Modern Drivetrain Compatible w/ Torque Tube? How?

[SBRMD]

Is it possible to hook-up a modern drivetrain, eg. a rear-wheel-drive 3800 V6 w/ a 4L60E overdrive trans, to an existing original torque-tube/rear end as found in a 40's-era Buick? How would one do this? Interested in all opinions, especially those of "the old guy" and others of the '40's Buick persuasion.<BR>Thanks in advance!<BR>Steve.<BR>PS: Don't shoot me, guys, it may be slight heresy, but it is the most modern Buick engine! Also more powerful than a 320 straight eight!

[Guest]

Why don't you put fuel injection on that straight 8

[The Old Guy]

it is probably possible to use the torque tube but it would require extensive machining, and be cost prohibitive. If you are going to change engines, you are better off switching to an open drive rear end.The latest thing is using a complete later chassis and setting the early body on it. This way you have all the later technology for the stopping and handling as well as the <BR>convenience of finding parts at the local <BR>NAPA store instead of waiting three weeks <BR>and finding out you got the wrong part. <BR>

[SBRMD]

Old Guy: Thanks, was hoping you'd check in! The car in mind is a '49 Roadmaster Sedanet, wheelbase 126", rear track 62 3/16", front track 59 1/8". If you had your druthers, what vehicle would you use for the donor chassis?<P>Thanks!<BR>Steve

[SBRMD]

Old Guy, are you out there?

[The Old Guy]

My 57 Special is on a 72 Electra Chassis and the wheel base had to be shortened a couple of inches, so i don't see why you couldn't add a little to the same chassis and put you roadmaster body on it.This way you don't have to worry about re-engineering the suspension. It also has the benefit of using easily found parts, and replaces the border line brakes on the 49. My 57 had brakes the stopped you ,but you had to be VERY careful!

[The Old Guy]

I have a friend that used the later(84-86) chassis from the GM big cars(The rear drive Buick Olds Chevy ) which gave him the OD trans ,but That gives you anOlds or Chevy engine ,and I like my Buick power. I average 17+ MPG with my 455 in my 57 ,so it isn't really that bad

[The Old Guy]

Fisher body ran bodies down the line for years and never changed the line. You will be amazed to see that the body mounting brackets from year to year are the same. The only problem you will face (other than having to move the engine and trans a little) is the upper arms that hold the rear end will need some clearance behind the back seat. The panel behind the seat had to be notched to clear the arms.

[Guest]

With a little ingenuity you'll be able to stick that straight 8 on a modern chassis.

[SBRMD]

That's actually what I was thinking of; late 60's - early 70's Electras had wheelbases in the 126-127" neighborhood, which is more or less the same as the '49 Roadmaster at 126". How do you match up the new frame with the '49 body mounts? How did you mount your '57? -Thanks in advance. Steve.

[Bill Stoneberg]

Hey Tomsriv,<P>How about telling us some details on Fuel injection for a strait 8 ? It sound like an interesting idea.<P>Bill

[Guest]

Bill,<BR> I don't know of anyone that has done it, but if I had a car with a straight 8 I would definately try it. As you probably know, carburated inline engines have some cylinders that always run rich and others that always run lean. I think a modern V8 multi-port efi setup could be adapted to the old straight 8 and give it a noticeable hp increase. Their are companies that will machine intake manifolds for fuel injectors. Simple fuel injection systems fire all the injectors at one time. A more sophisticated system could be used if you just switched the wires around to match the injectors to the straight 8 firing order. <BR> Personally I think that the engine is at least half the character of an old car. Especially a straight 8. Most people have never seen one, its a great conversation piece. I personally have never heard one run. I can say the same for the flathead Ford. I'm really curious as to what they sound like. I think that if your are rebuilding a basket case you should make some improvements, but I am bored by classics with modern drivetrains and tweed interiors. I like modifications that mix modern technology into old cars, but the character need to be preserved. I enjoy the history of engineering and automotive design. As a 20-something I morn the loss of our automotive heritage. It's going to be a while before I can afford to start tinkering. I just hope their are still some classics out their when I have the money and the space.<P>I was dreaming about what I would do with this car all week.<BR> <A HREF="http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/aw-cgi/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=596561279" TARGET=_blank>http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/aw-cgi/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=596561279</A> <P>I'm through now

