Engine Relocation

[cykotic]

I'm looking at 21st century's front clip for my 69 maro, but I was wondering if there's an aftermarket clip that allows moving the engine backwards. If not, has anyone here attempted something like this. And how benefitial is this?

[Mean 69]

Moving the engine back is very, very beneficial for two important reasons. One, it helps the front rear weight bias, and further helps the polar moment of inertia of the car by placing the weight more towards the middle of the car. Two, it is basically impossible to get really good front suspension geometry, and good steering geometry at the same time, without moving the engine. The problem is the interference of the oil pan/balancer withthe rack and pinion unit. The systems out there have either compromised the setup by raising the engine, moving stuff around to make it fit and as a result, compromising the geometry, or both. You can't have it all at the same time (as an exercise, compare where the rack and pinion unit is on a C5 Corvette, both in terms of relationship to the engine, as well as the height, to some of the systems that use these components for aftermarket setups).

Before anyone calls BS, I will say that you can improve the performance of the car, relative to the stock seriously flawed original suspension by replacing with an aftermarket subframe. But, you can also tune out a lot of the really bad stuff with the stock configuration by the use of springs, sta-bars, and shocks, etc.

We are in the process of prototyping our go at the front suspension, and through a ton of research, and a lot of conversation with some very, very savy engineers that have been doing this stuff for almost as long as I have been alive, the conclusion has been made that our max effort front setup will require an engine setback. Most folks won't want to do this, because it will require cutting the firewall (which is ironic because there are very few PT cars that don't do a mini-tub job, same amount of effort!!!), but to do it "right," this is the only way. It is looking like a setback on my 70 Camaro will be about 6" from stock location, based on the use of a small block engine. Big blocks are longer up front and will require additional setback. And no, we won't be using C5 parts.

It's my understanding that Wayne Due offers a C5 based setup that requires a setback too, though I haven't seen one in person and can't comment on the geometry.

Mark

[David Pozzi]

I'd like to add that moving the engine only a couple of inches is not really worth it. The effect on wheel weights on a 108" long chassis is nil.

I think you'd need to move the engine at least 6" to 10", and 10" to 12" would be better. Moving something smaller like the battery from front corner to the trunk is equal to moving the engine back a foot! So do all those tricks before considering moving the engine.
Moving 50 lbs (battery) 10 feet is equal to moving 500 lbs 1 foot.
David

[Mean 69]

I completely agree David, and if "only" trying to improve weight balance is the goal, then it's a heck of a lot easier to remove weight than it is to move the engine (i.e. aluminum block, 'glass hood, etc). If we could get the suspension the way we want it without moving the engine, that is certainly the approach we'd take.

M

[Matt@Lateral Dynamics]

Don't forget that once the engine is set back far enough, even if it isn't enough to really impact front/rear bias, the opportunity to move the engine down is presented. Good stuff there.

Everybody should have a dry sump small block!

[slow4dr]

Unless I make my own front clip to work around my front pan set-up on my engine I will have to run a dry sump.

The other option would be to set the engine back far enough to clear the cross member to which I am not against. :)

[Mean 69]

The other option would be to set the engine back far enough to clear the cross member to which I am not against.

Yeah, baby..... :yes:
M

[race-rodz]

Everybody should have a dry sump small block!

im really suprized how few people run dry sump oil systems, in a "good" handling car it is very easy to starve a wet sump system....even on street tires.

on a side note....there is a fortune to be made if "somebody" were to whip out roadrace dry sump pans for sbc's. 99% of all dry sump pans i found were made for goin left :thmbsdwn:

[Twin_Turbo]

I have a 5 stage dry sump system on my engine with the tank in the back (above the rear axle) I too wanted to move the engine back a considerable amount but ran into a problem, the transmission. Because I'm using a Zf6 with it's internal rails the shifter is in a fixed position and as it is now it's already pretty far back, just in front of the parking brake. Then again the engine is aready a considerable amount behind the front axle on the C3 corvette (about the only reasonably good thing about the chassis/suspension setup) and as low as it gets. I couldn't get it any lower without loosing a lot of ground clearance.

As for the oil pan, I have a stainless dry sump pan, it's custom made and has the 4 scavenge ports equally distributed, one in the front two the pass side front & rear and 1 on the drivers side rear so they are out there.

http://www.crossfire.homeip.net/twinnie/drysumppan4.jpg

http://www.crossfire.homeip.net/twinnie/drysumppan3.jpg

A big block is only about 3" longer than a small block, and that's using a long water pump so w/ a short one you win a little there.It's about 20,5" for the small block and 23,5" for the big block from water pump snout to bellhousing flange.