Well, obviously it'll be in the engine bay (before the smart alecs start on me )

I want to get the engine as far back as possible in the chassis for better weight distribution. It's a 2ltr vauxhall which probably weighs nearly as much as i do with gearbox and gubbins attached.

I have widened my transmision tunnel so the engine block is only about 2 inches from the bulkhead, only problem is I didn't want to reduce the driver footwell for obvious reasons (ie pedal space!!) so although I've gained a little on the drivers side I have gained a lot more on the passenger side. This leads to the engine being slightly skewed in the chassis towards the front left corner.

I think this will be pretty negligable as the slight offset in weight to the passenger side will be offset by the weight of the driver (when driver only in car) and results in the engine being able to be mounted much further back in the chassis as mentioned above.

Just thought I'd post it up to see if anyone has any opinions either way,whether this is a good idea or will cause any problems I've so far missed.

Cheers all,

Ned.

I think you will cause problems with the prop if you don't have a sliding joint in it. The uj's should run parallel to each other even if they are offset. It would be better to move the engine over but keep it straight in the chassis. The rear of the type N gearbox does allow some in out movement but it will wear the rear seal out quickly if out of line.

The U/J s shouldnt be a problem Ive used them in lots of industrial aplications where they are not parrallel to each other, the only stipulation is that you musnt go beyond the limiting angle with each joint and you MUST NOT run perfectly straight, aparently this distroys then faster than going over the design angle

Gordon

quote:

---

(before the smart alecs start on me )

It's a 2ltr vauxhall which probably weighs nearly as much as i do with gearbox and gubbins attached.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Mk-Ninja
The U/J s shouldnt be a problem Ive used them in lots of industrial aplications where they are not parrallel to each other, the only stipulation is that you musnt go beyond the limiting angle with each joint and you MUST NOT run perfectly straight, aparently this distroys then faster than going over the design angle

Gordon

---

Interesting, would you care to explain how/why running UJs perfectly straight wrecks them?

Ill dig some info out, I must admit I was supprised when I was first told. We have had to mount some gearboxes on plinths or scew them to the side to give the minimum advised angle which from memory is about 2deg. Like I said Ill dig out what I can find and post it later.

Gordon

Look up 'brinelling' in Google.

When the U/Js are straight the bearings chatter around in their races, damaging the running surfaces. When they are slightly off-true (about 3 degrees is ideal, I believe) the bearings are forced to run properly.

Ideally, each end should be parallel but offset slightly, so the shaft itself runs at about 3 degrees between them.

rgds,

David

[Edited on 23/6/04 by David Jenkins]

Thanks for the info Gordon. I guess what people have to remember is that even if their engine gearbox is straight in the chassis, the line between gearbox output and dif may well be up/down, so I wouldn't worry too much garage19!

I think the angle I'm looking at will be 3 degrees or less, which I'm sure should be well within the sierra props tolerances...?!

thanks all,

Ned.

Nope, still worrying. made sure the centres were perfect height wise as well!

DOH!

remember your engine will move around a bit on it's rubber mounts (now, don't tell me you solidly mounted the enigne?!)

Ned.

[Edited on 23/6/04 by ned]

Thanks David. Saved me a job, since I cant find by U/J book. But yes we were always advised on 2 degrees as the absolute minimum.

Ned, I solidly mounted the....... only joking!

Ok then you maths boys. Use some trig and tell me roughly how out of line i need to be to create a 3 degree angle over the legnth of a propshaft, say... 600mm long?

About 30mm