Waldo
Sr. Member
   
Posts: 187
Diesel power :o)
|
 |
« on: May 27, 2008, 10:00:12 pm » |
|
Hi, I have worked on the drive shafts for my HDI conversion today... Seems like I have very limited space between my gearbox and trailing arm. I know that the trailing arms on the 2.2 are different from my 1.6... the rear wheels are 20mm further apart, and depending on how my project works, the 10mm might be exactly what I'm looking for! Does anyone have more information about the difference between the 1.6 and 2.2, mainly in regards to the trailing arms but also in general? A picture of the two different trailing arms would be spot on  Also, if you would happen to have a set of trailing arms for a 2.2 I know someone who could be interested in buying 
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Waldo
Sr. Member
   
Posts: 187
Diesel power :o)
|
 |
« Reply #2 on: May 27, 2008, 11:59:45 pm » |
|
Hi Anders, Thanks for the info... Yes I'm more than close on the gearbox side... 5th gear is actually above the trailing arm, and I think the arm might hit the gearbox when the spring is compressed... I will take a few pictures tomorrow. I have found a breakers yard in Germany that are supposed to have a 2.2 sitting around. Asking price: 600 Euro... Anyone needs any other parts (engine, gearbox etc.) Though the trailing arms should be in a bad condition, but I guess a bit of welding can fix most things 
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
Waldo
Sr. Member
   
Posts: 187
Diesel power :o)
|
 |
« Reply #5 on: May 28, 2008, 08:17:07 am » |
|
Hi, Well I could maybe move the engine another 10mm to the right, but I would like to have just a little space on both sides... The 2.2 trailing arms should be an easy fix to my problem. Gearbox is allready sitting as high as possible (or nearly), also I will have problems with the angle of the left drive shaft is the gearbox is much higher... Another thing... Can someone tell my the "correct" ride height at the rear? I measured the two cars I got, from ground to the arch of the fender I have 645mm on my Yellow 1.6. I believe this is slightly lowered, but looks rather nice, so I'm aiming for this height on my HDI (I'm installing adjustable Spax suspension). At moment it's sitting at 680mm, but it will get somewhat heavier (no windscreen, doors, rear window aso) though it won't get even close to the 645mm no matter how heavy it get's... Pictures later today 
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Waldo
Sr. Member
   
Posts: 187
Diesel power :o)
|
 |
« Reply #9 on: May 29, 2008, 08:57:29 am » |
|
Hi Bart, Yes I also believe the drive shaft angle is fine, but still concerned about the trailing arm. I know that I could make more room by cutting the engine mount on the chassis, but that's been my goal not to modify the chassis all the way along... I wan't a conversion that can be taken back to orig., not that I will but I like it that way and also that will give me less problems at MOT I believe... Modifying items like engine, gearbox and bolt on items like engine mounts, trailing arms, exhaust etc. are fine  The lower engine mount is plenty strong I should think. From an engineering point of view that is. It's only designed to take forces in one direction (holding the engine against rotation / torque)... not sure what you think is to weak, but it's very strong indeed made of 40mm pipe with 5mm wall thickness, also rather short.
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Anders Dinsen
Administrator
YaBB God
    
Posts: 2839

WWW
|
 |
« Reply #10 on: May 29, 2008, 10:35:20 am » |
|
The lower engine mount is plenty strong I should think. From an engineering point of view that is. It's only designed to take forces in one direction (holding the engine against rotation / torque)... not sure what you think is to weak, but it's very strong indeed made of 40mm pipe with 5mm wall thickness, also rather short.
I agree, your construction looks very sturdy, perhaps even too sturdy as you may end up deforming the chassis on the high torque levels you are aiming for. I wouldn't worry initially, though, but I think you should take some precise measurements of the chassis, so you can detect deformations before they become serious. The problem is that the vertical bar carrying the engine mount will be subject to torsional forces with your engine, instead of forces that are "straight on" as it was designed to take.
|
|
|
Logged
|
'82 Murena 2.2 prep 142 '01 Grand Espace 24v '08 Smart Fortwo 0,8 cdi
|
|
|
|
|
|
|