[SBRMD]

Tom: Thanks for the input, and nice Riv, by the way (saw it on that other thread). Dreams are nice, but I think the more creative (ie weirder) things get, the more expensive and touchy they seem to get, with more unforeseen problems. The modern chebby drivetrain in classic du jour bores me too, along with many on this site (martinsr, are you listening?). It's especially boring when it's some carburetted mid '70's sbc that was only installed because it was cheap, or because it was laying around the garage. As for the straight eight and dynaflow, well, they're great, but limited in their utility compared with modern stuff. My idea is a little different, in that it would use an engine with Buick heritage dating back to the early sixties that now has been engineered into one of the finest engines in the world, eminently driveable, economical, and more powerful than the straight eight, in a classic Buick. There wouldn't be such a gain to do this to say, your Riv, because it is already such a modern car that the improvements would not be so great. Anyway, thats my two cents. Incidently, I aim to keep the original interior, no tweed allowed.<P>Old Guy: Thanks for the info; are the body mounts really on the same places, in other words, can one just use the '49 locations and actually bolt them right to a '72 frame??<P>Thanks,<BR>Steve.

[The Old Guy]

I am not sure about the 49 ,but a friends 50 and my 57 were bolt ons.

[Guest]

Steve,<BR> Glad to hear your keeping the original interior. I hope with your modern drivetrain you can drive the car often and make rich guys in their BMW's jealous. (I get a kick out of that )

[Don McClair]

Keeping the original chassis and drive train is good but for a fun car to go touring in you can't beat a modern drive train and it makes a great conversation piece. I was fortunate enough to ride in The Old Guy's 57 and it is a blast. Very smooth, corners very well, and stops on a dime so to speak with the front disc brakes. Everyone was facinated with seeing the 455 under the hood and everything that went into the conversion. If somebody can do the work properly it makes a great vehicle. Too often I seen somebody try something like this and the car never moved again except to the junk yard. Good Luck on what ever you decide.

[Guest Chrome]

Hi!<P>I think too that Classics are great as they were builded but some changes doesn't harm them either <P>I've planned to swap Cad 390/Hydramatic to my '49 Roadmaster Sedanet. I have talked with Jyrki about his project and decided to follow his steps and install Camaro rearend.<BR>Cadillac engine with Hydramatic gives to my Buick good acceleration (when needed) and much better MPG(my old Cadillac had better MPG and it weighted much more) Besides, it's classic engine at least so I think.<P>SBRMD can you send me photos of your Buicks interior because I want original style interior too, but I don't know what it looks like. So help would be great <P>

[Guest]

Chrome,<BR>What kind of mileage did you get with the straight 8?

[SBRMD]

Chrome: Sorry, don't have a scanner, so can't send you pics of interior, but try Wyattt Fawley's site about his '49 Roadmaster Sedanet; I don't have the address, but if you search dogpile or google for "1949 Buick Roadmaster", it comes right up. He's got pictures of his interior on there.<P>Good Luck!<P>Steve.

[SBRMD]

Chrome: Found addresses for Wyatt's '49:<BR>Try: <A HREF="http://www.hhs.net/wfawley/buickfiles/coachwork.htm" TARGET=_blank>www.hhs.net/wfawley/buickfiles/coachwork.htm</A> <A HREF="http://www.hhs.net/wfawley/buickfiles/49buick1.htm" TARGET=_blank>www.hhs.net/wfawley/buickfiles/49buick1.htm</A> <A HREF="http://www.hhs.net/wfawley/buickfiles/otherint.htm" TARGET=_blank>www.hhs.net/wfawley/buickfiles/otherint.htm</A> <P>Have fun!<P>Steve.

[Guest Chrome]

SBMRD doub. I already knew Fawley's pages and have inspected them carefully, but there are so few close-ups and friend who does all the new interior work may need additional info.<P>Tomsriv, my mileage is about 12-13mpg and it's too bad, especially here in Finland.

[SBRMD]

Chrome: Should be getting a scanner soon, will send when I can.<P>Steve.

