A442F ?

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate
links, including eBay, Amazon, Skimlinks, and others.

my cruiser tranny do not have ect button and when I switch to 2nd gear manually, then the car starts moving directly from 2 gear and not (1 and 2)
when in Low its faster than L and ful of torque.
I think mine is 440, without any electronics. It is very interesting to see the aisin manual to encode the leters and numbers.
As I know, the difference between A440F - A442F is the size of torque converter (A442f is equiped with biger t-converter)
 
Last edited:
otka said:
my cruiser tranny do not have ect button and when I switch to 2nd gear manually, then the car starts moving directly from 2 gear and not (1 and 2)
when in Low its faster than L and ful of torque.
I think mine is 440, without any electronics. It is very interesting to see the aisin manual to encode the leters and numbers.
As I know, the difference between A440F - A442F is the size of torque converter (A442f is equiped with biger t-converter)
Click to expand...

I don't know how the gear are moving on my tranny, but I like the "supercharger" noise on my cruiser when I go over 50 miles at over 2000 RPM
Lets see, maybe somebody in the forum have access to this manual and give us a help. Is strange because on my tranny is wrote that 3 F....!

:beer:
 
The 343 is used in the 100, which is heavier than the 80, behind a more power V-8 engine, with zero issues. That's good enough for me.

There are few quirks with the 95-97 343s, that may or may not have to do with a minor design defect that was supposedly solve late in the 97 model year and isn't present in the 100 series versions. Has to do with something in the valvebody and a problem with reverse.

That may be one reason to favor the older tranny. One less thing to have to worry about.
 
CowboyUp said:
The cruiser have the PAIR valve system that other cruiser don't have :).
Click to expand...

That's not anywhere near as special as you may think- just about all '93-'94 US models had those.
 
Here's a little blog post from Rodney's Wholesale transmissions out of Australia, a land cruiser tranny expert.


Pete


From Rodneys website

"I'd like to hear your thoughts on the durability/reliability of Toyota's A442F transmission (used in the US landcruiser from 1993-1994/95) and the A343F that replaced it for 1995-97. Many people have noticed that Toyota only changed the tranny to the A343F in the US, and left the A442F in other countries. Can you speculate as to why this was done (was it cost-saving?) In any case, what is your opinion on each of these trannies? What are the pros and cons of each and, in your opinion, which will hold up longer? Thanks! Vik

"Both the A442F and A343F transmissions is capable of holding 450K/W of power when fitted with an Extreme Stage II Blue Print Valve Body. These valve bodies are the direct result of a development program that was introduced for the Extreme Fully Blue Printed Landcruiser transmission range. The valve body is the same unit that was developed for that unit. The Valve Body can be brought separately for $795.00 Australian but is sold as a change over unit with a deposit being charged until the old valve body is returned. I don't know why the A442F was replaced with the A343F but if I was to guess I would say weight ( both dead weight and centrifugal weight ), The smaller 2.7 and 3.4 litre Landcruiser Prado engine's are just to small for the A442F heavy weight. The A442F is much larger than the new design and for this same reason I would say that the older A442F transmissions is a little stronger. "
 
CowboyUp said:
Now you are talking :grinpimp:!!!
In the end all tranny are good because are Toyota Land Cruiser :clap::cheers:

:steer::steer::steer:
Click to expand...

The pic of tranny comparison is giving me an inferiority complex :crybaby: :D

Brian894X4 said:
There are few quirks with the 95-97 343s, that may or may not have to do with a minor design defect that was supposedly solve late in the 97 model year and isn't present in the 100 series versions. Has to do with something in the valvebody and a problem with reverse.
Click to expand...

My '97 has a peculiar symptom while in Reverse and this may explain it. It makes an unusual (jacket zipper??) sound when the vehicle is stalled going in Reverse (like backing up a loaded trailer) and the engine is working very hard.
 
ToothDr said:
Here's a little blog post from Rodney's Wholesale transmissions out of Australia, a land cruiser tranny expert.


Pete


From Rodneys website

"I'd like to hear your thoughts on the durability/reliability of Toyota's A442F transmission (used in the US landcruiser from 1993-1994/95) and the A343F that replaced it for 1995-97. Many people have noticed that Toyota only changed the tranny to the A343F in the US, and left the A442F in other countries. Can you speculate as to why this was done (was it cost-saving?) In any case, what is your opinion on each of these trannies? What are the pros and cons of each and, in your opinion, which will hold up longer? Thanks! Vik

"Both the A442F and A343F transmissions is capable of holding 450K/W of power when fitted with an Extreme Stage II Blue Print Valve Body. These valve bodies are the direct result of a development program that was introduced for the Extreme Fully Blue Printed Landcruiser transmission range. The valve body is the same unit that was developed for that unit. The Valve Body can be brought separately for $795.00 Australian but is sold as a change over unit with a deposit being charged until the old valve body is returned. I don't know why the A442F was replaced with the A343F but if I was to guess I would say weight ( both dead weight and centrifugal weight ), The smaller 2.7 and 3.4 litre Landcruiser Prado engine's are just to small for the A442F heavy weight. The A442F is much larger than the new design and for this same reason I would say that the older A442F transmissions is a little stronger. "
Click to expand...



In the end A442F is little stonger then other tranny :hillbilly: !

:beer:
 
Toyota used the 340 series in loads of applications, all over the world. It out punches it's weight.

I had one in my JDM import Surf (4Runner) into the UK (turbo diesel auto). I abused that rig for years (good maintenance program).

85km's at 10 y.old. (when I got it) - 285,000km's 5 years later.

Lots off road, never an issue with this tranny at all.

However, the legend that is the 440 - Oh God - those pics make me laugh - HUUUUGE!!!
 
Lka1988 said:
Like 440 vs 442?
They'll both hold their own against the "stronger" American transmissions (pathetic excuses include: 4L80E, 700R4, and Torqueflite).
Click to expand...

Lka1988- 700R4 and TF maybe, but the 4L80E is in a different league altogether. That's definitely no pathetic excuse for a transmission, and I'd bet it's quite a bit stronger than an A442F.
 
The Lovely Boyo said:
Toyota used the 340 series in loads of applications, all over the world. It out punches it's weight.

I had one in my JDM import Surf (4Runner) into the UK (turbo diesel auto). I abused that rig for years (good maintenance program).

85km's at 10 y.old. (when I got it) - 285,000km's 5 years later.

Lots off road, never an issue with this tranny at all.

However, the legend that is the 440 - Oh God - those pics make me laugh - HUUUUGE!!!
Click to expand...

No doubt about the A34xF, it's a strong tranny and will hold it's own very well under a lot of abuse.
 
alaskacruiser said:
Lka1988- 700R4 and TF maybe, but the 4L80E is in a different league altogether. That's definitely no pathetic excuse for a transmission, and I'd bet it's quite a bit stronger than an A442F.
Click to expand...

FWIW... I don't really care for anything behind GM V8s.

That, and the 4L80E is not much bigger than an TF A747.

:beer:
 
69LC said:
so which tranny would be more ideal behind a mechanical diesel? Do both trannies have the same bolt pattern/output shaft to the tcase?
Click to expand...


Depends on which diesel engine. If a 1HZ or a 1HD-T, the 442 was a stock option for each and should bolt up as long as the bell housing on the engine is correct and not for a manual tranny (H150 or H151/R151).
 
I have an A442F with no ECT. Must not have been available in 91.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

Back
Top Bottom