engines and axles.

SOA...go full width or stay factory and cut and turn?

I'm only going to 36's for now and think a slightly trimmed 14 bolt would be overkill and a land anchor.....opinions?


Engines: right now I am 196, t-19 close, d-20. I can either swap to most likely a 345 and call it a day or should I look into Cheby swaps?

is the drastic cut in engine weight noticable?

I am going to notice a difference either way in power :rolleyes:
so is it all personal opinion on both of these or are there legitimate gains either way?

Originally posted by mkbruin
engines and axles.

SOA...go full width or stay factory and cut and turn?


Do you want to be able to turn?


I'm only going to 36's for now and think a slightly trimmed 14 bolt would be overkill and a land anchor.....opinions?


Dunno.. think my '44 is up to bald 36" TSLs and a worn out Trashloc?

http://tigger.tmcom.com/~tsm1/scout/jpg/tigger/broken_axle_8_1_2002/smDCP_0184.JPG
http://tigger.tmcom.com/~tsm1/scout/jpg/tigger/broken_axle_8_1_2002/smDCP_0183.JPG



Engines: right now I am 196, t-19 close, d-20. I can either swap to most likely a 345 and call it a day or should I look into Cheby swaps?


345 will be fine.. 304 would probably do the job well enough, too.

Cheaper than a Chevy, and stouter, too.

Engines: right now I am 196, t-19 close, d-20. I can either swap to most likely a 345 and call it a day or should I look into Cheby swaps?

If your looking to save weight you should probably pick something other than a Scout. Do you still have your doors on your Scout? Well those weight about as much as the differecne between the Chevy and IH motors.

Seriuosly find a 345 buy it for a song "Cause it's just an IH motor - aren't they just good for boat anchors..." drop it in and have all the torque you need.

If you have bigger axles avalible than the Stock 44's bolt 'em up you'll be glad you did when you have a 36" tire airborn.

If you do the chevy you will definatly notice the weight loss.

Originally posted by Scoutillac
If you do the chevy you will definatly notice the weight loss.

And if you dump those heavy-ass TSL SXs and go with something like 235/75-15s on some bling-bling aluminum wheels you'll REALLY notice the weight loss and vastly improved acceleration.. and lower center of gravity, too.

:flipoff2:

Hmm.. maybe you'd keep the greasy side down more often then, too.

:D :flipoff2:

I'm going to split the difference between full width and stock. 63 inch axles. Stock 14 bolt rear (very cheap), narrowed fullwidth front with wagoneer axles (cheap). If I don't like how far the tires stick out I can always change the backspacing. I think this is the same width jdlanda runs.

You'll bust those D44's every other month with 36's. Go with the 14 bolt. :)

As far as engines I would only go chevy if you find a low mile Vortec 350 (or 454) cheap WITH the overdrive tranny AND accessories, computer, wiring, etc. The 241's t/c's aren't the greatest (alum cases), but have lower gears.

IMHO keeping the IH tranny and T/C and using an adapter to swap in a 350 in a complete waste of money. Nothing wrong with IH drivetrain, but why spend $500 for the adapter when you can go with an overdrive tranny instead? SMACK :D

Otherwise just stick with a 345 or 392. They're available all day for under 5 bills. 304's go real cheap.

If you go with a BLOWN BBC, power will be the least of your worrys:D For your info I'm running 63 wms - wms at a 102 3/4 long wheelbase. And I still clear a 7 ft tall garage door with the 39.5s.:p

Originally posted by Shadow man
If you go with a BLOWN BBC, power will be the least of your worrys:D For your info I'm running 63 wms - wms at a 102 3/4 long wheelbase. And I still clear a 7 ft tall garage door with the 39.5s.:p

I want to see a pic of your beast. :cool:

What width/backspacing are you running. :question:

Originally posted by Hammerlock
As far as engines I would only go chevy if you find a low mile Vortec 350 (or 454) cheap WITH the overdrive tranny AND accessories, computer, wiring, etc. The 241's t/c's aren't the greatest (alum cases), but have lower gears.


