73-87chevytrucks.com
73-87 Chevy _ GMC Trucks => 73-87 Chevy & GMC Trucks => Topic started by: Stewart G Griffin on March 02, 2009, 03:13:43 PM
-
i really did not want to divulge what i was trying to do at this point; All i did was ask about specs on cab and chassis models specifically wheelbase.
But, since so many people are so dang curious i suppose i can't fight it anymore.
Alright, i've caved in; Essentially, what i'm aiming to do is to mount the engine and trans'm behind the cab of a cab-chassis model:
(http://i223.photobucket.com/albums/dd31/sencraig/2383a03b.jpg)
The purpose of doing this is to provide unprecidented/unparalleled access to the engine so as to facilitate easy, efficient, fast maintenance. In essence creating a C-30 "Simplex" vehicle. The goal here is to get as simple as possible-----to maximize dependability and ease of servicing.
If you look at my other problem, in the engine section, it has dragged on since december and still not solved; i'm sick and tired of getting stressed out about cars and transportation. This project will remedy this.
i'm not interested in performance right now. All i'm looking for is cheap, reliable, easy to fix transportation. Is this too much to ask for?
NOTE: the above picture i just grabbed off the net for example use only; It accurately pictures what i'm trying to do, but it won't be the actual truck because:
1) i don't particularly want a 67-72, i want a 73-91.
2) The truck in the picture actually has had the frame extended and i'm not into that. i feel, based on my calculations, that a stock 159.9 WB model will work. i think it's best not to alter the suspension or frame in order to keep everything safe and dependable for the street.
ENGINEERING/FEASIBILITY DISCUSSION:
Believe me, i've been very stressed out over the subject of my personal transportation (the current economic situation is no help on top of that) so i've done alot of thinking about this. Probably to unhealthy obsessive/compulsive levels.
1) i've thought about putting a tilt front-end on a truck/car. And have also considered having the hood and both fenders fastened with quick release dzus fasteners or equivalent. Either of these approaches would make for very fast and excellent access to the engine. And, admittedly, after you get rid of the A/C, fan shroud and fan---switch to electric fan, and get rid of all the vacuum lines except for the essentials, you have something that is pretty simple and uncluttered and therefore relatively easy to work on. Now, i may, after all is said and done, end up going this way.
But i think the mid-engined idea is pretty neat, and i'd like to pursue it.
2)The radiator will stay in the stock position. i will run extension tubes up to the front. And use an electric fan. Shouldn't be a big deal. (?)
3)the electrical lines would need to be lengthened but this too is not a big thing.
4) i would need to make up mounts for the engine--i will probably use the ones on the side and possible also use something for the front at well sort of how the 55-57 chevys had. For the trans mount , i would want to use the one at the rear and forgo a mid mount plate. This should all really be no big deal (despite the fact that i can't weld).
5) Another possibly good alternative is to just get a van, but i would have to do further investigation at a junkyard. Preliminary observations as far as engine access looks good. Despite this, the mid-engine idea still has several access advantages over the van. Just one being exhaust pipe access.
So, there you go; i've laid it on the table.
-
The easiest and cheapest way to do what you are describing is to purchase a 70-76 Cadillac Eldorado.
These can be had for about $500.oo rusted all to heck. Cut off the suspension at the windshield and graft it to the back of what ever you want.
-
While I can repsect what you are wanting to do, and sympathize with you, I think you are going to create even more headaches. A removable front end would make more sense than relocating everything. It would be cool just to do it for a project or show rod, but not for a daily driver to make it easier to work on. I dont have to open the hood on any of my trucks unless itsto check or change the oil. I know its frustrating but its not going to help by moving it to the back. Youve got a Gremlin in your truck that needs to be shot, not moved to the back. Hang in there buddy dont go postal ;)
-
That is a classic one liner right there!
Youve got a Gremlin in your truck that needs to be shot, not moved to the back.
-
Yeah, i do tend to get all neurotic and make mountains out of molehills, "go postal" etc. when it comes to auto repair. But i think this would still be a cool project.
As far as my present problem with my existing truck, i will take care of that first and leave the engine in the stock position as the truck is too nice to modify.
So, the cat is out of the bag so to speak. Do i feel liberated? Not at all.
-
I support you stewart. If you do this project take some good pics as you go, it would be interesting to follow.
