"V8-capable" transaxle sources

[horizenjob]

The windshield washers reqularly relieve themselves on the windshield , and it makes me smile everytime .

My Ford does this too. Odd...

Phil, can I talk you into uploading your model? If you don't have the time, I'm willing to do it for you and give you credit as "Phil in Canada" or anything more specific you would like. I have created a 3d Warehouse collection called "Dream it, Build it, Drive it" to hold our member's projects. It is set up as a collection of collections so you can still maintain your own model etc. It isn't clear yet what the best way to do this is, but it seems doable this way.

I think it's close enough to be interesting and help attract people to our forum and just the idea of building their own car. Already, I think your driver model would be helpful and you might want things like engine and transaxle models that I'm working on...

[BB69]

I agree fully with Horizonjob. Thats why I'm interested in the weight of that 4x4 transfer case trans combo. I think it might be going in the wrong direction weight wise. Even with a v-8 trans-axle combo, the frame can be lighter on a midi for the reasons Horizonjob mentioned. I'm using sketchup . Take the online tutorials . An hour spent there will save you days down the road.

When I said significant , what I really meant was significant enough for me to build a whole second car for. I'm talking about a street driven car for occasional track days, not a single seater. And just like a couple of other Yahoo's on this sight(no disrespect intended, HE doublehockeystick's , I'm one of you), I'm partial to v-8's. The only completed v-8 midi on this sight (BB69s) weighs 2441 sans driver, without much bodywork and no windshield. It uses fairly lightweight aluminium corvette spindles and a-arms and a robust aluminium trans-axle able to handle a v-8s torque. I'm fairly certain that car is extremely robust and will live a long time, and I love it. But I want a lighter car than mine. His car is large. I think the frame material and overall dimensions are what make his car so heavy.And its not streetable

My car has proven to be robust(I am Canadian ,but I plead the fifth, suffice it to say I have beat the *#*! out of it and haven't broken it yet). The windshield washers reqularly relieve themselves on the windshield , and it makes me smile everytime . It weighs 2000lb with full bodywork and a windshield and is fully road worthy. The frame is mostly 1.5"x.063" tube with some 1" as diagonals. The roll cage is 1 5/8" x .125". The wheels and tires are HEAVY, the six-speed trans is huge and heavy ( with the available torque a 4 speed would have been fine). The brakes are probably overkill size wise. And the car is quite a bit larger than it needs to be. I figure if I redesigned the car as a midi I could ditch the t-56, driveshaft and hoops, 8.8 IRS and replace with a Audi diesel 2wd box which could maybe handle the torque but certainly not the abuse ,I could save maybe 100lbs, but I might give up some reliability and it would be expensive by the time I got a working adaptor plate clutch starter and LSD. Reducing the dimensions of the car to 96" WB, making the frame from 1" and the cage from 1.5 x .095 might save me another 100lbs. Reducing the size of the wheels , brakes , spindles from v-8 car size to miata size might save me 100lbs but I might give up traction, and robustness . So I might , If I was very careful,be able to get the weight down to 1700lbs as a small v-8 midlana type midi with a lot of expensive components and potentially reduced reliability. Somebody correct me if I'm wrong.

The Midlana (which I feel is a brilliant design and beautifully built) weighs 1461 without gas , a windshield and several other little bits. So it should end up around 1650 by the time he's done with fuel in it(don't get mad at me Kurt , It's just a guess) . It has a 67% rear weight bias because the engine sits almost directly over the rear wheels. Is that ideal? Will the transaxle live at those power levels ? Will the engine live at those power levels ? Is it locost ? It is compact. And he's definitely using light parts( except for wheels and tires ).

But all 3 of these cars are as aerodynamic as bricks. For me to build another car , It has to be better than the one I already did. And that includes weight ,aero and reliability. I still haven't put on my front fenders because 1) they look awful 2 ) they wreck the aero 3) they break 4) they increase unsprung mass.

Sorry again for the thread hijack


Phil

Phil
I always loved your build. Glad to see another V8 car out and running, and running hard.

I just wanted to throw a few things out there. I think it's been mentioned before, but what is a capable transaxle depends on what you are asking your car to do. My car is for the race track, and the race track only. Every time it's driven, it's driven hard. Harder than anything you can do on the street by a fair amount. I'm putting 100% of the available torque and HP through the transaxle probably 50-60% of the time the car is running. The transaxle has to live through that and it has to be heavy to do it. If you are looking for a everyday driving kind of car, a lighter transaxle will suffice.

I also wanted to make sure everyone knows what's included in my 2441 pounds weight.

