Rosco's haynes Build

[Tatey]

Ross you want the input and output flange to be as close to parallel as you can to prevent any vibration. When setting the height/offset of the engine you just need to make sure you don't go above 7 deg on each universal joint otherwise you run the risk of shortening the lifespan of the bearings. The smaller the angle the better though.

It's not the be all and end all if they aren't parallel/coaxial and you end up running different angles on both UJ's, it will just introduce more vibration into the system which essentially being a race car you won't really notice. If you were designing a tin top designed to cruise along the motorway at high speed you really don't want to feel that vibration.

If you have a look at the shaft drive Triumphs you will see that only has 1 UJ meaning there isn't a second UJ to cancel out the speed variation and therefore the vibration in the system. And the rear wheel pivots the angle of the joint changes meaning the vibration in the system increases. So don't get too hung up on trying to get it spot on.

[Rosco]

Originally Posted by Tatey

Ross you want the input and output flange to be as close to parallel as you can to prevent any vibration. When setting the height/offset of the engine you just need to make sure you don't go above 7 deg on each universal joint otherwise you run the risk of shortening the lifespan of the bearings. The smaller the angle the better though.

It's not the be all and end all if they aren't parallel/coaxial and you end up running different angles on both UJ's, it will just introduce more vibration into the system which essentially being a race car you won't really notice. If you were designing a tin top designed to cruise along the motorway at high speed you really don't want to feel that vibration.

If you have a look at the shaft drive Triumphs you will see that only has 1 UJ meaning there isn't a second UJ to cancel out the speed variation and therefore the vibration in the system. And the rear wheel pivots the angle of the joint changes meaning the vibration in the system increases. So don't get too hung up on trying to get it spot on.

Ok mate thanks for that, it's just all the mk's I've seen are mounted on the piss with no effort to keep the flanges parallel

[Rosco]

Just been looking at engine position and I'm sort of happy with this current position

Running the engine dead inline it seems to put the output shaft in a good position

If I turn the engine so it's parallel to the outer chassis rail it just skews the output shaft but doesn't improve the position for the prop
And from what I've read it's better for the flanges to be parallel









In this position the total prop length would be 1460mm but I could move the engine back 50mm if I moved the passenger footwell upright back

I have strung a ling between and it's at an angle from the horizontal of about 4 deg, I take it I will still need a 2 piece prop with a centre bearing and a slight kink in the centre so the UJ's aren't running straight

[Rosco]

My main doubt is the more photos of people builds I look at the more seem to have the engine skewed

If anyone could agree or disagree that would be great!

[flyerncle]

Argument was about angle of u/j's in the prop but you would need a center bearing anyway.

[Rosco]

Originally Posted by flyerncle

Argument was about angle of u/j's in the prop but you would need a center bearing anyway.

Sorry I'm confused, what argument?

[Tatey]

Ross you can just use a 2 UJ prop setup with the UJ's 90 degrees out of phase, no need for a centre bearing. You only tend to use a centre bearing when you have 3 UJ's in the proshaft as you need the centre bearing to support the centre UJ otherwise it would be free move in free space.

[Rosco]

Originally Posted by Tatey

Ross you can just use a 2 UJ prop setup with the UJ's 90 degrees out of phase, no need for a centre bearing. You only tend to use a centre bearing when you have 3 UJ's in the proshaft as you need the centre bearing to support the centre UJ otherwise it would be free move in free space.

Yeah I thought that but I thought it was a bit long for a single prop?

[Rosco]

Few exhaust clearance pics



That's looking straight at the side



That's looking straight down the axis of the exhaust ports



And that's a ruler coming straight out of the port



Hopefully I might be able to drop the engine down a tad more, just waiting on AB performance to give me some sump dimensions