[Guest Chrome]

GREAT!<P>thanks in advance

[Guest]

I would aggree that the 49 engine is fine the way it is. But I would add a little comment on somthing I heard a few years back.<BR>The 49 Dynaflow can be updated by rebuilding with Triple Turbine 61-63 parts using the old case and you will have a Buick with vertially no slippage that will run like a raped ape and should be much easier on gas as well.

[SBRMD]

Question for you guys, especially The Old Guy: If one is going to swap an old car onto a later chassis, eg. a '70 electra, do you think the standard frame (ie non-boxed rails) is stout enough, and as stout as the original frame (which was X-braced) or would one be significantly better off finding a '70 boxed convertible frame to set the old body onto?<P>Thanks in advance, all opinions welcome!<BR>Steve.

[Guest]

I would just box the frame, your going to be doing some extensive frame modifications. Your going to get real intimate with your MIG welder to do this kind of job anyway. <P>Just my 2 cents.

[SBRMD]

Old Guy, are you out there?<P>Steve.

[WQ59B]

I'd like to weigh in here too. And I'd like to preface the below by saying I have nothing against anyone doing whatever they want with their own car-- there's plenty of old cars to go around. TheOldGuy- we disagreed on this very subject in the past, I am not here to put down your '57 or you. This is merely my opinion:<P>I agree very much with Tomsriv- what's underneath is as much of a car's 'flesh & blood' as the sheetmetal. I liken it to going to the zoo and finding out the gorilla in the cage is a man in a costume. He looks like a gorilla, fine, sounds something sorta like a gorilla, but he's not what you want to see at the zoo, is he? <P>I'd prefer to keep as much original AS POSSIBLE, yet I am certainly not against updating what's there with better materials and components to increase safety & performance, if that's what you wish. I greatly admire all the hard work involved in chassis-swapping, but that admiration far overshadows the end result for me. <P>Now, I'm going to apparently contradict myself: I've put a 455 Stage 2/ TH400/ Dana 60 into my (stock-chassis'd) '59 Invicta after I was forced to rule out modifying the stock powertrain to achieve the performance levels I desired. I didn't want to at first, believe me; if I could get 550HP out of the nailhead AND get it thru the TwinTurbine, they'd still be there instead of at the other end of my shop gathering dust. It's just I placed a very high priority on asphalt-melting performance and this was the least intrusive and 'most Buick' way to go.<P>I wanted the stock frame in place at all costs- just my preference, and I made that work. Others suggested 'clipping' the front end, but why change out anti-dive geometry forged control arms (lowers), screw in steel bushings & 12" finned aluminum drums for merely equal or lesser quality pieces, just because they're newer? An A-body front end in my B-body- I don't think so! I changed over the rear suspension with slight modifications to that area of the frame, as there is no performance gearing for the '59 axle and no way to make stock suspension work with a Dana 60.<P>The front suspension & brakes are completely stock, component-wise. Everything's rebuilt and the brakes are Kevlar-impregnated, but no discs or other more modern pieces there. '59-era brakes from road tests I've read were excellent stock (on crap-4-tires!) Slight modifications to motor & trans mounts and whatever engine/trans you want drops right in. In my case; a '72 455 with aluminum Stage 2 heads. Is this to increase reliability or 'update'? No, it's to go faster with Buick power!<P>If you research the procedures involved and find a true experienced shop or individual to guide/do the work for you, there is no guess-work on chassis-swaps OR chassis-modifications or any other sub-assembly. I say- don't be overly quick to cut away the original unless it greatly impedes your goals for the car. <P>If there was a tasteful way to show where the Wilmington DE assembly plant paint guy cleared his paint gun of gold on my car's tranny tunnel before grabbing the green gun, I would-- everything of 1959 on the car I am so very proud of!<P>Still... I must go faster...<P>Again- just my personal stinking opinion

[Guest]

For the amount of work adapting a stock type chassis, why not just build a steel tubeframe chassis attach what ever drive components to it you want and put your body mounts in the stock location so in the future you could just lift the entire body off and slide it right back onto the stock frame.<P>While you are driving your tube frame chassis car you could be restoring the old chassis to it's formal glory and in the process will not have destroyed anything original, hell with wheels on it you can even roll it in and out of your shop all by yourself. With a Mustang 2 front end and nine inch out back the parts are dirt cheap and there is all kinds of aftermarket parts to support the project.<P>You retain the originality while getting a truly trick/custom rod to drive the entire time. And if you do not have facilities to do the frame you could take the frame/drivetrain combo to your favourite chassis fab shop and they could build you a perfect fit if you provide the parts.<P>I'm not trying to be snotty but everyone does it this way, why reinvent the wheel.