-
(http://i223.photobucket.com/albums/dd31/sencraig/2383a03b.jpg)
If you look at my other problem, in the engine section, it has dragged on since december and still not solved; i'm sick and tired of getting stressed out about cars and transportation. This project will remedy this.
The only time I put a broken motor in the back of a truck is when I'm taking it to the dump to get rid of it.
Why not fix the problem instead of trying to reinvent the wheel? These older vehicles can be dead on reliable with proper care. My camaro is 40 years old and I would drive that car anywhere(although the 4.10's get old on the highway real quick).
Are you making any progress with the truck you currently own?
-
1) As far as progress on the existing truck, i will come back to earth, do it right and WE WILL solve this problem if it's the last thing i do. i've just been busy lately with work picking up, which i suppose is a good thing.
i'm not sure at this point whether to do an "in-frame," or take the engine out and go over it thouroughly.
The "in-frame" has the advantage of less work----less stuff to take apart, keep track of, take pictures of, draw pictures of etc.
Taking the engine out has the advantage of making sure everything is 100% kosher; After all, i don't know the history on this engine. And going over it up and down will make sure that something stupid doesn't happen again and ground me for 3 months going on 4.
2) As far as the proposed project itself, i think it is a very interesting thing and would still like to do it independant of my other cars. Sometimes when you get a project in your head and it doesn't fade, i think you have something. This idea has the fire (like my twin engine chevette project---more on that in another post).
i mean, if you look at the people doing the rat-rod thing, look at all the effort they are putting into it. With my proposal, everything is basically already set in place----suspension, brakes, steering, frame, etc. The only really tricky part of the whole deal is to set the engine and trans in place and even that should not be too hard despite the fact that i can't weld, but this would be a learning experience as well.
P.S.
To everyone, this is actually going to be mid-engined, not rear engined. Think of the handling!
-
You need a longbed crewcab. I think that would be the longest unless there is a crewcab cab and chassis. Take a crewcab, put a bulk head between the front and rear passenger. put the engine in the previous backseat area, and route the plumbing to the front. Lots of sound deadending material, and dark tinted windows. The the tranny and back of motor will be through the back of the cab into the bed which could easily be hidden by a bed cover. Bada bing. A mid engine suarebody that looks normal at first glance.
-
I don't know where you plan on putting the fuel tank, but just imagine the wheelie oppoutunities :D lol.
Good luck with this one Stewart.
-
Well, since the tank is located outside of the framerails (even on C-30?) i will just leave it there.
More chance of explosion with the hot exhaust and engine that much closer.
-
Cool idea.. I've played around with the idea for a mid engine truck myself. I can appreciate how you want to make it easier to work on, as I wish very often on my s10, my friends k10 truck kinda makes me jealous in that sense... How do you plan on closing off the engine area? Are you going to do it to a 4wd or just a 2wd? I bet with better balance in 4x4 it would make it wheel pretty good! I think you will need a long truck for it to work right, I think if not you'll end up with drive shaft that is very short and I would imagine that can cause problems as well. If you wanted something easy to work on get an old VW beatle/buggy... only 4 bolts hold the engine on. no cooling system too, less parts=less stuff to go wrong :) I re-wired our whole fiberglass buggy and it wasn't too bad at all, these things are about simple as they get imho
-
1)The engine will eventually be enclosed with a bed or something that as closely resembles one. The sides will be quick release with dzus fasteners or equivalent. Of course, there will be no floor where the engine is. And a tonneau cover will be on top.
2) 2WD. i don't know or care anything about 4x4, although it is another world of 73-87's and i am open minded to it and it is fascinating, but 2wd is good enough for me and suits my purposes as i never go offroad and don't have a desire to. We don't get enough serious snow around here to be too concerned and even if we did, i would just chain the rear wheels and get 4 snowtires.
3) In general, the longest wheebase cab-chassis will work; There is a shortshaft kit for TH-350's available that makes the th-350 shortshaft even shorter that we could use if we have to, but i don't think it will be nessesary. We would lose the speedo cable capabilities in this case, but who really cares as the goal is to make this truck as simple as possible----we are talking about Model T simplicity here. The time has come to pursue simplicity. i truely believe this.
Yes, the driveshaft will probably be pretty short.
-
We would lose the speedo cable capabilities in this case, but who really cares as the goal is to make this truck as simple as possible----we are talking about Model T simplicity here.
Are you really concerned about the speedo cable breaking? I've owned a lot of these Trucks and have yet to have one go bad. The one in my car is 40 years old and it works fine.
