Mike's TR7 Ford repower project

[Addicted]

Updated

[mgb260]

Mike, How is there room for the oil pump? I remember a post a while back about a special front cover with gerotor crank driven oil pump like later Buick/Rover.  Found it:    http://www.racemate.com/

[Addicted]

There isn't.  It's going in the garbage.  Oh well, I'll chalk it up to a good attempt.

I've been talking to mustang guys about doing that modification for quite a while, and no one mentioned anything about an oil pump.  I should have pulled the old pan before I spent the time on the new one.  If that's the worst mistake I make, I'll be happy.  

See, this is why I need people to tell me I'm on the wrong track.  LOL.  

Thanks.

[mgb260]

I'd keep the pan and use the front oil pump cover if you can afford it. On your project page you show a sleeve for outer wheel bearing. You maybe able to use a smaller outer bearing and sleeve the hub(interference fit .002) for the smaller race, much better way.

[Addicted]

I can't find info on how to actually buy that front oil pump system.  I'm guessing it's quite pricey.

[Addicted]

Hey MGB260, what's better about sleeving the hub to use a smaller bearing?

[mgb260]

The inner bearing race is very hard and precise to run directly on the spindle. The outer angled race is very hard and precise to run on the outer bearing race. By sleeveing the hub which is cast iron (trailer hub) the relationship between the rotating parts is as designed. Your spacer would heat up and spin and destroy itself in no time. If you used chrome moly, interference fit, instead of mild steel  for the spacer it may work. You may be able to find a bearing that has the smaller inner hole/larger outside race.  I've done this sort of thing for a while. I really like your caliper adapter.

[glenzo654]

here are some pics of the new subframe I made using 1.5 square tubing mainly.
it bolts to the stock mounting points and uses the 1.5 tube for the lower link mounting point.
the front sway bar mounting point is identical to stock .
the steering rack is approx. 1 inch lower and slightly forward of stock doesn't appear to be a problem.
it clears the front hump of the stock mustang oil pan though not by much it is just behind it.
I made the trans. mount first using the stock ford mount the shifter is perfect in the existing hole.i have the car sitting on the new setup right now waiting for a set of block hugger ford headers to arrive to look at the next hurdle.
good luck
glenn

[Addicted]

Thanks Glenn.  I think I have things lined up pretty well with the stock cross member and the stock ford oil pan.  I moved my engine about 1/2"  further forward, and all seems good now.

[Dan Jones]

Sounds like it's too late but early Broncos used a rear sump pan.  This Bronco pan from Milodon has more space between the sumps than the typical fox body double sump oil pan.

 http://www.tomsbroncoparts.com/product/milodon-major-oil-pan-kit-oil-pan-pick-up-tube-dip-sticktube-289-or-302-new

Dan Jones

[Addicted]

Dan, thanks for the suggestion, but every Milodon and Moroso pan I've looked at has too deep of a rear sump.  The Fox pan is 7.5" deep including the drain plug, and that Milodon pan is 10" deep.  It would be way to close to the ground.  

I made 80% of the motor mount supports off my subframe / k-member yesterday, and it's looking good.  I wish I hadn't scrapped out the k-members from the parts cars I've had over the years.  

The next question will be, how many stock TR7 drivetrains to keep.  I have a complete 4 speed and now the compelete 5 speed (engine, transmission, driveshaft, rear end).  I'll probably never use either of them again, but that's what I said about the k-members that I wish I had back.  If I had space, I'd keep everything.  That's just not a practical option.

[Addicted]

I've been plugging along as time and family commitments have allowed.  

I'm close to being ready to bolt the engine into place.  Here are some pictures of the k-member.  The driver's side setup is a bit convoluted to clear the steering, but it's plenty strong and looks decent.  

The driver's side motor mount was touching the header, and the passenger side was too close for comfort, so I trimmed the corners off and made some stainless heat shields to protect the rubber.  

I had this all set up to use the stock mustang oil pan, but it was pretty tight.  I decided to give myself a little more clearance between the pan and the steering rack with a tweak to the pan.  This time, my pan modification actually fits on the engine!  
I have the engine, clutch, and transmission assembled together now, and I weighed it all last night.  538lbs.  Missing from that weight is an air cleaner, water tubes (to feed the heater core), wiring, alternator, pulleys, and belt.  

I'm working on cleaning up the engine bay before final engine installation.  

Once I get my garage cleared out a bit, I'll weigh the stock TR7 assembly for comparison.

