Ever since installing my TKO I have been less than happy with drivetrain vibrations in the 75+ mph range. My problem is a combination of a large 4" diameter driveshaft with 1350 u-joints and a very low rear ride height. If I were to raise the back of the car 2.5" inches the u-joint working angle was substantially reduced and the vibes went away... but the car looked awful.

Because of the 1350 u-joints & large driveshaft even with the front yoke 1/8" away from the floorpan the working u-joint working angle was still too excessive. Worse than that, over bumps my driveshaft was taking the paint off the floorpan in 3 different spots... and that was with bumpstop extenders installed to limit bump travel of the rear suspension to just under 2" from normal ride height with a full tank of fuel. Put another person in the car and the rubbing occured more often. Put 3 people in the car and the rear weight on the driveshaft would rub the floor on every revolution. Don't even think about having 4 total occupants!

Because the tranny was too low (even though I couldn't go any higher) the u-joint working angles were at 4.2 degrees... simply too much for vibration-free high RPM operation.

So I finally got off my butt last weekend and decided to make more room. I drew up my current engine / driveshaft / rear end combo in a CAD program and started seeing what I needed to do. In order to reduce the u-joint working angles to 0.8 degrees at ride height would require moving the rear of the transmission up another 1.7". I had already hacked up the tunnel when I first installed the TKO and got it as high as I could without the front yoke rubbing the floor. I also decided to install ZQ8 progressive bump stops on the rear end which allowed the rear end an additional 1.5" of bump travel, giving me about 3.5" of bump travel from my normal ride height-- a much better number for a street car.

So out came the sawzall and plasma cutter. First I made more room for the tranny to go up. Then I made room in all the spots the driveshaft rubbed. Then I took the bumpstop extenders out and jacked the rear end up all the way against the new shorter ZQ8 bump stops and cut out the new spots that rubbed. By the time I had eliminated all the spots that the driveshaft and transmission rubbed there wasn't much left. :p

http://home.comcast.net/~swedish_chef/stuff/ForumStuff/missingfloor.jpg

Here's with the tranny reinstalled at the new height. This is with the car and rear suspension hanging on the lift. At ride height the driveshaft was 1/2" away from the floorpan brace under the backseat... one of the rub spots.

http://home.comcast.net/~swedish_chef/stuff/ForumStuff/trannyinstalled.jpg

The rebuild is still in process. The rear portion started as an Alston's rolled steel tunnel. It's 7 3/8" wide inside which leaves plenty of room for the 4" driveshaft and the new bent tubular braces that I'm using to tie the original floorpan braces back together and also serve as driveshaft loops. There will be a permanent front loop and a removeable rear loop.

Here's current progress. The forward portion of the tunnel has much more squared off corners to fit the square profile of the top of the Tremec TKO. A good indication of the new height is right at the front edge of the backseat. That used to be completely flat... it's now about 3" higher to the underside of the new brace. With the rear end all the way up against the new shorter ZQ8 bumpstops the driveshaft is now 1.5" away from the closest spot of the new tunnel.

http://home.comcast.net/~swedish_chef/stuff/ForumStuff/newtunnel1.jpg

http://home.comcast.net/~swedish_chef/stuff/ForumStuff/newtunnel2.jpg

There is still more welding to do, along with a lot of finish grinding on the underside and then seam sealing, primer, paint. Then I'll have my interior buddy whip me up a new carpeted tunnel cover and modify the backseat to clear. I may end up with 2 Camaro bucket-style seat bottoms.

nice work Troy.

Jody

That should do the trick nice fab work. I think you could go ahead and do a 2 inch body drop and not have any clearance issues (kidding of course). I am interested to see what you figure out for the back seat.

That looks very creative and excellent craftsmanship! If I ever get a project to go pro touring I will consider that.

Are you replacing the floor braces or is that metal a thicker gage? Looks good.

