Well, I guess it looks like you're parting that Fury....
A guy on the HAMB...
I know that Industrial Chassis in Phoenix specialized in Dakota swaps, and offered parts. I don't know if they still do, but it might pay to talk to them.
Yes, it makes me a little sad to cut into the Fury, but that's what I got it for.
There's a lot of good stuff on the HAMB. I believe it was this post:
www.jalopyjournal.com/forum/showpost.php?p=6239325&postcount=59where I was reading about "Re: F100 - '03-up CrownVic suspension swap" that I learned about Industrial Chassis' work with Dodge Dakota front ends. Those pics above are of their work. You can get to that photo album by:
www.industrialchassisinc.com/Favorite places / PHOTOS OF OUR WORK HERE!
then scroll down and select
1947-1953 Chevy Truck Dynacorn
A few weeks ago, I called them and spoke with Steve for a short while; long enough to learn that the plan sounded workable and that he'd be interested in working with me. But it also sounds like he's super busy. I don't think that's going to slow me down much right now; as long as I can learn the ground clearance to the rack and ride height, I can determine how low I can mount the motor, and then determine how much extra clearance I'll have to the hood, so I can get the intake made, then finish up the motor. I'm jumping ahead a bit, but my plan is to use a missile dry sump setup, remove the draglink, move the steering rack full forward of the oil pan, and move the crossmember forward of the steering rack. Something like these:
www.forabodiesonly.com/mopar/showpost.php?p=1412305&postcount=2Although the rack cutting through the frame rail on that last pic isn't good.
And I plan on using a motor plate to avoid the need for a crossmember under the motor, and allow for more clearance for headers, dry sump. Something like this:
www.moparmusclemagazine.com/featuredvehicles/a_body/mopp_0607_1968_plymouth_barracuda/photo_08.htmlThat 74 challenger build is quite informative, being that he he's mating a 4L80E to a mopar wedge and using a dry sump. But I have more strict requirements on the location of the transmission.
His car:
www.horsepowerjunkies.com/forums/showthread.php?t=36751&page=20I don't want the transmission to interfere with the interior layout of the floor, as I want my cop rubber flooring to look stock, like this:
Of course, one doesn't always get what one wants, but I have some thoughts that might help with fitting it. Here goes!
-------
So with the front of the tunnel located correctly to the front top of the bellhousing:
My crosshairs at the rear were 3.375" higher than the centerline of the output shaft.
But the place that was hitting wasn't at the rear (47" from the bellhousing). The place that was hitting was an electrical sender 24" from the bellhousing. So very roughly, let's say I need the transmission lowered 3.375 / 47 * 24 = 1.72" at a spot 24" back from the bellhousing.
I can get some of that from lowering the motor and leaving the rear of the transmission at the same place (tilting the crank centerline down), or by lowering the transmission and motor together (keeping the crank centerline angle the same), or some combination.
First of all, I checked the angle of the stock Monaco. The centerline of the u-joint behind the transmission was 14.25" from the ground.
The center of the harmonic balancer bolt was 16.375" from the ground:
and it would seem to make sense that there would be a straight line through the output shaft of the transmission all the way through the head of the balancer bolt.
Distance from u-joint to back of motor: 35.5"
Distance from back of motor to balancer bolt: 26"
Vertical distance: 16.375" - 14.25" = 2.125"
Horizontal distance: 35.5" + 26" = 61.5"
So the centerline is on an angle of about atan (2.125" / 61.5") = 2.0 degrees.
This corresponds well with me using my angle meter on the garage floor and the end rails of the block which show the angle to be about 2.1 degrees.
Let's say I lower the motor so that the crank centerline is horizontal. That would give me a bit of transmission clearance - and result in better handling with shifting the motor block and provide more intake clearance to hood.
Can I lower the motor? It sure looks like it. With a dry sump the pan doesn't need to be much deeper than the crank. And with the Mopar wedge, the crank is mostly inside the block.
It seemed that a pan would need to be no deeper than the shallowest part of the standard pan, or about 2":
This site shows oil pans with a shallow area of 1.26"
www.1962to1965mopar.ornocar.com/oilpans.htmlHere's the Fury:
and the 74 challenger with 572"
www.horsepowerjunkies.com/forums/showthread.php?t=36751&page=18I don't know how shallow I can get the pan.
> On Viper competition coupe engines dry sump oilpan is just over
> 1" high.
www.lateral-g.net/forums/archive/index.php4/t-33501.htmlBut let's say a 2.5" pan would be enough, which gives more than enough to lower the motor 2.125" and still keep the bottom of the pan no lower than the current pan.