How about a 1989 TBI 350 rebuilt with less than 30k on it, complete w/ wiring harness and computer and ALL accesories...i was even thinking about taking the radiator hose...:p, mated to a sm465, and on the back of that np208, i get the driveshafts and the motor mounts and crossmember. This is in a K10 and the guy is gonna HELP me pull all this. $1,000 bones...i think i scored a deal;) With all the other stuff thats getting thrown in. So thats why im going with the chevy setup...and it's 25 mins away also. So thats a plus. I am not making as much on my IH drivetrain, but thats O.K. im only 200 bones down, i can make that up quick. My 1 ton swap/ 38in tsls and chevy drivetrain should be done in about 3 weeks, i have some sorority formal to go to next weekend, so it would be done sooner, but the girl is calling....maybe ill have a redstar by then, then i will post up some pics:)

Originally posted by snoop dogg


How about a 1989 TBI 350 rebuilt with less than 30k on it, complete w/ wiring harness and computer and ALL accesories...i was even thinking about taking the radiator hose...:p, mated to a sm465, and on the back of that np208, i get the driveshafts and the motor mounts and crossmember. This is in a K10 and the guy is gonna HELP me pull all this. $1,000 bones...i think i scored a deal;) With all the other stuff thats getting thrown in. So thats why im going with the chevy setup...and it's 25 mins away also. So thats a plus. I am not making as much on my IH drivetrain, but thats O.K. im only 200 bones down, i can make that up quick. My 1 ton swap/ 38in tsls and chevy drivetrain should be done in about 3 weeks, i have some sorority formal to go to next weekend, so it would be done sooner, but the girl is calling....maybe ill have a redstar by then, then i will post up some pics:)

Sounds like you got a good deal. Only thing I would watch out for is that it was rebuilt by a reputable shop. Many, many rebuilt engines are junk. Did you do a compression test?

Well i haven't gotten it yet, i put a 100 bucks down for a deposit. I pull it sometime this week, i get to drive it sunday. The guy has a REAL nice shop, and he is a family man...i don't think he is looking to sell junk to a kid:rolleyes:....or i would hope not, things like that seem to happen though. I don't have a way to do a compression check, i know how to and i have done one on my 392 (yuck!). He is helping me pull it soooo, i really don't think this guy is trying to sell me a rebuilt piece of junk. He did say it leaks a little and thats about it. Ill get into it a little more tomorrow.

Well, if he paid $800 for a rebuilt long block it's probably junk. If he paid like $1500+ it's probably fine. I would buy a compression tester. They're only $20. Ask him if it has/had a warranty. Most good shops have a 3yr/36k mile warranty. Cheap shops have 12/12. Good Luck.

Originally posted by Hammerlock
I'm going to split the difference between full width and stock. 63 inch axles. Stock 14 bolt rear (very cheap), .....



umm, stock 14Bolts are 67" wide, unless you can get the cab-n-chassis version, that is 63", and they aren't nearly as common...



HOWEVER, if the CnC versions are plentyfull and cheap in your neck of the woods, they I would gladly pay you shipping plus cost for the outer hubs off one (shipping the whole axle is a waste of $$$$)... let me know.

The CnC units are not very plenyfull, for a reasonable $, around here... but the regular 14b's are under $100 at the PnP, and I can get them all day!! (well, till my back gives out :D)

I'm getting a c&c delivered for $100. I know the biggest diff between the c&c and truck is the hub, but I've read that the housing is diff also. If I find another one cheap I'll send you the parts cheap. I could use a spare set of axles anyway.

I talked to him and it has been built by a reputable machine shop in columbus ga, that i have heard of and know has good stuff. He said, that he has only fouled out 3 spark plugs, it smokes a little when you REaLLy get on it. And it cranks up fine. He was selling the whole vehicle, but all i want is the drivetrain..whole vehicle is 2k...and he does have reciepts of when it was built.

Originally posted by Hammerlock


I want to see a pic of your beast. :cool:

What width/backspacing are you running. :question:
3 " backspace on 14 wide beadlocks puts me at 7'2" wide. My truck is 6' 10 1/2" tall. Just clears the garage. My other Scout on stock axles and 35s is 6'2' wide.

U got pics of that bastard?:eek:

ya pics:cool:

Originally posted by tsm1mt


And if you dump those heavy-ass TSL SXs and go with something like 235/75-15s on some bling-bling aluminum wheels you'll REALLY notice the weight loss and vastly improved acceleration.. and lower center of gravity, too.

:flipoff2:

Hmm.. maybe you'd keep the greasy side down more often then, too.

:D :flipoff2:

Heavy tires, wheels, and axles should help with a lower center of gravity. Losing weight in these areas will raise your center of gravity, right? Course it is Monday, I don't drink coffee, and I have been packing boxes all weekend, so I might just be confused on this one...