LK

Way to go with not tolerating a problem. I need to modify my crossmember to accept mt TKO's mount right now and I don't yet have the body back on the frame to check for clearance.... any suggestions? If your rear suspension is stock geometry, what angle is your engine/trans sitting at in relation to your frame rails that allower for .08* at ride height? Thanks!

Are you replacing the floor braces or is that metal a thicker gage? Looks good.

LK

The tunnel piece from Alston's and the new sheet up front I used over the tranny were both 16 gauge, so a little heavier than factory. The tubular braces underneath that are being tied back into the factory braces are 7/8 x .125 wall (I think). I cut out and re-used the old factory inner seatbelt hardpoints and they are welded directly to one of the new braces.

The floor is stronger & stiffer than before, I put some weight on the floor and took deflection measurements in 4 points before I started. It deflects 3/16" less now with the same weight at the same spots. The floor actually sprung upwards when I cut the center out, and much to my amazement it sprung up the same amount on both sides.

Way to go with not tolerating a problem. I need to modify my crossmember to accept mt TKO's mount right now and I don't yet have the body back on the frame to check for clearance.... any suggestions? If your rear suspension is stock geometry, what angle is your engine/trans sitting at in relation to your frame rails that allower for .08* at ride height? Thanks!

I will get a frame to engine relation measurement tonight when I get home. I would guess the engine is about 1 degree down in relation to the frame. I did not measure that relationship, I only cared about getting the u-joint working angles to 1 degree. Spicer's recommended u-joint working angle spec is as little as possible for minimum vibration & maximum working speed but 1 degree minimum; any less and the needles will not make a full revolution in operation and this leads to eventual flattening & failure of the needles from lack of rotation. I have plenty of adjustability now so I'm shooting for right at 1 degree with 3/4 of a tank of fuel and me in the drivers seat.

so if im understanding right, in order to get the rear lower, the first thing to hit was the drive shaft? but at ride height, you only had a little clearance btwn the top of the housing and the bump stop on the frame?

so now you put a smaller, shorter bump stop in so that the housing could travel further before hitting the stop plus the option to lower it further. but that made more interference with the drive shaft. in addition, lowering the ride height gave you a worse drive angle, so you pointed the tranny and motor up as much as possible, to the point that the front joint was close to the floor. is this all correct?

im looking to set mine up the same way, but im not sure all the cutting will be necessary. why did your driveshaft hit the floor before the housing hit the stop? bigger drive shaft or something else? what did you do to move the tranny? custom crossmember? how does your exhast fit in to all of this? i know i was rubbing my exhaust on the axle tube when hitting bumps with the car loaded.

now with the amount of clearance you have, how much lower will you be able to get the car? tire clearance issues? any pics of the height before? the pics on you site dont show it with the new wheels and the previously lowered height.

thanks, Tim

Tim, the problem is the combination of the longer Tremec transmission and the lowered suspension. In order to get the proper driveline angles the driveline will hit the floor braces.

Many guys will tell you that amount of cutting is necessary but they have never ridden in a car set-up properly to se the difference. I had the same issue Troy had back a few years ago. At 130MPH it was smooth a newer luxury car after cutting up the floor.

The short answer is yes, if you intend to do any significant lowering you will need to cut the floor up a bit to gain proper driveline angles.

Tim, the problem is the combination of the longer Tremec transmission and the lowered suspension. In order to get the proper driveline angles the driveline will hit the floor braces.

Many guys will tell you that amount of cutting is necessary but they have never ridden in a car set-up properly to se the difference. I had the same issue Troy had back a few years ago. At 130MPH it was smooth a newer luxury car after cutting up the floor.

The short answer is yes, if you intend to do any significant lowering you will need to cut the floor up a bit to gain proper driveline angles.

Correct. It also helps if you don't run a stupid-big driveshaft like I do. Although even with smaller 1310 u-joints and a smaller diameter driveshaft I still could not have achieved reasonable working angles with the rear of the car sitting as low as I have it now.

