Small Block Chevy in a Chim/Griff?
Discussion
Boosted LS1 said:
It may understeer a bit.
OK, this is an Iron Block SBC in my humble Tuscan, so the extra weight up front will be even more apparent in the lighter car than a Chimaera/Griff...plus I've also the weight of a steel Lakewood bellhousing and TKO600.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PNAhZV8Kg4k
Feel free to sit through it all, but from 3:30 it's caught behind a big-power EVO and even with 4WD you can see the EVO struggle on the bends, and I don't see much evidence of the boat-anchor-up-front Tuscan understeeting or getting out of shape. Nor do I see the 'sharp handling' Exiges/Elises pulling away through the twisties; quite the contrary (6:54 is fun). And from the 8:00 mark the track's pretty clear and it's decent lines and not a hint of understeer - even at the hairpin at 8:30.
But feel free to point out where you think it's understeering due to the weight up-front.
900T-R said:
Well, at least Jon had the good sense to install an alloy LSx engine instead of a pig iron SBC lump... One for straight liners only I guess. 
So you've driven an iron-block SBC in a TVR chassis then? Kicked one's ass on a track day perhaps? Driven rings round one?
Thought not.
900T-R said:
Well, at least Jon had the good sense to install an alloy LSx engine instead of a pig iron SBC lump... One for straight liners only I guess.
Having followed topics like that (roadgoing) Tuscan install of the SBC etc, it bemuses me how the SBC gets branded with terms such ones you have just used BUT a company like BMW could use an iron block on the E46 M3 engine! It must be being European, iron is a special material which allows for greater compactness and strength than the usual alloy.
RichardD said:
900T-R said:
Well, at least Jon had the good sense to install an alloy LSx engine instead of a pig iron SBC lump... One for straight liners only I guess.
Having followed topics like that (roadgoing) Tuscan install of the SBC etc, See, it's got a number plate.
WOW, watch that understeer!
Wow, didn't expect to cause such a stir... In fact the 327 with aluminium fuelie heads weighs about 200 pounds more than the rover V8, being that the motor is pretty far back in the chassis and with the lighter weight of the simpler interior and body I am expecting little difference in handling characteristics.
What I was realy hoping for was if anyone had any experience with motor mount modifications, which bellhousing/ adapters are needed etc. realy the physical fit of the thing. Any help still welcomed.
- D
What I was realy hoping for was if anyone had any experience with motor mount modifications, which bellhousing/ adapters are needed etc. realy the physical fit of the thing. Any help still welcomed.
- D
Mine is a Tuscan challenge chassis, so not quite the same as a Chim/Griff, but I'd expect the mods/level of work to be pretty much the same. Even with a wet sump (Mine's a Canton race oil pan) the motor sits low enough, but the Canton pan is shallower than a standard Chevy sump. In fact the bellhousing sat lower than the sump (until I modified the bottom off it).
In order to get the motor far enough back you'll probably want to widen the top chassis rails - the limiting factor on getting the motor back is the top back corners of the rear of the block - the top of the rear of the 'V' is pretty much exactly at the height of the top rails. I even filed a few mm off the corners of the block to give be a little more clearance. If you don't open up the rails a bit, then while the motor will still fit, it's maybe just a little too far forward.
The Tuscan also had a cross tube that would have to go through the sump near the front, or have the motor sitting a few inches higher. The straight ladder-style cross-tube was replaced with a 'V' running from the same mounting points on the bottom rails to the cross tube ahead. I also put on a metal plate beneath this new 'V' in the chassis both for strength, and it makes a neat bash-plate just ahead of the sump.
As to the mounts, mine's just the standard Chevy mounts on tubular 'uprights' welded to tube 'intersections' on the bottom rail, triangulated off. Kind of like a teepee of tubes off the bottom rails coming to a point which is the engine mount. On mine, the motor sump is exactly the same level as the bottom chassis rails, so simple to replicate - sit the chassis flat on the garage floor, sit the motor 'in' the chassis on the floor too, then weld in the mounts to suit. But I also have another set of mounts on the bellhousing (Ford Fiesta egine mounts) on other brackets on the bottom rails plus the gearbox mount...just to keep things secure in there.