Originally posted by Hooper


Heavy tires, wheels, and axles should help with a lower center of gravity. Losing weight in these areas will raise your center of gravity, right? Course it is Monday, I don't drink coffee, and I have been packing boxes all weekend, so I might just be confused on this one...

Yes and no.

From a "throttle performance" stand point bit heavy tires rob power in a big way.

Small, light tires are much snappier performance wise. If a lighter engine is a Good Thing, so are smaller and lighter tires.

That means Radials, not heavy Bias Ply, or heavier Fiberglass Belted Bias Ply.

On the COG bit.. bigger tires weigh more and the weight is generally "lower".. but bigger tires raise the entire body, frame, engine, trans, and driver higher, which more than offsets and perceived benefit of a lower COG by heavier tires.

Plus, you get big enough tires, and half of the weight of the tires ARE up high.

Half the weight of a 44" Bogger is over 22" off the ground.

I'm not saying we should all run short light tires for all of their amazing benefits.. but I can come up with a counter-argument to just about anything (including whatever it is I personally choose to do).. and that's my counter to Kevin's lighter-Chevy motor "you'll feel it".. well, you'll feel smaller /lighter tires more than a lighter engine.

But we're not all swapping our 35+s for weight-saving 235/75R15s on aluminum wheels, are we?

So why rush to replace a 345 with a 350?

:D

Originally posted by tsm1mt
So why rush to replace a 345 with a 350?
:D

There's a saying that sums this up nicely..... "like lemmings to the sea...." :flipoff2:

Originally posted by tsm1mt


Yes and no.

From a "throttle performance" stand point bit heavy tires rob power in a big way.

Small, light tires are much snappier performance wise. If a lighter engine is a Good Thing, so are smaller and lighter tires.

That means Radials, not heavy Bias Ply, or heavier Fiberglass Belted Bias Ply.

On the COG bit.. bigger tires weigh more and the weight is generally "lower".. but bigger tires raise the entire body, frame, engine, trans, and driver higher, which more than offsets and perceived benefit of a lower COG by heavier tires.

Plus, you get big enough tires, and half of the weight of the tires ARE up high.

Half the weight of a 44" Bogger is over 22" off the ground.

I'm not saying we should all run short light tires for all of their amazing benefits.. but I can come up with a counter-argument to just about anything (including whatever it is I personally choose to do).. and that's my counter to Kevin's lighter-Chevy motor "you'll feel it".. well, you'll feel smaller /lighter tires more than a lighter engine.

But we're not all swapping our 35+s for weight-saving 235/75R15s on aluminum wheels, are we?

So why rush to replace a 345 with a 350?

:D

Hmmm, there must be a formula for this... Every inch of tire height raises you 1/2", but adds xlbs below the center of gravity. For the sake of leverage, you can use the axle for the cog of the tire, so the tire above the axle, and tire below the hub, balance each other out to a single point of weight, in line with the axle, which on a 38" tire is only 19" above the ground... well below the cog. I think the weight gain of larger tires outweighs the slight physical height increase of the rig... And steel wheels vs lighter aluminum definitely help COG.....

But, all that being said, I don't think you can quantify it either way. I would say larger tires will have the net effect of lowering your COG, but by how much is difficult to say...

Larger tires are much harder to turn, though, and it is not just because of the mass. Given two donuts of equal mass, a donut with a larger circumference takes much more energy to turn. (Mass has to be accelerated to a higher radial speed) But then, who runs drags in their rig with 42" tires....? ;)

Scoutillac thinks his rig feels lighter because of the smaller chebby, when in fact, it is because he is burning up so much energy hollering at the folks at his work that he is losing weight... ;)

Originally posted by Hooper


Hmmm, there must be a formula for this... Every inch of tire height raises you 1/2", but adds xlbs below the center of gravity.


Need to do some measuring.

Let's take my rig.

4" lift, 33x12.50 radials on steel wheels.

Take a guess on what those tires/wheels weighed?

How about compared to 36x12.50 bias-ply TSLs on 15x8.5 aluminum wheels?

TSLs heavier? ( know the answer, I put the fawkers on)

I didn't change my track width appreciably. Still stock width.

No additional lift, though my entire Scout went up 1.5" or so.

Do you think the weight of the tires, down low, offset raising my T19, my 345, my trail spares, my seats, my doors, ME up 1.5"?

balance each other out to a single point of weight, in line with the axle, which on a 38" tire is only 19" above the ground... well below the cog.



Let's start with a stock SII on 30" tires.

Tire weight is centered around 15" off the ground.

Maybe the COG is 25" off the ground.. though maybe not even that high. Axles are roughly even with the main frame rails under the body tub.

