Engine/Transmission (1994 - 1998) 94-95 autos

[TJarecke]

Is their much if any difference in longevity you can get out of the 94-95 trans than the 96 and newer transmissions. My dads friend who drives only CTD seems to think the 95 autos are no good and I should stay away from them. I know they all have their problems but the earlier pickups are what are available to buy now. I don't want this to become a manual vs. automatic thread because there are no manuals for sale here for a decent price or with decent miles.

FYI: I do plan on putting some HP into what ever truck I get. But I know that goes hand in hand with transmission upgrades.

Thanks for any information.

 

[ndurbin]

No theres really not much difference in the newer 47REs vs. the 47RHs in longevity. They all have the same weakness (the TC). Besides neither well stand up to a BOMBed Cummins.



Nathan

 

[jimk]

automatic

Is their much if any difference in longevity you can get out of the 94-95 trans than the 96 and newer transmissions. My dads friend who drives only CTD seems to think the 95 autos are no good and I should stay away from them. I know they all have their problems but the earlier pickups are what are available to buy now. I don't want this to become a manual vs. automatic thread because there are no manuals for sale here for a decent price or with decent miles.

FYI: I do plan on putting some HP into what ever truck I get. But I know that goes hand in hand with transmission upgrades.

Thanks for any information.

there is or has been several improvments in the transmission , the 94 and 95, I have been told require more parts to bring it up to the level that needed. That being said, I have done not spent much on my automatic, fluid and filter. That is it. . I have 103k miles on it. It is best to call a trusted rebuilder and get the real information. good luck Jim

 

[Smokin Ram]

there are some substancial differences in 1994's. It depends when they are built, i have a 1994 built in sept of 93 this means its one of the first off the line, so my trucks transmission, we found this out during the ats transmission build, is actually a late 93, this causes many differences from a later 1994 or 1995, it also changes some drive line characteristic ie it has a much heavier rear drive shaft. 1995's are weaker, in 1996 they made some changes, i own a 1994 and 1995, the 1995 just acts a little different. If you want a real good trnny you want a 97 through 01, these became hydraulicly controlled trannys and they will shift and perform better, they are faster then teh 94 through 96's ive seen this.

 

[Joe G.]

I don't know about the first of the '94 trucks. If they had a '93 in them then there was no lockup torque convertor. You might want to ask Bill K. at DTT about the early '94 transmissions. The '94 and '95 had a 47RH. The later trucks had a 47RE. The biggest difference is the governor. The H (hydraulic) has the flyweight governor so the shifts are controlled by hydraulic pressure from the governor. The E (electronic) has an electronic governor. There are other differences. The torque convertor lockup is system is different.

 

[WBusa]

My '95 (47RH) has 153,000 mi. on it and is still in fine health. According to the previous owner, most of those were hard-towin' miles, too. The truck has been 'lightly' bombed over the past 6 months (see my sig) and the transmission is handling it well (so far, at least). The transmission cooler lines were all leaking when I got it (piece of poop 'quick disconnect' fittings... why would anyone want to quickly disconnect their transmission?????), so I had to invest $500 in upgrading to modern flared fittings/lines, which I highly recommend to anyone going with a '95 AT.

 

[ALehman]

transmission

My truck was made in late 93'. It has the same O/D off button as all the other trucks i've seen. The only thing i have done is fluid and filter. The transmission lines leaked bad, but instead of replacing the lines, i had the ends cut off and connected with high pressure hydraulic hose, no leaks now

 

[Cummins4Life]

When I had my 94 rebuilt for the first time at 170k the was only one clutch/clutch plate that was burnt and warped. They all looked wore but nothing bad. The torque converter clutch was shot too.



I liked it before the rebuild, and I like it even more now.

 

[Piatt]

When I had my 94 rebuilt for the first time at 170k the was only one clutch/clutch plate that was burnt and warped. They all looked wore but nothing bad. The torque converter clutch was shot too.



I liked it before the rebuild, and I like it even more now.

I have a similar question TJarecke has asked. I own a stock 95 2500 4x4 and have put over 205,000 miles on it so far. The auto trany seems to be functioning properly, but I am worried that if I buy a camper the extra weight may be an issue. Does anyone have any suggestions? I really like my truck and do not see the need to go buy a newer one.

 

[RBratby]

i was told the output shaft on the 94-95 auto is harder to break then on the 96 and up transmissions.

 

[Smokin Ram]

1994 do have the torque converter lock up hence it is a 47rh, however the out put shaft is neither a 1993 or a later 1994, the trans was changed slightly i fought with this for a week and it took that long and 2 output shafts later for the dodge dealer to figure the part numbers out. I have heard the opposite from peirs about the 94 and 95 's being harder to break, i replaced mine when it shattered with a later part number because i was told the latter years was a improved harness.