Rango.....1942 Willys MB
- Thread starter Metcalf
- Start date
locrwln
Expedition Leader
I guess I have to ask why the "like" for odd fires? I had a beater POS 79 toyota truck that had a odd-fire/th350 swapped in (poorly I might add), but I was not that impressed with it as a motor. Seemed difficult to tune based on the fact that no matter what I tried, it wouldn't smooth out, so it was hard to tell if I was going in the right direction or not. I realize mine was not a good example, but based on the realitively limited support compared to the even-fired motors, I don't see the allure. By the way, the truck came with a 4.1 in the bed, the PO was planning on swapping it in and I sold the truck before I got that far.
Don't get me wrong, I love what you are doing and am really impressed with what you have accomplished, I just don't see what the odd-fire has going for it other than the nostaglia.
Jack
Don't get me wrong, I love what you are doing and am really impressed with what you have accomplished, I just don't see what the odd-fire has going for it other than the nostaglia.
Jack
Metcalf
Expedition Leader
The odd-fire CAN be a really great engine. Like all retro stuff these days you just have to dig a little deeper for information, parts, etc.
The 225 had a 50lb flywheel in manual applications. This makes for GREAT ultra low end stall resistance. I have seen my engine bounce the tach off zero and come back. The 225's also came with a 9.0:1 factory compression ratio. A lot of the later even fire engines where down a few points in compression compared to the odd fire engines.
The willys had one when I bought it also....so.....I used what I had. I have had really good luck with it in general. I had the chance to pick up a complete running spare engine for $250 so I did.
Most of the later 3.8 and 4.1 engines where pretty much dogs compared to the 225 because of the emmissions, smog, and the lower compression ratios. The later motors did probably have more potential with the 4bbl intakes and better heads in the long run.
The 225 is no slouch however, it just needs a little more love in a few areas....
The 225 had a 50lb flywheel in manual applications. This makes for GREAT ultra low end stall resistance. I have seen my engine bounce the tach off zero and come back. The 225's also came with a 9.0:1 factory compression ratio. A lot of the later even fire engines where down a few points in compression compared to the odd fire engines.
The willys had one when I bought it also....so.....I used what I had. I have had really good luck with it in general. I had the chance to pick up a complete running spare engine for $250 so I did.
Most of the later 3.8 and 4.1 engines where pretty much dogs compared to the 225 because of the emmissions, smog, and the lower compression ratios. The later motors did probably have more potential with the 4bbl intakes and better heads in the long run.
The 225 is no slouch however, it just needs a little more love in a few areas....
Metcalf
Expedition Leader
Yup, I think you would spend just about the same on either motor to make the same power. At some point the even fire engine will probably be able to make more power. At that point though your probably talking race gas however....
If I can get 225hp out of my little 225 I will be way happy That doesn't look to be THAT impossible on pump gas with a good all around power band. Honestly, my 225 is mostly lacking in the 3000-5000 range right now. I would give up a little low end power for more mid and top end. I can lug it around in 3rd gear with 4.30 gears and 35" tires at like 1200rpm pretty easy....
If I can get 225hp out of my little 225 I will be way happy
That doesn't look to be THAT impossible on pump gas with a good all around power band. Honestly, my 225 is mostly lacking in the 3000-5000 range right now. I would give up a little low end power for more mid and top end. I can lug it around in 3rd gear with 4.30 gears and 35" tires at like 1200rpm pretty easy....bishopdunn
Observer
When you raised the front fenders did it require moving the front grill and radiator further forward and how did it affect your cooling? Did you have to modify your fan shroud or did you go with an electric fan? What is the distance from your water pump to your radiator? Were you looking for a particular clearance? Did this affect your engine placement front to back?
Metcalf
Expedition Leader
yes, with the fenders raised along the cowl slope that pushed the grill forward 1.38"
I have been running an electric fan for a while, before this current rebuild. It is a OEM dual fan unit from a 90s Chrysler New Yorker if I remember right. It's on an 80s Datsun pickup radiator that has been mounted to a modified grill shell. This radiator is pretty short top to bottom which is nice for the flat fender grill height.
I can measure the distance from the water pump to the radiator if you need it. The water pump pulley basically tucks between the dual electric fan motors.
There wasn't a specific distance I needed for the radiator or fan. It just needed to clear the front of the engine.
I took advantage of the extra 1.38" in nose length to push the motor slightly forward. This forward position allowed me to mount the motor higher in the chassis for more belly clearance without totally having to redo the firewall. I still had to have a huge tunnel cover, but the firewall is pretty intact.
I have been running an electric fan for a while, before this current rebuild. It is a OEM dual fan unit from a 90s Chrysler New Yorker if I remember right. It's on an 80s Datsun pickup radiator that has been mounted to a modified grill shell. This radiator is pretty short top to bottom which is nice for the flat fender grill height.
I can measure the distance from the water pump to the radiator if you need it. The water pump pulley basically tucks between the dual electric fan motors.
