Printable View
Yes, I learned that from the Great Brune Debacle of '05-06. I carried a pen light and a spark plug wrench with me. After tons of research by me and a GM service manager, it is concluded that piston inspection is the only way to tell the difference.Quote:
Originally Posted by Fredo
You can also pop the oil pan off and tell by the crank/rods, but who wants to do that?
Exactly. You'd have to measure the throw. There are no stampings I know of to denote a diffence, is there? Do they actually use different rods or are the wrist pins just moved down on the 4.8 pistons?
I can't remember if it's marked 4.8 on the rods or there is an actual casting number, but I remember there was something on the inside where we were able to tell.
Found a couple more pics of the springs and axles under the frame and my in-lb torque wrench for checking pinion bearing pre-load.
http://www.tamor.org/forums/attachme...1&d=1174866275
http://www.tamor.org/forums/attachme...2&d=1174866275
http://www.tamor.org/forums/attachme...3&d=1174866275
Nice work, it looks good. What's all that tube for besides a cage?
thats really not that much tube
I test fit Ed's Dana 300 on my NP241 adapter to tell if what I had heard was true. Sure enough it fit with the exception of one bolt hole. That hole was very close to being in line and clearly could be elongated with a rat tail file and work fine. Even the alignment boss is the right size. After getting it cleaned up, I bolted my t-case up to it to check spline engagement. The factory NP241 engages 1.5" of the 4L60E output shaft and the new t-case engages ~1.125". The 27 spline shaft is around 1" in diameter, so I feel confident that this is enough to not worry about the difference. I ordered the STAK with a 27 spline input. This enabled me to use the factory adapter. $500 knocked off the cost right there. The low range is 4.3:1 for two reasons. I have never felt the need for lower gearing in the Scout with the auto and viscous coupling of the T/C and I wanted to be able to maintain good wheel speed in low range for the looser surface this jeep will see around home. The Scout crawl ratio is around 69:1 and this jeep will be in the neighborhood of 135:1. I bolted the drivetrain together and got ready to mount it in the chassis.
http://www.tamor.org/forums/attachme...4&d=1174869436
http://www.tamor.org/forums/attachme...5&d=1174867611
http://www.tamor.org/forums/attachme...6&d=1174867611
http://www.tamor.org/forums/attachme...7&d=1174867611
Quote:
Originally Posted by AggieTJ2007
This is true. I may need another stick. Anybody got one? 1.75"x.120" DOM
Here's the adapter with the hole modified. It is the one to the lower left.
http://www.tamor.org/forums/attachme...2&d=1174869240
http://www.tamor.org/forums/attachme...3&d=1174869240
whats so revolutionary about the 241 having the same pattern as a 300? I think all of those round pattern NP cases share that pattern along with the 300 and a few BW cases.
the splines are different, so its not like its a free adapter.
That's my stool.
Quote:
Originally Posted by robertf03
No, but its a cheap adapter if you get a 27 spline input for your 300 from Novak. In my case, however, it was free.
I always thought that was a grinder stand :confused2:Quote:
Originally Posted by BMFScout
Quote:
Originally Posted by uglyota
I think it was a vice stand at one point too. Not anymore though. Brandon has learned the joy of a heavy table with a good vice bolted to it.
I set the drivetrain in between the framerails and raised the t-case up against the bottom of the tub. I decided on a drivetrain inclination angle at 5 degrees for two reasons. One, its a nice round number and will help with my rear CV joint angle. Two, at 5 degrees, the bottom of the transmission pan is level. This leads me to believe that GM designed it that way and it must sit at 5 degrees in the trucks. I also offset the entire assembly 1" toward the driver's side to aid the front driveshaft in clearing the 4L60E pan that hangs off to the passenger side. Without cutting the tub out, this left the oil pan, trans and t-case hanging down quite a bit.
http://www.tamor.org/forums/attachme...6&d=1175132538
http://www.tamor.org/forums/attachme...7&d=1175132538
http://www.tamor.org/forums/attachme...8&d=1175132538
Obviously, I was going to have to cut out the floor some. After sitting and looking at the contours of the floor, I decided it would be easier to just cut out the contours and rebuild the tunnel from the flat part of the floor. This allowed me to raise the assembly up until the bellhousing was about 1" from the tunnel where it meets the firewall. At this point, the trans pan is just about dead level with the bottom of the framerails and the bottom of the trans mount is about 1/2" below the framerails. I played with the t-case clocking ring and got it up out of the way too. Close enough! The negative side effect is the intake manifold now sticks up above the hoodline. This is one of three inherent problems I've found with the swap. The other two being the deep oil pan and the wide set exhaust manifold outlets. The driver's side manifold dumps almost directly into the top of the framerail. The passenger side, however, will work very well.
http://www.tamor.org/forums/attachme...9&d=1175133697
http://www.tamor.org/forums/attachme...1&d=1175133697
http://www.tamor.org/forums/attachme...2&d=1175133697
http://www.tamor.org/forums/attachme...4&d=1175134309
After I got the engine on jack stands where I wanted it, I pulled the tub back off so everything would be easily accessible. I originally planned to use GM clamshell style engine mounts. I put them on the Scout and have been very happy with them and they are easy to work with when fabbing up the rest of the mount. However, with the Y block style of the LS series engines, the clamshell mounts would not fit very well. I then decided to go with a leaf spring bushing style mount. Since this will not be a daily driver, vibration transmmission is of little concern. This style of mount is very robust and also easy to work with while fabricating towers and block plates.
