-
Next up, I welded up a section of curved fill pipe. I kind of goofed when I built the gas tank in that I installed fill hose connection on an angle. I thought then that it would be easier to hook up that way, but I really should have put it in straight up. I wasn't about to pull the tank and cut it up for that, so I just worked around it.
I also made a set of tubing bead dies for the bead roller and rolled a hose retention bead on the bottom of the fill pipe. I actually had to do this twice since I made the first internal die a little too big. The first time I used it, I managed to crimp the tubing perfectly around the die! Had to cut that one off and start over.
https://i.imgur.com/Ie1H42A.jpg
https://i.imgur.com/6TBhEak.jpg
https://i.imgur.com/JJypllY.jpg
https://i.imgur.com/vPiLUYt.jpg
https://i.imgur.com/eGTiNws.jpg?1
-
The last piece of this puzzle was a new aluminum plunger for the cap. The original part was designed to seal the cap when closed. It was spring loaded to apply pressure to the seal and keep cap pressed up against the lock bale. The cap wouldn't work without it, but the original wouldn't work with the internal secondary cap. It took a little fiddling to get the clearance just right.
https://i.imgur.com/ZMG5552.jpg
After all the work, it turned out really well. There is even enough clearance for a locking cap. I had a flip cap on my T and found it open once after leaving it unattended for awhile so the locking option will be nice to keep curious folks from tampering with it. The hose is wire reinforced gas hose.
https://i.imgur.com/N0speYe.jpg
https://i.imgur.com/ttpnD3I.jpg
https://i.imgur.com/hr4uRWk.jpg
https://i.imgur.com/NjO0D7G.jpg
-
I like the way you solve puzzles!
-
Thanks 36. Most of the stuff on this car goes together like a Chinese puzzle! After this, I think I'm going to take up building ships in bottles. It couldn't be any harder!:LOL:
Another change I made due to my back issues is a new transmission crossmember. Some of you may remember that I modified the trans tunnel to allow me to install a 4L60 automatic transmission if I ever needed to. With my back acting up like it has, I decided to build an adjustable trans mount that would allow me to install just about any transmission I wanted to, including a 4L80E. It adjusts down to 3 and 4-speed length, also. This will just make the swap process that much easier if the time comes and keep me from having to mess up the chassis paint. My intentions are to keep the T56 6-speed as long as I can deal with it, though.
https://i.imgur.com/YhFXGgf.jpg
https://i.imgur.com/2wF6c0M.jpg
https://i.imgur.com/Q7b8oNn.jpg
I should also mention that the LT1 T56 went off to Texas to be converted to LS configuration. I had actually figured out a way to make the LT1 trans work on the LS (even though I was told it was impossible), but I was concerned that my makeshift conversion would give me issues down the road. By having it converted, I can source readily available replacement parts for repairs. I bought an LS style bell housing to go with the new configuration. The LS swap shifted the trans mount back about an inch, but that worked out fine with the new crossmember.
It's probably a good thing I decided to do it, too. While they were in the trans, they discovered that it had a failing reverse and second gear. The synchros weren't looking very good either. The car it came out of had been street raced, which was the reason it was in the salvage yard. It also got some Stage 2 upgrade parts, so I should be good to go for a long time.
I got a package deal on a lightened steel flywheel and a Stage 2 clutch with stock LS1 throw out bearing, too.
-
It occurred to me some time after I posted about the crossmember that I had used to wrong pictures. When I built the one in the pictures, I intended to run the exhaust over the top, but that proved to not be practical.
I had to remake it as a drop crossmember. The side brackets are the same, only the actual crossmember has been changed. Sorry for the confusion. This was all done months ago and I forgot to take pictures of the build at the time.
Here are some pictures as it is on the car now. Unfortunately, it's hard to see with the exhaust in place.
https://i.imgur.com/7T1Ls0X.jpg
https://i.imgur.com/j4j4X5A.jpg
-
It's looking great. I really like the adjustable cross member. That T56 game can get expensive. That's why I stuck with the T10 in the camaro.
-
Well, as usual for me, this thread has been MIA for several months. Back when all the Corona Virus stuff hit, my company took no chances with the workers at my job. With little info to go on about how to protect us on the job, they decided to split all the workers up and went to a skeleton crew. Just enough people actually on site to keep things going. This meant that I had a lot of time off on my hands. Our governor also issued a stay at home order, so I decided to make the most of the time. I made up my mind to quit playing around and get the chassis to the powder coaters. To this end, I started spending long hours in the shop.
The bottom line is that, in July, I accomplished my goal and delivered the frame and most of the suspension parts to the coater! A couple of weeks later I had them back in my shop. I never took the time to post about this work since I was dead tired every night and pretty much just showered, ate supper and went to bed. During this time, we were having a heat wave that had the heat index hovering around 105 every day. This was a hard thrash with gallons of water drank, but it was worth the effort. Luckily, my back cooperated and didn’t protest very much about the long hours on my feet. It only complained during the last few days that were spent mostly bending and stooping for the final welding push. For a very short time at the end, I actually had a mostly complete car sitting on my lift! About the only things left to do were plumbing and wiring. It sure hurt my feelings to take it all apart again.