There wasn't a specific distance I needed for the radiator or fan. It just needed to clear the front of the engine.
I took advantage of the extra 1.38" in nose length to push the motor slightly forward. This forward position allowed me to mount the motor higher in the chassis for more belly clearance without totally having to redo the firewall. I still had to have a huge tunnel cover, but the firewall is pretty intact.
bishopdunn
Observer
Thanks, I don't need the measurement. It sounds like you basically just pushed the engine as close to the radiator as possible. Was it the same setup before the build?
Metcalf
Expedition Leader
The engine is what I would call a normal distance from the radiator.
I had a mechanical fan on it when I first bought it. I changed to the electric fan(s) when I changed over to the HEI ignition system.
During the latest build I pushed the engine forward a bit since I was making the 'nose' of the vehicle longer ( from raising the fenders along the cowl ). This let me use the same radiator hoses and everything also.
I had a mechanical fan on it when I first bought it. I changed to the electric fan(s) when I changed over to the HEI ignition system.
During the latest build I pushed the engine forward a bit since I was making the 'nose' of the vehicle longer ( from raising the fenders along the cowl ). This let me use the same radiator hoses and everything also.
bishopdunn
Observer
Is your HEI an aftermarket unit specific to the odd-fire?
Metcalf
Expedition Leader
Specific to the odd fire engine, but not the expensive aftermarket version, its just a $20 pick and pull unit from an 1976 odd-fire 231. You can get them at any decent parts house....
They are a TIGHT fit on a 225 odd fire engine. You have to file down the mounting ear on the intake manifold closest to the distributor a little bit. You also replace that bolt in the intake with a button head allen bolt to make a little more room. The distributor just drops in after that.
The factory HEI is a good little unit but needs a little tuning just like everything else for peak performance. The mechanical advance and vacuum advance both need to be tuned to the engine.
I've been running the same $20 pick and pull unit for 10 years now. I should probably get a rebuilt one soon
They are a TIGHT fit on a 225 odd fire engine. You have to file down the mounting ear on the intake manifold closest to the distributor a little bit. You also replace that bolt in the intake with a button head allen bolt to make a little more room. The distributor just drops in after that.
The factory HEI is a good little unit but needs a little tuning just like everything else for peak performance. The mechanical advance and vacuum advance both need to be tuned to the engine.
I've been running the same $20 pick and pull unit for 10 years now. I should probably get a rebuilt one soon
jeepdreamer
Expedition Leader
I've been running the same $20 pick and pull unit for 10 years now. I should probably get a rebuilt one soon
If it ain't broke... fix it till it is...!
heehee!
Metcalf
Expedition Leader
I forgot to post this info a few days back....I posted it on the Pirate version which has been getting a bit more traffic lately ( hint hint )
Anyways. I had my friend take some comparison measurements on his 1947 CJ2A. His Willys is a much more retro stock build. He is running 31" tires but I think that is about it for suspension modifications. He still has stock springs, shackles, etc.
So. My Willys sits at about 42.88" to the top of the tub in the rear. His cj2a sits at 41.38" to the top of the tub....
Mine is on a 35" tire, his is on a 31" tire. That is basically a 4" difference in overall tire height or a 2" change in radius.
There is only about 1.5" between the two....but I am running a tire with a 2" taller static radius.
So basically my suspension is 1/2" lower than his. He is running a stock suspension. Effectively my suspension has been lowered 1/2" from stock....
Now there are a lot of other factors in the frame height, spring height, shackle length, etc. I find this comical in general. With my shorter military windshield, seating position, and cage height I am pretty sure that I am lower overall than his stock cj2A on 31s! When you figure in the 5" of extra wheelbase and probably close to a foot of extra width to the outside of the tires it is no wonder this thing feels to stable for a 70 year old flat fender!
Anyways. I had my friend take some comparison measurements on his 1947 CJ2A. His Willys is a much more retro stock build. He is running 31" tires but I think that is about it for suspension modifications. He still has stock springs, shackles, etc.
So. My Willys sits at about 42.88" to the top of the tub in the rear. His cj2a sits at 41.38" to the top of the tub....
Mine is on a 35" tire, his is on a 31" tire. That is basically a 4" difference in overall tire height or a 2" change in radius.
There is only about 1.5" between the two....but I am running a tire with a 2" taller static radius.
So basically my suspension is 1/2" lower than his. He is running a stock suspension. Effectively my suspension has been lowered 1/2" from stock....
Now there are a lot of other factors in the frame height, spring height, shackle length, etc. I find this comical in general. With my shorter military windshield, seating position, and cage height I am pretty sure that I am lower overall than his stock cj2A on 31s! When you figure in the 5" of extra wheelbase and probably close to a foot of extra width to the outside of the tires it is no wonder this thing feels to stable for a 70 year old flat fender!
Metcalf
Expedition Leader
In other news...
I am still trying to make sure this thread has most of the info my Pirate thread does.
