 450-500 HP.

Neither is the trans of choice in a 8-9 second car, the 4L80E is...

[jusjay]

I have ran a 200-4R for the last 10 years in my 64 tempest 455 with a 4.33 rearend. The first 2 units died a quick death, one less than a year! I found a builder who works with the GNX guys on the west coast and he build my current unit. It has been in there for 6 years now and is due for a new clutch packs. My car has run a best time of 12.57@108mph with this unit. It is not a race car, it is mainly driven on the street with a few trips to the track. I have been very happy with the 200-4R. Its nice to run at freeway speeds and only turn 2600 rpm with 4.33. I think the in car set up is very, very important. If the TV is not spot on, you will kill the trans in as little as 500 miles.

[Cliff R]

"The "trend" is that they do pretty good to low to mid 11's in GN's and similiar power/weight set-ups. Quicker than that the life expectancy is considerably reduced. They last just about forever in mid-12 second and slower cars."

Read the above statement closely, it's all you really need to know about the 200's. There is no need to bicker about specifics with internal components, and if/when/why and which ones should be used. If you want a lesson in them, kit the 85 unit and install it behind a 455, it will be DEAD by the end of the month!

We've built gobs of them over the years, back when no one else even looked at them. Put them behind nearly "stock" 350 SBC's and had them get all busted up, then behind 455 Old's or 3.8 Buick's making twice as much input torque, and had them hold up pretty good. Peice by peice we found the "weak" spots, from the band, to leaking/porous/weak welds on the drums, to "soft" internals, and of course less than desirable hydraulic shift function. They stung me bad enough we decided to quit messing with them for any serious work.

Jake makes good points, obviously our experiences overlap on these things. I still personally don't consider these transmissions suitable for big power in any configuration, at least one that's even within the realm of affordablility. I could easily build, 4, if not 5 KILLER TH400's for the cost of a decent 200 and reliable converter, so guess what's in my car?

Last comment, a few pretty good friends of mine recently went the 200-4R direction behind their high torque Pontiac engines (despite my warnings), after some coaxing by "builders" claiming 800-up HP capabilities, and from I've been told, neither one of them lasted much longer than it took to type this! No names mentioned, they may or may not want to comment on this topic at some point?......FWIW.....Cliff

[jakeshoe]

Cliff,
No doubt you can build a TH400 for a much less than a billet 200-4R, but you don't get overdrive...

A 200-4R also has the proper bolt pattern for a Pontiac which IMO makes it worth it for many applications over the adapter plate.

I warranty my units at over 600 HP without any second thoughts if they have the billet parts.

The hydraulics are easy once you know the tricks. Some of the tricks are carried over from TH400 builds...Others are specific to the 200-4R.

Anybody that has a basic understanding of hydraulics and does a small amount of research can determine why the 200 has some very strong advantages over a 4L60 in the clutch holding capacity.

It is common knowledge that the 4L60 series transmissions have issues with the 3-4 clutch pack. Even the latest greatest clutch materials haven't been a total fix for this in cars that are drag raced frequently, it is simply an apply area/clutch friction surface area issue.
UNless you have figured out a way to increase either of those beyond what everyone else is doing, you are still limited by this.
AFAIK Rossler is probably the only one who has actually increased the friction area on the clutches by doing some machining on the drum and using different frictions.

The 200 has the ability to easily increase the clamping force on the 3rd gear clutches, by over 2 times....

I can also build the 700s, 4L60E's cheaper than I can a 200-4R but I recognize their weaknesses and don't try to sell them at those power levels.

There are only about a dozen guys in the country who know the tricks to the 200-4R. If you don't use one of the good builders, you aren't going to have any luck with them...

Bowtie Overdrives isn't one of them....

[Overkillphil]

Another vote for the 200-4R. We have 4 of them in our current musclecar fleet. All are excellent.

I typically did what you are thinking about doing right now. I put the trans in, worked out any bugs in the drivetrain, etc. (usually not an issue anyway), get to know the trans and if it has any issues, then when I have the money I can upgrade it.