The transmission hit point is 24" back from the bellhousing, or 11.5" forward of the u-joint. Moving the motor down so that the crank centerline is horizontal would give 2.125" / (35.5" + 26") * 11.5" = 0.4" clearance.
I need 1.72" of clearance, so now I'm down to needing 1.72" - 0.4" = 1.32" more clearance.
But tilting the transmission down at the front will cause it to hang down lower than stock, so I thought to see what this would do to me, and here's where things really got surprising.
The 727 is setup so that the pan is flat when the crank centerline is at a 2.0 degree angle:
But the 4L80E is setup so that when it is sitting on the floor, with the pan flat and level, that the input/output shaft angle is about 5.5 degrees. The transmission expects a much steeper angle to keep the pan horizontal. This means that by simply putting the 4L80E in a stock position, the bottom of the pan will be at an angle.
For the 727 and 4L80E, it looks like the bottom of the pan to the center of the output shaft is pretty close (I get 5.75" for the 727, and 5.625" for the 4L80E, but I'm only trying to ballpark things within a 0.25" or so). But the 4L80E front pan is about 1.5" lower than the 727.
And then I thought "how could this be? This pic of a 4L80E mated to a 572 wedge shows that the front of the pan is level with the bellhousing - why is the pan not hanging down below the bellhousing?"
www.horsepowerjunkies.com/forums/showthread.php?t=36751&page=11Then I see that his flywheel has 6 welded torque converter holes,
> Hole pattern is 6 on 11.500 bolt circle.
and the bellhousing completely encircles the flywheel:
So if those converter holes are on a 11.5" circle, the flywheel must be larger than that, and the bellhousing is much larger than that.
I'm guessing its a 168 tooth chevy flexplate which is 14" in diameter.
www.gmpartsdirect.com/performance_parts/store/catalog/Category.jhtmlCATID=913.htmlThe stock Monaco 440 flexplate is a "1941648" (from the parts catalog), which is a 130tooth:
www.ebay.com/itm/MOPAR-383-426-440-NEW-FLYWHEEL-RING-GEAR-NOS-1941648-/160582288377which is a 10.5" flywheel:
www.brewersperformance.com/products.asp?cat=245So it looks like that 74 challenger setup hangs down an inch or two more than a stock 727, which equals the extra distance the front of the pan hangs down lower than a 727.
What about my setup? My bellhousing is open at the bottom, so I can make a bottom cover as close to the flywheel as I dare.
It's shown here:
www.reidracing.biz/transmission-products/bellhousings-and-flexplates/big-block-mopar-bellhousingand it works with a stock size flywheel:
> Designed for use with a 130 tooth flexplate, stock style starters
> are used in the factory location. It will also accept the larger 168
> tooth Chevy-style flexplate.
So it seems to me that I can create a bottom cover that hangs no lower than the stock 727 bellhousing - because it's using the same diameter flexplate as stock.
I need to checkout my 4L80E with the flexplate installed, tilted forward with the centerline horizontal to see how far the pan hangs down below the highest I can make a flexplate cover. But let's say 2.0".
If I make a pan to eliminate that 2.0" hanging down, I'm basically removing the pan:
copied from
www.technicalvideos.com/identify_my_transmission.phtmlThe entire pan is only 2.6" deep:
www.pro-touring.com/showthread.php?52213-Depth-of-stock-pan-for-4L80E&p=487790#post487790I'll be using an external transmission oil cooler, so I don't need depth for keeping the fluid cool. It looks like a good portion of the inside of the pan is for the filter; I can have a remote filter.
Other than the filter there's a bit that hangs down below the bottom of the machined surface:
but it looks like most of the meat is inside:
all those pics from:
www.gmfullsize.com/forum/showthread.php?t=90090&page=3So is there anything like a "dry sump" setup for a 4L80E, that allows most of the fluid to be stored elsewhere, allowing for a shallower pan, allowing for lower mounting? I'll eventually end up calling the transmission place, but thought to get some ideas before I do.
That 74 challenger guy ended up leaving the motor in the stock location:
> The trans and bell housing are just monsters, and when you
> move the engine back, you start having to deal with the larger
> parts of the trans, ie, bell housing and forward portions of the
> trans (that are bigger in diameter).
www.mopartech.net/showthread.php?p=94669I can lower the motor.
I can lower the bellhousing.
Now I just need a way to lower the transmission by chopping 2" off the pan depth.
your friend in jawboning about ideas,
arthur