Das Projekt Nein Fo-Fo

Strut your greasy stuff!
User avatar
Huckleberry
Chief Patty Officer
Chief Patty Officer
Posts: 1409
Joined: Tue Nov 20, 2018 9:10 am
Drives: 2004 GTO
Location: Hi. I'm in Delaware.

This project was a long time coming. Probably about 12 or 13 years ago, a friend of mine and I started talking about building a Chevy 302. He used to race back in the 70s and 80s, and said that he had always wanted to build one. He had messed with more than his fair share of 350s, 396s, and 427s, but he never went in the opposite direction with displacement when it came time to build another. That seems to be the case with a lot of people who ponder about the Chevy 302, its allure, and the mythos it has developed over the decades. The internet is full of people asking about the motor and the possibility of building one, but their curiosity is often met with strong opposition wielding convincing arguments that always circle around the simple ratio of horsepower per dollar. Yes, it seems counterintuitive to the hotrodder's mantra to not maximize the amount of horsepower gained for every dollar spent, but this hobby is more than dyno queen hero runs, and this project's purpose is to build something that will happily sing while navigating the road less traveled.

My friend and I would talk during our lunch breaks about the motor, and we would throw around ideas of where it would ultimately reside. S10s, 3rd Gens, and G-Bodies were frequently discussed due to their low cost of entry and abundance of parts, but it was all nothing more than lunchroom banter. As the days went on, the conversations shifted onto other topics, and it wasn't until a few years later when it sparked back up again. It was at this point when the Porsche 944 was brought into the mix, and the idea caught my eye. I began doing research on swapping a V8 into a 944, but at that time, I wasn't prepared financially or with my abilities to take on the task. So, more time passed by, and other projects came my way: transplanting my totalled GTO into a new shell, restoring my dad's 64 Impala, restoring another friend's 1980 Rabbit, and building my wife's 1981 El Camino. Each project brought its own challenges, and as each one progressed and my skills improved, I always had the Chevy 302 in the back of my mind.

Unfortunately, my friend passed away in 2017. I owe a lot more to him than just this aspiration to build a motor that no one understands as to why. He's the one who got me into the hobby, who took the time to show me not just how to turn a wrench, but how to apply the concepts behind the parts I was bolting together. The four project cars, the tool collection, the knowledge gained, and the knowledge passed on can all be attributed to him. Needless to say, this project is a culmination of those years.


While finishing up the Rabbit in 2018, my other friend, Geoff, had gotten wind of a 944 with a bad clutch that his buddy was trying to unload. At the time, though I was talking about wanting to do the project, I wasn't prepared to take the plunge. The garage was filled with my dad's Impala, his Rabbit, and the El Camino. My GTO was hanging out at my mom's until I was able to get the Rabbit finished. While we were assembling the car, Geoff would update me on the dropping price of the 944. Given that the value of those cars were rising, I ultimately passed due to the lack of space and free funds. Over the course of a year, I began to start seriously looking for a chassis since the Impala was now nearing completion and I would have an open garage spot. I looked at 944s, 240Zs, C4s, G-Body Malibus, and 300ZXs. Everything was going up in price due to Radwood, so I continued to watch Marketplace and Craigslist. That was when Geoff told me that his buddy's 944 was still available for sale. I was shocked given the price he was asking. I had assumed that it would have been long gone by then. Much to my fortune, it wasn't, and Geoff was so kind as to let the 944 hang out in his driveway until the Impala was finished up. So, in June of 2019, I bought a car cover, and we went down to Virginia and picked it up:

Image
User avatar
wap
Chief Master Sirloin of the Wasteful Steak
Chief Master Sirloin of the Wasteful Steak
Posts: 38966
Joined: Wed Nov 02, 2016 11:52 pm
Drives: Blue Meanie
Location: Pepperland

Oh man.
:popcorn:
:gonbgud:
:wap: Where are these mangos?
User avatar
Acid666
Senior Chief Patty Officer
Senior Chief Patty Officer
Posts: 3117
Joined: Thu Nov 03, 2016 9:47 am
Drives: 02 Z06/95 Meowta/05 SilveraDOE

Before I settled on my C5 Z06, I debated on project cars and turn key cars. Turn key, the Z06 and S2000 were on top of the list. Project cars, the 944 was strangely on top of the list for just some weird reason. It's quirky, kinda cool and kinda ugly all in the same package. I read they take LS motors fairly well and it comes out lighter than the stock motor since it's aluminum.
Looking forward to this project baw!
User avatar
Huckleberry
Chief Patty Officer
Chief Patty Officer
Posts: 1409
Joined: Tue Nov 20, 2018 9:10 am
Drives: 2004 GTO
Location: Hi. I'm in Delaware.