As long as the trans is reliable and good condition, you can run it until then. Obviously, you shouldn't be beating on it in the meantime.

For reference, we have one in our 70 GTO that I pulled out of a low mileage 85 Monte SS that was unfortunately T-boned. That trans was bone stock and has been working flawlessly for over 10 years! But the car is not driven like it's in the Cannonball run either.

I keep waiting for some sign of a problem so I have an excuse to pull it out for all the goodies Cliff and Jake mentioned.

Alot comes down to the driver and how the car is finessed.

One thing for certain, If you have a good unit, and a good builder you will love this trans and wonder how you did without it.

[smdellin]

I appreciate all your comments, but keep in mind my vehical is a street driven, more less for fun type vehical. Possibly 400 to 425 HP at best.

So I'm looking for 2004r minimum requirements, or best areas to spend my money on it.

[jakeshoe]

At 400 HP you are borderline for the forward drum upgrade.

Other than that a 200-4R with a GN servo and deep pan with a valve body kit would work excellent.

I always upgrade them to a 3 clutch overdrive setup because it is an almost free upgrade, one extra friction ($2) and machining on the apply piston (time or $10 from my machinist, but I drop off 5-10 at a time and we already have a setup to hold it on the lathe)

My valve body mods are simple and very effective, it doesn't take much and most of it is the same as you would do to a 700-r4 or any other trans, but there are a couple of "little" things that make the difference between a successful 200-4R builder and the guy who is afraid of them.

[Half-Inch Stud]

Cliff, jakeshoe, Please seriously consider the FORD 4R70W with Bolt-on Bellhousing (JEGS) as the killer OD Automatic for our PMDs.

Even HUGHES has 2800-3200 10" converters for the 4R70W.

[Cliff R]

Jakeshoe, good points, as always. Folks just need to know the limitations of these units, and when it becomes manditory to start buying billet parts and making upgrades to keep them alive at certain power levels......Cliff

[jakeshoe]

Definitely,
And most of it is covered on the TurboBuick website.

Bruce at PTS has a very good post on the weaknesses and capabilities and when the upgrade should be made.
I am not a fan of his, but the post is still a very good place to start.

I can post pictures of dozens of broken 700-r4, 4L60E parts.

Broken input drums, shafts (even all the fancy hardened, sleeved, high dollar stuff), failed 3-4 clutch packs, etc.

Even the best stuff available breaks on them simply due to design limitations (that exist on all things mechanical).

I just won't sell a 700 or derivative to a customer for over 500 HP if I can help it. I have some out there against my better judgement behind 502 Ramjet engines, pretty fast 454 Chevy combo's (11's), and a few behind some stout LS1 combos.

I'm not advocating that say a 3rd or 4th gen Camaro guy take out his 4L60 and put in a 200-4R. Build the 4l60 up until you reach it's design limits, and then upgrade to the 4L80E IMO.

But in these older cars that were usually equipped with a Glide, TH350, or TH400, the 200 is an easy transplant, fits the tunnel on cars with tight space, has excellent gear ratios for a mild street strip car, on the BOP cars, they require no cheesy adapter plates, and work exceptionally well.

A purpose built race car doesn't need an OD...

A fast street strip Pontiac, the 200-4R would be my choice.

The 4R70 units can be built tough. And there is a bellhousing available. I would definitely be willing to test mule one for a local Pontiac guy. I'll build the unit, help with the install, electronics tuning, and send it out to abuse it. Anybody with a mid 10 second or faster Pontiac wanting OD and willing to try it, I'll do the trans build labor for free... Only labor will be for fab time for crossmember and install, or I offer my lift, welder, shop to the owner if they want to try one.

They are proven for some very fast cars and I can get the cores for reasonable prices.

[Overkillphil]

Jake, with the 4R70W do we have to play the old "Ford AOD" selector dance with the shifter when racing?

[jakeshoe]

No,
No "AOD Shuffle" on the 4R70W. It has a different shift pattern and besides, I would usually recommend you control it electronically. Set it to shift wherever you want it to... leave the shifter in Drive or OD.

