Engine Lowering?
Thread Starter
Drifting
Joined: Mar 1999
Posts: 1,381
Likes: 15
From: Lusby MD
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?
Melting Slicks
Joined: Aug 2004
Posts: 2,063
Likes: 1
From: Beverly Massachusetts
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.
Thread Starter
Drifting
Joined: Mar 1999
Posts: 1,381
Likes: 15
From: Lusby MD
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.
Racer
Joined: Jul 2004
Posts: 420
Likes: 1
From: Lapeer MI
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.
Melting Slicks
Joined: Jun 2001
Posts: 2,429
Likes: 14
From: CA
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.
Corvette Stories
The Best of Corvette for Corvette Enthusiasts
2027 Corvette vs The World: Every Model vs Closest Competitor
Joe Kucinski
10 Most Common Corvette Problems of the Last 20 Years!
Joe Kucinski
5 MOST and 5 LEAST Popular Corvette Model Years in History!
Joe Kucinski
2027 Corvette Buyer's Guide: Everything You Need to Know!
Joe Kucinski
10 Things C8 Corvette Owners Hate (But Won't Tell You)
Joe Kucinski
10 Best Corvettes Coming to Barrett-Jackson Palm Beach 2026!
Brett Foote
Every Corvette Grand Sport Explained! (C2, C4, C6, C7, & C8)
Joe Kucinski
Grand Sport & Grand Sport X Launch Alongside All-New 535hp LS6 V8!
Michael S. Palmer
5 Reasons Bad Drivers Crash & 5 Ways to Avoid a Costly Mistake!
Joe Kucinski
Melting Slicks
Joined: Jun 2001
Posts: 2,429
Likes: 14
From: CA
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; Sep 21, 2004 at 07:54 PM.
Thread Starter
Drifting
Joined: Mar 1999
Posts: 1,381
Likes: 15
From: Lusby MD
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.
Melting Slicks
Joined: May 2002
Posts: 2,508
Likes: 0
From: Wisconsin
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.
Melting Slicks
Joined: Jul 2002
Posts: 3,000
Likes: 22
From: Boulder Creek California
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