Acid666 wrote: Mon Oct 12, 2020 9:23 pm Before I settled on my C5 Z06, I debated on project cars and turn key cars. Turn key, the Z06 and S2000 were on top of the list. Project cars, the 944 was strangely on top of the list for just some weird reason. It's quirky, kinda cool and kinda ugly all in the same package. I read they take LS motors fairly well and it comes out lighter than the stock motor since it's aluminum.
Looking forward to this project baw!
They do take LS engines well, and as a result, most of the support for the SBC/LT1 has dried up for these cars. It has even gotten to the point of when people ask about the parts for an LT1/SBC swap, they are mostly met with, "Just go LS." While I love LS engines, there is some merit to the older V8s. One of those merits is that they are even more compact than the LS.
User avatar
Acid666
Senior Chief Patty Officer
Senior Chief Patty Officer
Posts: 3117
Joined: Thu Nov 03, 2016 9:47 am
Drives: 02 Z06/95 Meowta/05 SilveraDOE

Huckleberry wrote: Tue Oct 13, 2020 3:19 pm
Acid666 wrote: Mon Oct 12, 2020 9:23 pm Before I settled on my C5 Z06, I debated on project cars and turn key cars. Turn key, the Z06 and S2000 were on top of the list. Project cars, the 944 was strangely on top of the list for just some weird reason. It's quirky, kinda cool and kinda ugly all in the same package. I read they take LS motors fairly well and it comes out lighter than the stock motor since it's aluminum.
Looking forward to this project baw!
They do take LS engines well, and as a result, most of the support for the SBC/LT1 has dried up for these cars. It has even gotten to the point of when people ask about the parts for an LT1/SBC swap, they are mostly met with, "Just go LS." While I love LS engines, there is some merit to the older V8s. One of those merits is that they are even more compact than the LS.
Yeah I guess it really just depends on what you're looking for in your build. Teenage and 20-something Acid would be all about the big numbers and the most horsepower you can get, but after having a z06 with 400 at the wheels, and doing a ton of autocross, I learned that I can likely enjoy any good engine build in the 300+hp range and not have to go balls to the wall since I'm not into drag racing anymore. I think after being exposed to the Z06 and the Meowta for a while has given me a better appreciation for for all sorts of milder builds that are just better handling and capable of not putting you in a ditch.
User avatar
Detroit
Chief Master Sirloin of the Wasteful Steak
Chief Master Sirloin of the Wasteful Steak
Posts: 38085
Joined: Thu Nov 03, 2016 6:10 am
Drives: Gladiatrice

I love this, and am excited to follow along. I've debated this swap since I had my 951 and figured I'd go this route if I blew the engine up.

What are you doing for transaxle? I recall that Turbo LSD transaxles work really well for this swap.
Desertbreh wrote: Tue Oct 10, 2017 6:40 pm My guess would be that Chris took some time off because he has read the dialogue on this page 1,345 times and decided to spend some of his free time doing something besides beating a horse to death.
User avatar
D Griff
Trollistrator
Trollistrator
Posts: 18554
Joined: Thu Nov 03, 2016 8:49 am
Drives: Plastic Fantastic + Beep Beep

Hell yeah man, excited to see this unfold!
User avatar
Huckleberry
Chief Patty Officer
Chief Patty Officer
Posts: 1409
Joined: Tue Nov 20, 2018 9:10 am
Drives: 2004 GTO
Location: Hi. I'm in Delaware.

Since the N/A 944s had paltry brakes from the factory, I decided to start there. Of course, my research showed that Porsche parts still come with Porsche prices. However, I did find a post where someone had mentioned that they thought the brakes from an 04-06 GTO would fit without much issue, but further research into the matter yielded no actual testing. It appeared that most people either swallowed their pride and bought Turbo calipers or bought adapters to bolt on Lexus calipers. The fact that the GTO caliper idea was floated but seemingly never tested piqued my interest since I am a fan of the 04-06 GTOs, and more importantly, had a spare set of 05/06 brakes sitting around. So, I popped one of the original calipers off and did a little test fit:
Image

The bracket bolted on and the holes lined up perfectly!

The next test was the wheel fitment. With these calipers, the brakes require a minimum of 17" wheels for clearance. Luckily, the previous owner had upgraded the 944 to 17s.
Image

Image

She's close, but she clears!
Image
Image
Image

Here are some comparisons of the calipers and the pads:
Image
Image

The next part of the puzzle was the rotor. The factory GTO rotor for this caliper measures 318mm x 32mm, and the stock 944 rotor has a depth of 74mm:
Image

That 74mm depth was no dice with the caliper bracket:
Image

So, I started scouring the internet for rotors that would fit the dimensions I needed. Thanks to Porsche's oddball 5x130mm bolt pattern, I was limited in choices that didn't require a trip to the machine shop. I came across Sebro 205838C, which was a 318x32mm rotor with a 68mm depth, and she seemed promising:
Image
Image