I can build the AOD valve bodies to have a different shift pattern too. Instead of the stock 1-D-OD (1-2/3-OD) I can set them up to be 1-2-3/OD.

So instead of 2nd and 3rd being the same on the selector, 3rd and 4th are, and they don't shift to OD at WOT, so you can run it in "3rd" and when you let off it will shift to OD.

[242177P]

Originally Posted by Cliff R

neither one of them lasted much longer than it took to type this!

TV is critical. Not saying that's what killed these, but if it isn't set up right then it doesn't matter how well built they were...

[jakeshoe]

Originally Posted by 242177P

TV is critical. Not saying that's what killed these, but if it isn't set up right then it doesn't matter how well built they were...

Yep,
A well built 200-4R doesn't die easily...

The stock pieces had a few issues that caused them to die fast.
The stock band wasn't big enough (same issue the early 700s had), the servo wasn't large enough (same issue as the 700...) the sun shell and stators weren't heat treated (same issue as the 700), the pump rings would break in high rpm applications (same as a 700, exactly the same parts, interchangeable), they needed larger boost valves (same as the 700, interchangeable), they didn't have the valve body calibration for performance usage (same issues as the 700).

Anybody see a trend here?

The other trait they both share is the shafts breaking off. The 700's don't really have this issue USUALLY until you get over 450 HP, or a heavy vehicle with big tires.
The 700s/4L60Es will break the input shaft at the lube holes, they will break the input drum (aluminum) where the steel input shaft comes in.
They also both share a less than ideal amount of clutch surface area (700 is actually worse here) and less than ideal amount of clutch apply area for the 3rd gear clutches on the 200, and the 3-4 clutches on the 700/4L60E.

It isn't a big deal to add extra clutches to the stack on either trans, although the 200 has proven to not really need it, and the 700/4L60Es do. More on that...
It is an easy modification on the 200-4r to "dual feed" the 3rd gear clutches. Basically a free modification, the only caveat is that when you do so, you make the shift from 2nd to 3rd gear more positive. Even when you back off the valve body calibration to soften this shift, it will break the snout off the forward drum as I posted above.
That is a particularly weak area b ecause if you look at the factory piece, the pilot hole in the front is drilled deeper than the splines on the outside. If you look at the cross sectional area between the splines and the pilot hole, it's about 3/16" thick including the splines high area. Not very thick.. So it easily snaps off as shown.
If you look at the aftermarket drum next to it, the splines have a taper to the shaft, and the hole isn't drilled past the splines, it is about half as deep, so where the splines terminate, is much stouter and the material is TOUGH. They simply don't break there anymore.

So when we dual feed the 200-4R direct clutches (which is a common mod on high performance TH350's, TH400's, etc.) it takes care of the clutches.

You have 3 ways to make a clutch pack capable of increased torque capacity.

1. Increase the pressure. This is done on most performance transmissions, and is a part of many "shift kits" or more correctly stated valve body kits.
You increase the spring tension on the pressure regulator spring and the overall transmission pressure is increased.
You increase the size of the boost valves, and the pressure under throttle is increased. You make additional modifications to the TV up/down/limit circuits to increase pressure under certain operating conditions.

2. You increase the amount of friction material surface area. Bigger clutch plates or more of them. It is usually very difficult to increase the diameter or facing of a clutch plate. You are limited by the overall diameter of the trans case, the drums that contain the clutches, etc. It IS done in some instances, but it is one of the more expensive ways to go about it.
You add friction plates. If you have a stock capacity of 6 plates, and you increase it to 7, you have increased the capacity IN THEORY. The true capacity may actually be less due to having to use thinner steels that warp easier. So the holding capacity may be higher, but the shifting capacity could be less. This is a fine line that builders have to walk and play with. Keeping the steels adequate thickness while getting as many frictions in place as possible in problematic units like the 700/4L60E.
You can get 9 frictions (two sided) in the 700-R4/4L60E drum relatively easily but a count of 7 or 8 has proven to be best for most builders.

