Dick Axtell
|
 posted on 18/8/02 at 02:49 PM |
|
|
Xflow Height in Chassis
Calling all Xflow-ers,
According to received info, the recommended Xflow height in chassis, is with crankshaft centre-line 120mm above lower chassis rail. This still looks
too high, although there is the 1" sump projection below the chassis.
So what was the installation height for other xflow users (relative to top of lower chassis rail)?
Dick Axtell
Work-in-Progress: Changed to Zetec + T9. Still trying!!
|
|
|
|
|
David Jenkins
|
| posted on 18/8/02 at 07:37 PM |
|
|
My West field construction manual has the centre of the crank 120mm above the BOTTOM of the lower chassis rail.
From which point are you measuring?
regards,
David
|
|
|
Dick Axtell
|
 posted on 19/8/02 at 07:16 AM |
|
|
Hi DJ,
Thanks for your input.
I measured from the top face of the bottom chassis rail (using a square) to the pulley/crankshaft centre. Your info suggests that I'll have to make
up some more brkts (I bought mine from Lluego), to lower the engine 25mm.
Dick
|
|
|
David Jenkins
|
| posted on 19/8/02 at 07:38 AM |
|
|
Hi Dick,
Why don't you do it the book way? That is, work out how much you want the sump to stick out below the car, pack the chassis up with blocks, and see
where the engine ends up. (Mind you, it'll probably be that 120mm again!)
Also, were you aware that the engine crank c/l needs to be offset from the centre-line of the chassis? Can't remember the exact figure offhand, but
I can look it up. (What the hell, I can scan the drawing in the manual and post it, if you want!)
happy building,
David
|
|
|
David Jenkins
|
| posted on 19/8/02 at 07:41 AM |
|
|
Oops, forgot...
I've based my engine setup entirely on the West field manual - they recommend roughly 6" from road to the bottom of the chassis, I wanted 4"
clearance, so the sump sticks out 2" below the chassis.
This is probably the reason why my engine rides 25mm lower than yours!
David
|
|
|
wicket
|
 posted on 19/8/02 at 12:37 PM |
|
|
David
What is the reasoning behind the crank c/l to chassis offset? When this came up recently in another posting I checked with Luego, the buider of my
chassis, and they say there is no reason for an offset.
Eric
|
|
|
Dick Axtell
|
| posted on 19/8/02 at 02:12 PM |
|
|
DJ & Wicket,
The reason for the 19mm offset (to the nearside) is to provide space to unscrew the oil filter (with the engine at MY height). For DJ's installation,
I'd guess that without that offset, the oil filter would foul the chassis.
DJ - Have found that xflow sketch. That 120mm dimension is from BOTTOM surface of the lower chassis rail. Which means new brkts after all!
Thanks for the feedback,
Dick
|
|
|
davef
|
| posted on 21/8/02 at 10:25 AM |
|
|
hi dick, on my chassis i used an oil filter from a 1600cc front wheel drive escort motor same dia but shorter, so it can be positioned over the
chassis member no problem, although my engine is positioned slightly to the near side but still parallel with the chassis ctr line, this to
accommodate the prop shaft angle as i am using the cortina axle, and the input shaft flange on the pinion is set further over to the side than the
escort, if it was central the shaft would foul the inside of the tunnel. cheers davef.
|
|
|
David Jenkins
|
| posted on 27/8/02 at 07:24 AM |
|
|
Davef,
That's an interesting tip - although my oil filter clears the chassis, I would have to lift the engine an inch or two to unscrew it!
Can you give more info? Car model, engine type, part number, etc. would be really useful.
cheers,
David
|
|
|
davef
|
 posted on 27/8/02 at 01:34 PM |
|
|
Hi David there are two makes that you can use one is Fram TH2964 or GUD Z85 the dia is 76mm length is 89mm both fit the xflow motor. cheers davef.
|
|
|