[SBRMD]

WQ: Did you notice the chassis proposed was a '70 Electra, obviously with a Buick 455?<P>Chuck: Intriguing idea! But presuming one can find the right donor car at the right price, wouldn't that be a lot more expensive, not to mention less-well-engineered, than a chassis that has already been designed for the application, so-to-speak? That is, to carry a 4,000+ pound Buick? Teach me about this, I really don't know much about custom tube-frames.<P>Thanks,<BR>Steve.

[SBRMD]

Chuck: Thanks for the info! I always find your posts highly informative. I don't have the capabilities myself of pulling off such a thing, would have to have a shop do it. Which brings me back to my question: wouldn't it be easier/cheaper/safer to swap in the entire chassis from a '70 Electra? Such a chassis is already engineered for such loads. In fact, a '70 Electra generally outweighed a '49 Roadmaster by about 500 lbs, so chassis should more than enough, especially if one would be so luck as to find a boxed convertible frame. The '49 and the '70 have the same wheelbase and similar tracks.<P>What do you think??<P>Regards,<BR>Steve.

[Guest]

Steve<BR>No question that it would be stout enough, BUT and this is a big but. That still leaves steering to figure out plus measuring axle hoop dimensions not to mention fuel tank fit and sway bars and making sure you don't have to hammer at the body to slip it on etc. etc. etc. I shudder when I think about it.<P>It may very well be possible but would take a lot of measuring/fitting to get it all to work. The prep work involved with getting the old chassis ready for welding new mounts and then modifying just about everything else makes me think it could be a black hole.<P>I like the idea of dragging your old car chassis to a chassis Mfg and saying "copy this in tubing please" and then having them fit modern easily replaced aftermarket drive gear into place for you.<P>While you did this you would end up with all new/refurbished components a painted or powder coated frame and will get the spring rate right the first time. Either way you do this it's going to cost on the high side of $4000 I'm guessing. With the tube chassis you'll end up with a resaleable vehicle that someone would buy not to mention one trick pony!<P>Check out some Kit Car magazines and see what these guys are doing, I think you'll see an entire market devoted to doing just what you are proposing. Who knows maybe one Mfg already has a turn key kit just for your auto and all you have to do is come up with the cash. Stranger things have happened.<P>Modifying a stock frame without the tools to do it with will mean constant trips to the machine shop and the finished product might not be too attractive. If you end up stripping the old frame and painting it, the time/labour will probably cost you more.<P>Think long and hard about this and look at what others are doing and then see if you can register it in your state/province, staying with all Buick underpinnings is a noble idea but not that practical. <P>If you happen to be rich, send it to me and I can guarantee you will get whatever you want, no expense will be spared. I would like to see what living mortage free is like, JUST KIDDING!<P>If you had all the tools and were capable with a welder and could fabricate anything you might need I say go for it, but I always say your labour has to be worth something.

[SBRMD]

Chuck: A learned reply, thanks. Definitely food for thought. I went to <A HREF="http://www.fatmanfab.com" TARGET=_blank>www.fatmanfab.com</A> and looked around a little, they have complete rolling chassis for the more common rods, eg '30's chevys and fords, and probably the ability to make a kit for just about anything. Of course, then your Buick is riding around on Mustang II IFS and rear leafs! Still, the old guy (see above)described his '57 Buick onto '72 electra swap as a near bolt-on. Old Guy, are you out there? <P>So you think a regular (non-boxed) electra frame would be tough enough from a rigidity/load-bearing point of view, and a convert frame wouldn't be necessary?<P>Regards,<BR>Steve.

