727 locking dipstick length too short

[Don Trombley]

So because of the famous leaking dipstick tube problem I bought a Hughes locking dipstick #HP1235A for my 727 in a 1967 Charger. The car has a 1974 440 engine installed. After everything was up and running the transmission was leaking, a lot, around the tailshaft seal, the shift selector seal and the Hughes dipstick tube. The fluid level was correct according to the Hughes part. I discovered a discrepancy between the “full” mark on the Hughes setup (orange pencil) compared to the stock parts (green pencil). My fluid level is at least an inch higher when measuring with the Hughes parts. Anyone else

notice this? I’m thinking it’s the source of my leaks.

 

[Lefty71]

That is a pickle!! We cant see where your full mark is, in relation to the tube end. I will say, what looks funny to me is your OEM set. That dipstick looks way long to me. You say the motor is a later model.... what trans are we talking about?? I think your original trans would have used the bolt-on tube?? Post up the trans number on the pan rail and maybe I can compare to something here.

 

[OKDart]

That is a pickle!! We cant see where your full mark is, in relation to the tube end. I will say, what looks funny to me is your OEM set. That dipstick looks way long to me. You say the motor is a later model.... what trans are we talking about?? I think your original trans would have used the bolt-on tube?? Post up the trans number on the pan rail and maybe I can compare to something here.

Agree, I checked one of mine on the shelf and the dipstick barely protrudes out the tube. The locking dipstick looks fairly accurate compared to mine based on the pic.

 

[Don Trombley]

That is a pickle!! We cant see where your full mark is, in relation to the tube end. I will say, what looks funny to me is your OEM set. That dipstick looks way long to me. You say the motor is a later model.... what trans are we talking about?? I think your original trans would have used the bolt-on tube?? Post up the trans number on the pan rail and maybe I can compare to something here.

The car originally was a 383 and the 727 transmission, and tube, are original as far as I know. The original tube is a bolt on. I bought the car in 1987 and it sure looked like original rust, grease and filth. Numbers on the rail are H2801543 3306790. I measured the Hughs dipstick full mark from the trans end and placed the orange pencil where the mark is in the tube. Thanks for the help!

 

[Don Trombley]

Agree, I checked one of mine on the shelf and the dipstick barely protrudes out the tube. The locking dipstick looks fairly accurate compared to mine based on the pic.

View attachment 1551425

View attachment 1551426

Hummmm. I was actually hoping the Hughs tube was wrong to help explain my leaking problem.

That is a pickle!! We cant see where your full mark is, in relation to the tube end. I will say, what looks funny to me is your OEM set. That dipstick looks way long to me. You say the motor is a later model.... what trans are we talking about?? I think your original trans would have used the bolt-on tube?? Post up the trans number on the pan rail and maybe I can compare to something here.

Agree, I checked one of mine on the shelf and the dipstick barely protrudes out the tube. The locking dipstick looks fairly accurate compared to mine based on the pic.

View attachment 1551425

View attachment 1551426

My Hughs part and the original. Tube is bent differently and different length so there is no direct comparison.

 

[Lefty71]

The car originally was a 383 and the 727 transmission,

. Numbers on the rail are H2801543 3306790

That checks out vintage-wise... Numbers on the rail come back as 1967 (or 68) with a 383 2-bbl engine. That is decoded by the H2801543 number. The 3306790 number has me a little confused. At some point in the late 60's they went to a 10,000 day calendar system, which would be the first four digits of the 3306790 number, and the remaining digits are the sequence for what was built on that given day. 3306 is Sunday, August the 16th, 1970...... I doubt thats correct and its a replacement trans.... Hopefully someone will chime in and straighten me out out the number.

I will look and see if I have a matching bolt-in tube and stick and see if they look any different than yours. You may want to look at your stick and see if there's any information there.... hopefully confirming an OEM Mopar piece (or not).

As far as your leak goes.... I wonder if a plugged vent is any possibility??

 

[R/T Boy 67]

The 3306790 number is a sequential serial number, and has no date information. The 10,000 day calender numbers started in the 1968 model rear.

 

[Don Trombley]

Agree, I checked one of mine on the shelf and the dipstick barely protrudes out the tube. The locking dipstick looks fairly accurate compared to mine based on the pic.

View attachment 1551425

View attachment 1551426

Hummmm. I was actually hoping the Hughs tube was wrong to help explain my leaking problem.

That is a pickle!! We cant see where your full mark is, in relation to the tube end. I will say, what looks funny to me is your OEM set. That dipstick looks way long to me. You say the motor is a later model.... what trans are we talking about?? I think your original trans would have used the bolt-on tube?? Post up the trans number on the pan rail and maybe I can compare to something here.

 

[Don Trombley]

Thanks guys. I guess I’ll stick with my locking dip stick and replace the trans seals.

 

[Lefty71]

I found a half dozen or so dipsticks here, including a brand new one from A&A that list the application as every 904/727, regardless of year. They are all identical lengths to the full mark. I did find that the older ones have a difference in what's acceptable as far as the "ADD" range goes, but other than that, they were the same. A couple had OEM Mopar part numbers on them, others did not. I would be real curious to know if theres a part number on your original....since it really looks to me as if your trans was running almost a full 1-1/2" low on fluid as opposed to the norm. ALL the sticks I have would put your fluid level at about 1/2" higher than the O-ring on your orange (original) tube. It would appear that the Hughes unit is indeed correct..... look below in the similar threads... Snook confirms this information a year ago!!

Hughes B/RB Transmission Dipstick review

 

[Don Trombley]

That checks out vintage-wise... Numbers on the rail come back as 1967 (or 68) with a 383 2-bbl engine. That is decoded by the H2801543 number. The 3306790 number has me a little confused. At some point in the late 60's they went to a 10,000 day calendar system, which would be the first four digits of the 3306790 number, and the remaining digits are the sequence for what was built on that given day. 3306 is Sunday, August the 16th, 1970...... I doubt thats correct and its a replacement trans.... Hopefully someone will chime in and straighten me out out the number.

I will look and see if I have a matching bolt-in tube and stick and see if they look any different than yours. You may want to look at your stick and see if there's any information there.... hopefully confirming an OEM Mopar piece (or not).

As far as your leak goes.... I wonder if a plugged vent is any possibility??

Any idea how to check the vent? Is it just a matter of removing the shield and looking for crud in the vent hole? The trans was totally rebuilt years ago by a professional shop and was just recently installed in the car, but who knows if they did a good job cleaning everything. I have the trans out of the car now so I’ll take a look at the vent. Thanks.

 

[Don Trombley]

I found a half dozen or so dipsticks here, including a brand new one from A&A that list the application as every 904/727, regardless of year. They are all identical lengths to the full mark. I did find that the older ones have a difference in what's acceptable as far as the "ADD" range goes, but other than that, they were the same. A couple had OEM Mopar part numbers on them, others did not. I would be real curious to know if theres a part number on your original....since it really looks to me as if your trans was running almost a full 1-1/2" low on fluid as opposed to the norm. ALL the sticks I have would put your fluid level at about 1/2" higher than the O-ring on your orange (original) tube. It would appear that the Hughes unit is indeed correct..... look below in the similar threads... Snook confirms this information a year ago!!

Hughes B/RB Transmission Dipstick review

Thanks for checking. Mine does not have any part numbers on the tube or on the stick.