-turbocharger from a Duramx diesel; probably weighs 60 pounds
-associated turbo plumbing including two wastegates, intercooler, blow off valve, 6 feet of steel intake tubing
-4 electric cooling fans (coolant, trans, intercooler/trans twin)
-diff cooler and diff pump
-rear wing and steel mount
-3 quart Accusump
-two fuel tanks and two fuel pumps
-oil cooler

All that adds up to probably a couple hundred pounds.

Ken

[pmatolcsy]

Thanks for clarifying that Ken. I didn't realize that weight included your turbo and accusump setup and that you had a diff cooler,wing etc also included. It's obvious from your videos how incredible your car is. What sort of power are you making now?

I've highjacked this thread too much already. I'll start a new thread.
phil

[oldejack]

Thank you for your responses, perhaps I should have exposed the bigger picture of my project upfront (914 Porsche) but, I wanted to focus discussion on the drivetrain nuts and bolts and in particular draw out Oldejack's comments (from other threads appears to be knowledgable of drivetrain nuts and bolt and the engineering behind them). However Oldejack chose to comment on the highjacked subjects. No disrespect intended to anyone.

Back to the subject...

Again, Lamborghini and Bugatti are respected constructors so, I believe this drivetrain concept is a good one that addresses all other design issues as well. What interests me most is the locost applicability. I may be able to build this drivetrain for $1K or use a hightorque transaxle for $5-10K and break it anyway. That's what I like about this forum, putting together locost solutions and in some cases exteme locost solutions as a community. Call me cheep but I thought that was the program here.

Now, specifically a NP231 weighs 75lb. I intend to remove some of the gears not required if practicable, reducing some mass, not sure how feasable that is. Also add a driveshaft and I don't think that adds too much to the car overall. Yes, the driveline may reduce some passanger comfort but that isn't really my problem.

This drivetrain obviously will also lend itself to AWD capablities. This too seams to be of interest to others on this site.

Questions:
1) Can the NP231 be partially gutted (don't need low range or front/back differential) easily?
2) The NP231 is reportedly very strong but, can it deliver 100% engine torque all the time through what was intended to be the front drive?
3) Can the differential simply be inverted to correct rotation for RWD?

thank you

Shoot, I completely missed this post. ..

The NP231. .. I suppose you could do something.
There are other options though, New Process (now called New Venture Gear) makes/made a few single speed boxes, models 119/128/129/136/147. .. Yep the 1 for a 1st digit means single speed, the 2nd digit is the torque rating, the 3rd digit is the center diff style.
The 147 is actually the highest torque rated of the cases, the center diff it uses is a "GeroDisc" basically an oil pump is driven by the speed differential between the front and rear output shafts and it's output is used to apply a set of discs in the diff. Not very modifiable as I recall. ..
The 128 is an open center diff and the 129 is a Viscous coupling, you can mod the 129 so its a fully locked unit with a drill and some nuts and bolts, a common cheap mod when the viscous coupler dies. Or do a Lincoln locker on any of them. ..
Forget about a 119, its the lowest rated of the boxes and hasn't been used since the AMC Eagle as far as I know.
The 136 (AstroVan) is the same torque rating as the 231, it's got a computer controlled center diff with what would end up as a FWD bias on the drivetrain powerflow.
Locking the center diff would let you run something what like Honda puts in the rear of the CRV in the front and have rear bias on the drive output.
The Hitachi R200 is probably the easiest to find for a decent diff you can flip with a decent ratio choice and LSD available, though i would recommend using an external oil pump/cooler circuit to keep the pinion bearing happy.
Depending on power level an R180 may be plenty (with the same recommendation of an add-on pump).
Wheww, now I can go eat some BBQ

[81cr450]

As per the title "v-8 transaxle" I'm curious as to what will work as well .

I'm thinking torquetube'b 4.6 northstar with the clutch on the motor. The theme is lowcost though. After searching all day the cheapest is the passat roughly $300 "ebay". I think the "weight reduction" of tying the trans & diff together is worth the fab time of building a tube setup, as well as cheaper by not purchasing 2 parts just the 1. Or if you look at it as ; a deeper gear set $200, Locker $350+, & the pumpkin it does turn into a more cost effective idea.

With no simple LSD though does the lost traction completely negate the idea? Or have I just not found the LSD solution? Will the passat tranny hold 400 hp for that matter?

AWD sounds like more traction ,but added weight & inner front tire lift in hard turns, does it not fail functionalitywise. Lowcost kinda goes out the window as well if you double up on lockers, 2 diffs, & a transfercase.