Going forward, there will be very little mocking up or fabrication. Everything that is assembled will be permanent and that feels extremely good! I have found a few minor items that will need a little fab work, but it won’t be major fab stuff.
Consider this a reset of this thread. There were many changes made to correct things that bugged me during the thrash. I got more work finished during this time than in most of last year. My intent is to make an honest attempt at documenting the final assembly. I will attempt to cover things that I built or changed to get to this point as well as stuff that has been built for a long time and never posted.
To get things started, here is a pic of the chassis loaded on the trailer when I picked it up at the powder coaters.
https://i.imgur.com/s9MmwsA.jpg
-
OK. I’m sitting here watching Hurricane Laura come ashore. The eye and major wind is predicted to go well west of us, but the big worry in our area is tornados that pop up with little warning from the bands as they track around the eye for a hundred miles or more. Looks like I’ll be keeping a late night vigil so that my wife can get some sleep, since she has to work tomorrow and I don’t. I figured that this would be a good time to kick this reset off with an update.
While I was eager to get started on the chassis, I decided to hold off on that and get the engine and rearend reassembled.
A little history on what’s going on. The aluminum LS1 that I originally bought for this car had to be replaced. I found out several months ago that some water had somehow gotten in three cylinders. This was a very early engine and these blocks were not recommended for boring. Only honing 4 or so thousandths. The rust in the cylinders was just bad enough to prevent clean up with honing. I might have taken a chance with it, but didn’t really feel comfortable with that. This engine was virtually new inside. The bearings and pistons looked like they had just came out of the box. The rods even still had the date codes on them like they were new, so all I really needed was a block. Unfortunately, I couldn’t locate a good LS1 block. I wound up with an iron 4.8 block that I had bored to fit the 5.7 pistons. Hard to believe that GM left enough metal in those blocks to be bored that far, but apparently, they did. The iron 4.8/5.3 to 5.7 build was pretty common back when 5.7’s were popular and still available in large numbers. I had to take the block to the Mississippi gulf coast to find someone that would use a torque plate. That’s a long drive, but I think that it’s worth it. The main downside to the iron block is weight. I don’t really like it, but that’s the way it goes sometimes. BTW- This was my first LS build. They are definitely a little different, but I had no real issues. It did take me about 3 times longer to build than a typical small block mostly because I had to verify that I was doing everything right.
I started the build up by mocking the crank, rods and pistons in the block with no rings so that I could see where the pistons were in relation to the deck. This block had to be decked a little to square it up and clean up some rust pitting around some water passages. I had read that LS pistons can be down in the hole or above the deck or anywhere in between. Mine were .005 above the deck on one end of the block and .006 above on the other end. I also plasti-gaged the main bearings just to make sure that the clearances were good in the new block. They all came up .0015.
Next I degreed the cam. It’s a Trick Flow brand part number 30602001. Intake center line was 110* on the money. Right where it was supposed to be. The specs on the cam are 216*/220* @.050 with .560 lift. This used to be called their Stage 1 cam, but I don’t think they call it that now. They started selling this grind several years ago.
I wrangled with cam selection for months. I looked at the LS6 stock cam, but it seemed to me to give up a lot on the bottom end for a few extra HP at the top. The TF cam gives up some on the bottom too, but no more than the LS6 and picks up a lot more on the top. The main thing I like about the TF cam is the “low intensity” lobes which should be easier on the valve springs. TF originally picked the “Stage” cam group that this cam was part of because they were not prone to valve float and were easy on the valvetrain.
-
The last thing I had to check was the head cc’s to see what head gasket I needed. I wanted a tight quench, but didn’t want a wild compression ratio since I wanted to run it on pump gas. Trick flow recommended at least 10.5 to 1 static for the cam I chose. My heads were some older CNC ported heads that I picked up at the local machine shop. They had belonged to a street racer and he was going to LS3 style heads. I’ve actually had them sitting around for over 2 years. I started to check the chambers and that’s when the wheels came off the train!
I knew the heads had been milled, but was very surprised to see the chambers coming in at 59-60 cc’s! They should have been around 66 in stock form. My heads must have been shaved a LOT. My CC’ing tools are pretty simple. Just a piece of Lexan with a hole in it and a large veterinary syringe marked in milliliters (same as cc’s). I thought my technique may be off so I pulled out the original LS1 heads and checked them. 66-67 cc’s just as they should be, so my measuring was most likely correct.
I knew before I fired up my compression ratio program that the numbers weren’t going to be good. I came up with a little over 11.7 to 1 with a .052 thick GM head gasket! Even worse, the dynamic compression ratio was over 8.5 to 1. I had hoped to keep that at 8 to 1 or lower for pump gas.
