Has anyone suggested running the driveshaft past the axle to a v-drive and then flipping the axle so the pinion faces the "wrong" direction? It'll be a bit of a packaging problem & limit travel of course. And my $.02, I know of a 500hp audi that holds up as long as you don't sidestep the clutch.
Does anyone know about the rear engine flathead from somewhere in the north west?I'm sorry I'm so vague on this but it seemed it was some chain driven set up. Does this jog any memories?
I think they go for around $6k new. Pretty expensive. EDIT: I found these by googling mendola transaxle. The Mendola site itself: http://www.mendeolatransaxles.com/homepage.php This may give you some ideas for cheaper solutions, although unguarded chain drives make me nervous. http://www.taylor-race.com/techsprt.cfm Another: http://locostusa.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=135&sid=cc4235084975af7990e0b258edc06b35 And another: http://www.gt40s.com/forum/tech-powertrain-transaxles/18018-who-wants-build-transaxle.html Other references to search would be Bill Porterfield and Mid-Engineering. http://members.aol.com/hrharrys/index7.html Good luck and post pictures of your progress! I've always wanted to do this, and look forward to seeing more rear or mid engine cars. .
One of our professors said he used a modified Tempest transaxle in his younger days to put a Pontiac 350 in the mid of a Corvair.
I remember reading on a GT40 replica site that some Renaults had good transaxles that put the engine in front, not over them. Hard to get in the States, but also came in some Eagles (medallion?). Of course, these are manual boxes, not autos...
The Pantera uses the same transaxle as the original GT40 did, bolts to a Clevland Ford, and can be had for around $2K in good condition...
I once worked on a 36 ford pickup that had a toranado setup in the rear. The problem was driving the death trap around town. With no weight over the front wheels the brakes caused the truck to slide. when you hit the gas the front end gets light. It was converted back to convetional and now drivable. I worked on one rear engine truck that the radiator was moved back to and it had cooling issues with a hopped up motor and got a little better with a stocker. Just to point out some problems with drivers. Motors in the rear are for race cars and volkswagons Its one of those things that seems like a good idea untill you put it on the street and try driving it.
German ain't American, but they aint' so bad. A whole bunch of us descended from them, and they don't sell out to the highest bidder(Crapan).
I'm going to set my motor faceing backwards and use a V drive out of a boat.(64 Falcon sedan delivery) I'm not sure if the V drive can take it, but I've got two different types. The car is still in the design and parts gathering stage, but I think it'll work. Some of the wheel standers turn the motors backwards and run 4X4 transfercases using the front output. That's my plan B if the V drives prove too weak.
About any V drive will handle what you can spin through it. Straight cut gears like a NP205 transfer case.Smaller the angle greater the load they will take.
It's early here so this may be a crazy idea, but here it goes. What if you coupled an affordable tranny directly between the engine and rear end like in the dragster pics? Then put the entire set up in a very narrow clip frame of its own that was allowed to rotate way upfront where it connected into the car's original frame. Then the engine, tranny, and axle could all move togeather. I saw a similar set up on a motorcycle (I think it was a "Biker Build Off" episode). I know the engine has a lot of weight to it, but maybe with it being in the front of this set up , with very limited movement being applied to it, it might work. I know this is way different, but putting an engine in the rear of car is already a problem that requires some engineering. Good luck to ya.
The problem with that approach is that the unsprung weight of that set-up would be huge. Very detrimental to a good ride quality.
I'm not arguing with with you, I'm just wondering if there is some way to make this work because it would be such a cheap and easy alternative. Do you think maybe the rest of the car would just move around the engine and tranny maybe? I understand what you are saying about the weight, I just didn't know if maybe the car (without the engine) would be so light that maybe it would do the majority of adjusting. Please write back with your thoughts.
[QUOTE='29MurrayTub]One of our professors said he used a modified Tempest transaxle in his younger days to put a Pontiac 350 in the mid of a Corvair.[/QUOTE] seems to me a 63 tempest had a 326 as an option.....with the transaxle...
Yup, front engine, flexible sagging driveshaft and a transaxle in the rear. He rigged up an adapter between the transaxle and the 350. Years ago I happened to see spare he had left over from that ancient project. If I remember right, the tranny case looked like a powerglide.
A long time ago there was a kit for installing a sbc in the back seat of a Corvair. It turned the transaxle around facing forwards making the car a mid-engine setup. I rode in one that was downright scary it was so fast and handled so well. Unbelievably quick and rock steady in the turns. There are also lot's of kits for installing damn near any engine you can think of on a VW transaxle, and they are pretty stout when built for offroad buggies. Worth a look anyways.
A Porsche 915 trans won't handle V8 torque for long unless it is built ($$$). THe Porsche trans you want is the Porsche 930 trans. It is a 4 speed but it was built to handle a ton of torque. To use it in a mid engine configuration you have to flip the ring gear to the other side of the diff. Most 930 trannys had a limited slip. I see them for sale all the time for $1500. The G50 is a great trans but it is alot more money ($2500-$3500) to buy and they only come with a limited slip on occasion. They are not as stout as the 930. If you want a 5 speed with as much strength as a 930 you will need to find a G50/50. These only came in 91-92 911 Turbos and 94 911 turbos. The had a variable slip diff. If I remember right it had 40% lock under accelaration and 100% lock under decel. Unfortunatly the G50/50 will run you between $4500-$5500 if you can find one. Back in 1991, the 911 turbo stickered for right around $100,000. A ton of money now but a shitload in 1991. Justin
Those were manufactured by Crown Engineering(Ted Trevor)and was a great set up.I rode in one that had a modified 365hp 327 in it and that car got hammered pretty severely(Reeves Callaway built it).It used the Corvair transaxle with the Crown ring and pinion and modified Corvette halfshafts supplied by Crown.The trans was basically a T-10(wide ratio)with a different case and gave no problems whatsoever. I don't know if Crown is still in business or not.
I,m back. And, I have to say that ONe of my other ideas is a chain driven speedster. Maybe there is a way that I could put both ideas together. I saw Grimes' chain driven flattie in a mag and it's awesome. THe only thing about it is it's not meant to be DRIVEN HARD. You know this by seeing the steering set up that puts the wheel under the dash. I think Grimes himself even said it in the article. Beautiful car none the less. Let's morph this whole thing into a rear engined chain driven beast to get even scarier. And let's have the chains driving on the outside of the body work for all to see. It's my understanding that the Toronado setup mentioned earlier in this thread uses a chain off the flywheel to drive the transaxle. So I guess that the chain could handle the torque produced. You just don't want the chain to be behind you when it breaks and you have to control the chain slap somehow.
There was a cool 1/24 scale model back in the 60s called the Beer Wagon. It was based on the styling of a Mack AC (or was it AP?). Many of those trucks had EXTERNAL CHAINS driving the rear wheels. You can see the models on eBay occasionally. EDIT: Aha! Here's a link: http://www.tomdaniel.com/85_kits/85_kits_pages/beer_wagon.html ANOTHER EDIT: Here's a pretty cool book showing some of the Mack chain drives... Unfortunately this pic doesn't show the chain drive as clearly as you'd like. --Matt .
Why not go nuts and put the engine in the front, only backwards and let the chain drive run the entire length of the car?
The Jalopy Journal
