Go Back   EcoModder Forum > EcoModding > EcoModding Central
Register Now
 Register Now
 

Reply  Post New Thread
 
Submit Tools LinkBack Thread Tools
Old 09-11-2009, 02:33 AM   #11 (permalink)
Moderate your Moderation.
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Troy, Pa.
Posts: 8,919

Pasta - '96 Volkswagen Passat TDi
90 day: 45.22 mpg (US)
Thanks: 1,369
Thanked 430 Times in 353 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Frank Lee View Post
I'd have to know if the 3800 had any goofy external balancer issues like some small blocks, and for sure the 2.8/3.1 flywheels/bellhousing bolt up? Sweet!

I know for my car there are many different axle combos depending on if it's m/t or a/t, 4 cyl or 6 cyl, etc. I don't know about the GM line but perhaps they are better about interchangeability on that than Ford.

Trans mount fab is no biggie for some of us but then it is a biggie for some of us.

Same with the clutch pedal/linkage.

I've never reflashed an ECU. Something tells me I'd need more than jumper cables to do it.

So how does a 3800 5 sp m/t FWD '59 Bel Air sound?
I honestly can't remember what axles I used to put the 1.9's tranny against the 2.3, going from auto to manual, but I feel like we just used whatever was already installed.

There have been several 3.8 swaps in place of 3.1's and 3.4's in Luminas and other similar mid-size cars, with no talk of adapters or mill work. Without having done the swap myself, that's what I'm going on, but I'll say "yes", they fit. If you check out 60degreeV6.com, you'll probably find a swap or two, if you're really interested.

Reflashing an ECU is the trouble point, here. You're correct on that. Most cases, only dealers can do it. They will only do it based on VIN number, as well. Unless you can find a tuner ($$$$) with the proper equipment, you're going to run funny unless you're swapping in place of an older hydraulic (non-controlled) transmission.

That Bel-Air would def be something... but I'd go for and MR drivetrain if using a 3.8/5 speed. Enough torque to break up the day to day grind, and a rather efficient setup with a decent weight bias. Putting everything up front might seriously upset the weight bias of the car, and I assume that would be important, given the nature of the project. (I'm fairly certain it's not a hypermiler...)

__________________
"¿ʞɐǝɹɟ ɐ ǝɹ,noʎ uǝɥʍ 'ʇı ʇ,usı 'ʎlǝuol s,ʇı"

  Reply With Quote
Alt Today
Popular topics

Other popular topics in this forum...

   
Old 09-11-2009, 03:00 AM   #12 (permalink)
(:
 
Frank Lee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: up north
Posts: 12,762

Blue - '93 Ford Tempo
Last 3: 27.29 mpg (US)

F150 - '94 Ford F150 XLT 4x4
90 day: 18.5 mpg (US)

Sport Coupe - '92 Ford Tempo GL
Last 3: 69.62 mpg (US)

ShWing! - '82 honda gold wing Interstate
90 day: 33.65 mpg (US)

Moon Unit - '98 Mercury Sable LX Wagon
90 day: 21.24 mpg (US)
Thanks: 1,585
Thanked 3,555 Times in 2,218 Posts
What's an MR drivetrain?

I didn't know Luminas and whatnot were available with m/t?

The FWD rationale is, the donor '59 has completely shot floors, trans, rear axle, etc.

The "other donor" '89 Le Sabre has good engine/trans/floors/etc. Drives like a dream, has astonishing power, and gets good fe.

Throw away that Chev X-frame (which I'm not all that fond of anyway as it makes servicing u-joints a rare treat. And, should lose a nice chunk of weight in the process) make sure the custom rockers are stout, stretch the Buick pan 11" (probably somewhere behind the driver's seat) and voila- unibody fwd '59 complete with cushy ride, good roll bars, good brakes, and air-ride suspension. Also the Chev driveshaft tunnel really puts a cramp on the interior- it would be grand to be rid of it. Heh heh flat floor could lead to lower seats could lead to top chop! Weight bias = probably not a whole lot different than the Buick. Total weight probably not a whole lot different either.
__________________



Last edited by Frank Lee; 09-11-2009 at 03:39 AM.. Reason: spelling. yah! ME! i know!
  Reply With Quote
Old 09-11-2009, 03:03 AM   #13 (permalink)
Moderate your Moderation.
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Troy, Pa.
Posts: 8,919

Pasta - '96 Volkswagen Passat TDi
90 day: 45.22 mpg (US)
Thanks: 1,369
Thanked 430 Times in 353 Posts
So basically, you wanna drop the sheet metal of the Belle on the Le Sabre's chassis? Sounds just crazy enough to work...
__________________
"¿ʞɐǝɹɟ ɐ ǝɹ,noʎ uǝɥʍ 'ʇı ʇ,usı 'ʎlǝuol s,ʇı"

  Reply With Quote
Old 09-11-2009, 01:13 PM   #14 (permalink)
Master EcoModder
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: South Jersey
Posts: 553

Little Blue - '98 Ford Escort ZX2 Cool
Team ZX2
90 day: 44.75 mpg (US)

