Engine wanted

Issues pertaining to the TGB/C30X series engine and driveline issues
User avatar
GadgetPhreak
United States of America
Posts: 281
Joined: Wed Jan 27, 2016 12:14 pm
Location: Redmond, WA
Contact:

Re: Engine wanted

Post by GadgetPhreak » Sun Feb 03, 2019 5:52 pm

dokatd wrote:It’s in the hole now. Lots of work ahead, but it’s seemingly plausible that it will work.
You should start a build thread and post progress there. This is going to generate a lot of interest and questions. I plan to do this same swap and would love to follow the build Image


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
King County Search & Rescue | Regional Special Vehicles Unit
1972 710M - Building up for SAR use
Follow my build: http://www.facebook.com/sarpinz | http://instagram.com/sarpinz

Jim Molloy
United States of America
Posts: 251
Joined: Sun May 30, 2004 2:16 pm
Location: Sheridan, Oregon
Contact:

Re: Engine wanted

Post by Jim Molloy » Sun Feb 03, 2019 6:39 pm

Dokatd,
Perhaps it is just the angle of the photo and the offset of the new motor with the original Volvo bellhousing but the new motor's flywheel OD looks significantly larger than the Volvo bellhousing. Is your swap going to a new transmission or are you sticking with the original ZF unit?
Take care.

Jim Molloy
Waldersee Farm
http://www.northwestmogfest.com

dokatd
United States of America
Posts: 239
Joined: Sun Nov 30, 2008 8:13 pm

Re: Engine wanted

Post by dokatd » Mon Feb 04, 2019 8:32 am

The Cummins has a huge flange on the back. Not totally clear why. Seems a major oversight by Cummins. That said, I am retaining the stock drive train with an adapter. The entire drive train will move to the passenger side by 2” to make everything happy. It’s not required, but it will give everything room to breathe and is excruciatingly easy so...

brandonium
United States of America
Posts: 28
Joined: Mon Aug 13, 2018 3:21 pm

Re: Engine wanted

Post by brandonium » Mon Feb 04, 2019 8:44 am

Looks like you have significantly more room to work on poop in there with the 2.8 over the B30.

dokatd
United States of America
Posts: 239
Joined: Sun Nov 30, 2008 8:13 pm

Re: Engine wanted

Post by dokatd » Mon Feb 04, 2019 11:56 am

Not really, the 2.8 is much bulkier than the B30. The B30 has plenty of room to breathe, but the 2.8 is shoe horned in for sure.

dokatd
United States of America
Posts: 239
Joined: Sun Nov 30, 2008 8:13 pm

Re: Engine wanted

Post by dokatd » Mon Feb 04, 2019 7:21 pm

Oh, and FYI there is little to no chance an NV4500 or the like will fit without major mods to the front of the cab/engine bay.

User avatar
VinceAtReal4x4s
Admin
United States of America
Posts: 1722
Joined: Mon Apr 12, 2004 10:36 pm
Location: Ca. or lost in South West USA
Contact:

Re: Engine wanted

Post by VinceAtReal4x4s » Mon Feb 04, 2019 7:53 pm

People will think Im nuts but I'd rather have a stout auto behind that motor.
"For those who risk, life has a flavor the protected shall never enjoy"

Real4x4 Facebook https://www.facebook.com/real4x4s

Image

brandonium
United States of America
Posts: 28
Joined: Mon Aug 13, 2018 3:21 pm

Re: Engine wanted

Post by brandonium » Mon Feb 04, 2019 9:30 pm

Where's the hangup with it? It's definitely not a large transmission in comparison to many others and the length is such that it wouldn't push the xfer past the stock location. What's the reasoning? The R2.8 is not as long as the B30 is it?

dokatd wrote:
Mon Feb 04, 2019 7:21 pm
Oh, and FYI there is little to no chance an NV4500 or the like will fit without major mods to the front of the cab/engine bay.

dokatd
United States of America
Posts: 239
Joined: Sun Nov 30, 2008 8:13 pm

Re: Engine wanted

Post by dokatd » Mon Feb 04, 2019 11:40 pm

First, I would LOVE to get an auto in this thing. Let me say that again, I would LOVE and Auto.

Though the R2.8 is shorter than the B30, it is much bulkier. It will not mount as far forward as the B30. So you cannot easily gain any drive train length using this engine. Basically, at the moment I feel like the .75” planned spacer is about maxing the forward position that can be reasonably attained with the R2.8. That doesn’t mean you can’t body lift it and hack of the interior etc, but if you like things to stay somewhat original, this is about as far forward as it goes. This makes autos virtually impossible as well as most manuals. You could hack out the vacuum crossmember and rework everything backwards, but I’m going to give Volvo a shot and see how everything works this way around. Plus, the ZF trans in the C303 has a very particular method of shifting so its just that much easier to retain the stock transmission.

dokatd
United States of America
Posts: 239
Joined: Sun Nov 30, 2008 8:13 pm

Re: Engine wanted

Post by dokatd » Tue Feb 05, 2019 12:16 am

Problem with the NV4500 is length with adapters and T-case. You would want to use something like an atlas short 2 speed, and that would end up being way to long. The NV4500 plus t-case is not a particularly short setup.