But, alas, the rotor's diameter was too narrow.
Image

See, what had happened was, while the bracket bolted onto the 944, the 944's position on the knuckle moved the caliper out by a half inch. So, instead of 12.5"/318mm rotor, I needed a 13"/330mm rotor. So, it was back to the internet to do some more digging. After a few more trial runs of purchasing rotors, testing, and returning, I finally found an affordable, bolt-on solution. It is 330mmx28mm, and sits at the appropriate depth:
Image
Image
Image
Image

The next step was dealing with the flex lines. That part was easy. Since the GTO also used metric fittings, I just used stainless brake lines for an 04 GTO. The only modification needed was to take a step drill bit to the strut's bracket for the line's bushing:
Image
Image

So, yes, GTO do calipers work, and made for a rather cheap brake upgrade to the front.
User avatar
Huckleberry
Chief Patty Officer
Chief Patty Officer
Posts: 1409
Joined: Tue Nov 20, 2018 9:10 am
Drives: 2004 GTO
Location: Hi. I'm in Delaware.

Acid666 wrote: Tue Oct 13, 2020 3:34 pm
Huckleberry wrote: Tue Oct 13, 2020 3:19 pm

They do take LS engines well, and as a result, most of the support for the SBC/LT1 has dried up for these cars. It has even gotten to the point of when people ask about the parts for an LT1/SBC swap, they are mostly met with, "Just go LS." While I love LS engines, there is some merit to the older V8s. One of those merits is that they are even more compact than the LS.
Yeah I guess it really just depends on what you're looking for in your build. Teenage and 20-something Acid would be all about the big numbers and the most horsepower you can get, but after having a z06 with 400 at the wheels, and doing a ton of autocross, I learned that I can likely enjoy any good engine build in the 300+hp range and not have to go balls to the wall since I'm not into drag racing anymore. I think after being exposed to the Z06 and the Meowta for a while has given me a better appreciation for for all sorts of milder builds that are just better handling and capable of not putting you in a ditch.
Yeah, I was the same in my 20s. My GTO makes 500 at the wheels and can be a handful. I went up in displacement with that car, and it certainly requires feathering of the throttle. This 944 is a different approach to fun.
User avatar
Zillon
Chief Master Sirloin of the Wasteful Steak
Chief Master Sirloin of the Wasteful Steak
Posts: 25698
Joined: Wed Nov 02, 2016 10:11 pm
Drives: Terrorist Taco / Jizz Rocket
Location: Dirty JerZ

:excited:

I'll be watching this one.
Zildor the Liberal Cuck
Garage: 2013 Terrorist 🌮 | 2006 :jizz: rocket
Bender wrote:Lulz you don't respect science. You respect fake science that validates your pre-existing opinions.
User avatar
Huckleberry
Chief Patty Officer
Chief Patty Officer
Posts: 1409
Joined: Tue Nov 20, 2018 9:10 am
Drives: 2004 GTO
Location: Hi. I'm in Delaware.

The next thing I tackled was upgrading the fuel pump to a Bosch 044 unit. The Bosch pump is a perfect replacement pump for the 944. I took the time to also replace the fuel filter.
Image
Image

I wrapped the pump in the original sleeve, and upgraded the wiring gauge due to the increased amp draw.
Image

Instead of trying to get the interior apart, I ran a new hardline from the engine bay to the fuel pump with the thicker gauge wires. The fuel pump is going to be powered by a relay that is trigger by the Holley Temrinator X, so I don't need to tap into the factory harness.
Image

I used a 135* -10AN pushlok fitting to make the short transition from the tank to the pump.
Image

And I used -6AN fittings with Pushlok hose to connect the pump to the fuel filter.
Image

To go from the fuel filter to the factory line, I removed the original flex hose, cut the hose off the fittings, cleaned up the fittings in my blast cabinet, and reassembled with new hose and crimped ends. It sure as hell beat the near-$100 price tag people wanted for a replacement fuel line.
Image

On the other side, in the engine bay, I used the trusty -6AN compression fittings that I have used before. Of course, I was thrown for a loop since the Porsche lines were metric and the compression fittings were standard. When I had measured the return line, it came out to 5/16, so I had assumed that the feed line was also 3/8". That was incorrect; the line was 10mm, and the 3/8" compression ferrule was not able to fit over the line. Luckily, I was able to source 10mm ferrules and the fitting was installed.
Image
User avatar
Huckleberry
Chief Patty Officer
Chief Patty Officer
Posts: 1409
Joined: Tue Nov 20, 2018 9:10 am
Drives: 2004 GTO
Location: Hi. I'm in Delaware.

