Administrators BRAAP Posted January 24, 2009 Author Administrators Share Posted January 24, 2009 As promised, I stabbed the VH45DE in the engine bay of the mock up Z-32. I'll post the pic in a few days. The fit is intersting. It has such a natural fit in the Z-32 engine bay you would think it was meant to be. As covered already in the other VH45 Z-32 conversions, the cross member is just barely in the way of the front sump oil pan, which the x-member can easily be massaged without affecting any of its structural integrity. As others that have succesfully done this conversion have also shown us, the VH intake is in direct conflict with the hood, though a custom intake would alleviate that and also add more of the custom WOW factor when the hood is raised. The currently available VH45DE to Z-32 5 speed trans adapters makes this conversion a very attractive all NISSAN, V-8 Z-32! In the end, I am electing to go "Elle, Esss, Exxx" This means the VH45DE with its ECU harness and auto tranny, are now for sale! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Administrators BRAAP Posted January 24, 2009 Author Administrators Share Posted January 24, 2009 Pulled the VH45 out of the engine bay and dropped the 5.3 back in for more measuring. Current plans are to use the 5.3 I pulled from my wifes '01 Burb, replace the seized lifter, "possibly" install an early stock LS1 Vette cam, and use the '01 LS1 intake I already have. Haven't settled on the oil pan yet, highly modified F-bod pan, move the rack forward at least 1" if not 2" if space allows or convert to front steer rack, or go with the front sump GTO pan with some x-member modification and possibly a little pan mod. T-56 will either be the GTO with its shifter being 3 3/8" further rearward, (not sure the plastic housing for the GTO shifter will fit in the trans tunnel?!) or the Caddy CTS-V and its remotely mounted shift lever, (allows for virtually any shifter location). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Daeron Posted January 24, 2009 Share Posted January 24, 2009 In the end, I am electing to go "Elle, Esss, Exxx" This means the VH45DE with its ECU harness and auto tranny, are now for sale! This also means, you HAVE to make a chevrrari motor at some point, or I get to beat you with a giant foam cluebat for not making the super cool camshaftmachine. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Administrators BRAAP Posted January 29, 2009 Author Administrators Share Posted January 29, 2009 This also means, you HAVE to make a chevrrari motor at some point, or I get to beat you with a giant foam cluebat for not making the super cool camshaftmachine. Deal! A single plane 6.0 is slated for build, after this car is up and running with the 5.3. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Administrators BRAAP Posted January 29, 2009 Author Administrators Share Posted January 29, 2009 As promised, a picture of the VH45DE sitting in the mock up mule. Other than the intake interfering with the hood, it really does fit rather well. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Administrators BRAAP Posted January 29, 2009 Author Administrators Share Posted January 29, 2009 UPDATE! Ok, this engine stab was to see how well the LSx and T-56 fit with the shortest possible oil pan over the rack with no mods to the car itself. Oil pan was removed, T-56 bolted up! Short version is, the LSx will NOT fit in an unmolested Z-32 engine bay. Even with the most extensively modified shortened oil pan, some form of modification will HAVE to be done to the car, whether it be cutting the firewall/trans tunnel entrance, relocate the rack and pinion, and or modify the hood to clear the throttle body. Long version. Took the ’01 Vette LS1 short block, removed the oil pan and bolted on a pair of wooden strips to the pan rail to simulate the absolute shortest oil pan, (included the distance that should be between the pan and the rack). The OE LSx Windage tray is very close to the rotating crankshaft. The lowest point of that windage tray is 1.25” below the pan rail. I figure the oil pan should be no closer than ¼” to the windage tray. With the cast oil pan being approx 1/8” - 3/16” thick, add a 1/2” oil pan to rack clearance, (between 2 1/8”-2 3/16”), I cut a couple of boards at 2.25” and bolted them to the pan rail so that the engine could sit on the rack simulating the lowest possible engine position as if it were bolted in the car. This puts the crank windage tray 5/8"-3/4" inch above the rack, allowing approx 1/2" oil pan-to-rack clearance with an oil pan modded as short as possible in the region of the rack. Then I bolted up the T-56 trans and stabbed the engine/trans in the mock up mule. In an attempt to replicate the OE crankshaft position, engine tilt, etc I measured my Z-32 DD. Crankshaft centerline is approx 6.125” above the top of the stock sway bar, engine tilt as measured across the face of the crank damper, is 1.5-2 degrees tilted rear down,in relation to the top of the frame rails. I realize those figures do not have to be replicated exactly, but it does offer some point of reference. With the engine sitting in this low as possible position, engine as far back as it will sit with 2.5 degree engine tilt, crankshaft centerline is approx 3/8” higher than OE. Trans is wedged up tight against the top of the tunnel, (bellhousing to trans mating surface is what contacts the top of the tunnel). With the hood closed, the