-I am replacing my SM420 transmission with a T18. The SM420 is a good transmission but I think overall the T18 is a better overall package. The T18 does have the reverse gear bulge of the passenger side of the transmission so running a 1310 U-joint and normal front driveline is a LOT easier. I should be able to ditch my 2-pc front driveline and go back to a somewhat normal front driveline. The T18 is available with a factory adapter to the Dana18/20 transfer case. I am using the D20 version for the 4" locating bore. The overall length of the T18 adapted to a D18 transfer case is shorter than the overall length of an SM420 to a Dana 18 transfer case if you use an off the shelf adapter. Overall I think the T18 is just a better way to go....
-Time for a fully rebuilt transfer case when I install the new transmission. I bought a complete spare twin stick Dana 18 with all oem gears. I will be using to build a 'new' transfer case with the Dana 20 late model 1.25" intermediate shaft housing i have. It's time to just do it right and be done with it.....new bearings, new seals, new intermediate shaft, etc. With the new rebuilt transmission and transfer case I won't have to worry about longer distance driving anymore. I also won't have as many critical one off parts that can't be bypassed if broken.
-I decided to do something a little crazy and different for some additional gearing. I am going to retrofit a low range unit from an older quadratrac transfer case onto the pto port of the Dana 18 transfer case. It will install similar to the AA saturn overdrive, but works the opposite way. I will gain an additional 2.59:1 low range beyond the stock low range. I always like trying new things. Super deep gearing....in the 200:1 range is fun for deep deep snow and technical rock stuff. I haven't seen anyone do it yet so why not. The underdrive also has no effect on driveline length, a really good thing with an 85" wheelbase.
You can read a little bit more about it here. A friend and I have been tossing the idea around for years.
http://www.pirate4x4.com/forum/showthread.php?t=1023228
-Now that I am not trying to chase every last bit of low range out of the transmission, t-case, and axles with the addition of the underdrive, I am trying to decide if I should go with 4.88 or 5.38 gears in the axles. The current 4.30s defiantly are not low enough. I don't see 4.56s being that big of a step adding only like 100rpm or so. 4.88s are pretty much the 1st real step in gearing. 5.38s are the lowest I can go in the D30/44 axle combo. 4.88s give me about 5mph extra at 3000rpm, are a bit stronger, bit cheaper, etc.....
I am still trying to make sure this thread has most of the info my Pirate thread does.
-I am replacing my SM420 transmission with a T18. The SM420 is a good transmission but I think overall the T18 is a better overall package. The T18 does have the reverse gear bulge of the passenger side of the transmission so running a 1310 U-joint and normal front driveline is a LOT easier. I should be able to ditch my 2-pc front driveline and go back to a somewhat normal front driveline. The T18 is available with a factory adapter to the Dana18/20 transfer case. I am using the D20 version for the 4" locating bore. The overall length of the T18 adapted to a D18 transfer case is shorter than the overall length of an SM420 to a Dana 18 transfer case if you use an off the shelf adapter. Overall I think the T18 is just a better way to go....
-Time for a fully rebuilt transfer case when I install the new transmission. I bought a complete spare twin stick Dana 18 with all oem gears. I will be using to build a 'new' transfer case with the Dana 20 late model 1.25" intermediate shaft housing i have. It's time to just do it right and be done with it.....new bearings, new seals, new intermediate shaft, etc. With the new rebuilt transmission and transfer case I won't have to worry about longer distance driving anymore. I also won't have as many critical one off parts that can't be bypassed if broken.
-I decided to do something a little crazy and different for some additional gearing. I am going to retrofit a low range unit from an older quadratrac transfer case onto the pto port of the Dana 18 transfer case. It will install similar to the AA saturn overdrive, but works the opposite way. I will gain an additional 2.59:1 low range beyond the stock low range. I always like trying new things. Super deep gearing....in the 200:1 range is fun for deep deep snow and technical rock stuff. I haven't seen anyone do it yet so why not. The underdrive also has no effect on driveline length, a really good thing with an 85" wheelbase.
You can read a little bit more about it here. A friend and I have been tossing the idea around for years.
http://www.pirate4x4.com/forum/showthread.php?t=1023228
-Now that I am not trying to chase every last bit of low range out of the transmission, t-case, and axles with the addition of the underdrive, I am trying to decide if I should go with 4.88 or 5.38 gears in the axles. The current 4.30s defiantly are not low enough. I don't see 4.56s being that big of a step adding only like 100rpm or so. 4.88s are pretty much the 1st real step in gearing. 5.38s are the lowest I can go in the D30/44 axle combo. 4.88s give me about 5mph extra at 3000rpm, are a bit stronger, bit cheaper, etc.....
Sean VHA #60013
Adventurer
I love your idea to retrofit a low range quadratrac unit - it will be exciting to see how that turns out! Personally, I'd go with 4:88 gearing to retain drivability now that you have an ultra low range sollution :coffeedrink: