Posted on 12/03/2008 12:52:50 PM PST by 2ndDivisionVet
I have a friend that wants to buy a late 70’s Rolls, he wants to purchase a remaned engine and trany and wants me to install it. I like a challenge, should I attempt it or run for the hills? I am confident I can do it, I just wonder if there are any suprises instore for me.
Guess I won’t mention the 69 Shelby 350 that I was supposed to buy from my Dad’s friend for $2000 back in the seventies.
Called him up, told him I would buy it the next morning after I stopped at the Bank. After I got the money, I called to tell him I was on my way. He told me he sold the car to a friend of his the night before.
WHEN YOU SNOOZE, YOU LOSE.
I still have my 68 Chevy Step Side with a 307 I bought new in 68. 56,000 miles
Did I tell you I traded in a 65 GTO Tri Power I bought new. About 25,000 miles on that one...1/4 mile at a time :))))
Rode hard put away wet...
[Son nearly killed himself and a couple of friends when the brakes faded on a panic stop from a 120 mph.]
Heck, my Camaro barely stops at 20mph much less 120 (I’ve only done 110 myself). That’s one of the first coming upgrades, the Wilwood disk brakes.
Good guess but that engine is not in a Chevy. And yes the “American HP” GM LS4 is assembled about 10-20 miles from the US border at a US company plant.
RWD is great for higher power cars (as I know from another 400ci/335hp one of mine) but FWD is still best for winter, particularly when my wife also drives it. So our daily driver gets FWD but I get the power too. Torque steer is moderate and not a serious issue in this car even with the V8.
Tire spin is possible with 303hp but the design of P255’s up front, enhanced traction control and TapShift coupled with knowing the car, it can be minimized for some fun launches. I also love the enhanced braking system and the heads up display. I’ve had that HUD on daily drivers since ‘95 and would hate to ever give that feature up.
Actually, FWD is not best for winter. AWD or 4WD is. And RWD can be just as effective as FWD at initial traction if the weight over the rear axles is the same.
So what is it, a Pontiac Grand Prix?
Yes, GP GXP.
I have more fun with cutting cookies in a RWD with Posi in the snow (LOL) but can say from driving hundreds of vehicles, the FWD really is much better traction in snow.
We just loaded two 80lb bags of salt in the rear of my son’s Camaro to get him some weight over the wheels so he can even move in the snow falling now.
Nice looking car FastCoyote.
See, the trick is to start with a RWD car with proper weight balance.
The Camaro starts out life weighing about 3500lbs and with about a 60/40 weight distribution, front/rear. That makes it about 1400lbs over the rear. Your GXP starts out with a 3600lb curb weight, and a 62/38 weight distribution, which means the front axles have 2232 pounds over them. Assuming the same tire, you would have to add about 768 pounds to the Camaro to make it have the same traction over the rear in snow.
My Series III (4550lbs, 52/48 weight dist) has about the same weight over its rear axle as you do over your front. Given the same tire, my Jag will have the same initial traction from rest as you do, but once the vehicle is moving, weight transfer will increase the Jag’s traction.
We get snow and ice here in Dallas, and it’s a great laugh to watch the FWD cars herk and jerk their way up slick hills, assuming they can make it, while the big steel cat just powers straight up them. :D
You might want to put that on a dyno... those “400hp” figures from the 70s have been *proven* to so often be just so much hot air.
As a British car guy, unless he’s putting another Rolls engine in it, run away.
Also, be prepared to rebuild the underhood wiring harness.
He may not pass - that specific 454 used a particularly wretched TBI implementation, if memory serves.
yes he is planning on using a rolls engine from that era. he loves the look of the older rolls he says he can get them at a reasonable price but they have 100k on the engine. I really dont think it would be a problem to leave it be. but he says it will be the last car he will own so he wants a fresh engine.
Fair enough. Rebuild the underhood wiring harness *first* with all modern wires and connectors and you’ll avoid a lot of nightmares before, during, and after the swap. Also, make sure the TH400 behind the engine is properly rebuilt. Next, unless it has the later GM-sourced HEI ignition system, convert it to the optical or CDI aftermarket ignition controls. Then install an aftermarket transmission cooler and a larger (+1 core) radiator of good quality to avoid the thermal kills so common to Brit cars of the era. Finally, fit the car with at LEAST a 105 amp (bigger is better) alternator and upgrade the battery and alternator leads to avoid a lot of the electrical problems with the car. You may also wish to fabricate some electric fans for it.
rolls has a gm tranny? cool
Back in the 70s, if you were a maker with a high horsepower engine and/or a heavy car and needed a transmission, you called GM and got a TH400. All the more so, since GM’s had a transmission plant in *France* of all places for the longest time.
Many brands used them, including some you’d never think of. From Wikipedia:
“Other non-GM firms have used the THM400 and its 4L80E successor, including Ferrari (in the 400/412), Jeep (usually found in the SJ pickups and SUVs), Jaguar (found in their pre-1997 XJ12 and XJ-S coupes), Rolls-Royce (1965–1980 Silver Shadow and 1980-1992 Silver Spirit series cars, along with their Bentley stablemates), and AM General. It has been known to adapt a THM400 to other engines via the use of adapter plates. “
GM’s French plant still makes BMW’s automatic transmissions under contract. They’re BMW designs, and GM doesn’t use them (because they can’t) but they put them together over there.
[You might want to put that on a dyno... those “400hp” figures from the 70s have been *proven* to so often be just so much hot air.]
It will not diminish the value if it doesn’t make 400HP. I’m just purchasing this 57 Bel Air as a rebuildable collectible, so 400 Horsies is a bit too much anyway. Don’t have a dyno handy, guess I will have to get the HP from quarter mile times. Whoopee!
Under #10K in 1958.....awesome 3rd gear in that Pony.
Okay, just so long as you know that.
It’s quite amusing and sad when the proud owner of something like a Chevelle SS comes out to a dyno day crowing about his freshly restored stock configuration 454 LS6 with 450 horsepower... only to find out that the thing *really* only makes 270-280 at the crank and makes about 225-250 at the wheel. And then he discovers that the guy with the turbo 350Z that he was belittling for having a “tiny, puny, weak engine” not 30 seconds before turns out to be pushing 410hp at the wheel... and the guy with the blower Mustang Cobra is pumping out *460* horsepower at the wheel from a “tiny 281 engine”. And the guy with the snorting “slow ass” diesel truck? Yeah... he’s got propane injection and he’s cranking out **650-plus** horsepower at his rear wheels.
It’s apparently quite a shock when these people realize that no, those muscle cars really weren’t as powerful as they claimed and that modern cars put them to shame.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.