Now there are usually options, but in this case, none were very good. A thick head gasket was out of the question. The .052 was the thickest I really wanted to use. The early original LS1 heads I had were some of the worst stock heads GM made and I didn’t really want to use them. Which was why I got the CNC’d heads originally. I could have found better stock heads and had them rebuilt, but the only local shop that I trust is very busy with commercial customers and I literally would have to wait weeks to get them back. I also could have went to dished pistons but that would mean rebalancing the rotating assembly and there again, it would be the same shop doing the work. Weeks of waiting. My only real choice, it I wanted to solve this issue quickly, was to buy new aftermarket heads and that was money I really didn’t want to spend. But, it really was the only choice that kept me moving forward, so I bit the bullet and ordered new heads.
The heads I picked are Trick Flow Fast as Cast 220’s. They have 64 cc chambers that are CNC cut. The ports are as cast, but they are very, very smooth for castings. The short turn radius at the valve feels perfectly blended to the floor and bowl. I doubt you could gain enough with a grinder to make it worth the effort on a street engine. They also have a raised valve cover rail so that you don’t need a spacer to run roller rockers. It just so happens that I had picked up a set of Harland Sharp rocker arms months ago. Trick Flow also changed the valve inclination a few degrees to improve flow. Several years ago when these heads first came out, it was claimed that they were good for 15-20 HP more than similar heads.
With the new heads and a .045 head gasket, my static compression came out to 10.7 to 1 and the dynamic is around 7.7 to 1. I’m hoping that those numbers along with the .039-.040 quench will help this engine tolerate pump gas.
https://i.imgur.com/uDbQ3ba.jpg
https://i.imgur.com/5McQ4s3.jpg
-
The engine assembly went pretty smooth even if it was slower than I would have liked. I felt like I was building my first engine! All the torque to angle bolts were a real pain to me. I like setting the torque wrench and getting on with business. It did get easier the more I did it, but I still didn’t really like it.
Then there was the whole oil pump alignment thing. What a pain! Disassemble the pump and scrape up enough shims to hold everything in alignment while you tighten the mounting bolts. It’s obvious that this engine was designed to be assembled by robots that can stab a part in perfect alignment with nothing other than what it’s camera sees.
I did get lucky a few months ago and scored a set of front and rear cover alignment tools. These the are Kent Moore tools that GM recommends for this job. They were laying on the shelf at a local pawn shop and I picked them up for chump change. This set of tools is stupid expensive for what it is. Something to the tune of $300-$400!!!!! The set is a cast brass(bronze?) part that does the actual alignment and a plate that bolts to the oil pan rail to keep that surface aligned.
https://i.imgur.com/OJMFomz.jpg
https://i.imgur.com/7hKsIt3.jpg
The rear seal came with it’s own installation tool already in the seal. It’s a double lip seal and is marked which way is out. The trouble is. The writing is very tiny for my 62 year old eyes. I had to get it out in the sun to actually see the markings. I marked it to make sure I got it right in the shop.
https://i.imgur.com/AdIvefV.jpg
I made one mod that the block didn’t come with. I added this LS2 timing chain damper. The boss was there on the block, but it wasn’t drilled. Getting this thing lined up for drilling was tricky. I made a tapping guide out of aluminum to hold the tap square to the block. Sorry no pics of that operation, but it turned out ok, I think.
https://i.imgur.com/6n3bTL9.jpg
-
Another thing I added was a better windage tray. I’m already using an LS2/LS3 Corvette oil pan. The Vette pan is pretty close in size to the LS Camaro (F body) pan, but has more baffling.
https://i.imgur.com/6S7yFFo.jpg
The windage tray is by Improved Racing. It comes with a very close fitting crank scraper and has extra baffling with trapdoors.
https://i.imgur.com/bDQE9YI.jpg
Crank scraper
https://i.imgur.com/tZ5igsB.jpg
New windage tray compared to the factory part.
I also intend to install an Accusump oil accumulator. The LS Vette engines with the low profile oil pan like mine were known to have oil starvation issues if cornered really hard. Bob Bondurant’s driving school was losing engines to this issue. The GM engineers recommended adding an extra quart of oil for tracking the car. That sounded like a bandaid solution that would cause a lot windage. The Accusump is like poor man’s dry sump system and should cure the starvation issue without all the windage. Here’s a video if you want to know about it. This is a moroso, but the principle is the same.
https://youtu.be/vyaGoj60A6s
-
Thanks for the update Mike, I've never had to open up a LS based motor, but I've heard they are a little bit different, and nice score on the oil pump alignment tool! It's going to be fun watching this get butt back together, hopefully for the last time for you!
-
Very nice progress and some more nice parts too! The score on those tools is awesome!
-
Thanks. Glad ya'll are still following along.
I did run into one unexpected issue with the new heads. This is hot rod building and I should have expected something to pop up to throw a monkey wrench in the plan.
The old CNC heads did have bigger ports than stock, but they were not that not much bigger. The TF heads are quite a bit larger. My original plan was to run LS6 exhaust manifolds and they matched up with the CNC heads pretty well. I liked the tri-y design and they offered stock reliability. While trial fitting them to build a custom dip stick, I realized that the ports in the manifolds were visibly smaller than the exhaust ports in the TF heads. I could have ported the manifolds where they mated to the heads, but they have fairly long individual runners (for stock manifolds) that I can’t get to to open up.
