Re: LRO: Re: Engine/Trans Swap

From: Peter Ogilvie (konacoffee2@hotmail.com)
Date: Mon Jun 11 2001 - 02:36:05 EDT

  • Next message: David Scheidt: "Re: LRO: Re: Engine/Trans Swap"

    Given the aerodynamics of a Series, I think you'd rue the day that you
    geared it so high (low numerically). Probably would take 400hp to push the
    brick at that speed. 3,000rpm @ 70mph would probably be a lot better as the
    engine would be well into its hp and torque curve so would actually be able
    to hold that speed going up a hill. It may even develop enough hp to
    actually get it up to 80mph. Though why anyone would want to drive a Series
    over 65 is beyond me. If the 3436rpm @ 95mph is correct, you'd only be
    turning 2351rpm @ 65mph. Only a few hundred rpm above the base of the
    torque curve and well below the hp peak. You'd probably have the
    performance of a stock 2 1/4 because the engine would never get up on the
    torque/hp curve. If the first figures are right, performance would suck
    even more. I think its a little presumptious to gear a Series to have the
    same cruise rpm of a 250mph racer.

    Don't want to rain on your parade, but your figures just didn't seem to be
    based on reality.

    Aloha
    Peter O

    >From: "Kirk Hillman" <kdhillma@telusplanet.net>
    >Reply-To: lro@works.team.net
    >To: <lro@Works.Team.Net>
    >Subject: LRO: Re: Engine/Trans Swap
    >Date: Sun, 10 Jun 2001 21:40:59 -0600
    >
    >Adam,
    > I was looking into this swap, but ended up scrapping it. Though, it
    >should be noted that it wasn't because of viability. Other 'things' came
    >up
    >(read 'of the opposite gender'). I am curious about your desire to use the
    >Muncie 420. I had trouble locating one at all. They were built a LONG
    >time
    >ago. Around here at least the SM-465 is much easier to locate but still
    >isn't a piece of cake. Sure, you get a slightly lower 1st, but I am told
    >the 420 is simply far less 'friendly'. Louder and more clunky etc.
    > I am a little more curious about your calculations though. 95 MPH @
    >3000 RPM? Unless I am messing the numbers up this is what I get with this
    >set-up:
    >
    >SM-420
    >Ashcroft High Range LR case (0.871 High)
    >4.10 Diffs
    >33" tires
    >
    >=3436 RPM @ 95 MPH (152 KPH)
    >
    >If there is something wrong with my calculations let me know. I was making
    >a lot of decisions based on them. I have an Excel spreadsheet laid out
    >that
    >I would email you if you like with a number of transmission/transfer case
    >options.
    >
    >Kirk
    >
    >

    _________________________________________________________________
    Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Mon Jun 11 2001 - 03:56:39 EDT