These cars were never intended to run as low as I now have it set; the factory tunnel simply didn't offer enough clearance. Several years ago when I put the TKO in the rear of the car was 1 3/8 higher than it is not and the vibes weren't too bad and didn't start until about 90 mph. Then 2 years ago I dropped the back of the car another 2" and had severe clearance issues (the driveshaft was literally 1/8" away from the floor at ride height) & the vibrations moved down to start in the 65-70 mph range and were very severe-- so bad that after 20 seconds at 80mph or so my rear view mirror would point itself at the floor! So I hammer-clearanced the rub spots as best as I could, put in Elky / station wagon bumpstop risers that moved the bumpstops up about 3/4", and put rubber isolators on top the springs that raised it back up another 5/8". The rubbing was greatly reduced (except over very large bumps) but it still limited me to no more than 1 passenger. The rear end also hit the raised bumpstops much easier which made the rear of the car very twitchy in corners as it hit the bumpstops much easier. It was not an ideal solution. I needed more bump travel and needed to get the back of the tranny up higher-- I knew I had to hack up the floor to do it and my temporary fixes only postponed the cutting.

The large driveshaft and TKO made things worse. As I mentioned earlier if I raise the back of the car about 3" then all the problems go away as the engine & tranny have a much "straighter" shot at the rear end and the working angles drop down to about 1.5 degrees. But raising the car that much looks ugly. :p

I may drop the car another 1/2" over where it sits now after all this is done, but if I start rubbing headers & exhaust when leaving my driveway (it has a healthy rise to the street) then I'll raise it back up again. It's plenty low where it sits now but I wouldn't mind a little lower. :)

The other good thing about raising the back of the tranny another 1.7" is the flange on my McLeod scattershield is now even with the front crossmember rather than hanging quite a bit lower. I was always worried about catching that on something at speed, it's a vertical "wall" that could cause a LOT of damage if it got snagged on anything.

so besides the bump stop and the floor, what else is keeping the rear end up in the air? i would think the wheel wells would be next, but is there anything esle? cutting the floor is no problem if it will make it drive smooth and give me the look im after. but if i have to cut the floor, tub, move this, move that etc......

so if im thinking about this right, when perfect the tranny points down one degree more than the shaft, and the pinion points up one more degree than the shaft. right? your problem is your tranny is pointing down x degrees more than your shaft and that is too much. so if you could lift your tranny without cutting your floor, you would be ok. but you cant. what is your "X" amount?

how does raising the tranny 2" affect the motor mounts? is there that much free play? did you build a custom trans mount?

any pics of the underside of the car after the tunnel mods?

thanks again, Tim

The wheel wells are not much of an issue as long as you stay with a 275/40 on a 9.5 wheel or narrower. 285/40-315/35 on an 11" wheel will be very tight and has to be perfectly centered. My 68 had a 315 on an 11" wheel and sat low enough to cover the top of the tire completely. It rubbed on any driveway or speed bump and during hard cornering even with a PHB in place.

As far as how much needs to be cut...it will vary on every car and every application. What ride height, what trans, what engine, what driveshaft, how much movement has the body had on the chassis, what condition are the body mounts in, where is the engine sitting in the chassis, which transmission mounts and cross member are you using, etc... You just need to get in there and start mocking things up to know, there is no answer for your question.

Moving the transmission a few degrees here or there has little effect on the engine mounts. You can move the tail shaft a bunch before the engine sees any substantial movement.

Gokou what driveshaft are you useing? I picked up a ZR2 (highrider S-10) rear shaft and it looks like its going to be perfect- 52" c-to-c, 4" dia aluminum.... only problem is that it uses the metric 3R U-joints so I have to use a conversion joint at each end to get me back to my 1330's. The 4" diameter has me concerned about fit to the tunnel which is why this thread is so interesting to me.

If you can, please place an angle finder on your frame as well as on the top of your trans and report the differance. Greatly appreciated! -Scott

I'm running a 4" aluminum driveshaft with 1350 u-joints from Inland Empire. Front yoke is a Spicer HD Forged and the rear is a Moser billet.