I do have a set of long tube headers that a friend gave me to see if they would fit the car. They are for a 69 Camaro and I did manage to get them on the car during the initial fab work, but they were very tight to the frame rails at the collectors and one tube on the passenger side was close to that frame rail. I also thought that they hung down a little more than I liked. I really wasn’t wanting to run headers on this car, but they do fit the exhaust ports and I already know that they kinda fit the frame. I don’t think anyone will have anything on the shelf for a kit car that hasn’t been made in 25 years and never even came with an LS engine. So, it’s either make these work, build custom headers or go with the LS6 manifolds and live with the small ports. Looks like I’ll be running headers! The big issue is that I already have a complete exhaust system in stainless, the 2nd actually, and it looks like I’ll be doing at least part of a 3rd. At the very least, I’ll have probably have to put some bends in the collectors and dent the tube next to the frame. I may just whack most of the collectors off and use V-bands to attach some offset collector extensions. The length issue might be solved with some skid protection. I’ll just have to wait until I get the engine back in to come up with a solid plan.
I can’t find a brand name on these headers which leads me to think that they are Chinese knock-off parts. They are stainless of some kind, probably ChiCom 409’ish. The upside is that they do have very thick flanges, fit the heads well and they were free. Of course, it goes without saying, that the long tubes will be a lot better for power.
https://i.imgur.com/IK58aEf.jpg
https://i.imgur.com/RD9JrJE.jpg
Here’s my fitment issue. The pics are from the build.
https://i.imgur.com/OCoocq7.jpg?1
https://i.imgur.com/O0w0MQj.jpg
I’m pretty sure I can put some offset bends in the collector and cure this. Might not be the best for power, but that’s the way it works out sometimes.
-
Where the collector gets close to the frame bracket would it work to cut the collector back 2" or 3", then weld on a reducer to the size of your exhaust tubing and put the V-band clamp flange on there? Hard to tell from the picture how much additional clearance it would garner, just a thought.
-
Dave, that would work. I'm going to try and save as much of the collector as I can, but your idea may be the only way to get them to work.
In my last post, I talked about hurting power. I accidentally backed into almost the exact same combo of parts that Trick Flow offers as a complete top end kit. Same cam, heads and rockers that is. My .045 head gasket is even the same thickness as one that they offered in their kit. They tested the kit on a stock 5.7 short block and it made 515 HP! Hard to believe that such a relatively small duration cam could make that kind of power, but I'm used to old Gen 1 small blocks. Has to be the heads if that power number is to be believed.
Now I'm not naive enough to believe that my engine will make that kind of power. That was engine dyno power and that's not anywhere near the same as real world HP. Published engine dyno numbers are usually inflated with tricks to sell magazines and parts. Nobody runs around on the street with no accessories, no exhaust, cool dyno room air and cold water temps. I would consider myself lucky to not lose more that 30-40 HP in my car. I figure 50 HP loss would be a better real world number, but still, that would mean 460 or so at the crank, maybe 350 at the wheels. I consider that a lot for a car this light.
I hope my new suspension is up to the task and I hope my driving is adequate! The original 427 street Cobra was only rated at about 435 and it had reputation as never really being tamed by most drivers. It could kill you in heartbeat if you got overconfident.
-
If you have 350 horse at the wheels, I think that would be more than sufficient lol. If I recall correctly, I think small block Ford exhaust manifolds will fit on the LS motor as well, It Could be another option for you.
-
Have you seen the donuts you can get so you can cut the curved pieces you need? I got some for the 40 but haven't cut them yet. Maybe those would get you close to where you need to be and keep the same size tubing. One reason I live cutting collectors off of headers and adding v bands is for ground clearance. The other is for no collector gaskets to blow out. :LOL: That definitely sounds like a stout engine you built. I bet it will be over 400hp at the rear tires. I had my car tuned and it is just a stock headed 5.3 with a BTR Stage 3 cam. It did 395 to the back tires. I'm guessing the guy's dyno sucks though because he dyno's my friend's duramax and they claim that turd is 700hp. Too bad it is stock besides a tune and slow. So I don't trust his numbers. :lol: I figured I'd be lucky to have 300hp to the back tires. Maybe someday it will go to a real place to get dyno'd after I switch over to a Holly Terminator.
.
-
Ryan, I have seen the donuts and I'll definitely keep that option in mind. They seem to be the tightest bends you can get.
400 RWHP would be interesting indeed! 460 at the crank, based on the last "complete" weight I got, puts the pounds per HP in the Hellcat range. I don't think I'm gonna have nearly enough tire!
I have zero experience with LS engines, but I've watched enough of Richard Holdener's videos to say that LS engines apparently respond very well to more cam. The heads are just so good, even in stock form, and the stock cams are so mild that they are just begging for cam. The stock LS heads are probably better than really high dollar Gen 1 heads used to be.