Next up was the engine bay:
Image

I started by getting the cruise control, brake master/booster, tank evap controller, and clutch master out of the way:
Image

Then I picked up a Wilwood 260-10373 master cylinder, which has a 13/16" bore over the 3/4" bore of the stock master. This master is designed to fit in tight spaces, and the 944 clutch master is basically wedged inbetween the firewall and the strut tower. One issue with the Wilwood is that its pushrod thread pitch is 5/16-24", which doesn't jive with the M8x1.25 clevis. There are vendors who sell a new clevis with the SAE thread pitch for a pretty penny. However, I simply got a 5/16-24 female to M8x1.25 male adapter.
Image

I had to cut about 5/8"-11/16" off the master's pushrod so the assembly didn't protrude beyond the clutch pedal, but a few jam nuts later and I was in business:
Image

The master also requires the stud holes on its body to be slotted. A few minutes with the rotary tool later, and I was off to the races:
Image

The next part of the puzzle was the clutch reservoir. Originally, the 944 had also used the reservoir on the brake master for the clutch, but since I was not sticking with the factory master, I had to come up with a solution. Once again, space is limited in the engine bay, and even more so near the clutch master. Most reservoirs have the outlet on the bottom pointed down. The GTO's clutch reservoir, on the other hand, has the outlet pointed outward, and I just so happened to have a spare reservoir. So, with some quick trimming of stock sheet metal, I had myself a bracket for the reservoir:
Image

And with the help of some Honda touch-up paint, I was able to get a pretty decent match:
Image
Image

I used an 1/8 NPT to -4AN 90* swivel adapter to connect the master to the clutch line.
Image
User avatar
Huckleberry
Chief Patty Officer
Chief Patty Officer
Posts: 1409
Joined: Tue Nov 20, 2018 9:10 am
Drives: 2004 GTO
Location: Hi. I'm in Delaware.

At this point, it was time to pull the motor out. This was a teaching moment for me. I'll be the first to admit that I knew dick-all about the 944 when I bought it. I knew the car's clutch was shot, and I knew that I did not need the motor that was in the car. When it came to the values of used engines, I looked around to see what they were going for. The typical NA 2.5L was in the neighborhood of $400-500 from what I could see. Being that mine was an '89, I found out that I had a 2.7L. I couldn't find any examples of 2.7Ls on the used market, so I listed it for $500. No sooner than I had posted the ad on Facebook, my phone was exploding with messages. I had one guy willing to drive from Quebec to buy this thing. Another guy just wanted the block and cylinder head, and when I told him I wasn't interested in tearing the motor apart, he offered $750 for those two items. This got me curious, and a guy who sells Porsche parts reached out to me and offered information on what I had exactly, as well as the value of the parts. So, after some back and forth, I had the motor sold for $400 more than what I had paid for the car. I gave my dad a call asking for some assistance, and we got the motor out of the car, strapped, wrapped, and shipped off to its new owner, who arranged for the freight.
Image
Image
Image
Image
Image

Now we have more room for activities. In the top left, you can see the location of the fuel pump relay and fuse:
Image
User avatar
Tarspin
Senior Master Sirloin
Senior Master Sirloin
Posts: 10634
Joined: Fri Nov 04, 2016 6:06 pm
Drives: Aaarrr
Location: Georgetown, Canada

Wow you're a serious kat, love what you did with the brakes!
User avatar
wap
Chief Master Sirloin of the Wasteful Steak
Chief Master Sirloin of the Wasteful Steak
Posts: 38966
Joined: Wed Nov 02, 2016 11:52 pm
Drives: Blue Meanie
Location: Pepperland

Damn, that is one big 4 cylinder engine.

Damn :impressive: work.
:excited: to follow.
:wap: Where are these mangos?
User avatar
Huckleberry
Chief Patty Officer
Chief Patty Officer
Posts: 1409
Joined: Tue Nov 20, 2018 9:10 am
Drives: 2004 GTO
Location: Hi. I'm in Delaware.

Detroit wrote: Tue Oct 13, 2020 3:58 pm I love this, and am excited to follow along. I've debated this swap since I had my 951 and figured I'd go this route if I blew the engine up.

What are you doing for transaxle? I recall that Turbo LSD transaxles work really well for this swap.
A lot of guys go for the Turbo transaxles. I wound up going for the S2 transaxle for a few reasons: it has a shorter final drive ratio of 3.875 instead of the Turbo's 3.375, it has a taller 5th gear at .75 versus the Turbo's .829, and it is just as strong as the Turbo trans. I wound up going with an open diff S2 trans due to the price disparity between the non-LSD and LSD (Codes AOS and AOT respectively). The AOS I got from a car in California was $700, whereas the AOTs I was finding were $2,000+. I figured I could get the car moving with the open diff, and put the savings towards having the trans built with an LSD of my choosing down the line, instead of spending $2k on a questionable factory unit.

I will say that this California transaxle is friggin' clean.
Image

And since the new trans is waiting to go in, I figured I would get rid of the rubber shift linkage and install shift linkage and a short shift kit from Only944s.
Image

Image

I'm glad I did, because that would have been a major pain to install in the car.
User avatar
Huckleberry
Chief Patty Officer
Chief Patty Officer
Posts: 1409
Joined: Tue Nov 20, 2018 9:10 am
Drives: 2004 GTO
Location: Hi. I'm in Delaware.

So, some deets on the motor:

There won't be too many pictures in this post, but I wanted to give a breakdown on this engine touching on the initial math and the changes made along the way. So, in the mid-90s, GM had two V8s that they put in their B-Body cars: the 5.7L LT1 and the 4.3L L99. Along the way, someone discovered that the L99's 3" stroke crank and 5.94" rods could be paired with the LT1's block and pistons to make a hydraulic roller 302. I believe Hot Rod or Chevy High Performance did an article on this back in the late 90s/early 00s. The one issue with this combination is that, while it would be cheap using factory parts, it was still using a flattop piston that set .025" below deck. Losing .48" of stroke meant that compression was going to suffer and needed to be made up elsewhere. In terms of the original 302, it retained the same 5.7" rod found in the 350, but had a large piston dome to raise compression to 11:1. So, I asked myself, "Why not bring the piston to the deck, if not slightly above the deck of the block?" I began playing with rod lengths and piston compression heights and finally settled on a 6.125" rod and a 1.400" piston. The longer rod would help slow piston speeds while increasing dwell time at top dead center, and the shallower piston would naturally reduce weight in the rotating assembly. This combination would effectively bring the piston to the 9.025" deck height. Assuming there would be a .005" cleanup pass of the deck's surface, the piston would be .005" out of the hole.

So, why the LT1 over a Gen 1 SBC? Well first and foremost, I had an LT1 block laying around that I had acquired for free. It is a 2-bolt main block, but with ARP studs, the webbing is actually stronger than the coveted 4-bolt blocks. Secondly, the LT1's intake manifold actually flows pretty damn well out of the gate, and even better with portwork. The intake also has a very low profile that fits underneath the stock 944 hood, and is set up for port fuel injection. Thirdly, the reverse-flow cooling design allows for more compression to be safely ran. The factory aluminum heads can be milled down to 52-51cc chambers, which would allow me to easily achieve 11:1 compression. Lastly, if I'm going to do an oddball setup in an oddball car, I might as well use the oddball generation of Chevy's small block.

My initial plan was to acquire some LT1 aluminum heads and send them out to be milled and ported. My desired compression ratio relied on the smaller chambers in conjunction with flattop pistons. However, scouring Facebook's Marketplace, I came across an ad selling some LT1 AFR heads and matching T&D rockers for a song. So, I scooped them up. They were older, pre-Eliminator castings that appeared to be in great condition. The one caveat was that they had 58cc chambers. After calling AFR, they told me that the decks could only be safely milled down to a 55cc chamber. This threw off the numbers and dropped compression more than I wanted. The difference would have to be made up with a dome.

After acquiring the crank, rods, main studs, oil pump, and other miscellaneous items, I loaded up the parts and took them to the machine shop.
Image

I then started placing calls to various camshaft manufacturers to work on the specs for the camshaft. I spoke with Cam Motion, Bullet, Howard, Erson, Isky, and Comp. Each manufacturer gave me their specs, and they wildly varied. Cam Motion specified one of their low-lash solid rollers at 224/228, 112 LSA. Bullet and Comp were in the mid-high 240s on duration. Erson went with a 230/238, 112 LSA. Isky decided on a 241/249, 112 LSA. Howard went with a 237/245, 112 LSA. Ultimately, I went with Howard. Typically, I tend to lean towards smaller camshafts, but I decided to give Howards spec a shot. The guy I spoke with, Eric, was very interested in my project, and even thanked me for having something that wasn't another 10:1 350 Chevelle. I had questions and he was responsive with the answers. The other companies weren't nearly as responsive, if not at all, and Bullet can piss right off. The guy I spoke to at Bullet felt it was a good plan to criticize the build altogether. I bought the cam, titanium retainers, springs, locks, and locators from Howards. I bought some Isky short travel lifters that are made by Johnson. The pushrods will most like come from Trend.