forward portion of the padding on the underside of the hood is between 0" and 1/8” clearance to the throttle body! Bellhousing mating surface is +/- 1” or so fore and aft of where the VG30DE trans-engine mating surface resides. In summation, trans is wedged tight to the top of the trans tunnel, engine/trans is as far back as it will physically sit and the throttle body is in contact with the padding under the hood! Moving the engine forward offers no relief to the throttle body hood issue and only exaggerates the very short distance left between the throttle body and the radiator core support to get a 90 degree air inlet elbow, even with the Radiator mounted in front of the core support. All in all, the LSx Z-32 will require some modification to the car itself. I still have quite a bit of head scratching to do, all kinds of ideas running through my mind, goal is still to get the LSx in the Z-32 without having to cut the firewall. Ideally I want to come up with a solution that can be duplicated as easily as possible by others without having to gut the interior to hack up the firewall compromising climate control and/or other factory Z-32 systems! Couple ideas revolve around altering the rack location, the trick will be doing so without adversely affecting the steering geometry. Dropping the rack down approx 1” will be a huge help. Just opening up the trans tunnel entrance at the firewall allowing the engine to move back approx 2-3” and dropping the rack approx 7.5-1” would alleviate essentially all physical installation conflicts, but again, want to avoid cutting the firewall. Here are some pics; Frontal shot; Shot of the bellhousing; Lack of hood clearance. Hood is NOT in the first latch! Windage tray to rack clearance. Rack is outlined in Green, windage tray is outlined in Magenta. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
biohzrd Posted January 29, 2009 Share Posted January 29, 2009 not sure if it's been brought up or not, but maybe taking the approach that i've used on 240sx swaps may help. GTO pan, notch the k member, find yourself a BFH, and go to town on the tunnel. i think there should be enough room there without cutting the firewall all to pieces. just have to get a little creative. also there is a company that sells a modified oil pan for the 240sx that give more clearance. kinda pricey though. http://www.sikky.com/products/mount_kits/nissan_mounts/ls1__s14_240sx/S14_pan i'll be putting mine together hopefully here in a couple of months. is the insall manual that was going around a few years back still availible? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Administrators BRAAP Posted January 29, 2009 Author Administrators Share Posted January 29, 2009 not sure if it's been brought up or not, but maybe taking the approach that i've used on 240sx swaps may help. GTO pan, notch the k member, find yourself a BFH, and go to town on the tunnel. i think there should be enough room there without cutting the firewall all to pieces. just have to get a little creative. also there is a company that sells a modified oil pan for the 240sx that give more clearance. kinda pricey though. http://www.sikky.com/products/mount_kits/nissan_mounts/ls1__s14_240sx/S14_pan … Thank you for the input. I like your idea of the BFH in the tunnel. Like you say, that may just be enough to allow a little more rearward placement of the engine/trans which could be just enough for this to just barely fit. I will go out the mock-up-mule and start removing the myriad of “stuff” that resides under the dash of the Z-32 and see just how much clearance there is between the those components and the firewall/tunnel entrance for BFH style clearancing. More to the point, if the tunnel can be cut enough to resolve the fitment issue and not interfere with the “stuff” under the dash, (want to keep all the climate control, etc stock!) Regarding the pan, with the engine in this location as pictured, a GTO pan could be modified to fit and with the X-member modified so the rack is the furthest forward item in the way, (X-member to be built under-behind the rack), the GTO pan will still need the rear section of the sump trimmed to clear the rack and there is still little to no room between the throttle body and the upper radiator core support for plumbing, (see pic below) unless the upper core support is removed and a new twin latch hood latch system done, (NO hood pins!) That aftermarket pan for the 240-SX is a nice unit with plenty of volume, though is too deep over the rack. The rack in the Z-32 sits a bit higher in the car than the 240-SX. For the Z-32 the pan needs to be essentially within 1/8” of the windage tray, directly over the rack which is a pan depth of only 1.5” MAX! With that and only a ½” oil-pan to rack clearance, the engine is still a tad too high in the engine bay putting the throttle body into the padding on the underside of the hood. If I can easily get the engine further back, then a rear sump pan will fit such as this sweet AUTOKRAFT unit, though even this very shallow pan is still ½” too deep as it crosses over the rack, tough the sump would “just” clear the rack if I could get the engine back approx 1.5”-2”. Courtesy of; http://www.autokraft.org/products Note how close the throttle body is to the core support/hood latch!; …i'll be putting mine together hopefully here in a couple of months. is the insall manual that was going around a few years back still availible? Are you referring to the Z-32 LSx manual? Haven’t heard anything more about it or from anyone that actually seen/read it. Was it actually ever published? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Administrators BRAAP Posted January 30, 2009 Author Administrators Share Posted January 30, 2009 Head scratching fine tuning of mock up UPDATE! Unlike the S-30 where there is practically 2 and half acres of open space to just willy nilly drop an engine into without fear of clearance issues, the Z-32 is a confined space with very limited options! So I spent some time playing with different fore-aft positions with the LS1 and T-56 and feel pretty comfortable with my final engine resting place. "Points of interest" that need addressing; (calling those issues "obstacles" just sounds so negative…) 1) Rack and pinion. Lower the rack ½”-1”. Will be looking into the least compromising way to accomplish this. a) Dropping the entire x-member with a spacer between the X-member and frame rail is the easiest, so long as it doesn’t compromise suspension geometry to much. b) Lower rack in the cross member, only if that doesn’t induce too much bump steer, which I have a feeling it will if I don’t also drop the inboard LCA pickup points. Might have to contact Tube80Z with the plotted out Z-32 front suspension for his opinion of the stock geometry and what the feels are options in terms of getting the rack 1/2"-1" lower without compromising to much. 2) Trans tunnel entrance/Firewall. Lightly modify the trans tunnel entrance at the firewall to clear the top crest of the bell-housing using a 1-2 lbs mass at high velocity, may take several applications, (i.e. the BFH!) Also grind down the rib of the bell-housing if one exist on the T-56 I will be using. 3) Trans tunnel. Lightly modify the trans tunnel at the body seam where it goes from the slope from the firewall to the horizontal plane, to clear the bell-housing to trans bolts on the top of the trans. Again, the BFH method. There is approx ½” clearance between the trans tunnel and the bottom of the cars climate control duct work at this location. Pic below, Green is duct work, Magenta is trans tunnel, Red is seam that needs BFH modification from under the car. 4) TB-hood clearance. “Might” have to notch the stiffener in the hood to gain clearance for the Throttle body. 5) Heater lines. They exit the car through the firewall right at the passenger cylinder head which will require some creative plumbing to make that work without having to open up the dash and relocate the firewall penetrations for the heater supply and return plumbing. I figure this project is one of those “points of interest” that can be dealt with later and shouldn’t dictate the engines placement as much as the other interference “points of interest” do. 6) Oil Pan. Looks like the uber nice AUTOKRAFT oil pan will essentially be a bolt in. The sump is exactly 9” from the rear to the front of the sump, clearing the rack by approx 1" fore and aft. Will have to notch the pan to clear the top of the rack. Might talk to the nice gents at AUTOKRAFT and see if they will do that in-house, (dedicated Z-32 LSx oil pan?!?!?) The rack mount tabs look like they can easily be modified to clear the pan kickouts. 7) Trans. In this position, the GTO T-56 with its shifter location puts the shifter EXACTLY 3/8” forward of the stock Z-32 location To use the GTO T-56 you may have to remove some material from the top of the trans tunnel to clear the plastic housing for this shifter, but I am pretty sure there is enough room under the Z-32 console for such. I still may use the Caddy CTS-V T-56 as its shifter design and operation is the same as the OE Z-32, would just require adapting the stock shifter to the T-56 shift arm. GTO shifter extends shift lever 3 3/8” rearward from the F-bod T-56. A HUGE thank you goes out to m1noel for this GTO shifter. Area of the trans tunnel that “might” need to be modified/cut to clear the GTO shifter apparatus. Here is the TB to core support distance; For those interested in a possible front sump pan with the engine trans in this position, here is the measurement from the forward most portion of the rack to the front cover/block mating surface. The cross member is infront of the rack so it will need to be extensively modified for any sort of front sump oil pan; Till the next update, BRAAP…. OUT! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dts300z Posted January 30, 2009 Share Posted January 30, 2009 Awsome!! Looks like you got it figured out. I can't wait to see some build progress. The BFH will be your best friend on this one. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Administrators BRAAP Posted January 31, 2009 Author Administrators Share Posted January 31, 2009 Latest update. Dropped the cross member ¾†simulating an engine drop of ¾†lower than yesterdays mock up! WOOHOO!!! Now we have hood clearance! Now to find a way to get the rack exactly 1†lower in the car without negatively affecting the front suspension geometry too much. Regardless, this is 100% GO! Started the official build thread here; http://forums.hybridz.org/showthread.php?t=143967 Here are some pics of today’s mock up. The motor mounts and X-member mount hole alignment; Intake-Firewall clearance; Heater outlets into passenger cylinder head; TB-hood clearance; Trans mount alignment; Underside of engine with pan removed; Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Daeron Posted February 1, 2009 Share Posted February 1, 2009 Heater line idea: Cut, tap with external thread, and get 90 degree fittings? Looks GREAT, but I guess its time to let this thread die as the query is answered...... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