http://www.tamor.org/forums/attachme...5&d=1175135034
http://www.tamor.org/forums/attachme...6&d=1175135034
http://www.tamor.org/forums/attachme...7&d=1175135034
Although I hope to not have to work on this Jeep very much (crosses fingers), I didn't want it to be any bigger of a pain to pull the skid plate and service the transmission and/or t-case than it has to be. With this in mind, I decided I wanted the back half of the drivetrain supported by a separate crossmember, not by the skidplate itself. This is what I came up with. Actually, I did this before the engine mounts (ergo, the jackstands still under the oil pan).
http://www.tamor.org/forums/attachme...8&d=1175136255
http://www.tamor.org/forums/attachme...9&d=1175136255
http://www.tamor.org/forums/attachme...0&d=1175136255
http://www.tamor.org/forums/attachme...1&d=1175136255
looks good john
Look's badass John. :gigem:
looks great - again, nice fab work.
looks like crap, you suck. :flipoff3:
Did you use poly spring bushings for the motor mounts? Thats what I have in pigpen and the vibration annoys the **** out of me. I am planning on swapping them out for rubber spring bushings eventually but hopefully when my new motor is done it wont vibrate nearly as much. I'm sure the 5.3 doesnt vibrate as much as a 20 year old 6.2 so this probably wont be an issue for you.
I'm using poly. My first set of motor mounts in the Scout were poly bushing style. I don't recall engine vibrations being the problem. It was a rear driveshaft angle problem. I didn't put a CV on it when I did the engine swap. When I did the suspension, I put a CV on and the new motor mounts just for good measure. I hope this 5.3L doesn't vibrate as much as a 20 year old 6.2L diesel with cracked pistons.;)
edit- Thanks for the compliments fellas. Especially you Ed, you're a sweetheart. :flipoff2:
Old motor had cracked pistons, new one probably doesnt.
The fab looks great, but you need more speedholes. You can never have too many speedholes.
Looks like any other crappy ole jeep to me :flipoff2:
Quote:
Originally Posted by BMFScout
Holesaws are expensive! One of these days ill have a job [shudder] and I'll be a dimple die fool.
post up some current pics, i haven't owned the Benz in months.
I love you man....Quote:
Originally Posted by agjohn02
Next on the agenda was to address the intereference issues I mentioned earlier. I do not like body lifts and did not want to run one. The truck manifold is too tall, the truck pan is too deep and the truck driver's side exhaust manifold dumps into the top of the framerail. All three were dealt with using f-body parts. I put a 2000 LS-1 intake manifold on. That shaved around 6" off of the height of the engine and got the intake under the hood. I had to relocate one idler pulley and cut off the old pulley mount to clear the lower throttle body. I also had to rotate the coolant inlet neck a little to just barely clear the throttle cam. The shorter runners will cost a little low end torque, but I don't think it will be missed with the low gearing. The f-body oil pan is 3" shorter than the deep truck pan but with a longer sump, so the capacity does not suffer. The truck pan simply hung down too low for me to feel comfortable wheeling it like that and cast aluminum oil pans don't dent, they break. I didn't want this rig to be the Exxon Valdez on the trail. The exhaust manifold I got for $5 so that worked out much better than aftermarket headers. It is tucked up closer to the block so it dumps inside the framerail. Plus, I won't have to worry about constantly keeping bolts tight to prevent exhaust leaks.
http://www.tamor.org/forums/attachme...1&d=1176349381
http://www.tamor.org/forums/attachme...2&d=1176349381
http://www.tamor.org/forums/attachme...3&d=1176349381
My next step was to build a skid plate to protect the underside. There is a lot of expensive aluminum under there that won't get along well with rocks. I went to Bryan Iron and Metal and got a 4'x6' or so peice of 1/4" mill plate. I notched for the spring shackles and slid it under the jeep. After marking and figuring up what needed to be dropped to clear the crossmember, trans pan and oil pan I decided to have it broken at the fab shop to create a 1" "dip" in the middle. This cleared the crossmember and gave me a comfortable margin between the trans, engine and skid. After I had the basic shape, I built the mounts and stiffened the skid up with some angle and c channel. You can see now why I built the engine mounts beefy. I've still got some additional gussets and stiffners to put in, but that will come after I disassemble for paint.
http://www.tamor.org/forums/attachme...9&d=1176396347
http://www.tamor.org/forums/attachme...0&d=1176396347
http://www.tamor.org/forums/attachme...1&d=1176396347
http://www.tamor.org/forums/attachme...2&d=1176396347
http://www.tamor.org/forums/attachme...3&d=1176396347
I bet thats a heavy b!tch but looks great.
I thought you were already buidling cage?
I think he is delaying the pics and progress. His cage is ~doneQuote:
Originally Posted by BMFScout
Yes. I am rationing the awesomeness.;)
I think you're bringing the :rainbow:ness :flipoff2:Quote:
Originally Posted by agjohn02
I just dont have the time or desire to sit here and type it all up at once.
How are you planning on actuating the t-case e-brake? I have one on pigpen but I havent hooked it up yet. It was previously on my burban and I hooked it up using the factory cable with a little pulley on the frame rail but it never worked very well that way.