Big Red - '00 Ford Excursion XLT
90 day: 15.53 mpg (US)
Thanks: 5
Thanked 45 Times in 29 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by IsaacCarlson View Post
I pan on running a full-out MANUMATIC transmission. since there is no manual option for my car
i just have to figure out how to run the TCC because it is PWM.
I love that post.....THANK YOU!!
I've researched this PWM issue on my car. It seems they use the PWM to engage the TCC without a harsh grab, then it goes straight to 12V 100%. So you can just hit it with 12V, just need to do it in a low torque/rpm range because it will just hit vs. sliping in.
However, you may want to look into this for your application.....
__________________
  Reply With Quote
Old 09-11-2009, 01:15 PM   #15 (permalink)
Master EcoModder
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: South Jersey
Posts: 553

Little Blue - '98 Ford Escort ZX2 Cool
Team ZX2
90 day: 44.75 mpg (US)

Big Red - '00 Ford Excursion XLT
90 day: 15.53 mpg (US)
Thanks: 5
Thanked 45 Times in 29 Posts
BTW, I made a Manual-Automatic box for my car and was a little disappointed to find out that the ECU was doing a better job than me at shifting at the right points. Except I can hit the TCC sooner than it would. Which, for my commute, doesn't help enough to justify using it. MTX is the next step for me....
__________________
  Reply With Quote
Old 09-11-2009, 01:35 PM   #16 (permalink)
Master EcoModder
 
wagonman76's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Northwest Lower Michigan
Posts: 1,006

Red Car - '89 Chevrolet Celebrity CL 4 door
Team Chevy
90 day: 36.47 mpg (US)

Winter Wagon - '89 Pontiac 6000 LE Wagon
90 day: 28.26 mpg (US)
Thanks: 8
Thanked 17 Times in 16 Posts
I would check the Fiero boards, as there has gotta be someone who put a 3800 or 3800SC w/ 5 speed into a Fiero. Somebody has put pretty much every other combination into those cars.

The only difference after that is the axles, and I'm sure there is something that can be done there with the right combination of GM parts.
__________________

Winter daily driver, parked most days right now


Summer daily driver
  Reply With Quote
Old 09-11-2009, 02:05 PM   #17 (permalink)
eco....something or other
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Colfax, WI
Posts: 724

wood hauler - '91 Ford F-250
Team Pontiac
90 day: 26.69 mpg (US)

Rav - '06 Toyota Rav4 Base
90 day: 26.52 mpg (US)
Thanks: 39
Thanked 67 Times in 50 Posts
It would be nice to have a manual in it.....

like a nice 6 speed or something....but i don't have the money to stick into it.
I am just going to break 40 mpg and MAYBE stop there.....WE'LL SEE
__________________



1991 F-250:
4.9L, Mazda 5 speed, 4.10 10.25" rear
  Reply With Quote
Old 09-11-2009, 03:43 PM   #18 (permalink)
Moderate your Moderation.
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Troy, Pa.
Posts: 8,919

Pasta - '96 Volkswagen Passat TDi
90 day: 45.22 mpg (US)
Thanks: 1,369
Thanked 430 Times in 353 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Frank Lee View Post
Most everything from the rockers on up = '59, and most everything else = '89.

I'm sure it would work. Wouldn't be easy but what the hey.

I've thought about that part of it more than the 5 speed part. But that would be the icing on the cake!

Actually the 3800 a/t combo is pretty decent; I know 3800s actually are rated for higher fe than 3100s, likely due to better trans and gearing. I wonder what the potential accel and fe improvements for m/t would be? Maybe not enough to make it worth it.
You're right, given the nature of the 3800's auto, you can easily make it a manu-matic with switches and a paddle shifter, bypassing the TCU completely.

That makes it less than worth it to swap in a 5 speed if you can keep the TCL engaged all the time.
__________________
"¿ʞɐǝɹɟ ɐ ǝɹ,noʎ uǝɥʍ 'ʇı ʇ,usı 'ʎlǝuol s,ʇı"

  Reply With Quote
Old 09-11-2009, 10:24 PM   #19 (permalink)
Driving the TurboWeasel
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Steuben County, NY
Posts: 459
Thanks: 14
Thanked 18 Times in 17 Posts
I've come within a hairsbreadth of 40 mpg before in my LeSabre. 39.5 according to my ScanGauge. Same 3800 Series II engine, and the 4T65 transmission instead of the 4T60. If you want to keep it automatic, look at a transmission from a Bonneville SE with the 2.84 (IIRC) final drive ratio. Some cars came with a 3.06 FDR for better punch off the line.

The 4T65 is much more electronically tunable than the 4T60, which is still vacuum-actuated for many things.

My car has a little bit of aero done, and nothing with the transmission except regular service. I noticed a difference with the aero mods to the tune of 2 mpg highway.

My next transmission mod is a shift kit to get it into gear faster. At the same time it will be flushed with low-viscosity Dexron-VI ATF. Both should make shifts faster, and reduce losses in moving a thicker fluid around.
__________________
2012 Chevrolet Cruze Eco 6MT
  Reply With Quote
Old 09-12-2009, 12:05 AM   #20 (permalink)
Moderate your Moderation.
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Troy, Pa.
Posts: 8,919

Pasta - '96 Volkswagen Passat TDi
90 day: 45.22 mpg (US)
Thanks: 1,369
Thanked 430 Times in 353 Posts
Dexron VI is what I just put in my wife's transmission w/ a new filter.

Are the ratios in the Bonneville SSEI longer than others? I assumed they woudl be b/c of the supercharger...

__________________
"¿ʞɐǝɹɟ ɐ ǝɹ,noʎ uǝɥʍ 'ʇı ʇ,usı 'ʎlǝuol s,ʇı"

  Reply With Quote
Reply  Post New Thread






Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.5.2
All content copyright EcoModder.com