March 17, 2025, 05:29:49 PM

Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.


Messages - al0389

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 12
1
General Tech / Re: 99-00 4.8 flywheel???
« on: March 06, 2018, 07:07:21 PM »
Update. Finally got the sucker on the road.

The Camaro flywheel won't work, the OEM clutch won't fit the flywheel, the disk/hub won't fit the center of the flywheel. I found a cluch that would fit, but I wanted to stick as close to OE as possible. And, like nfw1050, it places that flywheel for the short crank engine.

NFW 1050 fits, but the starter will not spin the engine. It's designed for short crank engines, so the ring gear won't align right. Couldn't find anything else to use, other than $350 flywheels, so my original one was checked and resurfaced for $40.

Also rebuilt the transmission. Replaced gear synchro and ended up replacing all the main bearings. Found some bad teeth on the synchro sliders as well, so the transmission shop that did the Flywheel found me some good used parts. The input shaft bearing was also collapsed. The plastic cage was melted and the input shaft had started turning blue.



Also, this is a long crank engine.  4.8 V8 if anyone was curious. No thanks greatest picture, but if anyone knows GM rear flange, they can see that's it's longer.



2
General Tech / Re: 99-00 4.8 flywheel???
« on: January 05, 2018, 03:53:37 AM »
From what I've read in different swap forums, the early 4.8 and 6.0 MANUAL have long nose crank. Everything else was built with a short nose and a spacer, or redesigned flywheel.

I'm going to go ahead and order two different flywheels. The nfw1050 and a Camaro ls1/t56 one.

The nfw1050 is built with a recessed flange to compensate for the .40 in difference. The Camaro one, is built .4 thinner than the one for the truck(from what I've read).  Both flywheels are relatively the same weight, so I'm not to concerned about daily drivability. My concern is bellhousing clearance and throw out bearing/slave cylinder travel. If the flywheel is .4 closer to the transmission, how will the clutch pedal be affected? Will it even release at all? I know proper spacing is critical on the internal slave setups.

I was hoping for a one and done deal, so I'll have to see if the .4 matters at all when I pull it all apart.

3
General Tech / 99-00 4.8 flywheel???
« on: January 02, 2018, 05:37:50 PM »
Hello,

Guys I'm having a bit of an ordeal with my clutch. Throw out bearing locked up 300 feet from home. I managed to break I free by turning it off and starting it up, in gear, but she's singing her last song. The pilot bearing has been noisy for 30k miles, but the TO decided to go out suddenly. As far as I know 186k miles, original equipment. I'm hoping somebody could help me out, since there is a ton of mix//match engine combinations.

Nobody sells flywheels for my 1999 Silverado 1500 4.8L 5speed nv3500 daily driver. At least OE/OEM, that's not the dealer, and I don't have enough lubricant to deal with a stealership. I've got enough to cover parts, but don't really want to go past 1k. I'll do all the labor. All hydraulics, rear main, and clutch. Flywheel purchase is because I want it to be a 6 hour r/r, don't want to risk having it stuck on my friends lift/shop hes loaning me.

I understand that the 99-00 models use a longer crank snout. 4/10 longer than the 01+ and the flexplates/flywheels reflect that with dished or spaced products.

Is there a combination OEM or aftermarket that could support the long nose crank of these engines? Clutch/flywheel?

Can I just use a generic GM LSX 168 tooth FW and the truck clutch?

Would I be able to purchase the newer style flywheel and install it onto my engine without any adverse effects? The clutch hardware/hydraulics seems identical, just the flywheel aspect of it.

FWIW, the truck just has a KNN intake and straight pipes. I don't plan on making huge power gains, other than long tubes and a mild cam. Pretty much, just to make noise. Stock hardware will probably fare pretty well, seeing that it does 99% street/non towing driving.

I've checked GM trucks, 4x4, S10, and other forums, but all I fucking see is people's opinions on what a POS the nv3500 is and no solutions. I'm hoping to get some clarity from here.

If anyone has any suggestions and could provide a confident answer, I'd greatly appreciate it. I just lost my car, and asking for rides to work at 2am isn't exactly going to happen.

Thanks in advance

4
The Lounge / Re: daily drivers
« on: March 20, 2017, 11:52:49 AM »
My DD is a 99 Silverado 4.8 with a 5spd. Single cab, short bed, and while I love the truck, sometimes I wish there was a back seat. But I can't beat that it's paid off and the only issues I've had during my ownership was a bad fuel pump, blown ac compressor and it recently blew off a header bolt head. Can't complain at 180k miles. Its getting long tubes when my taxes come in.


I also daily drove my rotary for almost 10years. I spent enough on repairs for that thing, over time, I could have bought myself my truck.... Twice

5
Build Threads / Re: Blake's 1965 Mustang Project
« on: February 06, 2017, 06:38:52 PM »
Once you're done with all the work, the only difference between your car and a show car would be the quality of the paint job and completion of the interior. The attention to detail IS there. Aside from that, it's original vs restomod.

6
General Tech / Re: SBF pan? double sump, rear sump ?
« on: January 26, 2017, 06:14:19 PM »
You're going to have to relocate the sway bar, or build a custom one. I think a member on here has had one made before, but I don't remember who it was.

The problem with the ford engine is that the oil pump and pick up sits in the front of the oil pan. Its driven by the distributor and there is no real way of changing that without making significant modifications to the inside of the engine. The dual sump is probably the most appropriate pan as the other ones would be too deep, OR not allow it to fit since the pan will be too deep and the center section will hit the sub frame of the vehicle.

Find or build a relocation kit.
Find a custom sway bar builder.
Find an OEM sway bar from another vehicle and make it fit.

7
Drivetrain / Re: Mazda Repu swap possibilities, lets discuss.
« on: December 15, 2016, 11:45:36 AM »
Why t56? I don't think the lnf bolts to the t56 without a custom bell housing. The newer 4cyl ecotec from the cadillac ats has the tr6060/3160 behind it, but the first rwd lnf setup came with an aisin transmission. It's supposed to be the newer version of Toyotas w58. IIRC.

The easiest option IMO would be to get a drop out from a 2006-2010 Pontiac solstice gxp or Saturn sky redline. It's already bolted together, then you just need to worry about fitting it in the repu.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I didn't think the LNF/t56 was a bolt on ordeal.

Unless you are going for big power, I think the aisin unit should hold for the most part.

8
The Lounge / Re: Compressor/Air Distribution System Thoughts...
« on: December 13, 2016, 05:12:55 PM »
I'm going to link this as the rapid air system looks very similar to DOT air brake hoses. You may be able to find nylon brake hoses in whatever size and use quick connect or compression fittings. They're also sized and adapted very easily.

Truck air brake systems run anywhere from 90 - 135psi all day. I even had one run up to about 190psi without fail. Well, the governor and safety valve failed, but the rest of the system held up.

Parker Catalog PDF

This is a generic Parker catalog I googled. But all brands will have the same, or similar products for air brakes.

In my opinion, it all looks the same. Maybe you could expand your search and find a more cost effective means.  My $0.02

9
Electronics / Re: 302 to fc wiring question
« on: September 26, 2016, 10:15:46 AM »
Do you have a good battery?

Are your connections tight and proper?

Is your fuse good? You will need one capable of supplying the starter and vehicle components with current since it is the only power cable.

Where is your ground?

You should have provided a ground (negative) to the block of the engine. The engine, transmission and body should all have their own path to the battery negative terminal or should all be grounded to each other.  This eliminates stray currents and false/poor grounds. If everything else checks out, you may not have a proper route to the negative post of the battery.


If you are relying on the engine block to "ground" the engine, remember that there are rubber isolators in the mounts. What is actually "grounding" the system is any metal to metal connection between the engine components and the body.  You will need to provide a direct connection to the battery or "bond" the engine, transmission, body and battery together.

10
Parts for Sale / Re: 86 Rx7 fc 5.0 parts car!! PA
« on: June 16, 2016, 05:56:18 PM »
What rear end is the shaft built for?

And what kind of hydraulic setup is it?