-
The last thing I had to do was get the intake sorted. If you’ve been following along for a while you will remember that I’m using a 2x4 Holley EFI setup. I found this for sale on another forum and thought it would look a lot better than the standard LS intake. The squat stock LS front throttle body intakes just don’t look right to me on an older car. I thought this setup looked more like it belonged on a 60’s muscle car.
https://i.imgur.com/kp6G8SY.jpg
https://i.imgur.com/DSsTrkR.jpg
Even after several searches, I couldn’t find much info on using this thing. The throttle bodies flow 1000 cfm each and are progressive like a standard 4 barrel carb. 2000 cfm is a ludicrous amount of air for a 350 CI engine. The linkage that came with it has both TB opening together. At this point I really don’t want to disconnect the secondaries. I may have to eventually, but I consider getting it to work without that as a challenge.
The only complaint that I read from someone that actually used it said that it had touchy throttle response, sort of like an on/off switch. That stands to reason if they didn’t try to slow down the throttle opening. There’s a 1000 cfm available on the primaries alone. That’s a lot of airflow potential for a small amount of throttle opening. My last reasonably accurate weight I have for the car is about 2700 lbs. With a potential for 450 HP on tap, the last thing I need is an on/off switch for a throttle. I’m going to attack that problem 2 ways.
https://i.imgur.com/EazPLM7.jpg
https://i.imgur.com/yhc0UUR.jpg
First, I came up with a throttle linkage that slows down the opening on the initial tip in. It uses a cable wheel/cam that has an offset axle. This changes the ratio as it’s opened. Slower initially and faster at the end. I didn’t build that part. It came off a 90mm FAST LS throttle body that I had laying around. It stands to reason that the larger single bore TB's would be touchy too. Apparently, FAST used this cable wheel to slow their opening rate. You can see the off set compared to a stock GM cable wheel in the bottom picture.
https://i.imgur.com/nr3UnJ5.jpg?1
I had to mount the throttle cable on the right side of the engine. There wasn’t a lot of room on the left due to the fuel rails being close to the existing linkage on the TB’s. The FAST cable cam was designed to work on the right side too. I built this mount that transfers the throttle movement to the left side. It’s cut from 6061 aluminum and has a 3/8” stainless shaft. Another nice thing about the FAST cam was that it had it’s own torsion return spring. I transferred that over to the new mount.
https://i.imgur.com/t3zNKbV.jpg
https://i.imgur.com/U6P0yBn.jpg
https://i.imgur.com/bLnFoMD.jpg
This is the linkage I built on the left side. The way the pivot is positioned (close to the centerline of the shaft), it slows the initial opening down even more. It spends much of it’s initial travel moving more vertically than it does moving backwards. After the first 20 or so degrees. It speeds up considerably. I am getting full stroke on the TB’s. So far, the combo seems to be working like I wanted it to. The proof will be in the driving.
-
The second part of my strategy is to limit total airflow with a restrictor plates as someone on here suggested a long time ago. EFI isn’t as sensitive to big TB’s as having an oversize carb. There is no need to keep air velocity high through the boosters for a good signal (there are no boosters!). A 105 mm single bore TB will flow somewhere around 1100 CFM, as far as I have been able to find out . Those are being installed on 5.3 engines regularly with no issues, but the 2000 CFM that this thing can flow is just crazy. A 5.7 engine can only flow so much air based on volumetric efficiency and RPM, no matter how much potential air flow is available. I doubt my engine will need more than 850 CFM (if that much), so I have a bunch that I can throw away.
https://i.imgur.com/F83Ollh.jpg
This restrictor plate limits air flow to around 1200 CFM for the pair. I know the primary bores will most likely need to enlarged. My “back of the envelope” estimation says a pair of plates will flow 350-400 CFM , wide open, on the primary side, but the progressive linkage stages the secondaries well before half throttle. Since this is port EFI, the restrictor plates only have to flow air, no fuel. This pic is of the unfinished plate. The holes have been radiused on both sides.
This is just an experiment and may be crazy. I can always pull them if they cause issues.
https://i.imgur.com/JzPjC1e.jpg
I also had to build a custom throttle cable mount. The car will have cruise control, so had to have 2 cables.
-
Next, I needed a nice air filter that looked like it belonged on a 60’s era hot rod. I like the look of the Shelby Cobras and other hot Fords in the sixties that had long oval air cleaners on the 2x4 setups. I wanted something similar, but with a finned top. My plan is to have it wrinkle powder coated and then polish the tops of the fins.
The only air cleaner I could find that had the look I wanted was from Speedway Motors. It was cast aluminum and had the fins, but it was very poorly finished. The filter element supplied with the air cleaner wouldn’t even fit the top or bottom. All surfaces were as cast. Except for a couple of tapped holes, no finish machining had been done at all. It was adjustable for different carb spacing, but I didn’t much like the parts supplied. They were thin aluminum castings and looked pretty fragile. Rather than send it back, I decided to make it work.
