Engine Lowering?
#1
Drifting
Thread Starter
Engine Lowering?
With hood clearance being a recurring C3 concern (unless you like L88 Hoods), I was wondering if anyone has looked into lowering the engine in their engine compartment. I watched Troy Trepanier do this on the eBay Mustang and it didn't seem too bad. Aside from a little creative engineering on the engine mounts and some ground clearance concerns, it seems to me that lowering an inch wouldn't be too hard and would open up intake manifold options pretty extensively and keep a stealthy persona.
Has anyone tried this?
Has anyone tried this?
#2
Melting Slicks
Member Since: Aug 2004
Location: Beverly Massachusetts
Posts: 2,063
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
what about ground clearance on the oil pan and clearance for the crossmember under the oil pan? there are more options for hoods besides the L88 which i dont like IMHO but that is just me and that is why i went wiith a high rise hood but like i always say to each his own.
#3
Drifting
Thread Starter
Its all a matter of preference. I don't particularly like the L88 or aftermarket hoods. Too batmobile for me. I like a stock, sleeper look. On a SB car I'd consider a BB hood, but that doesn't buy too much and it still raises eyebrows.
Obviously, whatever you do to lower the engine you need to account for with a low-profile oil pan and pickup. But that's not visible when you lift the hood.
Obviously, whatever you do to lower the engine you need to account for with a low-profile oil pan and pickup. But that's not visible when you lift the hood.
#4
Besides lowering the center of gravity your engine wouldn't stick out so high. Sounds like a win/win situation. I've thought about this before, and when I go BB I'll look into it. Surprised no one has chimed in yet.
#6
Team Owner
Member Since: Sep 2001
Location: Middletown Connecticut
Posts: 30,958
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Cruise-In IV Veteran
it's a lot harder then you think..
everything behind the engine will have to be modified to compensate for the different angle
everything behind the engine will have to be modified to compensate for the different angle
#8
Melting Slicks
I've brought this up before here. I think it's a great idea, but it would be a big job. In addition to lowering it, you could also move it to the right a little for weight distribution. May also be able to move it back more too.
#10
Melting Slicks
No - passenger side. This would compesate for the drivers weight to "ballance" the car better.
Check out this link:
http://www.442.com/articles/articles.html
Click on "other articles" at top, then click on "72 Ols Banshee desert racer" at bottom of page. This was James Garrners other race car.
The engine was set back 27" & right next to driver for better flying.
Cool piece of Olds history.
Check out this link:
http://www.442.com/articles/articles.html
Click on "other articles" at top, then click on "72 Ols Banshee desert racer" at bottom of page. This was James Garrners other race car.
The engine was set back 27" & right next to driver for better flying.
Cool piece of Olds history.
Last edited by 71coupe; 09-21-2004 at 07:54 PM.
#13
Drifting
Thread Starter
I can see the crossmember being a challenge. The damper tucks in there pretty close. I don't think I'd sweat the driveshaft geometry too much. Lowering the engine would cause rotation about the rear trans mount, which is only about 4 inches from the rear yoke. An inch down in the front would only be about 1/10" rise in the rear. That's a VERY small angular change in driveshaft angle. I think the U-joints could handle that.
#14
Melting Slicks
Member Since: May 2002
Location: Wisconsin
Posts: 2,508
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by 69L71
I can see the crossmember being a challenge. The damper tucks in there pretty close. I don't think I'd sweat the driveshaft geometry too much. Lowering the engine would cause rotation about the rear trans mount, which is only about 4 inches from the rear yoke. An inch down in the front would only be about 1/10" rise in the rear. That's a VERY small angular change in driveshaft angle. I think the U-joints could handle that.
#15
Melting Slicks
Maybe I missed it, but I think you guys are forgetting the steering linkage. You can't just lower that, without throwing off the whole geometry... but really it needs help anyway, so why not throw that in the "while I'm at it" bin with the rest
-Chris
-Chris