340 upgrade

[BlownMGB-V8]

I've been working on the brakes. This all started because I found one usable 256/50-14 tire on ebay and in the process of fitting it to the car I noticed... well you know how it goes. I decided to try fixing one nagging problem I've had since 1980 which is hub-centric wheels on lug-centric hubs. Probably the ultimate solution is a new set of wheels and tires but being the cheap Scott that I am I decided that adapter rings should work, made up a set for the back and while pulling the front hubs discovered scored rotors. No problem, ordered a set. They are only available as a hub/rotor assembly though. More money but I get them anyway. Take the first one out, break it down, and start planning how I'll incorporate an adapter ring. I've pretty well decided to use the ford hub (1973 Mustang), put the rotor to the outside and space the caliper bracket to match and even machined down the flange to go inside the rotor when I open the second box.

It's a one piece assembly. Not only that but it turns out it's the only way anyone makes them any more. Which is fine if you own a Mustang, but not so great for me. Suddenly my brake rotors are obsolete, and worse than that they've fallen into the gap between obsolete and restoration. The first box I opened was the last two piece assembly on the planet earth. I did manage to reclaim one old rotor before it went to the scrappers and it only has one score mark in it so it's usable in a pinch, but what a revoltin' development! No new hub for that side so that plan is out the window. I might be able to fit rings to the existing hubs but it'll take a good bit of work and since my tires are also obsolete and in the gap what's the point? Will the other three thin tires last the 5 or 6 years it may take Coker to pick them up? Not if I drive the car the way I want to. Those Centerline Drag-Lite wheels were never made to last for decades either and are showing their age, wouldn't be a real big surprise to start seeing cracks in them, what with the sealing and pitting problems I'm seeing now on the inside. I guess the thing to do is just to slap it back together as-is and start shopping for wheels and tires, and look for a new plan on the brakes. Best laid plans and all that, who would have thought... I really can't afford Wilwood and they might go obsolete just as fast for all I know. I guess that's the price we pay for progress. So now I have 5 lug hubs that are spaced about an inch out from the 4 lug flanges, an obsolete rotor nobody makes anymore, pads that are hard to find, but at least the caliper brackets use the stock attachments. Well, at least modern technology should provide me with lighter calipers if nothing else, and possibly lighter rotors too. Wonder what Mitsubishi is using these days?

Jim

[BlownMGB-V8]

The rotors from Tire rack ended up being the one piece ones and had to be sent back so the old rotor with one score mark in the back will go back on the car. I've found a solution for the pcv plumbing on the 215 blower motor and if I'm willing to pull the heads again should be able to cure the one remaining flaw with that engine, a slow leak of combustion gases into the coolant system. I could make or possibly borrow an o-ring groove cutter, have the heads checked for porosity and use composite gaskets with o-rings and I think it'd hold OK.

I've also been looking for small diameter stainless tubing for the front end lift cylinders, I'm thinking 1/16 or 1/8" tubing would work fine, be easy to route and is flexible enough that a loop or two would be all I need near the connections to the cylinders. Small pressure hose was impossible to find but I think this will work.

Jim

[BlownMGB-V8]

You know I've been thinking about this transmission situation. Now I've pretty well determined that it's going to be an automatic, and with the 340 engine the choices are pretty much between the 2004r and the 700r4 and it's progeny except that the 700r4 is not available in a BOP pattern. But an automatic transmission really shifts like crap if you want to drive it hard. The rest of the time they're fine but for the twisties they never do what you want. They shift early, downshift or upshift when you want to stay in gear, don't downshift quick enough, don't upshift quick enough, and in general just miss the optimum shift point every time, to say nothing of the fact that they have absolutely no notion of how to enter a turn. Facing facts, it's just a dumb mechanical device. But then I've been driving this (relatively) new 2002 truck and it does a whole lot better. Reason is that the computer controls the shifts. So that must be the answer. Set it up so the computer can control it. No rocket science there, no new technology. My efi controller can handle that with very few changes. BUT, the 4L60E won't work without an adapter and the gears in that aren't as good as the ones in the 2004r that I already have. Hmmm.... both are 4 speeds with lock up converter.... I think I'll see if I can get a valve body from a 4L60E and see if I can adapt the computer controls to the 2004r. Wouldn't that be a trick? There might even be a market for it. If I'm really lucky the sensors and solenoids will lend themselves to being mounted to operate the 2004r shift valves and not much more will be needed but like most things it's never quite that simple. Well I guess that's one more item for my shopping list.