As anyone who has dealt with a machine shop before knows, these guys take their time. As it turned out, and a reason I hadn't ordered pistons yet, the block needed to be bored .030". This meant that I now needed 4.030" pistons, and my displacement is now closer to being a 305. The shop also felt it was best to leave the heads at 58cc instead of trying to cut them down to 55cc. This meant more piston dome was needed. So, a call was placed to Autotec, the same company that supplied pistons for my GTO's 404, and I had a set of 4.030", 1.400" height pistons with 7.6cc domes ordered.
Image

Shortly after the pistons arrived, I received a call from the shop. The block's deck height had been previously cut down to 9.015, and after the shop made its finishing pass, the deck height was now 9.010. This effectively puts the piston .015" out of the hole. I was rather irritated with this news since my dimensions were made known to them at the start of the project, and I figured that deck height was verified when I was talking to them about piston options. Fortunately, Cometic makes a head gasket that is .056" thick, which keeps my quench at the desired .041". In the end, the compression went from 11:1 to 11.5:1. This is where the reverse-flow cooling comes in handy.

The final word of bad news occurred last week. I received a call about the cylinder heads. The machinist started cutting the seats and found that they were not concentric with the guides. Basically, he could fix them, but the price tag would be more than new heads. It's really the first time I got burned by a used purchase from the internet. It stung, but I'll get over it. More importantly, this put me in a bind, because most of the LT1 heads had a 55cc or smaller chamber, and since I had bought pistons with the 7.6cc dome, the smaller chambers were resulting in compressions over 12:1. While it is doable to run a 12:1 LT1 on pump gas, it wasn't something I really had a desire to tackle. After looking around some more, I found that Dart has a Pro1 casting that comes with 58cc chambers and 180cc runners. After placing a call to Dart, I was in luck. They ceased production on their LT1 line, but they had two pairs of 180cc Pro1 heads in stock. Now they only have one pair left. The second issue was the T&D shaft rockers that came with the AFRs. I wanted to use the shaft rockers for stability, but after calling T&D, they informed me that my rocker stands would not work, and since the rockers were older with no stamped part numbers, they couldn't verify if the rockers would work or not. I mulled it over, but ultimately decided to order a set of T&Ds to go with my Dart heads.

For the exhaust, I went to Sanderson. They offer a blockhugger with a 1 3/4" primary. The part number is CC-134. Space in the engine bay is tight, and these should still help the motor breathe.
Image

So, in summation, here is where I stand with the motor:
Bore: 4.030"
Stroke: 3.000"
Rod Length: 6.125"
Rod: Scat Pro I-Beam
Piston Height: 1.400"
Dome Size: 7.6cc
Head Gasket Bore: 4.100"
Compressed Thickness: .056"
Camshaft: 237/245, .564/.563, 112 LSA/108 IC, Hydraulic Roller
Lifter: Isky Racing 2077HYRT, Silver Series HPX Short Travel
Cylinder Head: Dart Pro1, 180cc
Combustion Chamber: 58cc
User avatar
Detroit
Chief Master Sirloin of the Wasteful Steak
Chief Master Sirloin of the Wasteful Steak
Posts: 38085
Joined: Thu Nov 03, 2016 6:10 am
Drives: Gladiatrice

Huckleberry wrote: Tue Oct 13, 2020 9:19 pm
Detroit wrote: Tue Oct 13, 2020 3:58 pm I love this, and am excited to follow along. I've debated this swap since I had my 951 and figured I'd go this route if I blew the engine up.

What are you doing for transaxle? I recall that Turbo LSD transaxles work really well for this swap.
A lot of guys go for the Turbo transaxles. I wound up going for the S2 transaxle for a few reasons: it has a shorter final drive ratio of 3.875 instead of the Turbo's 3.375, it has a taller 5th gear at .75 versus the Turbo's .829, and it is just as strong as the Turbo trans. I wound up going with an open diff S2 trans due to the price disparity between the non-LSD and LSD (Codes AOS and AOT respectively). The AOS I got from a car in California was $700, whereas the AOTs I was finding were $2,000+. I figured I could get the car moving with the open diff, and put the savings towards having the trans built with an LSD of my choosing down the line, instead of spending $2k on a questionable factory unit.

I will say that this California transaxle is friggin' clean.
Image

And since the new trans is waiting to go in, I figured I would get rid of the rubber shift linkage and install shift linkage and a short shift kit from Only944s.
Image

Image

I'm glad I did, because that would have been a major pain to install in the car.
:amazing: Very good to know.

Great call on the shift linkage, stock BLOWS...my biggest complaint with the car.
Desertbreh wrote: Tue Oct 10, 2017 6:40 pm My guess would be that Chris took some time off because he has read the dialogue on this page 1,345 times and decided to spend some of his free time doing something besides beating a horse to death.
User avatar
Detroit
Chief Master Sirloin of the Wasteful Steak
Chief Master Sirloin of the Wasteful Steak
Posts: 38085
Joined: Thu Nov 03, 2016 6:10 am
Drives: Gladiatrice

This is so fantastic, that engine choice is :neat: AF. Best thread in here IMO.

What are you doing for an engine management on the LT1?