The first thing to take care of was making the filter fit. The castings worried me, because I had no idea of their quality. They weren’t flat either which was expected.
Here is the issue. With the filter seated on one end, this is how far it hung over the opposite end.
https://i.imgur.com/GTVUqww.jpg
Step one was machining the lower half flat on the bottom to make setup a little easier. I had to shim the center with cardboard to give it some support. I knew better than to try and clamp it flat. I’m pretty sure it would have snapped as it had a pretty good bow in it.
https://i.imgur.com/NHhE5Zw.jpg
Then I flipped it over and cut the filter cavity.
https://i.imgur.com/OZlAJLF.jpg
https://i.imgur.com/AwJcXOQ.jpg
After machining, the filter fit as it was supposed to.
-
Very nice work on the air cleaner Mike.
The big oval Ford air cleaners have been my go to on multiple carb setups for years. They flow so much better than individual air cleaners. I usually ended up just using the chrome steel ones because normally I had heavily modify the bases to fit the Tri-Power setups.
When I built the 57 Plymouth that’s what I used on the Hemi. I never really liked the way the chrome steel Air Cleaner looked with the finned aluminum valve covers though. When I changed out the Tri Power for dual quads I finally bit the bullet and ordered an aluminum lid. It was powered coated black wrinkle with the fins shinny. After stripping the powder coating (soaking it in acetone works great for that by the way) I found that the quality of the aluminum wasn’t that great so rather than trying to polish it out I decided to have it Powder coated with “Chrome”. The so called chrome actually looks a lot more like polished aluminum than chrome and matched the valve covers very well.
Naturally when I did the PS conversion it turned out I couldn’t keep the aluminum valve covers so after changing those out to chromed steel the chrome steel lid also went back on and the aluminum lid is now shelf art at least till the next project.
.
-
Mike, flow was one of my concerns, too. The little chrome filters are pretty restrictive.
I had the intake manifold powder coated in the shiny chrome powder coat with a clear coat. I thought I would try powder coating since the LS intake doesn't get very hot and it would make keeping it clean a lot easier.
BTW - The casting quality on mine is pretty poor, too. That was one thing that led me towards having it wrinkle coated. My coater has some powder available called Screaming Eagle Wrinkle or something like that. It has a lot of wrinkle and looks like the stuff that Harley uses on some of their engine parts. I'll have whatever valve covers I wind up with done in it, too.
-
https://i.imgur.com/rCGMsQw.jpg
Then it was time to do the top section. This one was a little more difficult since there were no good surfaces to clamp on. I had to just catch the edge of the lip. This one had to be shimmed in several places with cardboard, too. I used cardboard and paper because it was easy to work out the thickness needed and it wouldn’t scratch up the aluminum. I had to clamp this one pretty light, because it had a good bow in it, also. I added the mag-base dial indicator to keep a close eye on any movement while cutting.
https://i.imgur.com/v2h20wx.jpg
The filter fits both halves now.
https://i.imgur.com/dxAMsJ3.jpg
Here is the air cleaner mocked up on the intake. Now it’s time to tackle the base plate that adapts it to the throttle bodies.
-
You do some fabulous work!
Believe it or not, the real advantage of a single air cleaner on multiple carbs is balance, it actually helps balance the flow between the carbs.
Trick, your vacuum gauge will tell you if your air cleaner is large enough. If the vacuum is higher with the air cleaner on than it is with it off, your not getting enough air through the cleaner.
-
Thanks, 36. I made my living for many years doing machine and fab work, mostly machine work. It's nice to be able to do it just for fun now.:):cool:
The balance thing never really occurred to me, but it does make sense.
-
https://i.imgur.com/HADTTXI.jpg
I machined the base plate adapter from a piece of 1 ¾ 6061 plate. This is probably overkill, but it is very solid and does a good job of reinforcing the cast filter base.
https://i.imgur.com/z8wkDdm.jpg
https://i.imgur.com/bH33NWP.jpg
Not much drama during the mill work, other than a ton of shavings. Getting the internal openings cored out was a little tricky. I cut the first side of the core 1 1/4” deep.
https://i.imgur.com/TFvqW6x.jpg
https://i.imgur.com/Witfnc3.jpg
https://i.imgur.com/GVBjvIK.jpg
https://i.imgur.com/Lop2Nja.jpg
Then I flipped it over and finished the throttle body openings.