-
No, what i'm saying is that A-1 makes/sells a "shorty" kit for th-350's; This is for applications that require a really short transmission for tight situations. In this case (will get a link/picture up soon hopefully), the place where you plug in the speedo cable in is now non-existant because the tailshaft has been eliminated. No, big deal to me as i would utilize GPS---electronics ok for this project as long as they don't control anything on or related to the engine/trans. But again, in my particular case, i feel the "shorty" kit is unessesary.
My situation/approach may be viewed as bizzarre, extreme, "postal" etc. by non-car and car enthusiasts alike, but i really feel i have something here. And i think in the long run it will really pay off.
i believe it is time to pursue simplicity. Not just with cars, but with everything else except electronics, computers, internet, sci-fi special effects etc.
P.S. pls post a link to your truck concerning the 1-ton axles on a 1/2 frame etc.
-
P.S. pls post a link to your truck concerning the 1-ton axles on a 1/2 frame etc.
You can see pics of my truck under members projects. It will show the cab+chassis dually rear axle (running single wheels) mounted under the stepside bed.
-
I'm not seeing a problem here... It's been done hundreds (if not thousands of times). Hot Rod magazine featured a VW bus not too long ago that had a mid-mounted SBC with a blower sitting behind the front seats. There have been many, many mid engine Corvair and Econoline trucks built over the years... All three major domestic auto manufacturers either have built, or are currently building mid-engine chassis for use under vans and motorhomes.
Most circle track cars put the engine as far back as their rules will allow, many modifieds will have engine setbacks over 20" and use custom mounts that reach out to the widest portions of a passenger car frame (much wider than the framerail width on an 80's chevy truck). Much of this technology can be used here as well.
Go to Speedway Motors, Day Motorsports or Smiley's Racing websites, get some custom engine and trans mounts, bolt them to a dummy block, and weld the package wherever you want. Use a shorty powerglide or TH350 and just try to keep your driveshaft over 24" in length (and rotate the drivetrain or pinion to save the U-joints). My biggest concern would be getting front springs light enough to actually drive... Without the weight of the engine over the front wheels, it's going to pogo on even the smallest obstacle and push its way through every turn.
It could be very fun to have to play around with (with the right converter and transmission package it could yank the front wheels with every shift) but would be a challenge as a daily driver...
-
While i have not completely shelved the mid-engined/"can-am" idea, i have been doing more thinking about more practical (time-saving) routes to achieve what i want.
And i was thinking that a C4 (84-96) corvette might be more practical or a 73-96 fullsize van or astro.
These candidates provide the following advantages:
1) With the corvette, you can get one of those short stools (even with wheels and tray underneath) and pull up and sit right next to the engine. It seems this way at least based on observations of pictures on my part.
2) With the vans, you are literally on top of the engine, which is cool.
However, both of the candidates fall ultimately short of the ultimate in depth goals which i will state here:
The new, detailed objective is as follows:
To be able to diagnoise any and all engine problems in the most easy, expiedient manner as possible; To change any part on the engine (except crankshaft) in the most easy, expiedient manner without taking the engine out of the chassis.
So, in the case of the corvette and vans changing a cam would mean taking the radiator and grill etc. out. Also, with the corvette, it looks a little tight around the firewall/distributor area. This is not too big a deal, but it doesn't meet the objectives. Despite all of this, i have to admit that upon initial investigations, the corvette's engine accessability is admitedly still pretty good.
Now, the vehicle that WILL meet the objectives is the 64-71 van. However, the design i'm not real familiar with; Are the parts on this truck based off the 55-57 chevy? Are they related to the 72-96 vans and trucks/cars?
Please think of other possible good candidates and explain in full detail of why you think so.
-
Buy an older truck. My 51 has a 1 barrel carb, points ignition, and a stadard tranny. It doesnt get any easier tan that.
-
And i was thinking that a C4 (84-96) corvette might be more practical or a 73-96 fullsize van or astro.
Please think of other possible good candidates and explain in full detail of why you think so.
I've owned 3 vettes, an 86,92, and a 98. They were all great cars but when I think of a vette the words cheap or simple don't come to mind. Don't forget those 84-96 vettes are now 25-13 years old respectively. As far as price you should expect to pay about $10,000 and even then you will probably get a car with 100k+ miles on it. Trust me most of the $5000 vettes are junk. Take some time to price parts for one of those cars. Off the top of my head I would say set of TPI injectors would run you $400, Mass airflow sensor $250, wheel bearings $350 a pr, etc.