Now maybe a power glide 2 speed and an atlas would be a good setup. But that ends up being a $20k+ swap at the end of the day. That said, if My Volvo setup takes a dump I might go that route.

brandonium
United States of America
Posts: 28
Joined: Mon Aug 13, 2018 3:21 pm

Re: Engine wanted

Post by brandonium » Tue Feb 05, 2019 2:05 pm

If I went the NV4500 route I would want to pair it with the rover LT230. I've been on the fence over diesel vs petrol. I know I could make the LQ9 work and it bolts directly to the NV so the only adapter I would need would be the LT230 adapter which exists. If I added the gwagen power steering box then I would have to lift the body 1.5" anyways so perhaps that would give it the space it needs.

Typically if something is auto I stray from it. Driving is a passion for me and shifting is a joy. If I tossed an auto in the vehicle it might be more convenient but I would more than likely stop driving it. Ask me how I know.. I have a fully restored classic in my garage that is auto. 1500 miles in 14 years. That's what autos do for me. :)

dokatd
United States of America
Posts: 239
Joined: Sun Nov 30, 2008 8:13 pm

Re: Engine wanted

Post by dokatd » Tue Feb 05, 2019 2:42 pm

Autos are king when crawling through the rocks. That’s what I do so autos are my first choice every time.

The stock Volvo drive train from face of the bell back is about 22-23”. That includes the parking brake which is required for the most part. The LT230 parking brake is huge compared to the Volvo. There is a couple of inches you can move back but not much. I’m a former Rover guy and I do like the LT230 so... I just don’t see the package being small enough. Plus I believe the LT230 is wider than the Volvo Tcase and may not let you move the 2.8 enough to the passenger side to fit it.

Dunno for sure, as there are lots of variations out there, but I just don’t see any advantage to it considering the cost and additional figment issues.

brandonium
United States of America
Posts: 28
Joined: Mon Aug 13, 2018 3:21 pm

Re: Engine wanted

Post by brandonium » Tue Feb 05, 2019 3:00 pm

Are you making the adapter for the ZF yourself? In my earlier brainstorming sessions with an engine swap I had figured out that I could get a re-geared five speed ZF or even a fifth gear added to the four speed and just swap engines but the adapter for that pairing didn't exist and since I don't have the skills or tooling necessary to make such an adapter I became reliant on what exists on the market today. There's a shop in Italy that exclusively modifies ZF boxes and they are able to build the following ratios:

1st 3,90
2nd 2,10
3rd 1,40
4th direct
5th 0,80

The converted ZF S4-18 adds 4cm or 1.5" to the total length of the trans. The ZF S5-18 retains it's stock length. I do like the thought of having a center diff lock with the LT230 and I wouldn't object much to having to move the vacuum tank back if needed but you are right that spacing is sparse on these things. One of the guys in Scotland dropped the LS1 in his without much spacing issues but his is the 6x6. Still, engine placement would be the same I believe as he initially had it mounted where the front crank pulley nosed up to the old B30 location.

What is the torque limit on these ZF boxes? I think I remember looking at the R380 but these boxes can't really handle the torque either. I believe that is where I looked at the NV.

brandonium
United States of America
Posts: 28
Joined: Mon Aug 13, 2018 3:21 pm

Re: Engine wanted

Post by brandonium » Tue Feb 05, 2019 3:40 pm

Found what I was looking for. So my early measurements were

Cummins R2.8/NV4500/LT230 (with rakeway stubby + Xbrake) was around 62" total (including adapters from crank pulley to Xbrake/Pbrake)

Chevrolet LQ9/NV4500/LT230 (with rakeway stubby + Xbrake) was around 56" total (including adapters from crank pulley to Xbrake/Pbrake)

R2.8 (25.1") + adapter (1") + Nv4500 (18.8") + adapter (1") + LT230 stubby (16") so that puts you at 62"

LQ9 (20.25) + Nv4500 (18.8") + adapter (1") + LT230 stubby (16") so that puts you at 56.05"

So yes now I remember that the R2.8 with this combo is a bit too long and absolutely if you are saying that the R2.8 cannot sit as far forward as the B30. Since you have your eyes on the real deal :).

dokatd
United States of America
Posts: 239
Joined: Sun Nov 30, 2008 8:13 pm

Re: Engine wanted

Post by dokatd » Tue Feb 05, 2019 6:49 pm

I have done all the CAD work, but I have a machine shop to do the actual hard work. The adapter is .75” long and all parts are right at $1k

Post Reply