[BlownMGB-V8]

Mike, your photos aren't coming through. Probably they are larger than the 600Kb limit and need to be resized. Curtis has guidelines for doing that on a thread posted here somewhere.

Jim

[Addicted]

Yeah, the preview wan't working for me, and after I posted the message I saw that the pictures were all goofed up.  They should be fixed now.  I have them in photobucket.

[glenzo654]

mike
I am curious as to how high your engine is going to be in the car with that setup
I have 5.5 inches of ground clearance to the drain plug on the oilpan
if you look at the front of my engine and draw a level line with the bottom of the block where the oil pan bolts to over to the frame rail
the mounting point is 1.5 inches lower where the stock k frame would bolt to
in your picture with the oil filter it appears that you are going to have 4+ inches to the same point
that is why I abandoned the idea of the mounts on the k frame and went to the frame rails instead with removable mounts
the actual mounts are stock 1990 bronco
if someone can tell me how to resize pictures for this post I will put them up
glenn

[Addicted]

I'm not 100% set on height yet.  I may need 1/2" to 3/4" spacers to drop the k member down.  That will depend on what I need for air cleaner clearance.  The rear drain plug on the pan is about flush with the k member.  I have a short intake manifold (edelbrock performer).  It's nothing high performance, but it will give the best fit.  I had it sitting in the engine bay with about 3" clearance from the air cleaner mouting flange to the hood.  A regular 14" air cleaner with a drop base just barely fit under the slope of the hood.  I think I'm going to end up with a Spectre plenum style air filter setup.  I have the old TR7 hood without the extra little bump in the middle, and I don't want to modify it.  

I should end up with 5 to 5.5 pan and k member clearance.

[IaTR6]

Mike, Who's headers are you using? I have been considering Sanderson block hugger FF2 for a more rearward exit.
Thanks,
Dennis

[Addicted]

They're Speedway block huggers.

[Addicted]

Took a look at those Sanders headers, and I don't think they would work for me.  They must go outboard of the starter, which woud hit my "framerail" (unibody, of course).  There's a small window where I could have the headers come out.  I figured I needed something that came forward a bit on the passenger side, and headed down in front of the starter.  Then the pipe needs to route under the starter.  I didn't find any long tube headers that went under the starter (spent many many hours looking).  

Those Speedway block huggers are tight to the mounts and tight to the starter, but they point where I want them.  I can just barely slip the mini starter in and out with the header in place.

[Addicted]

Here's the header and starter fit.  It's tight.  

I figured I couldn't use headers that headed much outboard of the starter, which meant they needed to route somewhat under the starter.

[IaTR6]

Mike,
Thanks very much for the detailed explanation. Those who may be contemplating a project like this, and I, appreciate it!
Dennis

[Addicted]

I weighed the TR7 engine assembly, and it was 471 without fluids and without the alternator (comparable parts to what was on the 302 when I weighed it).  I'm gaining about 70lbs with the 302, which isn't too bad in my mind.  A set of aluminum heads would even it up pretty well.

[Addicted]

I'm continuing to make some progress on my project.  I made a new engine wiring harness.  I used all the correct colors from the Triumph wiring diagram, which Triumph didn't even do.  Eliminated some things, and added some things.  I still haven't decided whether I'm mounting my MSD 6AL in the engine bay or inside the car, but either way, I have wiring planned out.  

I replaced the entire the brake system except for the Triumph brake pedal with new stuff.  Hopefully it all works well together.  

With that done, I was ready to put the engine and transmission in.  It's all bolted up now and I'm quite happy with it.  

I ended up with 3/4" spacers for the front cross member to achieve a little hood clearnace to the air intake and to the distributor.  

This past weekend, I made the transmission mount and finished my steering linkage.  I also finished the front strut upgrades.  

Last night, I drug home another 8.8 rear end.  This one is rust free, which is hard to find around here.  I have a couple rusty ones, but I don't want to use them for this project.

[Addicted]

sorry, pics gone from photobucket

[Addicted]

Oh, I also ended up removing the new water pump I had installed.  I decided I need the shorter ford racing pump.  

Any tips on what size or type of radiator to buy?  I've been looking at 26x19 from Summit or Speedway, which would be a very tight squeeze.  I'd prefer to be 17"or 18" tall, but they are less common.  My "frame" rails are 26 1/4, so I'm targetting something 25 to 26 wide.