biohzrd Posted February 4, 2009 Share Posted February 4, 2009 looking good. was just thinking about it the other night on my drive back to work in houston, but have you thought of using an after market bell housing? i had one a few years back in a camaro, and it seemed to be a little smaller overall. may allow more clearance in the ever critical firewall area. another idea running through my head is making a tubular k-member that mounts the rack lower. i have lowered the rack in other vehicles, and never noticed much of an impact on the steering. i think it can make more of a difference in a manual application than a power steering setup. also looking towards a hydro-boost setup for my brakes. they take up a lot less room then a normal system, and work great. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hoov100 Posted February 6, 2009 Share Posted February 6, 2009 Paul, i have one tool that will solve every problem with this swap: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Administrators BRAAP Posted February 11, 2009 Author Administrators Share Posted February 11, 2009 looking good. was just thinking about it the other night on my drive back to work in houston, but have you thought of using an after market bell housing? i had one a few years back in a camaro, and it seemed to be a little smaller overall. may allow more clearance in the ever critical firewall area. another idea running through my head is making a tubular k-member that mounts the rack lower. i have lowered the rack in other vehicles, and never noticed much of an impact on the steering. i think it can make more of a difference in a manual application than a power steering setup. also looking towards a hydro-boost setup for my brakes. they take up a lot less room then a normal system, and work great. The bell-housing itself would only be a clearance issue if I were to pursue moving the engine back further. Right now it is the thick portion on the top and very front of the trans case that bell housing bolts to, (circled in Blue below), that is the clearance issue. Will be using a hammer for that. A modified cross-member may be the ticket, thank you. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Administrators BRAAP Posted February 11, 2009 Author Administrators Share Posted February 11, 2009 Paul, i have one tool that will solve every problem with this swap: Yes, will be using one! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Administrators BRAAP Posted February 11, 2009 Author Administrators Share Posted February 11, 2009 Heater line idea: Cut, tap with external thread, and get 90 degree fittings? Looks GREAT, but I guess its time to let this thread die as the query is answered...... Great idea, thanks Shawn. Yes, time to let this die as the question, "which power-plant", had been answered. Started an new “discussion thread†for this LSx Z-32 project here; http://forums.hybridz.org/showthread.php?t=144469 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Administrators BRAAP Posted February 19, 2009 Author Administrators Share Posted February 19, 2009 I see several ways to go about this, all equally badass.1) Like Daeron said, semi-stock SBC for now and do the flat plane crank long term. 2) Semi-stock VH swap on the Z32 immediately. Do a 'quick-and-dirty' flat plane crank proof of concept on an SBC in another Z car. Then do one for a VH and go all-out, ultimately swapping it in the Z32. …. The flat plane crank is still very much on the drawing board, just going to do it with the LSx instead of the gen I SBC. I'm picturing a 6.0L block with its 4" bore, single plane crank around with the stroke of the 4.8L at 3.268", (that combo with stock bore would be 329 CID, or 5383 CC, 5.4L. A .030†overbore gives 333 CID, or 5464 CC, 5.5L). ..3) M112 on the VH, yumm... 4) If you succumb to mediocrity and don't do anything nuts, I say VH. It's so refined! You could always plumb a turbo in... .. With the Supercharged SBC 350 now for sale, (That T-56 is sold), the M-112 might go with it. I agree wholeheartedly. The VH45DE is a VERY “refined†V-8! I just sold the VH45DE to a gentleman in Alabama last week. BTW, there's so much techno babble in the flat plane crank thread that I'll just post this here. THIS is the sound you NEED!!!: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BghVb2fM8dY OMG! How did I miss that video link?!?! That video is that much more motivation to build the single plane V-8 LSx, thank you. And another of that same flat plane crank V-8 driving by; http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qo157vkAMhE BRAAAAP... BRAAAAAAAAAP.....BRAAAAAaaaaaaa.......... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Powerskay Posted February 20, 2009 Share Posted February 20, 2009 Yep that sound cost big $$$$$$$$$ Cha-Ching-lol Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hitman Z Posted June 7, 2009 Share Posted June 7, 2009 Great project you got there. I wish you good luck and patience with it. I also see swaps in a Z32 with 2JZ engine that take also time, effort, patience and money, and they run really well. Good luck and low ET with those swaps. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.