And what about brakes? Manual brakes or did you find a small power booster? I recall the stock power brake booster takes up too much space.

:bravo: again!
Desertbreh wrote: Tue Oct 10, 2017 6:40 pm My guess would be that Chris took some time off because he has read the dialogue on this page 1,345 times and decided to spend some of his free time doing something besides beating a horse to death.
User avatar
Huckleberry
Chief Patty Officer
Chief Patty Officer
Posts: 1409
Joined: Tue Nov 20, 2018 9:10 am
Drives: 2004 GTO
Location: Hi. I'm in Delaware.

Detroit wrote: Wed Oct 14, 2020 12:09 pm This is so fantastic, that engine choice is :neat: AF. Best thread in here IMO.

What are you doing for an engine management on the LT1?

And what about brakes? Manual brakes or did you find a small power booster? I recall the stock power brake booster takes up too much space.

:bravo: again!
I'm going with a Holley Terminator X for engine management, and got the needed bits from EFI connection for the 24x crank signal and 1x cam signal. So, the motor will be run with LS ignition coils and not the optispark.

I was just getting to the brake master.

When it comes to brake masters in these V8 swaps, it seems that there are two options: manual brakes or hydroboost. When it comes to hydroboost, most people seem to gravitate towards the 98-02 Mustang GT unit, and some go with an older BMW unit due to the fact that the 944's brake master bolts on. There is a company that offers a soup-to-nuts kit for putting a Mustang hydroboost unit in the 944, but when I reached out to them, the cost was over $700. So, I decided to go my own route after picking up a used hydroboost and master off eBay.
Image

The first thing I did was make a cardboard template of the original 944 mounting plate.
Image

I then had to cut off the Ford clevis and thread the rod so that I could install the 944's clevis. The rod had to be extended to reach the pedal, so I used a coupling nut and a short M10x1.5 threaded rod as the extension. You can also see the metal I had traced the cardboard template onto. It was leftover from when I had to weld in a new crossmember in my friend's 99 Sierra's frame.
Image

Once the template was traced, I took out the angle grinder, cut my piece, and did test fits. I used a flap wheel to trim until it sat flush with the firewall. I just grabbed three metric bolts that I had acquired at some point.
Image

Once I was satisfied with fitment, I welded the bolts into place.
Image

The next step was trimming the original mounting plate to fit onto my adapter. One I did that, I bolted my bracket to the firewall and had a friend hold the entire assembly up to it while I secured the clevis to the pedal. My friend moved the assembly around until the pushrod was not at a funky angle. Any sort of funky angle would cause sideloading the cylinder, resulting in wear and an eventual leak of powersteering fluid into the cabin. Once I was happy with the angle, my friend marked the position, and then moved the assembly to the bench vise where I tacked it up.
Image

After tacking it together, I reinstalled the assembly to verify fitment.
Image

Once fitment was verified, I pulled the assembly apart, welded everything up, painted, reassembled, and reinstalled.
Image

The one thing to note is that the unit has to be kept at a 10-11* upward angle in order to keep the pushrod from sideloading the cylinder. This angle is already built into the original bracket. As you can see, the Mustang reservoir also accounts for the angle.
Image

I then got some M10x1.00 bubble flare couplers and short pieces of brake tubing from the parts store to connect the factory lines to the master. I bent the factory lines so that they were between the master and the strut tower in order to maximize valve cover clearance.
Image
User avatar
Detroit
Chief Master Sirloin of the Wasteful Steak
Chief Master Sirloin of the Wasteful Steak
Posts: 38085
Joined: Thu Nov 03, 2016 6:10 am
Drives: Gladiatrice

Huckleberry wrote: Wed Oct 14, 2020 1:29 pm
Detroit wrote: Wed Oct 14, 2020 12:09 pm This is so fantastic, that engine choice is :neat: AF. Best thread in here IMO.

What are you doing for an engine management on the LT1?

And what about brakes? Manual brakes or did you find a small power booster? I recall the stock power brake booster takes up too much space.

:bravo: again!
I'm going with a Holley Terminator X for engine management, and got the needed bits from EFI connection for the 24x crank signal and 1x cam signal. So, the motor will be run with LS ignition coils and not the optispark.

I was just getting to the brake master.