I would not recommend conversion u-joints, the input from all the driveshaft companies is that they are actually weaker than a u-joint made of just their small half.

I'll get frame to engine angle measurements this weekend when I finish the job. I haven't had much time after work this week.

The wheel wells are not much of an issue as long as you stay with a 275/40 on a 9.5 wheel or narrower. 285/40-315/35 on an 11" wheel will be very tight and has to be perfectly centered. My 68 had a 315 on an 11" wheel and sat low enough to cover the top of the tire completely. It rubbed on any driveway or speed bump and during hard cornering even with a PHB in place.

My tires don't rub the body in the back, but the closest object is my tailpipes that are about 1/2" away from the tire at one spot. There is a very faint black stripe on the tailpipes from the tires on the inside where it lightly rubs in hard cornering.

I could not fit 315's on the back of my car as low as it is with my 11" wheels. The tires don't rub the fender lip but rather rubbed the reinforcement on the inner wheelhouse about 1" up front the lip; the reinforced area of the inner wheelhouse actually sticks into the wheelwell further than the lip. At the current ride height the reinforced area hit right at the area of maximum sidewall buldge with the 315's. My 17" wheels sit about 1" below the fender lip right now.

I would have "massaged" the inner wheelhouse and trimmed the lip but I know there is some filler on the passenger side right at the lip from where my car drove into a house (previous owner) so I did not want to massage it and risk breaking it off. I'll square off the outer wheelhouse & cut the lip when I do the bodywork one of these days. For now the 285/40's fit and look just fine on the 11" wheels and I like how stiff the sidewalls are in cornering.

You answered my next question and i didnt even have to ask. i was planning on doing a cut and stretch on the rear inner fenders to make a little more room, but i wasnt sure that was necessary. now it sounds like im going to have to do it.

tremec will be in the mail as soon as i get my old motor sold. then i just have to wait for GM to deal with their manufacturing issues with the LSX block. then the shaft has to go back to denny's to be shortened. Its going to be this summer before i can get all the pieces together, so ill just have to wait and see what needs to be done.

Lets see some pics of the bottom when you get back to it this weekend. im interested to see what your hoops look like.

Thanks, Tmi

I would love to see the underfloor bracing.... I may have to do something similar on my 67... its lowered and I will have an LSx/T56 swap.... Did you fab the trans tunnel or is it a production piece? I know you said the back portion was an Alston's rolled steel tunnel. . .
Thanks

I fabbed the front portion from a sheet of 16 gauge. Alston offered a 2-piece tranny cover but it is curved. Because of squared off profile of the top of the TKO the curved Alston's piece would have had to be very high to clear the corners of the tranny. So instead I plasma cut a sheet then stuck it in a break and put two bends in it leaving plenty of width up top to match the profile of the tranny. That left plenty of room all around the trans without being excessively high inside the car. To match the curved contour of the floor in the front I put 4 relief cuts in the very front and then formed it over the curved nose of an anvil until it matched what little was left of the circular top of the factory transmission hump, then welded up and ground where the relief cuts were. I really wanted to try rolling my own tunnel on my friend's new english wheel but I quickly found my skills were lacking. :p

Similar process for the main DS tunnel. The floor was cut to width (7.25") to fit the Alston's tunnel. I set the height of the new Alston piece via blocks off the driveshaft with the rear suspension compressed (I left about 2.5" from the top of the DS to the new braces for plenty of room) and then it was tacked to the factory floor in about 20 spots or so. Then I went underneath and used the plasma to cut what was sticking down from the Alston piece; I used the factory floor as a torch guide. That left about a 5/8" flange sticking down from the Alston piece. I sprayed weld-through primer on it then had someone hold a dolly in the car while the flange was hammered over to match the factory floorpan, then it was welded too.

Because of the large vertical walls of the new tunnel the floor is substantially stiffer compared to stock. It was stiffer than the factory floor even before adding the tubular braces underneath.

Anyways, I wrapped up the bottom side of the car today and got it etch primed, painted, and back together. I still need to finish the inside (prime, paint, dynamat, jute.)