My fitment is not standard though so it will be less hampered than others by dimensional constraints

Look forward to more knowledgleable input on my thoughts

[Countach]

Hi Guys, I have been keeping this link for a while, have a look at this build page, he reversed a v8 and then took the drive forward to a boat v-drive and back to the original donor diff, worked a treat, he has the details in his build page, I think he moved the motor over about 1.5" to fit it all in, there is a drawing in there of the layout.
http://www.kitcentral.com/index.php?set ... _album.php

[KB58]

... So I might , If I was very careful,be able to get the weight down to 1700lbs as a small v-8 midlana type midi with a lot of expensive components and potentially reduced reliability. Somebody correct me if I'm wrong.

The Midlana (which I feel is a brilliant design and beautifully built) weighs 1461 without gas , a windshield and several other little bits. So it should end up around 1650 by the time he's done with fuel in it(don't get mad at me Kurt , It's just a guess) . It has a 67% rear weight bias because the engine sits almost directly over the rear wheels. Is that ideal? Will the transaxle live at those power levels ? Will the engine live at those power levels ? Is it locost ? It is compact. And he's definitely using light parts( except for wheels and tires ).

But all 3 of these cars are as aerodynamic as bricks. For me to build another car , It has to be better than the one I already did. And that includes weight ,aero and reliability. I still haven't put on my front fenders because 1) they look awful 2 ) they wreck the aero 3) they break 4) they increase unsprung mass.

Phil

Thanks for the kind words, Phil. I'm fairly sure that Midlana will weigh maybe 1550 lbs by the time it's one the road. Also, that weight includes the turbocharger, wastegates, and intercooler, so that's probably 50 lbs in itself.

As you note, rear weight bias is close to 67% and it'll be very interesting to see how it handles. Traction will be excellent - maybe too good - and that raising the issue of broken half-shafts. Braking should be excellent as well, what with the rear brakes doing more of their share of the work. But with that much weight at the rear it means that there isn't much at the front. While it makes it very easy to steer, it's possible there could be issues mid-turn, especially when getting on the gas. That said, mid-engine cars must be driven differently to extract their potential performance advantage. Driving at anything less than 9/10 it won't be any different than any other car... so it comes down to: Is it worth building a specialized car which has a performance advantage only near the limits of adhesion? Of course, people build mid-engine cars for many reasons so the above may or may not matter.

A V8 Midlana is possible but like you said, it's going to make the rear weight bias even more so. At some point there could be the real chance of lifting the front tires under hard acceleration, and while it'll impress friends it means it's also impossible to steer. Again, it's all about what the car will be used for as to whether that's a "problem."

If you want to go really fast, I agree that aero is the number one concern. While Midlana has a steeply-angled windscreen, flat bottom tray and difuser, I don't kid myself that it'll go more than maybe 160 mph (V8 Stalkers do about 150 mph.) That said, on the roadracing tracks around here the average lap speed is much lower, so I plan on bolt-on wings to exchange stability for ultimate top speed, which can't be reached anyway on the short straights.

It's all about what you want to do with the car.

[merim123]

No one has posted anything on here for a while, I found this searching around and this is some extremely impressive fabrication in my mind. Making his own transfer case, 2- 9" pumpkins sbc/turbo and running 8 sec quarter miles. Very ingenious and extremely impressive fab work.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YzGrfXJJU5o

http://www.914world.com/bbs2/index.php? ... entry=2209

[BB69]

I probably should have checked in here a little earlier.

Last year I decided that the automatic in my car had to go. I replaced it with a Muncie four speed I had laying around. It turns out that the Muncie output shaft slides right into the Corvette C5 differential once you remove the Muncie tailhousing. To bolt everything together, I made a custom adapter plate out of aluminum that goes between the trans and diff. The Muncie trans bolts to the engine using an old school big block Chevy bellhousing that I also had in the garage. Shifting is done using a Hurst shifter mounted by the driver and connected to the trans using push/pull cables. I found the idea on the Corvair forums.

The setup worked well, but had some teething problems. Original Muncie transmissions don't have a front seal, and under hard braking, the oil will actually spill out the front and into the bellhousing and then onto the clutch. So, after determining that the concept worked, I went ahead and bought a new Autogear case and M22 gearset. This case and gearset utilize a real front seal and also a cap over the countershaft to keep it from leaking. The M22 gearset is also much stronger and has a better set of ratios for road racing. Once I did the upgrades, the unit worked great all season. It still leaks a bit of fluid, but I believe this is because the trans isn't vented. I am adding a vent now for the coming season, as well as a fluid cooler.