Jim

[BlownMGB-V8]

Here's a neat oil filler cap.
You cannot view this attachment.
If you've been following the PCV thread, this is part of the conversion to a British type pcv system and the cap contains a filter and an orifice to limit air going into the crankcase. The other valvecover is plumbed directly to the blower intake so at idle it sees full vacuum and at WOT it vents blowby into the inlet where it is re-ingested. This system seems like it'll work well with a blower installation where the throttle body is upstream of the blower inlet and also upstream of the filter housing, and gives me more leeway in designing the inlet for the M112 blower to go on the 340. I started the engine today (the Olds 215) and it looks like some recalibration may be in order, but it was quite cold so I'm quite certain the calibration would not have been correct at any rate as I don't believe I've had an opportunity to tune it at that low temperature. I didn't let it run long enough to warm up either so I have no conclusions yet about how well this system will work. The idle seemed high, but again, it was cold. Anyway, ain't that a purty part?

Jim

[74ls1tr6]

Jim,

I have'nt been in looking at this post lately... but noticed the question on the measurements on the R200 diff. Today I will measure all over the R200. I also have a picture I will post later of the R200 out of the frame with the brackets on the diff.

I don't know if you looked at bowtie6.com (Joe's TR6 that has the long nose R200, which I believe is a strong R200..used in drag cars). Lots of picures to look at in his site.

Calvin

[MGBV8]

From bowtie6.com:

"The mass of a V8 would upset the handling and balance ..."

That urban legend just won't go away!  

[74ls1tr6]

Carl,...OH no! "The mass of a V8 would upset the handling and balance ..."

I hope I have'nt made a mistake ;-)

Jim,....specs on R200

Front bolt mounts on R200 from Q45. .........6"1/8"
Front flange bolt up area outside to outside..8"1/8"..So case at that point is 4"1/8" or pinion staft area.
From Front U-joint flange to rear finned cover is...17"1/4"
From flange to flange on output to rear wheels...13"3/8" + or - a little
From output shaft to output shaft (case measurement)...8*1/2"
From bottom finned cover to top of case......9"1/8" + or - a little

Here is some pictures.
You cannot view this attachment.


You cannot view this attachment.


You cannot view this attachment.


You cannot view this attachment.

[74ls1tr6]

more pics
You cannot view this attachment.


You cannot view this attachment.


You cannot view this attachment.


You cannot view this attachment.

[BlownMGB-V8]

MGBV8 Wrote:

> That urban legend just won't go away!  

We'll dispense with it once and for all when the Roadmaster is running.

So Carl, would you mind posting the update on the  Roadmaster engine progress, or would you rather I did it? I probably need to get some info on there about the upcoming weekend.
-------------------------------------------------------

My opinion is that if Carl thinks an MGB with a V8 will handle, I'd like to see the guy who is qualified to dispute it. Maybe an MGB with a GMC 8-71 or something totally nutso like that... But then again, there might be a way...
No, NO, NO!!!! Absolutely NOT!!! I will not be a party to any such madness!!! (At least not until the Roadmaster and the 340 upgrade are done.) NO!!!!

This cold weather sure slows things down. One of these years I'll have real heat in the workshop and things will move along a bit quicker. For a boy who grew up with a barn with gaps between the boards of the walls and happy to have those and a home-made barrel heater, just having solid insulated walls and a clean concrete floor are a major plus. Guess I could build another barrel heater but it had a voracious appetite and I don't have enough trees on the place to feed it. Still, the gas furnace is in place, just need a little work to make it put out heat. Sad to say I just don't want to mess with it in the cold. Funny how that works. I could get real creative and make a propane powered oil burning radiant monster in the middle of the floor, which would be kinda fun to build, but then it'd be in the way most of the time. Anybody guess it's cold today?