3. You increase the apply area. This is very easy to do in some specific instances. The TH350, TH400, 4L80E, and 200-4R are these instances, specifically the 3rd gear clutch pack for all of these units.
3rd gear clutches are also used in reverse. GM designed the drum so that the piston has two seperate apply areas. One area is used for 3rd, and both are used in reverse. We modify the hydraulic circuits to use both apply areas as one in 3rd gear, called dual feeding. Very simple mod that should be done on any performance TH350, TH400, 4L80E, and any 200-4R with the billet drum. It should not be done on the 200 without the drum...
In other cases this is a very difficult method to increase clutch capacity, the 700-R4/4L60E is one. There just isn't enough room to make the apply piston a larger diameter, and it is relatively small on the 700/4L60Es.

So on the 700/4L60Es you best option to increase the capacity of the clutch pack is to go for an 8 count clutch pack IME.
Some very high end units have modifications to the drum for larger clutches. We are talking about $4000 units. (Much more than a full billet 200-4R).

There is one other way to increase the capacity, and much of it is opinion based, and that is the type of friction material that is used. Some have higher co-effiecients of friction under static or dynamic conditions. Certain clutches work better in certain applications.

These are several of the reasons why the 200-R4 does actually make a better unit in built up form. It also has a much more rigid center support (actually has 2 internally) where the 700/4L60E is longer and only has one. So the internals of the 200-4R are going to run more centered and create less stress on the bushings and parts.

All the mods that the 700 gets on a performance build are used on the 200-4R. Most of the parts are the same.
.500 boost valve, larger reverse boost valve, upgraded pressure regulator spring, hardened pump rings, 10 vane or 13 vane pump. The parts listed are interchangeable between the two units.

Then the hardened sun shell mention by Cliff. It is bulletproof and came stock on the newer units. It's $13 my cost new. As opposed to about $45 for the Beast sun shell that should be put in any 700/4L60E build.
Hardened stator is about $15 for either unit.
A good band for either unit is about $25.
A larger servo for the either in "billet" is about $80-100 depending on what brand etc. The 200-4R has ONE servo, the 700 has two seperate pieces that go in the same bore.
The 700 however CAN usually get by with just a "Corvette" servo which is a $8-9 part, and the stock 4th gear servo for many applications.

In a 450 HP application, I can build the 700/4L60Es cheaper. 98% of the time, they will live a long reliable life at this power level, even if driven hard/raced.
At over 450 HP, if the unit is actually raced and driven hard, it becomes a "maintenance item". It will have to have 3-4 clutches replaced occasionally. It will occasionally experience a hard part failure, typically an input shaft/drum.
At over 450 HP, the 200-4R with simply a billet drum and aftermarket billet servo for hard parts will provide reliable service.
If it fails before the length of time it took me to write this then I put it together wrong or it was installed wrong. As stated the TV cable must be setup right. The converter must be installed correctly, and it has to be properly assembled and calibrated. If it's over 450 HP it MUST be dual fed for the directs to live IME.
My experience with the 200-4R in my personal ride ('69 Chevelle, 427 BBC) was that being a mid 12 second car, with a stock pan, it would cavitate on the 2-3 shift because of the acceleration.
You MUST have the deep pan at faster than a 13.0, or a specially designed pickup and a "dam" installed in the case near the park linkage.

I drove my car hard with the 200-4R for 2 yrs. I used it as a testing platform to find the weak points in the 200-4R and get the hydraulics figured out. I didn't have any hard parts issues, or any clutch failures. I did heat check the directs with the stock pan but it shifted fine when I freshened it.

I just freshened a 200-4R from a GN that runs high 10's. I built it a year ago. It had a converter issue so customer brought it in for a checkout. Band still looked new, 3rd gear clutches still looked new, it had some damage from debris on the center support sealing area. The billet shaft did not even have any scoring (HARD).

I speak and do business relatively often with big name transmission guys. Chris at CKPerformance (spoke to him twice today...one of the innovators for 200-4R hard parts), one of Hughes Performance senior trans guys, John Kilgore (occasionally, Godfather of the TH400 IMO) and other noted builders in the community. I get to pick their brains, talk shop, and compare notes. They've all seen the same things.

[Cliff R]

Just a couple of things to add. It is best to try to start out with a later unit, as GM continued to make changes to these transmissions to increase durability.

One will also notice that GM did NOT use the 200-4R in heavy duty applications, they chose the 4L60 instead, then kept upgrading it in places where it gave troubles.

If you are searching for a good starting point for a 700/4L60, look for a 1987 or newer unit. They can be identified by the large casting line on the case on the passengers side of the transmission, shaped like a big cam lobe, running up across the cooling line fittings. They will also have a governor cover and TV cable. These units contain the hardened stator, larger sprag assemblies, hardened internals, etc, etc.

For the 200's, look for 1986 and later cores. They will contain hardened internals and other factory modifications to increase durability. In stock form, the GN and Monte Carlo SS valve bodies have slightly better shift programs, but this matters little if one is going to modify them anyhow.

If building the 700/4L60, the best results we be obtained by using the latest GM set-up in the input drum. They continued to make modifications to that drum by improving the apply pistons, friction coeficient, etc. GM settled on 6 thick frictions and thick steels for the 3-4 clutch. They also used a thicker apply plate. This set-up has proven to be very reliable, in lieu of using 8-9 or more thin frictions, with a bunch of thin steel plates. As Jakeshoe touched on, increasing friction capacity "in theory" makes the drum have more holding power. Problem is, thin steels and frictions do NOT take the heat as well as the thicker parts, not holding their shape as well, and being more difficult to compress. Using a thick apply/backing plates and less frictions has proven to be more reliable in long term service. GM complimented the 3-4, overrunning and direct clutches with molded apply pistons on later units. The molded apply pistons are steel instead of aluminum, and provide less leakage points at the seals, with better sealing materials. They also used friction material with a better holding properties in later units. Upgrading to the later deal is recomended for 700/4L60 builds at any power level.

We have seen very, very few busted up 700/4L60's, even used behind some pretty serious engines that were raced frequently. As with any other drivetrain component, it is tested the most when you install a high torque engine and go out in search of perfect traction (drag racing).

I really don't think that either the 200's or 700's were intended to receive high shock loads when they were designed. The 200's were nothing more than a lightweight small package with a BOP bellhousing to provide movement to GM vehicles with relatively small/low powered engines. They faired OK once they addressed the weak areas. They never were, or are a HD transmission.

I don't converse with any of the "experts" about them, but we have seen enough of them busted all to crap that they are avoided here. If I was going to use one at any power level, I get a second mortgage and get all the forged/billet internals and other pricey upgrades to make sure it led a long life.

We also didn't go into detail about converters. We don't use the TCC (Torque Converter Clutch) for most applications, typically retrofits into early vehicles. This assumes that the gearing and converter stall is well chosen for the application. We have plenty of these transmissions running around with non-LU converters to know that when the plan is well thought out, there are no negatives from doing so. Matter of fact, a good friend of mine who went to the 200 trans behind a pretty healthy Pontiac engine, is not fond of the TCC, as it's on a toggle switch and lugs the engine frequently.

I really don't see any problem with adding a TCC, or using one, other than it should be set-up to lock and unlock in a variety of driving conditions just like the factory units. Using a toggle switch, or direct wiring grounded on a 4th gear pressure switch is OK, but most customers don't want to look for a switch, and direct wiring can/will overwork the TCC in some driving situations.

Some racers use and lock the TCC as soon as the transmission shifts into second gear. This is an excellent idea as it ceases all torque multiplication after the launch. This allows for a relatively "loose" converter to be used, with the benefits of direct drive after the car shifts to 2nd. The problem again becomes surface area of the single disk clutch, and construction of the converter shell. In high HP applications, it becomes extremely difficult to hold the TCC. The aftermarket has stepped up with stronger housings and multiple clutch set-ups for the TCC. Effective, but extremely expensive.

In any case, this should be enough information to completely confuse everyone about these units! Personally, I see them as a very good idea for retrofitting into many early musclecars. With the cost of fuel, as well thought out set-up can get well over 20 mpg's.

