I recently had the auto trans in my 1993 4Runner let go on me after a night of playing in the bush. I thought I would just go to the wreckers and grab another one, but their system says 92-93 is the only transmission that will work in my vehicle. I was told this by a couple of wreckers. So now searching for a transmission I am having a hard time sourcing the correct year. Is this true that 92-93 is specific to my 93 Runner? And if so has anyone done a swap with one from another year successfully?
Auto trans specific to 92-93?
- Thread starter Tom.D
- Start date
Register to hide this ad
No and Yes. I know that the A340H was used 1990-1995.5 on the 4wd models. I know there was some year to year variations on the engine/transmission relationship.
All this to say is, look, your wreckers have a basic system that shows them interchangeability. It isn't the ALL that of cars. It is basic and probably all wreckers use the same dang thing, which is why they say the same thing. You can make a transmission from an earlier year but same generation work, it may require some conversion.
So. Screw that and have your tranny shop do a manual conversion. I wouldn't trust a junked auto tranny anyway. Those things are so sensitive.. you would be risking a lot. A manual transmission is just stronger and more reliable. I hate that the 4th gens ONLY have autos.
I get why. Americans are lazy.. but I would love a manual in the thing!
All this to say is, look, your wreckers have a basic system that shows them interchangeability. It isn't the ALL that of cars. It is basic and probably all wreckers use the same dang thing, which is why they say the same thing. You can make a transmission from an earlier year but same generation work, it may require some conversion.
So. Screw that and have your tranny shop do a manual conversion. I wouldn't trust a junked auto tranny anyway. Those things are so sensitive.. you would be risking a lot. A manual transmission is just stronger and more reliable. I hate that the 4th gens ONLY have autos.
I get why. Americans are lazy.. but I would love a manual in the thing!
Dylan
Member
Just curious, any idea on a ballpark for a conversion to manual on a 2nd gen? Always thought about it. I've got 4.88s and want to move up to 33's and i hear you don't need to regear if you have a manual.
fourwd1
Moderator
The A340H was used from 88-95 behind the 6 cyl.
The A340F was on the 4 cyl.
The A340E was used with 2WD 6 cyl trucks.
fourwd1
Moderator
Having a manual trans doesn't eliminate the need to regear with taller tires, if that's what you're saying.
The loss of power caused by taller tires is just more noticeable with an auto than a manual.
4.88's is ideal for 33's and a manual, where 5.29's would be best with an auto.
Agreed. I actually wrote a lenghty post on that, but forgot to post it.
A manual allows you to get by a bit more. An auto transmission has set shift points that are calibrated to RPM, TPS and ECU information. Throwing huge tires on there throws it all out of whack and it doesn't know what to do.
On a manual... if you need to stay in 1st gear till you get to 15mph, redlining the the thing; then shift. You "can".. doesn't mean you should for long.
A manual allows you to get by a bit more. An auto transmission has set shift points that are calibrated to RPM, TPS and ECU information. Throwing huge tires on there throws it all out of whack and it doesn't know what to do.
On a manual... if you need to stay in 1st gear till you get to 15mph, redlining the the thing; then shift. You "can".. doesn't mean you should for long.
Dylan
Member
That's what I'm talking about I guess. I've got the 4.88 and want to go to bigger tires. Just wondering if I should do a manual swap.