-
Here is the finished base plate with the adapter in place. The brass component is an air temp sensor for the EFI. I may move this to the intake. Holley recommends the intake as a better location. Of course, the intake is not drilled in a good location. Just something else to do.
https://i.imgur.com/TgKJ7nw.jpg
This is from the top. With the tie down bars in place. I still need to add self-locking nuts. The air filter element was damaged in shipping. I have a new one, but won't install it until it's in the car.
https://i.imgur.com/xaZtadj.jpg
I had to add some supports for the filter. There wasn’t enough thickness in the castings to cut a deep groove and whoever designed it didn’t think to add any supports.
https://i.imgur.com/QkNYZJT.jpg
Here is the completed air cleaner on the engine. I know it is too tall and will need to be machined down later when the body and hood is back on. I intend to convert the non-functional air scoop in the Healey hood into a cold air intake, so I need the air cleaner to fit as high in the hood cavity as possible. The valve covers are just temporary to keep trash out. I need to check firewall clearance before I get some better looking finned covers.
https://i.imgur.com/L2Ax5T9.jpg?1
These are the valve covers I’m considering.
https://i.imgur.com/5f3dtw0.jpg
-
That's a very nice looking setup. Amazing work on that air cleaner.
-
That looks killer, and nice work ! Your doing an amazing job covering the ugly on the LS and those valve covers will work great!
-
Thanks guys.
Unfortunately, they may be good at making HP, but there's an awful lot of ugly to cover up on an LS. At least to an old guy, like ,me!
-
"......Unfortunately, they may be good at making HP, but there's an awful lot of ugly to cover up on an LS. At least to an old guy, like ,me! ......"
Ain't that the truth....... might be the reason so many of the new engines are just covered with a big piece of plastic.
.
-
With the engine done as much as possible right now, I turned to the rearend and rear suspension. This was the biggest change from the last time most of you saw this chassis. The 8.8 Explorer axle looked wrong to me every time I was under the car. Even though I narrowed it and centered the pinion, it still just looked wrong. The whole thing just looked too big and heavy. Plus I wasn’t satisfied with the 3rd link bracket. The way I attached it to the rearend looked like it might cause problems and you couldn’t pull the back cover without disconnecting the 3rd link.
The way I built the Watts link had it in the way of pretty much everything, especially the exhaust. Don’t get me wrong, the geometry was correct and the parts fit, but it just wasn’t as good as I felt it could be. I had been kicking around redoing it, but really hated to take the time. The final nail in the 8.8 ‘s coffin came when I discovered that I had made serious error when I welded the lower link brackets to the axle tubes. They weren’t centered. Not sure how that happened, but no use saying it wasn’t my fault because I built this junk! Might as well own it.
Instead of trying to fix what was there, I decided it would be easier to just start over. I had picked up a nice older 9” Ford axle in a trade a few months ago and decided to go back with it. The 9” had several advantages over the 8.8 for me. For one thing, I like working on the drop out gear carriers better than the open backs like the 8.8. Gear setup is easier and of course it’s easy to swap chunks around for quick gear changes and the 3rd link brackets could be welded to the housing. I was also convinced from eyeballing the two rearends, that the 9” might actually be lighter. With an aluminum chunk it could be several pounds lighter.
I found several different weights listed online for both rearends, but none of the info really agreed. Besides, most 8.8 weights you find are for a Mustang type 8.8. The Explorer rearend is a whole different animal. It almost looks like a light duty ¾ ton truck rearend compared to a Mustang type rear. I had another Explorer rearend that I had picked up cheap when a salvage yard closed near me. Just for my own info I stripped both the 9” and the Explorer rear down to the bare essentials, no brakes, to keep things even and weighed them. The box in the picture is a new pinion yoke. I added that because the 8.8 didn’t have a yoke and I wanted to keep things as equal as I could. Turns out, I was right. The 9” was 19 lbs. lighter than the 8.8 Explorer. In the spirit of full disclosure I have to add that the 9” had 28 spline axles and small bearings, while the 8.8 had 31 spline axles. The 8.8 was a few inches wider, too.
https://i.imgur.com/J6M1pje.jpg
https://i.imgur.com/RizX765.jpg
-
I shortened the 9”, centered the pinion due to tunnel clearance and added a small brace to the back. I was concerned that with the 3rd link, I was adding stresses to the housing that it wasn’t really designed for. The brace also gave me more surface to weld the 3rd link brackets on. The bearing housings were changed to the big bearing Torino style since I had already had the brake setup I built using Mustang Cobra SVT brakes that fit the Explorer axle. The Torino ends are pretty much identical to the Explorer flanges. The SVT brakes use a vented 11.6” rotor and a caliper with a built-in emergency brake. The setup is a lot lighter than the Explorer rear brake setup and should stop better.
https://i.imgur.com/iE0P92R.jpg
These are the tools I made to align the ends. I used 2” shafting based on a conversation with a fellow I know that builds fabricated 9” housings. I originally made the tools to narrow the 8.8 and had to make some new end tools for the Torino housings. The rectangular end pieces sure make aligning the ends easy. I didn’t get a picture of the bushings that went in the 9” carrier. Turns out they were the same diameter as the 8.8 carrier bearings, so I didn’t have to make them over.
I have to say that the brace on the back of the housing gave me a lot of trouble. Of course, the heat from welding pulled the tubes toward the brace. I expected this, but it moved way more than I thought it would. This is the first housing I’ve straightened with a brace and it was chore to say the least. I gave the only piece of beam I could have used to build a straightening jig with to a friend for something he was doing. That left me with just heat and shrink to move it around. It took a lot of heating and shrinking over several hours. Occasionally, I would have to stop and let the whole thing cool down or it would just quit moving, but eventually I got it straight. The line up tools, and ultimately the axles, just slid in.
https://i.imgur.com/X1gmCHF.jpg
And yes, I did get the link brackets centered this time!:LOL:**)
-
More nice work, looks beefy.