With the engine in the place you want it, I'm not sure you'll get a bellhousing that ends up with the gearbox in exactly the same place, so the prop shaft may have to be lengthened/shortened, but Baley Morris will make up/alter the prop shaft to whatever you want.
Plenty bellhousing options around though for SBC to T5 boxes. Not sure how you could re-use the clutch, so I'm guessing a new Chevy-fitment clutch and release - again, lots of choice. Mine has a Lakewood bellhousing/scatter shield, McLeod Magnum Force race clutch and a TKO 600 box. I wouldn't use the Lakewood bellhousing if I was doing it again though - it's massive! Trawl around SummitRacing.com for all the chevy stuff/clutches/bellhousings etc.
Ignore the 'boat-anchor-up-front' brigade. I tried to move as much weight as I could to the rear - the fuel tank is behind the diff (like a Chimaera/Griff), the [dry cell race] battery is under the prop shaft just before the diff, the fire extinguisher bottle is also behind the seats, and the seats themselves are mounted as far back as they will go with steering/pedals/gears located to suit. But I still expected the car to be nose heavy....except when I had it weighed for the SVA with a full tank it was 49% front, 51% rear!
On an empty tank I would have slightly less weight at the rear...and near as dammit 50:50. I was surprised at that and pretty pleased. However, I had it down at John Reid's to see of we could get the handling better and he dropped the front and lifted the rear to get a little more weight up front than I had!
If it's a home-build style car on a TVR chassis then you shouldn't have too many problems getting everything to fit. If it's primarily a Chimaera/Griff with things in the correct place then I'd expect further problems routing the exhaust headers and maybe the steering column (mine isn't PAS).
In order to get the motor far enough back you'll probably want to widen the top chassis rails - the limiting factor on getting the motor back is the top back corners of the rear of the block - the top of the rear of the 'V' is pretty much exactly at the height of the top rails. I even filed a few mm off the corners of the block to give be a little more clearance. If you don't open up the rails a bit, then while the motor will still fit, it's maybe just a little too far forward.
The Tuscan also had a cross tube that would have to go through the sump near the front, or have the motor sitting a few inches higher. The straight ladder-style cross-tube was replaced with a 'V' running from the same mounting points on the bottom rails to the cross tube ahead. I also put on a metal plate beneath this new 'V' in the chassis both for strength, and it makes a neat bash-plate just ahead of the sump.
As to the mounts, mine's just the standard Chevy mounts on tubular 'uprights' welded to tube 'intersections' on the bottom rail, triangulated off. Kind of like a teepee of tubes off the bottom rails coming to a point which is the engine mount. On mine, the motor sump is exactly the same level as the bottom chassis rails, so simple to replicate - sit the chassis flat on the garage floor, sit the motor 'in' the chassis on the floor too, then weld in the mounts to suit. But I also have another set of mounts on the bellhousing (Ford Fiesta egine mounts) on other brackets on the bottom rails plus the gearbox mount...just to keep things secure in there.
With the engine in the place you want it, I'm not sure you'll get a bellhousing that ends up with the gearbox in exactly the same place, so the prop shaft may have to be lengthened/shortened, but Baley Morris will make up/alter the prop shaft to whatever you want.
Plenty bellhousing options around though for SBC to T5 boxes. Not sure how you could re-use the clutch, so I'm guessing a new Chevy-fitment clutch and release - again, lots of choice. Mine has a Lakewood bellhousing/scatter shield, McLeod Magnum Force race clutch and a TKO 600 box. I wouldn't use the Lakewood bellhousing if I was doing it again though - it's massive! Trawl around SummitRacing.com for all the chevy stuff/clutches/bellhousings etc.