With the way things are set now with the rear springs out and the rear of the car being lifted by only the bumpstops the nose of the carrier is only about .5" away from the pinion snubber on the frame (I had to cut that shorter too) and there are no longer any clearance issues.

I have not driven it yet, it was raining today and I still need to get some wiring back together inside temporarily. Right now the u-joint working angles are down to 0.6 degrees, which actually isn't enough per Spicer's spec. I need to go drive the car over a friend's pit so I can adjust it-- much easier than on my back with the rear axle supported by jackstands.

Because it was asked, right now it looks like the engine & tranny is pointing 2.5 degrees down in relation to the frame but I need to raise it a bit more to increase the u-joint angles to about 1 degree.

Still plenty more to do on the interior side of things, going to try and take care of that over the next week or two. I also have ATS spindles, SPC uppers, and C6 brakes inbound to change at the same time.

Pics...

http://home.comcast.net/~swedish_chef/stuff/ForumStuff/primed.jpg
http://home.comcast.net/~swedish_chef/stuff/ForumStuff/primed2.jpg

Here's some pics with the rear suspension at full compression... you can see how close the nose of the 12 bolt is to the snubber spot on the frame. Even with the rear suspension compressed this far the top of the driveshaft is still 2.5" away from the tightest spot in the new tunnel. I probably could have left it with less clearance than that, but after 2 years of occasional rubbing I'd rather have too much clearance.

http://home.comcast.net/~swedish_chef/stuff/ForumStuff/bumpstop.jpg
http://home.comcast.net/~swedish_chef/stuff/ForumStuff/snubber.jpg

thanks for those pics. so you bent the new tunnel piece over the existing floor, right? that seems much easier than trying to profile the new tunnel to the floor.

but, im thinking about profiling it and tacking it in place, then cutting the old tunnel out from below. im just worried about the floor moving if i hack out the braces. id have to figure out the exact height needed along with the exact center.

Tim

Looks good Troy.......I cant believe you cut that sucker up!

Similar process for the main DS tunnel. The floor was cut to width (7.25") to fit the Alston's tunnel.

Where did you get the DS tunnel? Do you have a PN and a cost?
Thanks

Where did you get the DS tunnel? Do you have a PN and a cost?
Thanks

Chris Alston's Chassisworks... p/n #6626, $50

All done and back from the upholstery shop.

The lower seat frame had to be modified to fit the tunnel. I also had them recover the rear seat with a roll of material I got from Recaro to match the front seats.

I used a combination of a Lokar billet trim ring and a Hurst accordion upper boot; I thought it looked better than the stitched vinyl boot that came with the trim ring. The Hurst boot alone didn't seal well enough around the shift handle and let a little road noise in-- so I fabbed a lower boot which took care of that. Nice and quiet now.

http://home.comcast.net/~swedish_chef/stuff/ForumStuff/newcarpet1.jpg
http://home.comcast.net/~swedish_chef/stuff/ForumStuff/newcarpet2.jpg
http://home.comcast.net/~swedish_chef/stuff/ForumStuff/newcarpet3.jpg

Looks real good. :yes:

Awesome job!! :thumbsup:

Looks great. No console rocks!

Andrew

Looks great. No console rocks!

Andrew

I agree... except when you have no glove compartment because the vintage air box takes most of the room and on top of that you also put all your EFI stuff back there. :p

I need to attach a pouch or something to the glove compartment door to keep my registration & insurance papers there.

I need to attach a pouch or something to the glove compartment door to keep my registration & insurance papers there.
A backpack in the rear footwell works great for this. ;)

I need to attach a pouch or something to the glove compartment door to keep my registration & insurance papers there.

Why? Cops won't catch you anyway :D No use for those two items in your car. lol.

Nice job Troy. Real nice.

Troy,

What were you final driveline angles after the tunnel mod?