My own 67 Impala SS, using 3.31 gears, and a 1987 4L60 got as high as 26mpg's, and 18 average for city driving. This was using a custom built non L/U converter, with apprx 2400rpms flash stall and about 1800rpm's load stall. We actually ran it for several months with a custom L/U converter, but broke it on the first full throttle run with good traction! The vehicle was driven another 35,000 miles, with hundreds of full throttle runs, street and strip, without the first hint of troubles. Prior to installing the OD, the PG transmission provided about 13-16mpg's, and the vehicle was a TURD from a standing start. The 3.06 first gear ratio of the 4L60 is a big wake up call for a heavy vehicle, and complimenting it with a .70 OD ratio allows for highway cruising at low rpms. Just a few other things to consider when trying to decide on taking the plunge for an OD transmission for these older cars......Cliff

[jakeshoe]

The 200's were used in the GN, which at the time was probably GM's fastest production car. They aren't light either. About the same as a '68-69 Chevelle.

I have several of these running around without "all" the billet. Just the billet forward drum and a good servo, deep pan. I sell that unit for $1700 and I wouldn't hesitate to put it behind a 455 Pontiac in an A-body for even high 10 second usage. The 4340 input shaft and all the billet OD components are nice but I haven't really seen the breakage there yet on the stock pieces.

The biggest thing that makes the 200-4R cost more to build than the 700 for 400+HP is the forward drum, but some of that cost of offset by the savings on the installation since in many cases no driveshaft cutting is necessary, etc.

On the subject of converters. A full billet 200-4R can use a multi-disc lockup converter and take WOT upshifts with the converter locked, and will do so going into 4th gear stock. No special TV sleeve or weird shift characteristics because of the "WOT 3-4 sleeve".

I prefer to run lockup. It is part of the features of the trans that make them modern and efficient. It isn't hard to setup an automatic 4th gear lockup that unlocks under heavy throttle or at idle. On my builds I install a new pressure switch and TCC solenoid, wire it up for 4th gear auto lockup, and a command wire to lockup in 2nd and 3rd as well.
You wire through a vacuum switch that hooks to ported vacuum, and no toggle switch is necessary. It automatically locks in 4th gear but will unlock under any throttle or when coasting.

Also,
Trans failures related to converter. Some of the failures seen are converter related, especially on the 700's. The 700 cannot take a WOT upshift with converter locked due to the input drum issues covered already. Even locking the converter under WOT conditions can be problematic. You must be sure that the converter builder leaves the cushion springs on the clutch, so that it doesn't shock the input shaft. Many companies don't do this on their performance converters.
This is a good idea in any case. It just saves hard parts and has no ill effects on the converter.

Many builders used to convert the trans to non-lockup because the converter technology wasn't there to support the power, and because they couldn't get the trans to live with the converter locking.

IMO,
Nowadays this isn't the case. There are plenty of good converter companies and even the single disc converters are tough as nails if built properly and also lightweight.
If you are breaking converters, you need to find another converter company.
I don't fall for the "Pontiac" torque excuse.
I was using a CHEAP converter in my Chevelle, actually a used GN piece and then a mildly restalled stock one to match the GN one later. WOT lockups going into 4th gear many times. I don't recommend it for that type of converter, but it never broke or clutch failed.
Edge and PTC can both build a very high quality converter for a reasonable price. There are others as well, those are just two who my customers have had very good luck with and I haven't heard ANY negative feedback even online. That's a pretty good track record.

On the 200-4R,
the only thing the later models had going for them was the hardened sun shell and stator. I always install these new because they cost so little, so the year of the core is inconsequential to me. There was an upgrade to a torrington in the rear carrier by GM on the later models. I also always use this bearing instead of the plastic thrust washer. About $40 worth of upgrades makes any of the 200's equal. I update the pump to 10 vane usually, sometimes 13 vane (I actually prefer the 10 vane over the 13, but the 13 has gotten more commonly available and cheaper due to being a factory service part in the 4L60Es).

I use whatever 200-4R cores I get if the internals are good, I avoid the OG code units valve bodies.