[Guest]

As tough and flexible as a stamped piece of sheetmetal can be. I would build a tube frame before I boxed a factory frame unless your talking about unibody construction.<P>If you wanted rear coils I'm sure they could oblige. Whats wrong with the Mustang 2 IFS? Rack and Pinion steering? The improvement in handling dynamics might mean you could actually make an emergency manouver with the beast!<p>[ 02-25-2002: Message edited by: Chuck da Machinist ]

[Guest]

SBRMD, <P>There are many differing opinions about what is best, round tube or rectangular tubing. I have done both and I prefer the round tube only because it is lighter and making the axle hoops etc. can be done with a heavy duty tubing bender. I find the end result is stiffer,lighter, better fitting, lower riding and looks a little nicer.<P>With that said, rectangular construction can be done by anyone with a hacksaw/bandsaw and a MIG welder. You end up with an easier to square up chassis that can be almost completely mocked up laying on the floor. Standard square tubing for car construction is 2" X 3" mild steel, forget the chrome moly stuff it's too expensive and welding it properly is best left to a professional.<P>You don't mention your shop capabilities but if you have a MIG welder, a 50 ton press, drill press and a lathe plus a sh__load of clamps you can do this yourself. Here's a link to get you started;<BR> <A HREF="http://www.gmecca.com/byorc/dtipschassis.html" TARGET=_blank>http://www.gmecca.com/byorc/dtipschassis.html</A> <P>I suggest you pickup a book on chassis construction techniques for a better explanation.<P>The other consideration is no matter which way you go-stock modified or tube. Your insurer will want an engineering report plus the requisite stress calculations to boot!<P>I recommend that you leave the construction to a company that knows the ins and outs of this, there are a lot of factors to consider. <P>I don't want to scare you because it is possible to do yourself but will take a lot of dedication to the project. One of the guys in my car club built a complete CanAm replica car using a Porche engine and aluminum tubing with a hand layed kevlar/carbon fiber body. <P>He's an engineer so all the calculations he could do himself and also stamp off. One of the requirements of the insurer was that the chassis be able to withstand a 100 ton static load in every direction. <P>Needless to say the paperwork alone cost as much as the chassis itself but he did do it and it looks convincing. I thought it was funny that they were so retentive over the bumper design but could care less about the drivers compartment. <P>At any rate this is a major project and as I've said a chassis construction shop is the best route as they have the know how and the facilities.<P>Many guys will tell you to just start cutting and put your body on but if you ever get into an accident where someone is hurt and your insurer does not know about your custom chassis, you know who will get hung out to dry-YOU!<P>A safety will be required with whatever you build so it is best to talk to your local licensing board to see what they can do for you. The rules here in Canada are a little less restrictive than in the States so you might find they just won't allow it-period.<P>The early eighties when a lot of "pro street" cars were built left a bad taste in many a bureacrats mouth so be prepared for resistance from them. A copy of the Motor Vehicle Act will be a necessary ally when talking to these people, know it inside and out. <P>One consideration is that all steering components must made of forged steel with NO welding allowed and brakes must have factory rubber type with no braided stainless steel lines----dumb I know.<P>Good luck, this kind of project is a lot of fun and you will learn a ton of new things doing it. E-mail me if you need more help, I have many rodder friends that can help you out and I'll learn something new I'm sure.

[SBRMD]

Nothing wrong w/ Must II IFS, just doesn't have that all-Buick coolness. You're right, R&P steering would be great.<P>Still thinking...<P>Regards,<BR>Steve.

[The Old Guy]

I have been in Florida for two weeks and iI can see I missed out on a lot of things. It was cold and rainy ,and I can get that home. <P>Building a chassis is a great idea,but if you use an existing unit ,the geometrys are done for you . I have 37 Buick coupe with a Mustang 2 front end and a leaf spring rear and it handles like a slot car ,but it has the ride of an early 'Vette. It is a wonderful highway car but a little harsh riding around town.I had some problems getting the handling like I wanted ,so building a chassis can cause trouble. I also believe in leaving a good car as original as possible. My 40 Convert has been to Meadowbrook, so it is a fairly nice car ,but I have driven it almost 100,000 miles in the 30 years I have owned it.