Andrew

i must ask, what did you use for rear suspension components?

im planning on doing suspension in the winter, and was thinking of going with the 650/150 speedway springs, with their adjusters and the revalved bilstein shocks. i have jegs lift bars, and adjustable uppers in the rear now, and will use them when i put the springs and shocks in. im unsure of how far this will drop the car, and i hope i would not run into the same problem. stock ds will be used.


thanks.


aaron

Troy,

What were you final driveline angles after the tunnel mod?

Andrew

With the car at ride height:

Engine 1.4 down
Driveshaft 0.9 down
Pinion 1.1 up

Front working angle is 0.5, rear working angle is 0.2 nominal not loaded, but probably about 0.5 degrees under load (axle winds up slightly) because after some trial and error that's where things were the smoothest.


i must ask, what did you use for rear suspension components?

im planning on doing suspension in the winter, and was thinking of going with the 650/150 speedway springs, with their adjusters and the revalved bilstein shocks. i have jegs lift bars, and adjustable uppers in the rear now, and will use them when i put the springs and shocks in. im unsure of how far this will drop the car, and i hope i would not run into the same problem. stock ds will be used.

Global West TBC-4 lowers, Edelbrock uppers with stock rubber bushings in the rear end housing. Rear springs are 200#/in 11" single pigtails.

The spring combo looks good and the Hotchkis Bilsteins should work well with them.

With the car at ride height:

Engine 1.4 down
Driveshaft 0.9 down
Pinion 1.1 up

Front working angle is 0.5, rear working angle is 0.2 nominal not loaded, but probably about 0.5 degrees under load (axle winds up slightly) because after some trial and error that's where things were the smoothest.




Global West TBC-4 lowers, Edelbrock uppers with stock rubber bushings in the rear end housing. Rear springs are 200#/in 11" single pigtails.

The spring combo looks good and the Hotchkis Bilsteins should work well with them.

Troy,

I just want to confirm that we are on the same page.

Just so we are getting it right.

Your engine is 1.4* like this \
Driveshaft .9* like this \
Pinion is 1.1* like /

Is that correct?

andrew - the pinion should also be like \ with the front pointing up towards the motor.


gokou - is there a .2 difference or a 2* difference? .9 to get back to 0 and then an additional 1.1 to get to where it sits?

andrew - the pinion should also be like with the front pointing up towards the motor.


WidowMaker,

I always thought so too, but according to this:

http://www.vibratesoftware.com/html_help/html/Diagnosis/Reference/Powertrain_Angle_Configurations.htm

The UP, UP, Down configuration is also acceptable.

Andrew

that is an interesting site. ive never heard of that configuration. i guess it would work good if your pinion sat higher than your tranny and the tranny was pointing down at the back.

what are you guys using to measure the angles? those cheap angle finders just arent accurate enough in my opinion. im thinking about getting a digital protractor, but those are only accurate to +/- .3*. that means it could be off .6* which is kind of huge when your talking 1* angles.

tim

that is an interesting site. ive never heard of that configuration. i guess it would work good if your pinion sat higher than your tranny and the tranny was pointing down at the back.

what are you guys using to measure the angles? those cheap angle finders just arent accurate enough in my opinion. im thinking about getting a digital protractor, but those are only accurate to +/- .3*. that means it could be off .6* which is kind of huge when your talking 1* angles.

tim

Tim,

That is exactly how my configuration is. My pinion is higher than the trans. This happens a lot when you lover these cars.

I am using a digital angle finder. I didn't realize they are +/-.3*. Oh well. They are better than the analog ones. The one shown on the website seems really nice. I suppose it is only accurate to .25*.