-
The chunk for the rearend is cast iron at this point. I’m considering swapping to an aluminum carrier later when I decide on the final drive ratio. The gearset is an old 3.25 Ford brand set that I had. They are pretty worn and didn’t have really good pattern (even in the original stock setup from Ford), but will give me a starting point to judge what gears I want to run. As it stands now, with the transmission ratios and 26” tires I’m running, the gear splits with the 3.25’s are almost exactly the same as the LS6 powered Z06 Corvette though 5th gear. I was originally planning to use an LS6 cam, so this made sense then. My gut tells me that the cam I’m actually using will probably be happier with more gear. I’m thinking that I will wind up with 3.50 – 3.73 gears. Going by the dyno pulls I’ve seen for both my cam and the LS6 cam I may not be too far off with the 3.25’s, though. The cam I’m using doesn’t appear to give up much, if anything, in low end torque over the LS6 cam. My problem is the 2.97 first gear in my trans. If I go too high numbered on the rear gears, I risk making 1st gear too short to really be of any real use for ordinary driving. Luckily, the gearset in this transmission has a .64 6th instead of the more common .5 ratio, so my cruise RPM’s won’t make as much of a drop. Because this is primarily a long distance cruiser, I don’t want to run any more rear gear than I need to keep the cam happy. Time will tell. For now, this gearset will get me by for engine break in.
https://i.imgur.com/3BpT8VP.jpg
I also swapped in an Eaton TRU-TRAC Torsen style limited slip differential. I’ve never ran one, but like the idea of how they work. One crazy issue I ran into was finding ring gear bolts that were the correct length. This is a 9” Ford, so that stuff should be easy to find, but not with this diff and ring gear combo. The flange on the Eaton diff was thicker than the Ford diff and I think the ring gear bolt holes were a little on the shallow side of Ford’s tolerance. I tried 4 different sets, from stock Ford large head bolts to ARP bolts. They were either too long and bottomed out or they didn’t have enough thread engagement to be safe (IMO). I wound up making a threaded collet to hold the too-long large head Ford bolts so that I could shorten them in the lathe. Even then, I had 3 holes that required lengths shorter than the rest. Crazy, but true.
I used an aluminum Daytona pinion carrier and solid crush sleeve, too. The Daytona carrier pushes the yoke about .200 further forward on the pinion splines than the stock carrier. This means that you either have to run a thin pinion nut or machine the nut mating surface in the yoke deeper. I chose to cut the yoke deeper to use the stock pinion nut, so it took a ride in the mill.
https://i.imgur.com/gjO1EwG.jpg
https://i.imgur.com/BuCqiLL.jpg
https://i.imgur.com/zPKtgVV.jpg
I also got ambitious and built the handy, dandy carrier stand. In the past, I just rolled them around on the bench, which pretty much sucked. The stand sure makes things easier.
-
-
quote "I used an aluminum Daytona pinion carrier and solid crush sleeve, too. The Daytona carrier pushes the yoke about .200 further forward on the pinion splines than the stock carrier. This means that you either have to run a thin pinion nut or machine the nut mating surface in the yoke deeper. I chose to cut the yoke deeper to use the stock pinion nut, so it took a ride in the mill."
Curious how you found out about the .200 thou difference? Did Daytona tell you? Or you were measuring the parts.?.? Curious minds need to know... LOL :LOL::LOL:
-
34, I really can't remember where I found that out. I think it was on a Ford specific website. This was the first "Daytona" carrier I have ever setup. I'm certainly no expert on setting up gears, for that matter as I've only done a few sets in my life, but I researched as much as I could find on the Daytona setup. This was internet info, so take it for what it's worth.
What I learned is that it was originally designed by Ford for their high horsepower cars back in the 60's. The Daytona name is kind of generic for this style of heavy duty carrier and there are many versions available from a bunch of different sellers. It uses a bigger bearing set than the standard carrier and since the pinion has to stay in the same place, the yoke has to move farther out. The .200 number is one that I found online somewhere, but it was a good one. The problem is that the self-locking portion of the standard pinion nut hangs off the end of the threads. The original yokes for the Daytona were cut deeper, but the aftermarket sells a thin locknut so that you can use the uncut yoke. I already had the standard nut and the tools to cut the yoke, so I went in that direction. Even after cutting the yoke .200 deeper, you can see in the picture that the end of the splines are still about that much below the shoulder.
Ford's version was cast or nodular iron as far as I could find out ,but the aftermarket has been making them in aluminum. I went with the Daytona just so I could run the aluminum one for weight. It actually saves a few pounds, but not a lot.
If anyone on here has better info, please feel free to correct me. Like I said, all my research was on the internet.