Ignore the 'boat-anchor-up-front' brigade. I tried to move as much weight as I could to the rear - the fuel tank is behind the diff (like a Chimaera/Griff), the [dry cell race] battery is under the prop shaft just before the diff, the fire extinguisher bottle is also behind the seats, and the seats themselves are mounted as far back as they will go with steering/pedals/gears located to suit. But I still expected the car to be nose heavy....except when I had it weighed for the SVA with a full tank it was 49% front, 51% rear!
On an empty tank I would have slightly less weight at the rear...and near as dammit 50:50. I was surprised at that and pretty pleased. However, I had it down at John Reid's to see of we could get the handling better and he dropped the front and lifted the rear to get a little more weight up front than I had!
If it's a home-build style car on a TVR chassis then you shouldn't have too many problems getting everything to fit. If it's primarily a Chimaera/Griff with things in the correct place then I'd expect further problems routing the exhaust headers and maybe the steering column (mine isn't PAS).
Ah, so to compensate for the extra 200 lbs or so of cast iron up front you move it back a bit. What would happen if you just bolted it into the same place as the rover engine? 200 lbs plus of ballast up front just has to have an effect on steering and suspension hence why people move the engine back and fit uprated springs etc.
I once knew a guy who stuck an sbc in his sports car and the front end drooped right down, it hated corners. It was like the Queen Elizabeth, lol. Mind you, it was an all iron engine so maybe some 19 stone heavier then a nice light rover.
The more you can get the engine back the more it becomes like having a very fat passenger next to you. Obviously issues can be addressed but they would have been there in the first place.
I once knew a guy who stuck an sbc in his sports car and the front end drooped right down, it hated corners. It was like the Queen Elizabeth, lol. Mind you, it was an all iron engine so maybe some 19 stone heavier then a nice light rover.
The more you can get the engine back the more it becomes like having a very fat passenger next to you. Obviously issues can be addressed but they would have been there in the first place.
Boosted LS1 said:
What would happen if you just bolted it into the same place as the rover engine? 200 lbs plus of ballast up front just has to have an effect on steering and suspension hence why people move the engine back and fit uprated springs etc.
Tricky, since mine had been an AJP car. And in reality its no further back than the AJP motor was - the front of the motor is pretty much exactly where the AJP would have been. It's just since it's a wider engine the chassis has to be modified to get it where the AJP was. Plus its running the same springs and shock absorbers as last raced (with the AJP). 
Now I've no doubt that my car would handle better with an AJP up front, but in reality it outhandles most things exactly as it is. I constantly find it astonishing that folks who have never driven a SBC-converted TVR are able to tell me how badly they behave.Maybe it's just your SBC car that has problems...oh, wait a minute...
tvrolet said:
Boosted LS1 said:
What would happen if you just bolted it into the same place as the rover engine? 200 lbs plus of ballast up front just has to have an effect on steering and suspension hence why people move the engine back and fit uprated springs etc.
Tricky, since mine had been an AJP car. And in reality its no further back than the AJP motor was - the front of the motor is pretty much exactly where the AJP would have been. It's just since it's a wider engine the chassis has to be modified to get it where the AJP was. Plus its running the same springs and shock absorbers as last raced (with the AJP). Now I've no doubt that my car would handle better with an AJP up front, but in reality it outhandles most things exactly as it is. I constantly find it astonishing that folks who have never driven a SBC-converted TVR are able to tell me how badly they behave.Maybe it's just your SBC car that has problems...oh, wait a minute...
sbc has to have an effect on handling when compared to the rv8. It may be acceptable or marginal in which case people will be happy with it. I doubt the sbc would sit comfortably on stock tiffer suspension though. ETA, your video was Knockhill, is that your neck of the woods? Do you see a red sierra on that circuit?
Edited by Boosted LS1 on Monday 28th September 21:56
Gassing Station | TVR Major Mods | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff