To borrow a punchline, I'm going to open my mouth and remove all doubt. ::)
Is there any commonality between a CF2/CF3 block and the back of earlier longitudinally mounted TS engines?
So, in other words, can I put a 147 TS into earlier car like the Alfa 75? In reality, no, not without major modifications.
It's more deranged than that... Have spare CF3 plus full harness, mate has underpowered 120Y wagon.
Would this conversion not cause registration issues? I think the substantial increase in cubic capacity may well be more than the 'powers that be' will accept. I don't think this would be as big an issue if the recipient car had a seperate chassis, but probably will be if the car has a unitary chassis construction, which the Datsun will have. With seperate chassis the registration authorities generally allow a much greater increase in engine size than they will with unitary chassis. There will also be other issues, e.g. ensuring that the braking system is upgraded to cope with the increased performance of the modified car, and probably other things.
Another issue may be emissions related. It's my understanding that the authorities would in theory accept an engine transplant from a donor car subject to the same emissions control standard as the recipient car (i.e. an engine from a donor car made in the same era, more or less, as the recipient car). An engine from an earlier car (earlier emissions standard) would most probably not be acceptable. An engine from a later car (as you are proposing) may be acceptable (cubic capacity permitting), but only if all emissions standards related to the donor engine are met (this may also be the case with a donor engine of more or less contempory date / emissions standards to the recipient car). The authorities may well not take your word for this, and possibly insist on comprehensive emissions testing. This equals $s.
Whatever, I suspect certification will add a very substantial cost to such a project. Of course if this is for a competition car then none of this matters.
Regards,
John.
It's easy to comply with 2001 era emissions, if the project is commenced the exhaust would bear cats and the fuel tank have a sealed cap plus carbon canister.
Power is subjective, yes it's a lot more than the little 1.2 donk but things like the Datsun 1200 are a well-trodden path for modification; there's good practical support from people who've undertaken various swaps.
Old Datsun joke-
Whats the difference between a Datsun 180B & 200B ?
20 Mistakes. ::)
Could be true. I'm not really a Datsun aficionado.
Quote from: bazzbazz on January 01, 2019, 10:52:13 AM
Old Datsun joke-
Whats the difference between a Datsun 180B & 200B ?
20 Mistakes. ::)
HA!
(Proper first New Years laugh)
Quote from: Citroënbender on January 01, 2019, 10:33:38 AM
It's easy to comply with 2001 era emissions, if the project is commenced the exhaust would bear cats and the fuel tank have a sealed cap plus carbon canister.
Yes, it would be fairly easy to comply in the sense that the vehicle would meet the requirements if were actually tested, so long as everything is in working order. However, it's my understanding that the visible presence of the emissions mandated components doesn't necessarily mean that the authorities will assume that they are functioning as they are supposed to do and therefore that the engine will meet the standard. They may well require proof, which would mean emissions testing.
I've heard that this can be a real issue for people making ICVs ('individually constructed vehicles'), i.e. just because the unmodified engine and all emissions related parts from an ADR approved donor car are present in the ICV, the authorities won't necessarily pass it based on the ADR approval associated with the donor car. From what I have heard this can be something of a minefield, as the rules are not crystal and can be subject to interpretation...
Quote from: Citroënbender on January 01, 2019, 10:33:38 AMPower is subjective, yes it's a lot more than the little 1.2 donk but things like the Datsun 1200 are a well-trodden path for modification; there's good practical support from people who've undertaken various swaps.
As I understand it, the cubic capacity of the donor engine relative to the 'native' engine is used as a very blunt / dirty estimation / inference of the increased power output. For purposes of approval, the authorities seem to care more if the original output is increased by X by means of substantially increasing CC than they do if X is achieved by means of say supercharging or added carburettors, modified cam profiles etc etc. It doesn't make a lot of objective sense, but there you go...
Regards,
John.
I have no mechanical aptitude, but I say go for it. I would love to see it - kinda like a prototype ARNA but a darn sight prettier...
Once passed up a rusty SA import 140Z over here, but it had had the engine sold so not matching. Cool cars though, and not that I've experienced the twin spark much but I'd wager a rare conversion such as this you could purchase a nice L series or simply do the tried and tested CA/SR swap for not that much more coin.
Sent from my HTC 2PS5200 using Tapatalk
So, no earlier Alfa transmissions are even physically close to matching the CF2/3 bellhousing bolt pattern?
Quote from: Citroënbender on January 02, 2019, 06:57:56 AM
So, no earlier Alfa transmissions are even physically close to matching the CF2/3 bellhousing bolt pattern?
Don't know. But, given the time and determination it may be possible to adapt the engine to another brand of gearbox altogether.
For instance, many years ago I mated a BMW auto box to a Holden 'Red' motor (long story...). This involved the manufacture of an adaptor plate (cut from 5mm steel plate), with the holes needed for the engine bolt pattern, and the holes needed for the bell-housing bolt pattern. It included provision in the plate to attach the Holden starter motor. Part of the BMW bell housing had to be cut away to allow the Holden starter motor to fit. The engine had to be tilted about 5° from the vertical. I used a Holden flex plate to which I bolted the BMW torque convertor. I had to machine a custom sized bronze bush for the end of the crankshaft, into which the gearbox input shaft fitted. And, other stuff I can't recall, or have supressed the menmory of...
This conversion worked perfectly well, if we ignore that the gearbox was calibrated for an engine that produced it's best power at highish revs, but the holden motor was all out of puff by about 4,000rpm...
Of course this was all a lot of work, the sort of half baked project you wished you'd never been daft enough to start by about half way through, but way past the point of no return...
Anyway, lots of things are possible, if your'e
stupid keen enough...
Regards,
John.
If I want to deal with half-baked engineering that makes a Grey Fergie look sophistimacated, I just undertake a maintenance task on my AU Falcon ute, like the semi-regular replacement of its pedal box. You could have saved yourself all that grief with the BMW/186 mash-up by owning an Oz-made Ford.
The CF3 into Datto possibility appeals for the chance to offend two groups of people at once - Alfisti and Datsun enthusiasts. Our potential recipient is a lightly "personalised" vehicle, no chassis modifications but a non-original colour and B+ grade panelwork (honest, but not overly well gapped or aligned before topcoating). So it will never have high value as a car, yet it's sound.
I've noted that a transverse gearbox bellhousing would - at a pinch - possibly offer a starting point for mating a different box there, subject to input shaft length and shifter location...
Have you considered a 'cut and shut' bell housing?
Cut most or much (as needed) of the TS bell housing off the part of it that bolts to the engine. Then, weld the remnant bell housing (the bit that bolts to the engine) to an aluminium plate (this would resemble a thickish wobbly ring, the 'wobble' depending on the shapes of the bell housings being joined together). Next, cut the front off the donor gearbox bell housing, and weld the rest of it to the other side of the plate. The resulting bell housing would then be an amalgum of the TS bell housing and the donor box bell housing. How much of each bell housing is discarded would depend on the details of the conversion, i.e. length of input shaft, clutch actuation detail etc. etc.
Of course the clutch driven plate would need to fit both the clutch itself and the splines on the input shaft. There may be something off some shelf somewhere, but it might be possible to have a custom driven plate made up...?
It might be possible to use most of the TS bell housing, cut the gearbox end off and weld it to a thick plate having the necessary holes to bolt the gearbox onto it. Alternatively, this might be attacked from the other end, i.e. use most of the gearbox bell housing welded to a thick aluminium plate having the requisite holes to suit the engine mounting bolts.
Any way it was done, it would be a relatively difficult, somewhat costly project requiring precision, but probably doable.
Regards,
John.
Quote from: Citroënbender on January 02, 2019, 08:13:19 PM
If I want to deal with half-baked engineering that makes a Grey Fergie look sophistimacated.....
The BMW was my wife's car, a 2500. The engine died (cracked head), and was going to cost a great deal to repair. This was an issue with early BMW straight sixes, not a matter of
if the head would crack, but
when it would crack (badly designed coolant circulation through the head, causing unequal expansion rates eventually leading to cracks). I didn't want to fit a SH head likely to fail sooner or later, and a new one was megabucks.
She loved the car, so I saved it for her (this is a love story...) by fitting the Red motor. Yes it was a 186 that was more or less donated by a friend, and not really suited to the gearbox calibration because it wouldn't rev. The plan was to later fit a 202 GTR XU-1 engine, which would have been a much better match for the gearbox. Sad to say the car was written off before this was fitted...
Regards,
John.
It's OK, nobody is playing Gloomy Sunday yet. :)
C'mon CB - go for it.
HERESY! :o
Surely heresy would be putting a 120Y donk in an Alfa?
Quote from: Citroënbender on January 02, 2019, 06:57:56 AM
So, no earlier Alfa transmissions are even physically close to matching the CF2/3 bellhousing bolt pattern?
As I remember it (but can't find a link to cite), the donk that came along in the 156/147 etc., is based on a FIAT FIRE engine block.. and FIAT g'boxes of the same period or earlier (124/125/etc) fit....
... I'm basing this on an internet memory from another country and I probably have it wrong.
I'm other news, the current MX-5 gearbox fits the 1750 QV engine which could be put in longitudinally... markedly quicker and dafter, but includes a serv of rice
Quote from: Craig_m67 on January 05, 2019, 06:09:58 PM
As I remember it (but can't find a link to cite), the donk that came along in the 156/147 etc., is based on a FIAT FIRE engine block.. and FIAT g'boxes of the same period or earlier (124/125/etc) fit....
Isn't the the Alfa 'Twin Spark' engine a version of the FIAT 'Pratola Serra' engine? (not the smaller 'FIRE' engine). I doubt that this has any mechanical relationship to the old FIAT Lampredi 'Twin Cam' and associated engines (could be wrong).
Of course this doesn't mean that there is no chance that the 'Pratola Serra' engine wouldn't mate to an old FIAT 125 / 124 etc gearbox, but it would be unlikely is my guess. Wiki says that some version of the Pratola Serra engine is fitted to some Jeep vehicles (Cherokee and Renegade), but even these seem to be transverse engined (based on a FIAT platform).
Regards,
John.
This is all quite interesting, in light of the fact that "cutting and shutting" a bellhousing is easier when starting from one that doesn't take in part of the final drive as well.
Besides, it's reasonable to assume that a European cast housing would not be ferrous in a small passenger car application.