I'm hoping to be able to mock up the engine and blower in a few weeks and begin tacking parts together for the blower intake. For that to happen I will need to get Dale to ship back to me the two heads that we aren't going to use for this engine. I'll use that pair of heads for fitting and then possibly sell them when I'm done. Don't know if I'll use the heat-pipe intercooler this time or not. It seemed to work pretty well, and visibility over the scoop hasn't been a problem, but I must confess it looks a little odd. I will have to datalog some runs with it before I can make a decision one way or the other, and the alternatives will be an air/liquid system or air/air. If I were to go air/air I really think I'd have to look at alternatives to a front radiator.

I really wanted to build an engine with a higher rpm potential. But this block came with cast pistons fitted. If they were low compression slugs I'd be motivated to move up to forged, but since they have the CR I'm looking for it makes it much harder to justify the purchase. Especially when power is not even an issue. I have one or two things to finish up before I'll have the bench space to tear down the short block but once I look at the pistons and the bore clearances I might change my mind about it. I'd really love to have a 7 grand redline. It's just more fun.

I won the bid on a 4l60e valve body so in a few days I'll get a chance to see what needs to be done to fit the shifting solenoids from it to the 2004r. Megasquirt can control all of the shift parameters as well as the line pressure if I can put the hardware together so at least in theory there's the chance of getting the shifting under control. If I get it to work, this may be a product that Blackwood Labs will have to make available for purchase. But we'll see. There's much to do first.

Jim

[74ls1tr6]

Jim,

Check this thread out..it may have some info in there for you that might interest you. Talks about Nissan differentials.

http://forums.hybridz.org/showthread.php?t=114798

[MGBV8]

"So Carl, would you mind posting the update on the Roadmaster engine progress, or would you rather I did it?"

Sorry Jim, I'm off to do Boy Scouts tonight. Besides, it's more fun to read your stuff!

[BlownMGB-V8]

MGBV8 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

> Besides, it's more fun to read your stuff!

OK Carl, I'll take care of it, soon as I can get the cat to let me be.

Calvin, that was some very good info. I did some measuring and we only have a fraction over 7" between the battery boxes so the diff you used is too wide at the mounts. But in looking at the long nose (R200) diff it looks like it could be narrow enough to work. That might bear looking into, do you think you could confirm? Both sets of front mount bosses would need to be narrower than 7" outside to outside and the rear mounts might still be a challenge, but perhaps that could be designed around. At just under an 8" ring diameter I'm still a little skeptical about the strength of the ring and pinion where I am expecting to have significantly more than 400 ft/lbs of available torque with the blower (375 stock N/A) but perhaps the light weight of the car will offset that some. I can appreciate the advantage in leverage of the longer housing, especially as it is only 4 lbs heavier than the short version. Too bad they never made an R215. Anyway, it bears further investigation, especially as the 8.8 expedition unit does not seem to be real common.

Jim

[74ls1tr6]

Jim,

Here is another site for Long nose R200.

Site below.

http://www.datsport.com/R200_diff.html

I'm trying to find you the measurements on the pinoin area.

Calvin

[BlownMGB-V8]

Thanks Calvin. No LN R200's presently on ebay, but two interesting possibilities are the BMW 735i diff and the Mopar 8-3/4" unit. The Beemer may be compact enough and has a nice 3 bolt side attachment on the pinion, the main issue being the depth of the rear cover, which is replaceable. The Mopar is a drop out center section much like the 8 and 9" Ford but appears to have a higher pinion location which would make it more efficient (my main complaint with the Ford diffs) and the housing could be modified to IRS configuration. I don't know how common they are or what vehicles they were used on but I'm guessing they ought to be about as common as dirt. It's a good bit of extra work over finding one that will work without modification but could be worthwhile.

I'm planning on picking up a dead 735 diff on Monday to test fit it to the car and should know more after that.