The big downside; no reverse. Reverse is located in the tailhousing of a Muncie, so when you take that off, you lose reverse. For a dedicated track car, this is not a big deal and I went a complete season without it being an issue. The solution is to use a Jerico transmission or similar style that has reverse in the main case. I didn't do that because the Jerico only comes with a 32 spline output shaft and the C5 diff is 27 spline. However, the later C6 diff uses 32 spline. Maybe in the next year or two I will look into upgrading to a Jerico and see if it all works the same.

What does it cost? You can pick up a C5 diff anywhere from $150 for a 2.73 ratio, to about $1000 for the 3.42. There is also a 3.15 ratio available that sells closer to $400-500. A complete ready to run M22 Muncie runs about $2000. Used Muncie transmissions are all over the place in price. The adapter ran about $350 for the chunk of aluminum and the time for a friend to machine it. The cables were about $200. The only other thing you will need is a four speed shifter; figure another $100. For this money, you get an aluminum case four speed transmission with unlimited aftermarket support, and a package that will support about 600-800HP.

Here are a few pictures showing the mockup I made out of wood. I will have to get some new pictures showing the actual adapter and the cables.








EDIT: I found the pictures of the actual adapter

[romkasponka]

Why not audi V8/v6 engine with quattro gearbox?

I think to modify gearbox you can throw away all the transmission parts for rear dif and weld/lock center dif.

http://slammedsixty.blogspot.nl/2010/05 ... di-v8.html

[AceOfMace]

I have recently send a pm to the OP but it appears he hasnt come online yet or something, however, in the pm I was stating theese: PPS Weddle and Albins transmissions appear to be usefull when mentioned, they offer mostly VW style transmissions with awesome TQ capacity. Soon Im less busy I'll have a look into some catalogues and my bookmarks im sure theres more. Also you might want to mention that Audi / VW boxes have a broad range of torque capacities, some of them you wont be able to break with a Viper engine and theres rather cheap internals available, also straight cut designs, 4 gears and so on.

[bob]

I thought this mongrel G50 transaxle I built for a car might be of interest here. The normal way a g50 is installed on a v8 is in the inverted position with an expensive adapter plate, flywheel , starter and normally a special clutch. When all is in the driveshaft centerline is normally way to high and I always thought of the whole thing as a bit of a compromise. I set about making a separate bellhousing and dif centersection , this could then use stock flywheel,starter and clutch pressure plate with only the use of a 928 Porsche drive plate. When installed it ran straight driveshaftes and was installed a good 6" lower. Its been in the car now for ten years behind a 500hp motor and been hammered on a daily basis , its not given up yet so I can only assume all is well

This is the start of the centersection mold next to the Porsche one. I made the castings thicker to allow for milling in the ribs afterwards,it made the casting an easier process. Note the hole for the diff is now on this side of the case to allow the diff to be flipped.



Here is a one of the bellhousing mold



Mounting lugs on the mold.



Center section prototype on the mill



Bellhousing bolted to the centersection , there was enough material in the castings to get a neat transition between the centersection and the bellhousing.



HD side plate ( Stock are the weak point on these boxes)




Hydraulic clutch.

[horizenjob]

I thought this mongrel G50 transaxle I built for a car might be of interest here.

Thanks for posting, you've quite a bit of nice work there.

When I started my car project I wanted to go with a front engine and a transaxle. It seemed to help a lot with space issues and it also separates the engine and transmission issues. You don't need to find a RWD transmission for every engine, instead every engine can use the same transaxle, even counter rotating engines ( we get less call now for older Honda motors though ).

I didn't know the G50 had bolt on bell housing and center sections.

It's not really cheap or easy but it's worth thinking about and if it would work for a few people it might be worth doing some of this.

I heard that Westfield had a limited run car with a transaxle, so something like this has been done before.

[bob]

I thought this mongrel G50 transaxle I built for a car might be of interest here.

Thanks for posting, you've quite a bit of nice work there.



I didn't know the G50 had bolt on bell housing and center sections.

.

The standard G50 is all in one , when I did this design I though it best to keep it separate to give the option of a full size bellhousing for different engines. the one above was for a sbf.

Bob

[Dave1976]

The only middy manual I ever find in the salvage yards is in the fwd late-90s Audi / VW, and the 4- cylinder version is more common than the v6 version. One guy can't pull One by himself in one day or I would get one. I wish I knew the ratios, but i'd get a v6 version anyway, hoping it can hold more power