[BuickNut]

OK guys...just saw this thread....so how do I put a real hot Honda rice popper into my '49 Super AND switch it to front wheel drive ? ....does that get some eyebrows raised ? ....purerly kidding, purely kidding of course

[NTX5467]

One of our chapter members did a chassis/body swap many years ago. He found a '49 Roadmaster Riviera and with some checking and such, put it on a Cadillac Fleetwood chassis (seems like a '79 or thereabouts). The wheelbase in that case was the same so everything looks "right"--until you look past the factory Boranni wire wheels to see the rear disc brake rotors or see the rear sway bar from the rear, much less see it go around a corner (flat) or stop quickly.<P>It was a fairly easy swap with very little body mount modifications to use the existing body mounts. If you came to our 1996 National Meet in Plano, TX you might have seen it and not have known what it was from a distance.<P>It was interesting as one of our chapter members wanted to wring the guy's neck for "butchering" such a rare vehicle. Others applauded him for saving it and making it a much more fun car to drive without altering the cosmetics of it too much.<P>I feel that's the key to the whole deal--keeping it looking like it originally did until you raise the hood or look underneath. Plus doing your research and home work to see what other modern vehicles have the same wheelbase as the vintage vehicle and then going from there. The correct amount of finesse and good luck can make some neat things happen.<P>As for the later transmission in the earlier chassis issue, Phoenix Transmission in Weatherford, TX is working on such a situation. Greg Ducato (the owner) told me earlier this week that he would have a kit in about 6 months. His speciality is overdrive transmissions for all kinds of applications. He builds many such transmissions for street rod applications.<P>Several years ago, he did a Turbo400 swap into a member's '62 LeSabre. He rattled off what he'd need from the local salvage yard and had it all done inside of about a week. It transformed that car into a real hot rod, compared to what it had been with the previous DynaFlow variation. <A HREF="http://www.phoenixtrans.com" TARGET=_blank>www.phoenixtrans.com</A> is the website.<P>Greg also does a couple of DynaFlows a year at the present time. He refers the HydraMatics to another shop in Fort Worth.<P>As for the Straight 8 stuff - - - -<BR>There is a book I found a few years ago that is neat, although the title doesn't reflect it's Buick content as much as it does the inline Chevrolet and GMC content. It's a reprint of a 1950s "speed manual" -- "California Bill's Chevrolet, GMC, & Buick Speed Manual" 1954 Edition. Lots of neat stuff regarding manifolds, mixing nitro into fuel, camshafts, etc. You can probably find it at the Barnes&Noble website.<P>Chrysler's Mopar Performance used to market a retrofit fuel injection kit for the Jeep 4.0L inline 6cyl. It was about $2000.00 as I recall. Naturally, it would be relatively easy to use some 2bbl throttle body injection units (ala Holley's replacement units and kits) to replace the compound carbs on the Straight 8, then add a pair of oxygen sensors to let the thing run in feedback mode (except at WOT). The Holley kits are complete "free standing" kits to put fuel injection where it did not come previously. They have provisions to "gang" two 4bbl units together so you could probably do the same for a pair of 2bbl units and use only one computer to run the whole thing. Don't forget that such mods would require a 12volt electrical system and probably a 100amp alternator to keep things running well.<P>Rance Fuel Injection could probably put together a custom kit for a port injected Straight 8. For some real interesting things, you could build a custom manifold similar to the Chrysler Slant 6 and use some "resonance tuning" for an extra hump in the mid-range torque curve. I suspect it was the log manifolding that held the engine back more than anything else, but the intake ports would need some work -- AND then maybe some work with the exhaust manifold PLUS a good undercar system with some Walker DynoMax mufflers or similar. Just getting the intake side working is half the battle.<P>I wanted to offer this information into the mix here as it seems there could be more interest in this area than many would suspect. Naturally, an "altered" vehicle's value would be affected by any mods--but the degree of such would depend on the ultimate purchaser and their orientations.<P>Car season is now upon us . . . y'all enjoy to the limit of your tolerance and enjoy whenever possible!<P>NTX5467