Rear end ratio for 700R4?

[1project2many]

I'm sure we'll see a bunch of "no problem" responses, and that's fine. There are folks here who have good luck putting a V6 T5 behind an engine producing 350 ft/lbs or more as well. Hell, I used a 7.5" GM rear behind a 455 Buick in a Monte for 9 years without blowing it up. But that doesn't make any of these parts the best choice and it doesn't mean the parts are inherently good. The fact that there are survivor stories often says more about the user and the application than the part.

What's most frustrating to see in this thread is the number of responses suggesting a less expensive but practical solution involving a 2.73 rear and 350 trans should be dumped for a more expensive solution: buy new gears or rear axle then spend quite a bit more to rebuild and upgrade a transmission to go with the new rear. Why spend more to achieve what is easily done with less?

The Monte I mentioned had 2.26:1 rear gears and produced around 400 ft/lbs at 1600 rpm where it liked to cruise. Even though it only had three speeds (thm 400) it could take off plenty quick and still achieved 16-18 mpg on long cruises. I still have the car 29 years after I built it and I hope to get time rebuild it some day. I suppose I'd be told that I should ditch the rear for a 3.42 then spend money building and upgrading a 2004R if I asked for suggestions on the rebuild.