Jim

[MGBV8]

"The Mopar is a drop out center section much like the 8 and 9" Ford but appears to have a higher pinion location which would make it more efficient (my main complaint with the Ford diffs)"

Mine too. The 8.75 Mopar is a very good unit. I have a friend that has one under a 57 Chevy with a 6-71 blower.

[BlownMGB-V8]

I was a little disappointed with the Beemer diff. Physically it will fit into the space OK, but the ring gear is about a 7-1/2 to 7-3/4" piece. I do not doubt that they are excellent parts, made of the finest materials, but personally I feel that is a bit small for this application. The stock 340 puts out 365 ft/lbs of torque and with the blower it is completely within reason to forsee 450 ft/lbs or more, and I have my doubts that any ring and pinion of less than 8" diameter is going to last long under that kind of stress. IIRC the stock MG ring is not much under 8" itself.

So that leaves me looking at the Mopar, the Nissan, and the Ford 8.8 and possibly Jag (Dana 44). John did have a big selection of half shafts and I may have to go back and look at those again.

The Nissan diff having a 200mm ring is also under 8" at 7.87" or about 7-7/8" but possibly close enough. I consider it just a little marginal for this engine, but still a possiblilty.

The Mopar 8-3/4 still looks quite attractive. Carl, would you happen to know what cars used this axle? It would need some machine work on the housing but it's feasible to do this.

Still watching for the right 8.8 housing, so far no luck. Ford production numbers would sure be handy.

The Jag is still in the running. Recent fitting on the Roadmaster suggests it can meet the installation requirements, and could end up being the best choice still. Needs to be converted to CV half-shafts and have an upper link in order to have a modern suspension, but that may not be all that difficult.

Jim

[MG four six eight]

Jim
Are you planning on modifing the Mopar 8 3/4" for IRS?

Bill

[BlownMGB-V8]

That would have to be considered as an option Bill. I see that these axles were widely used until 1974 and there could still be a large number of them available at reasonable cost. Since they used a formed steel housing (banjo type) the modifications would include cutting off the tubes and welding on bearing housings close to the center and the addition of mounting brackets. All in all not a terrible lot of modification. I do not think an aluminum carrier is or will ever be available for them but I could be wrong. At any rate, it looks feasible. I wonder what stub shafts and bearings/bearing housings are used on the 9" ford IRS center sections?

Jim

[74ls1tr6]

Jim,
More info.

The V6 and i-Force 4.7 V8 Tundra models' rear differential uses a 9.5-inch ring gear, and the i-Force 5.7 models step up to a 10.5-inch ring gear - one of the largest in the segment. All Tundra differentials are made using new machining technology: "face hob" gear cutting for ring and pinion gears yields stronger tooth form and a greater engagement area for increased torque capacity and reduced gear noise.

I have a Tundra and it does ride smooth.

Couldn't you work on the R230 and take off some of the front mounts so it wouldn't be so wide at the mounting area around the pinion, and fab out some king of bracket. The front of the R200 is about the same as the R230. 8 1/2 '' that isn't that far off from 7"
...3/4" of an inch on both sides.

Just a thought.
Calvin

[BlownMGB-V8]

See that was the attraction of the long nose 200 Calvin, no need to modify or cut down the housing. I feel a lot more comfortable modifying a banjo housing than a cast piece if I'm going to have to do that. Any welds are a lot more likely to be sound and tolerate abuse. I also think any ring gear over 9" is going to be serious overkill even with something like the Roadmaster. The ring of the 230 is certainly big enough, but it won't fit the available space without some pretty serious modification and I doubt the average builder is going to want to make those mods. Had they made a 215 or 220 long nose or even a short unit with bolt on side pinion mount that would have been ideal I expect.

