How do I find out what automatic transmission my corvette has and is there anywhere that sells Rebuilt ones with performance upgrades to handle more horsepower?

 

What year is your car?

it either has a 700r4, 4l60 or 4l60e which are all derivative. Yes, any real/decent shop can rebuild. It will cost anywhere from $1500 - $3500 depending on what you do.

 

95 corvette

 

Early 4l60-E

 

Sonnax has a printable PDF as to what parts that they make that will be needed for different HP levels

https://www.sonnax.com/tech_resource...n-build-charts

 

95-96 was a transition year for the 4L60E. Some late produced 95 GM vehicles may or may not have PWM lockup strategy. A visual of the valve body would be needed to verify.

 

Rossler Trans will want to have you send the trans to them for rebuild.

 

If you decide to have your A4 rebuilt with hardened parts I strongly suggest including a good shift kit as well as a 2,000rpm TC upgrade.

After I added those mods to my A4 it really launched much harder as well as provided a very sweet "wag" on the 1-2 upshift at even 1/2-3/4 throttle.

 

I'm not aware of a program for the 95 automatic PCM that did not include the lockup PWM strategy, just like how all 95 automatics got the transmission temperature added to the CCM and digital dash display. Ergo, all 95 Corvettes should have the later 4L60E with the PWM lockup torque converter. If someone knows otherwise, I'd love to find out. I just find it safe to assume that if it's a 95 or a 96, it's got the 4L60E with PWM.

That said, if OP is savvy and wants to find out without cracking the case, there's an easier and cheaper way to find out. USB-to-ALDL cable (~$60), free software (Flashhack). Download the BIN from the car itself, open it in Tunerpro, look at any of the TCC-related values. The easiest one to check would be at address 2084, which is a switch for "TCC Control Feedback Diagnostic (SES Code 83)." This code is not present in the 1994 vehicle (non-PWM) but is present in the 1995 vehicle (PWM). Likewise you could look at the table at address 3725, "TCC Release Rate (%Duty/sec) VS %TPS VS Gear." This is not set on a 94 since there is no duty cycle control on a '94 (they're all set to FF) while on a '95 there are actual values populated.

So yeah.

 

Sorry, my error. Your solution seems far less cumbersome than removing 16 bolts, checking the valve body and doing a service at the same time.

 

Exactly! And less messy, and doesn't require getting the car in the air, and can even be done on a car that doesn't belong to you if you're doing a pre-purchase inspection and are curious. If you've got the trans out for a service already then by all means, but if you just want to know which one you have before you go buying parts, well...

 

Sometimes sarcasm gets lost.

 

And sometimes it gets ignored on purpose in favor of furthering one's own point, leaving the decision over what's actually a better idea up to the OP.

 

Considering that the vast vast majority of people on this forum have never or will never play around with the programming, I think I know what most would choose. Let's see - search around to find this special 60.00 cable, order it and wait, search around for this illustrious software program, spend hours researching and learning how to run it OR take said 60.00 down to the supply house and put it towards a service kit. Run car up on ramps and in less than two hours you have your answer and a freshly serviced transmission.

 

Cable: http://aldlcable.com/products/aldlobd2u.asp
Program: http://fbodytech.com/flashhack/
Tunerpro: https://www.tunerpro.net/downloadApp.htm

Cable got to me in less than a week. Time it takes to download from the car: 2 minutes. How: one click of a button that says "read."

I get it if you're afraid of electronics or don't think they're useful, but our cars have a lot they can help you with if you'd just let them do their job.

 

That I think is the main issue. Is it worth the time for a one off deal.

I'd go along with that for most people.

 

As a note that cable can be used for plenty else, such as datalogging from the car, both for tuning purposes and diagnostic purposes. Heck, it just helped another user with a '95 pinpoint the issues he was having with his car not running correctly. It just so happens that it can also be used to determine which transmission is in your '95 without cracking the case.

But again, I get that most people around here scoff at electronics and computers. It's just too bad since the C4 is so dang smart.

 

Totally agreed it can do what you said. It is highly useful for all you say IF you do use it. If you don't, you spent a lot of time learning how to use it for a "one off" or datalogging. The alternative is to get a scanner that can do most of what you want without wasting time to learn how to use it. I would imagine it is easier to use a scanner that gives you the data you need easier for most people.

I don't think there is anything wrong with computers and electronics. I think the part you miss is that if you don't use it enough to justify the time spent, what would be the point of it? For a shop, it definitely would be a good ROI. IF all you do is scan some data once in a while when the car breaks, I don't know if the ROI is there. I'm not saying it is a good thing or bad thing to spend time to learn. It depends on the situation one is in.

Good one. It WAS so smart. Past tense.

 

Condescending remarks such as yours are not entirely helpful. It is obvious that your are or claim to be an electronic whiz. Good for you. I am happy for you. But at what point do you
justify the smartass remarks you make. Has it crossed your mind that not everyone is interested in doing a deep dive on the workings of a microprocessor. Just because you think it is better than sliced bread does not mean that everyone has to. Does that mean that those people are "scared of electronics"? A rather insulting comment I'd say. In my line of work as an industrial superintendent, I deal with DCS systems on a daily basis. I supervise the placement, connection and servicing of these units. But I can assure you that when they screw up, no one cares or is interested in mapping and reading the command lines. The module goes in the garbage and is replaced with a new one. Done deal. Does that make me "scared of electronics"? Same with the original discussion. The majority are not going going to take your route as a matter of choice. Does that mean they "scoff at electronics"? Are you part of this "cancel culture" that doesn't want people with alternate ideas to exercise that right?

 

Of course it has. But spending $60 to plug in and click one button, wait 2 minutes, then look at the result is hardly 'doing a deep dive on the workings of a microprocessor'. That you even made that comparison in the first place is exactly what I was pointing out with my 'condescending remarks'. This isn't the first thread where people have turned their nose at it, and it won't be the last. I've just gotten used to it since joining this forum.

As you and aklim were the only ones really responding now, my back-and-forth is less trying to change either of your minds, and more to make sure that OP keeps an open one when considering the responses presented. Both yanking the transmission and asking the computer will get him the result he desires. It's entirely up to him whether he finds it more worthwhile to prop his car up for a probably-much-needed transmission refresh or to add a new and powerful diagnostic tool to his toolkit. And heck, there's absolutely no reason why he couldn't do both.

I just wish more people around here would stop poo-pooing computers when our cars are designed to help you as much as possible using those very same computers, that's all.

EDIT: As for aklim's remarks, the 94-96 Corvette PCM is still very smart, especially compared to its contemporaries, but even compared to some modern vehicles. There are features present on the '95 Corvette that weren't present in mainstream vehicles for a decade or more afterwards. In addition, while you could of course buy a scantool and try to figure out how to use that to get the data you need, there's still a learning curve (if you want to do datalogging), and the buy-in is far more expensive (a scantool that speaks 8192 ALDL is going to run you at least $150, if not more, depending on what it is and where you get it). Not saying you can't, just like you can go buy physical copies of the FSM for $100+ rather than a digital copy for $20. And people do, all the time.