Don't get me wrong, I love vettes, But as far as a simple vehicle my 69 camaro blows them away.
Like I mentioned before, what are the emission laws in your area? Some of the 80's trucks can be a rats nest of emission hoses under the hood but I would look for a rust free 73-79 or an 87 with TBI on it.
I think for the price of a vette you could put together a real nice truck.
-
1) i forgot to mention that if i did get a vette, i would convert to carb and non-computer HEI;
a) The emmissions law here is that if over 20yrs old, anything goes; You could run nitromethane if you wanted.
2) i've been doing some more thinking(that's just the way i am; i can't help it) and i was thinking that on a 73-91 truck, if i could get a way where the inner fenderwells alone could be quickly and easily removed (using dzus fasteners or something), then this could achieve most of my goals. This, in conjunction with removing the A/C system--i don't use a/c much anyways, relocating the battery and overflow tank means i could climb inside and stand right next to the engine. This would make it physically so much easier.
The inner fenderswells only----not the outside sheetmetal.
-
You could put a tilt front end or removable front end on it and that would help some. Really, if you hate the challenge of working on them this much, buy a new one with warranty, and let someone else work on it. You are looking at making the engine and tranny more accessable, build a funnycar type body on it. Instead of trying to make repairs more accessable, rebuild it to the point repairs are unnecassary. I have 4 of these trucks in the built in the 80s, and 1 truck and 1 car built in the 50s, and the most I have done to them in the last 3 years is charge up the battery. ( Not counting suspension drop on one and lift on the other) I gave a tuneup on the 51 3 years ago. Changed 6 plugs, wires, cap, rotor, and points in about one hour.
Rebuild your engine using quality parts, put a 2 barrel carb on it, manual steering box, manual transmission, and find an old points type distributor, and put a electronic iginition in it to get rid of the points, and let it rip.
I admire your thinking, but I dont think the key is to make it easily accessable, and think it would be better to make it durable.
-
I ran a 78 K 20 years ago with no inner fenders. It was slick to work on.
-
I ran a 78 K 20 years ago with no inner fenders. It was slick to work on.
I dont think there is a law that says you have to have a hood either, ;D
-
1) i forgot to mention that if i did get a vette, i would convert to carb and non-computer HEI;
a) The emmissions law here is that if over 20yrs old, anything goes; You could run nitromethane if you wanted.
It's the federal Government that regulates the emissions. If a state chooses not to test for them (usually for budget reasons) you can still not remove all the emission control devices from the car legally. As the vehicles get older the inspectors tend to let things slide a little but if you pull up in a vette with the fuel injection system A.W.O.L. that might be cause for concern.
What else can we do to convince you these trucks can be reliable rigs with a little work. Like Choptop said "build it to be durable".
I hate to sound like a broken record talking about my camaro on a truck website but I'm just trying to prove that these older vehicles can be very reliable.
I installed the current motor in that car 6 years ago and besides routine oil changes it hasn't needed a thing (I'll tune it up this spring but it still runs great). It's a 350 bored .30 over with a 1 piece rear main, 9.25 to 1 compression, small roller cam, vortec heads,GM performance manifold w/edelbrock 600 carb and a DUI HEI ignition. The machine shop was shooting for 325 H.P. Like I said, it's been 6 years of trouble free driving (weather permitting).
Now the old motor in the car was a 370 horse LT1 factory replacement motor that you could buy over the counter from GM up until the late 80's-early 90's. It had 11.5 to 1 pistons, big solid cam, Holley street dominator open plenum manifold with a 780 CFM Holley double pumper. The car was fairly quick (13.1 in the 1/4) but all that came at a cost as far as maintenance goes. Spent many Saturdays afternoons adjusting the valves and at every fill up you had to add a can of octane boost or a gallon or two of 103 octane race fuel to keep it from detonating.
See what I'm getting at, the same car was set up two different ways and had completely different maintenance requirements.
Build yourself a nice mild small block, toss it in a truck (in the front where it belongs) and I think you'll be happy.
-
Since you are putting the engine so far back, did the thought of using a Fullsize Blazer gas tnak in the engine compartment ever come to mind? Or: Nope, aint giving up the new front trunk area> Unde5r the cab?
I would suggest stacks being used for the exhaust..... That would be a real interesting looking exhaust if you created and X Pipe connection with stacks.