Personally I think the goal here is for a shippable kit that does not include heavy items like the pumpkin. A very short banjo housing is reasonable, a cast housing, not so much. One that uses a stock unmodified center section, even better. Unfortunately the universe of housings meeting the requirements is very small at present. I was pretty happy to see the mopar as an alternative. I've learned that it came in 3 basic configurations and perhaps the "A" body unit is the best choice. It is likely to have a light weight housing. The pinion is smaller at 1-3/8" diameter but this should be adequate and the axle bolt circle is 4" where the larger housings use a 4-1/2" BC, but that isn't terribly relevant to this application. Plus with the drop out center section it is very easy to set up the gears and differential. Much, much easier in fact than for instance a Dana.
You cannot view this attachment.
You cannot view this attachment.
This is a "B" body housing. The tapered sections on either side of the housing may cause difficulties but otherwise cutting the tubes and re-welding the bearing carriers would not be much trouble. I don't know which carrier is pictured, but from this perspective it seems to be deeper from the differential bearings to where the case narrows appreciably than it has to be. That could be a problem, so test fitting will be required befort deciding to go that way. Incidentally, I just discovered that an aluminum carrier as well as an aluminum yoke are available. Pricey, and the weight reduction is only maybe 15 lbs, but some folks would be interested I'm sure.
http://www.jimsautoparts.com/mopar_performance_drivetrain.htm

On the other hand, the Jag unit is readily available at fair prices and is already configured for mounts and inboard brakes. That's a significant advantage. There are good reasons why it is the most popular package for IRS.

Jim

[74ls1tr6]

Jim,

Jag IRS on ebay.

http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/Jaguar-Rear-Differential-and-suspenion_W0QQitemZ190195775767QQcmdZViewItem?hash=item190195775767

Calvin

[MGBV8]

"Carl, would you happen to know what cars used this axle?"

Uh, lots & lots of Mopars?  

Best pumpkins are the 742 & 489.

Great summary here:

http://www.usaimports.co.uk/Mopar_Tech_Pages/mopar_rear_ends.htm

[Bill Young]

Jim, the rear from a Corvette was mentioned early in the discussion. I've been doing some checking and this might be one to consider. There's a good selection of ratios available, the ring gear is about 8" and they did hold up behind the big block Vette's of the early 70s so they can stand some torque. There are a couple of rear covers available that eliminate the original spring mount and tighten up the size quite a bit and IIRC the nose isn't too wide to fit between the battery boxes. Or you could have a steel plate cut that would mount on the rear cover bolts and then use a really close fitting sheet steel cover for minimum size. The plate would then be the rear mount. You're still stuck with a U-joint half shaft with the stock stub axles, but that's something that is pretty easy to adapt if you really want to go to CV joints. The conversion of a banjo style housing to an IRS center can be done, the early Heidt type rear ends for the street rodders were based on a modified Ford 9" housing, they now have a custom alloy housing which is a bit narrower.

[MG four six eight]

Jim
When I had the machine shop narrow my 8 3/4". He chucked up the housing in a large lathe, at the center points where the bearings fit. Then built up the housing tubes at the point of cuts, with welding beads. Then machined the welded area true, this "true's up" the outer surface to the bearing surface. From there it was just a matter of cutting the flanges off and matching the outer surface, then weld them up. This process corrects the stamped housing to the center point of the axles.
He cut the stock axles and re-splined them.
Been running that same rear end since 1982 with no problems, although it was probably over-kill for my previous engine combos. I'm glad that I have it for the S/C engine now.
B body drum brakes are 10" x 1 3/4" (same as MGB), but are a dual sevro type. So you get more braking power then with the same sized expanding shoe type MGB brake. There are 13/16" wheel cylinders (same as MGB GT) available to fit the Mopar brakes. I believe they were from a early 70's Dodge 1/2 ton PU.
Quite a few 8 3/4" rears came with a limited slip diff, combined a wide selection of gear ratios, is why I chose to go with the Mopar.


Bill

[BlownMGB-V8]

Good find Calvin, one a little closer would be nice. Maine is a long drive for a local pick-up. Good info on the 8-3/4 Carl. So far I haven't seen anything on housing weights but one from an A body might be a good choice since it would be hard to break even the 741 in an MGB.

Bill, I seem to recall that the early Vette diff is a Dana 44 also (at least some years). The ring diameter on those is 8-1/2" so they are plenty strong enough for the MGB. In fact, that size is probably near perfect for a high powered MG. The Corvette rear could be made to work. I think it would be more difficult to mount than the Jag version.

Jim