Andrew

Troy,

It turned out very nice. I was wondering the amount of hours for the fab time not including the trans removal, carpet etc. I ask because I am not a welder and kinda would like to get a feel for it before I talk to a local fab guy. One more question if I may: My body is currently off so I think it would be best to bolt to the frame prior to cutting. Your thoughts on that? I won't be running a big DS as you and don't know where everything is going to land, but after talking with AndrewB70 Today he convinced me I should consider this while the car is torn down as I will likely have same problems with my 69 Chevelle with a TKO

Thanks,
Tom

tom - without a doubt, you must fit the body prior to cutting. you could try and cut without knowing where to cut, but its going to lead to headaches. when i test fit everything yesterday, the tranny hit in areas i didnt think it would. you can look at both pieces and try to guess, but save yourself the trouble. i would go as far as cutting what was needed and then taking it all to the fab guy. do you have a welder?

gokou - i thought those joints needed at least 1*? also, when you say pointing down, is that at the front or rear? i always thought about it at the rear, but i just want to make sure,


Tim

gokou- in an earlier post you said that you needed to raise the rear of the tranny to increase the working angles. can you explain? it seems to me, if you dropped the rear of the tranny, this would increase your angle btwn the motor an driveshaft.

1.4 motor / .9 ds would become
2.0 motor / .3 ds or thereabouts

I initially had to raise the tranny to decrease working angle, it was previously at 4.2 degrees front and rear. 1 degree minimum is the recommended spec for proper needle lubrication. While my angles are at 0.5 degree with the car unloaded, adding passenger weight and a bit of rear end "wind up" under torque increases the working angles.

You are correct in that if I were to slightly lower the transmission from the current new configuration that the working angles would increase.

I was wondering the amount of hours for the fab time not including the trans removal, carpet etc. I ask because I am not a welder and kinda would like to get a feel for it before I talk to a local fab guy. One more question if I may: My body is currently off so I think it would be best to bolt to the frame prior to cutting. Your thoughts on that? I won't be running a big DS as you and don't know where everything is going to land, but after talking with AndrewB70 Today he convinced me I should consider this while the car is torn down as I will likely have same problems with my 69 Chevelle with a TKO

Thanks,
Tom

Actually, I am prepared to answer this. I stripped the interior at my house and then trailered the car to my friend's fab shop. While it was there we kept a timecard just for tracking and just in cutting / bending / fabbing / welding hours the timecard came to 40 hours. That doesn't include interior reassembly, the wiring rework I had to do (I had 2 large terminal blocks in the console I had to relocate), seat & carpet mods, etc.

As far as bolting the body to the frame before you do this, I would recommend it. My floor did spring a little bit when I cut the center out. I used a straightedge and check the floorpan brace to frame heights prior to cutting and we put them back where they needed to be before tacking the new pieces in.

is the 1.4 in relation to the frame?

is the 1.4 in relation to the frame?

No, in relation to gravity. I'll have to remeasure to get engine angle relative to the frame.

gokou - thanks, i would appreciate that. i know every cars different, but it gets me in the ball park.

Tim

Actually, I am prepared to answer this. I stripped the interior at my house and then trailered the car to my friend's fab shop. While it was there we kept a timecard just for tracking and just in cutting / bending / fabbing / welding hours the timecard came to 40 hours. That doesn't include interior reassembly, the wiring rework I had to do (I had 2 large terminal blocks in the console I had to relocate), seat & carpet mods, etc.

As far as bolting the body to the frame before you do this, I would recommend it. My floor did spring a little bit when I cut the center out. I used a straightedge and check the floorpan brace to frame heights prior to cutting and we put them back where they needed to be before tacking the new pieces in.

Thank you for reply.
Tom

is the 1.4 in relation to the frame?

The relationship to the frame is not very critical.

Andrew

andrew - yeah that is a good point for someone reading this. the driveline angles have nothing at all to do with their relationship to the frame. for me though, knowing his in relation to the frame will help me get mine closer with a little less work.

tim

andrew - yeah that is a good point for someone reading this. the driveline angles have nothing at all to do with their relationship to the frame. for me though, knowing his in relation to the frame will help me get mine closer with a little less work.

tim

Tim,

If your car is all taken apart, I would shoot for having the crank be parallel to the frame.

Andrew

any update? is there any vibration? right now mines set at

trans 3* up
ds 2* up
pinion 1* up

the pinion and trans arent equal angles, but they are the same working angle. not sure if this is going to work.