NP833 Shifter questions

[mcarlo86]

I recently acquired an NP833 that I am planning to use in my '68 C10 to replace the SM465 it currently has. This transmission was most recently in a '65 C10 and the guy told me he thought 1st and reverse were geared too high for his liking since he does some towing and decided to go back to his original SM420 4 speed. It appears to be an early 80's model. It only has the 4 GM bolt pattern unlike some NP833's I have seen pictures of with the dual pattern. The shifter does not appear to be the original. It is a Hurst, but looks different and at least one of the shift rods has been modified. I'm hoping some of you experts will be able to help me identify what shifter is on this transmission. Previous owner told me it worked well. Here is my transmission:

You must be registered for see images attach

You must be registered for see images attach

That bottom rod has been modified apparently.
Here is what I believe the factory shifter and linkages should look like:

You must be registered for see images attach

 

[mcarlo86]

Here are some more pics of the shifter on my transmission:

You must be registered for see images attach

You must be registered for see images attach

You must be registered for see images attach

You must be registered for see images attach

Here is what the factory shifter should look like I think:

You must be registered for see images attach

I wonder if I should be looking for the correct shifter?

 

[mcarlo86]

Here is the numbers stamped on the transmission. @Keith Seymore I read some of your posts on a different forum on these transmissions.

You must be registered for see images attach

 

[bucket]

@HotRodPC can probably identify which model of shifter that might be.

Personally, if it works well, I'd run it.

 

[bucket]

I guess the 4wd shifter and rods were more different than I remembered. Mine are in different positions than yours.

 

[HotRodPC]

I'm a bit rusty on all my A833 research now. I know it came with 2 different shifters, one was better than the other. One was servicable and rebuildable, one was not. I'm wanting to say the one that came with the round shift stick was the serviceable one, the one with the square shift stick was not. The servicable one looked just about identical to the Hurst Competition Plus shifter, except it didn't have the grease zerk built in. I figured a Hurst Comp Plus shifter could be a direct replacement just have to use your OEM shift rods. Being the the shift rods are adjustable, I'd also be willing to bet a complete Hurst Comp Plus shifter would work just fine. But those pics above look like some shady after thought redneckery going on there. That don't look OEM to me at all.

Also, I'm not so sure that 2wd or 4wd had as much to do with which shfter as, Cast iron case or Aluminum case had to do with it. However, I don't beleive the 4wd model ever came in an aluminum but the 2wd came in either Aluminum or Cast Iron.

 

[bucket]

Ok, I think that picture you posted that is maybe the correct setup- I believe it is not properly assembled, so don't go off of that one at all.

Here's how mine looks:

You must be registered for see images attach

You must be registered for see images attach

You must be registered for see images attach

Yours has that modified base and shifter stub to account for the universal shifter that doesn't have the offset arms. And while the rods look cobbled from a kit and/or other random rods, they are installed the same way as mine.

 

[HotRodPC]

Ok, I think that picture you posted that is maybe the correct setup- I believe it is not properly assembled, so don't go off of that one at all.

Here's how mine looks:

You must be registered for see images attach

You must be registered for see images attach

You must be registered for see images attach

Yours has that modified base and shifter stub to account for the universal shifter that doesn't have the offset arms. And while the rods look cobbled from a kit and/or other random rods, they are installed the same way as mine.

I believe you are 100% correct on that. And the tell tale sign that it is correct, notice the one shift arm is pointed down where the other 2 are up. This is becasue 3 and OD are actually OD and 3rd position on this transmission, so by switching the one arm up, it reverses that pattern and makes the same shift standard shift pattern, other wise you'd do 1 2 OD 3 if you didn't.

 

[mcarlo86]

Ok. Thanks for the input. I will probably slap it in and see how the shifter works. I have the high hump floor , so I’m curious how the shifter will look in there (how close to my right leg and how close to the seat). Previous owner said his ‘65 had the high hump also and had no issues with the seat, etc. I know i will need to cut a new hole.

 

[HotRodPC]

Ok. Thanks for the input. I will probably slap it in and see how the shifter works. I have the high hump floor , so I’m curious how the shifter will look in there (how close to my right leg and how close to the seat). Previous owner said his ‘65 had the high hump also and had no issues with the seat, etc. I know i will need to cut a new hole.

I ran a Muncie M21 and M22 in my 64 GMC, it used the Hurst Comp Plus shifter and I used that same exact Hurst shift stick you have pictured above. I had to keep the seat all the way back which was not an issue at all since even short people need the seat all the way back being there wasn't alot of cab space like we have in trucks today. It's going to work just fine in a squarebody too since all the trans and bellhousing dimensions are the same. GM was good about that and why they're so good about interchangability throughout all year models and body styles, at least through squarebody. Pretty sure it stayed the same into the GMT400 series trucks too except transmission and bell housings were integrated but the distance it pretty close to the same if not exactly the same on the top loader transmissions like the NV3500.

 

[AuroraGirl]

The gentleman you got it from wanted to go back to 420? Wouldn’t a sm465 be a good upgrade for him or does he need the brake

 

[mcarlo86]

The gentleman you got it from wanted to go back to 420? Wouldn’t a sm465 be a good upgrade for him or does he need the brake

His pickup came originally with the 420. That was the predecessor of the 465 which came out in ‘68 I believe.

 

[AuroraGirl]

His pickup came originally with the 420. That was the predecessor of the 465 which came out in ‘68 I believe.

yes i mean woulddnt it make more sense for him ot upgrade then

 

[eskimomann209]

I have a spare sm420 if someone needs it.

 

[mmerlinn]

I recently acquired an NP833 that I am planning to use in my '68 C10 to replace the SM465 it currently has. This transmission was most recently in a '65 C10 and the guy told me he thought 1st and reverse were geared too high for his liking since he does some towing and decided to go back to his original SM420 4 speed. It appears to be an early 80's model. It only has the 4 GM bolt pattern unlike some NP833's I have seen pictures of with the dual pattern. The shifter does not appear to be the original. It is a Hurst, but looks different and at least one of the shift rods has been modified. I'm hoping some of you experts will be able to help me identify what shifter is on this transmission. Previous owner told me it worked well. Here is my transmission:

You must be registered for see images attach

You must be registered for see images attach

That bottom rod has been modified apparently.
Here is what I believe the factory shifter and linkages should look like:

You must be registered for see images attach

The NP440 (aka A833) had the aluminum case with standard front bolt pattern ONLY in 1981 and ONLY rear wheel drive. 82-89 had cast iron case, had weird front bolt pattern, and came both 4x4 and rear wheel drive.