I never said the C-6 is junk and contrary to foolish notions of Monster trucks vs: a car aplication that are not relative to the discussion at hand. Is the C-6 reliable, hell yes, BUT why carry the extra weight arround and a transmission that bleeds more horsepower. Bleeding horsepower is the reason I run manual instead of a slush box anyways.
The FACT still stands, the C-6 is heavier, the C-6 bleeds more power, and the horsepower and tourque figures turned in some of the blown 5.0 class is far in excess of what a stock block 390 will withstand period.
We can have peferences of a C-6 over a C-4, just as we can prefer an FE over the 385 series. I can also see an argument for if the car was a valuable car and the C-6 were the orriginal transmission, But lugging the extra weight and wasting power makes as much sence as hauling arround a fat girlfriend, it is a matter of taste or lack there of.
The C-6 may be used in monster trucks, but the Monster truck statement is entirely out in left field and has no bearing whatsoever to the discussion of choice on what a good choice for this guys street piece.
I never said the C-6 was a bad tranny, it isn't, it is strong, but if you and I have identical cars except for a built C-4 in mine, and yours has a built C-6, I let you loose the race to the guy in the chevy because you insisted on having your fat girlfriend / C-6 in your car why I would squeek by with the C-4.
As for your 200,000 mile C-6 trans, I just sold my wifes 98 mustang with 296,000 on an AOD that she bought new that still runs, and have ran 2 other cars I bought new and ran up to over 250,000 miles, that still ran, before selling them, so that 200,000 mile C-6 doesn't hold any weight.