11
My real question is, what's holding back Ford guys from using GM hydraulic clutch release bearings? The actual bearing is the same, and so is the part number for the 94+. The input shaft is the same diameter, I know lengths and spline counts are different. And it has a slightly different input shaft bearing retainer.

Why can't I use a GM bearing retainer and throw on the GM slave on the Ford t5? They "should" bolt on, in theory, and all I'll have to do is properly space the hydraulic release bearing to actuate the clutch.

12
General Tech / Re: Ronin service and quality issues
« on: May 18, 2016, 10:03:54 PM »
Let's get one thing straight! You've got this very confused!

Maracas need more beads inside to make it a musical instrument. I give it 2/10 would not buy, or use, as a musical instrument...


Also, that should have never been shipped out. Too many cracks in the fiberglass. I understand some cracking near the rivets may happen, even after shipping/handling/flex but not the ones where the drill shot through. As for resin leakage, fine, were not perfect, let whoever paints it level it down.  Those two haves will come apart eventually, they aren't bonded properly.

I was once certified marine composites fabricator. I've rebuilt/repaired sections of ship hulls and assembled custom yacht counters and fixtures. Resin is a very brittle thing, but if you fuck her gently, she won't crack.

13
What's holding anyone back from doing it? I see all these hydraulic conversions for Ford costing upwards of $2-300.

Chevy used the t5 on the Camaro v6 until 2003, there just isn't as much information on those years because nobody wants a v6 t5. Boohoo!

Anyway, many of the Chevy internal slave t5 kits won't fit a Ford because of the collar shaft on the bearing retainers. (From what I know) Why can't i just use the Chevy t5 retainer and slip on the Chevy slave hardware? Essentially they are the same part. Even share the same part numbers (Chevy 346724a vs Ford 346724g)  They just use different casting materials and Ford has a larger collar shaft diameter. Probably because of that monster of a clutch cable linkage. Other than that, input shaft diameters were generally yhe same, with the exception of spline counts and lengths.

Chevy even used the Ford t5 on models that needed top loaders like the astrovan which used an AMC Bell housing and the Ford nwc t5. The t5 was made with so much interchangeability, I just don't see why it hasn't been put together. Or maybe these guys selling a Ford conversion kit are selling you a Chevy bearing retainer and their proprietary hydraulic bearing, and keeping the rest a secret, while ordering parts from GM...

I know the initial project of finding out if it works would be costly, but given the failure rate of some aftermarket components, I'd prefer to have an OEM part I can just pick up at an Auto supply store. I'm also in the process of figuring out my clutch situation on my swap. If you look at Chevy's TOB line up, they use the same throw out bearing on Silverados, s10, and Camaros so I doubt I'd have same availability issues. At least from the t5 to nv3500, which the s10 was offered with both of those transmissions.

Fortunately for me, I need to install a clutch on my Silverado, so I'll have the hydraulic throw out bearing lying around. I guess I can order a Camaro t5 bearing cover to see if it will line up properly, then try it on my 5.0/t5 project. I'll probably have to shim/space it for proper clearance, but after that, its just a run of the mill OEM, easily available part.

If it doesnt fit the Camaro t5 bearing retainer, I'll just lose the cost of attaining one, and have to figure out an external slave cylinder sitting next to the header :/

Aside from me convincing myself it's going to work, does anyone have any experience they want to chime in?

14
Drivetrain / Re: 1993 302 swap. Motor mounts
« on: March 20, 2016, 03:35:13 PM »
Anchor 2316. Is the part number. They can be had for less than 20 dollars each. This is what's used to position the 5.0 on the granny's cradle. Keep in mind, that you might have to elongate one of the mounting holes. I didn't have to do this, but I have read that other people have had to. I managed to bolt it in by threading the bolts for the mounts and keeping them loose enough to wobble the mount.

15
Drivetrain / Re: 1993 302 swap. Motor mounts
« on: March 19, 2016, 10:38:02 PM »
The motor mounts are out of a early 70s mercury with a 5.0.fox body mounts won't work. I'll try and find the part number on the box gtannys sent me.

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 12