When it comes to brake masters in these V8 swaps, it seems that there are two options: manual brakes or hydroboost. When it comes to hydroboost, most people seem to gravitate towards the 98-02 Mustang GT unit, and some go with an older BMW unit due to the fact that the 944's brake master bolts on. There is a company that offers a soup-to-nuts kit for putting a Mustang hydroboost unit in the 944, but when I reached out to them, the cost was over $700. So, I decided to go my own route after picking up a used hydroboost and master off eBay.
Image

The first thing I did was make a cardboard template of the original 944 mounting plate.
Image

I then had to cut off the Ford clevis and thread the rod so that I could install the 944's clevis. The rod had to be extended to reach the pedal, so I used a coupling nut and a short M10x1.5 threaded rod as the extension. You can also see the metal I had traced the cardboard template onto. It was leftover from when I had to weld in a new crossmember in my friend's 99 Sierra's frame.
Image

Once the template was traced, I took out the angle grinder, cut my piece, and did test fits. I used a flap wheel to trim until it sat flush with the firewall. I just grabbed three metric bolts that I had acquired at some point.
Image

Once I was satisfied with fitment, I welded the bolts into place.
Image

The next step was trimming the original mounting plate to fit onto my adapter. One I did that, I bolted my bracket to the firewall and had a friend hold the entire assembly up to it while I secured the clevis to the pedal. My friend moved the assembly around until the pushrod was not at a funky angle. Any sort of funky angle would cause sideloading the cylinder, resulting in wear and an eventual leak of powersteering fluid into the cabin. Once I was happy with the angle, my friend marked the position, and then moved the assembly to the bench vise where I tacked it up.
Image

After tacking it together, I reinstalled the assembly to verify fitment.
Image

Once fitment was verified, I pulled the assembly apart, welded everything up, painted, reassembled, and reinstalled.
Image

The one thing to note is that the unit has to be kept at a 10-11* upward angle in order to keep the pushrod from sideloading the cylinder. This angle is already built into the original bracket. As you can see, the Mustang reservoir also accounts for the angle.
Image

I then got some M10x1.00 bubble flare couplers and short pieces of brake tubing from the parts store to connect the factory lines to the master. I bent the factory lines so that they were between the master and the strut tower in order to maximize valve cover clearance.
Image
Ditching optispark on the LT1 is 5/7...so awesome that you can control it with a Holley Dominator then. :amazing:

The brake master... :amazing:
Desertbreh wrote: Tue Oct 10, 2017 6:40 pm My guess would be that Chris took some time off because he has read the dialogue on this page 1,345 times and decided to spend some of his free time doing something besides beating a horse to death.
User avatar
D Griff
Trollistrator
Trollistrator
Posts: 18554
Joined: Thu Nov 03, 2016 8:49 am
Drives: Plastic Fantastic + Beep Beep

Damn man, this is incredible! I can't imagine doing all of this on my own, your ingenuity/creativity/knowledge is truly :impressive: !

I can't wait to see more, this is like the :melon: E30 thread of 2020 :megusta:
User avatar
Huckleberry
Chief Patty Officer
Chief Patty Officer
Posts: 1409
Joined: Tue Nov 20, 2018 9:10 am
Drives: 2004 GTO
Location: Hi. I'm in Delaware.

I picked up a Lokar throttle cable for the LT1, and swapped the 944's pedal attachment and firewall grommet onto it.
Image

I also had a spare firewall plug leftover from my buddy's Rabbit restoration that worked perfectly for plugging the hole for the original cruise control cable.
Image

One thing that I failed to mention is that this car has 230,000 on the odometer. It has been very well maintained, but obviously some things needed to be checked. One thing I did check was the runout on the torque tube. From what I have read, on the engine side, maximum allowable runout is 1.5mm, or 0.059". I was getting 0.070". So, the torque tube needed to come out for a rebuild. Removing the torque tube from the car is a bit involved, since everything needs to be dropped: the transaxle, the exhaust, and the rear suspension.
Image

I found a guy on Facebook named Budd Hoffmann who rebuilds the torque tubes. Luckily, he had one ready to go, so I was able to do an exchange. The tube took a day to arrive.
Image

The removal and reinstallation process took more than a day.
Image

The main issue is the spare tire well gets in the way of the torque tube-to-transaxle bellhousing, and there isn't enough room to pivot the tube around that obstruction. So, you have to lower the rear suspension until the tube can slide out. Once it is out, installation is the reverse of removal.
Image

Image
User avatar
Zillon
Chief Master Sirloin of the Wasteful Steak
Chief Master Sirloin of the Wasteful Steak
Posts: 25698
Joined: Wed Nov 02, 2016 10:11 pm
Drives: Terrorist Taco / Jizz Rocket
Location: Dirty JerZ

:amaze:
Zildor the Liberal Cuck
Garage: 2013 Terrorist 🌮 | 2006 :jizz: rocket
Bender wrote:Lulz you don't respect science. You respect fake science that validates your pre-existing opinions.
User avatar
Melon
Trollistrator
Trollistrator
Posts: 10708
Joined: Wed Nov 02, 2016 10:09 pm
Drives: Blue things, Orange thing
Location: 2' Underwater

Dude this is incredible.

Ditching the booster for the brakes?
Airboat Michaelangelo.
Post Reply