Now bolt on 38" tires. Axles go up to 19", old COG point goes up to 29"

I think the net result is a higher COG.



Larger tires are much harder to turn, though, and it is not just because of the mass. Given two donuts of equal mass, a donut with a larger circumference takes much more energy to turn. (Mass has to be accelerated to a higher radial speed) But then, who runs drags in their rig with 42" tires....? ;)


It's not just drag racing.

With 42s, you can't acclerate or decelerate as quickly. You lift off the throttle, but the tires want to keep rolling, so it's more work on the compression braking (except for those with an auto, ignore this whole concept..)

Or say you want to make a turn at speed. Big heavy tires want to keep going in their current direction of travel.

Heavier rotating mess means more braking required to stop.

Plus it's more weight for your springs and shocks to damp. Say you're going over some "whoop-dee-doos".. the tires are doing to come up the rise and want to keep going and push the rig off the ground, while lighter/smaller tires would want to move, but not push the rig around as much, and glide over the hump better - maintaining more contact with the ground.

If you want a vehicle to handle, you cut down on the unsprung weight.

Not that our Scouts are G-machines.. but "handle" can apply to anything - it's just a "scale" thing.

My Scout handles better than my lawn tractor. But my Mustang handles better than my Scout (at least, if it ran it would..)

In any case, dropping 200lbs of unsprung weight from the tires/axles will make a much bigger difference than dropping 200lbs of sprung weight from the engine.

Admittedly, if you go from heavy 38s to light 38s, your COG will likely rise in the process, though not necessarily.

But your handling will vastly improve with the lighter tires.

Originally posted by tsm1mt


Need to do some measuring.

Let's take my rig.

4" lift, 33x12.50 radials on steel wheels.

Take a guess on what those tires/wheels weighed?

How about compared to 36x12.50 bias-ply TSLs on 15x8.5 aluminum wheels?

TSLs heavier? ( know the answer, I put the fawkers on)

I didn't change my track width appreciably. Still stock width.

No additional lift, though my entire Scout went up 1.5" or so.

Do you think the weight of the tires, down low, offset raising my T19, my 345, my trail spares, my seats, my doors, ME up 1.5"?




Let's start with a stock SII on 30" tires.

Tire weight is centered around 15" off the ground.

Maybe the COG is 25" off the ground.. though maybe not even that high. Axles are roughly even with the main frame rails under the body tub.

Now bolt on 38" tires. Axles go up to 19", old COG point goes up to 29"

I think the net result is a higher COG.




It's not just drag racing.

With 42s, you can't acclerate or decelerate as quickly. You lift off the throttle, but the tires want to keep rolling, so it's more work on the compression braking (except for those with an auto, ignore this whole concept..)

Or say you want to make a turn at speed. Big heavy tires want to keep going in their current direction of travel.

Heavier rotating mess means more braking required to stop.

Plus it's more weight for your springs and shocks to damp. Say you're going over some "whoop-dee-doos".. the tires are doing to come up the rise and want to keep going and push the rig off the ground, while lighter/smaller tires would want to move, but not push the rig around as much, and glide over the hump better - maintaining more contact with the ground.

If you want a vehicle to handle, you cut down on the unsprung weight.

Not that our Scouts are G-machines.. but "handle" can apply to anything - it's just a "scale" thing.

My Scout handles better than my lawn tractor. But my Mustang handles better than my Scout (at least, if it ran it would..)

In any case, dropping 200lbs of unsprung weight from the tires/axles will make a much bigger difference than dropping 200lbs of sprung weight from the engine.

Admittedly, if you go from heavy 38s to light 38s, your COG will likely rise in the process, though not necessarily.

But your handling will vastly improve with the lighter tires.

Hmm, you are right. The extra weight of the tires below the COG does not make up for the 4000lbs going up an inch and a half, or if it does, it is a wash.

Originally posted by Hooper


Hmm, you are right. The extra weight of the tires below the COG does not make up for the 4000lbs going up an inch and a half, or if it does, it is a wash.

C'mon, Hooper.. that was too easy. :D

There I go, ruining a perfectly good debate again...

Originally posted by tsm1mt


C'mon, Hooper.. that was too easy. :D

There I go, ruining a perfectly good debate again...

.... I wasn't finished. Your logic makes sense with a SF rig, but on a RS rig, that all goes out the window... :D :D :D (Just for Rusty!!)

Of course, the old tire weight to width to COG has been kicked around a few times... ;)