Outer Limits 4x4 Board

ado250 wrote:Just need to work out how to do the speed sensor conversion on the zuk cluster!!

Here's some info on the VSS install. My Vitara engine was and '89, which did not have a vss. I believe all later years did.

http://bbs.off-road.com/ubbthreads/show ... er=1362684

Ben

ado250 wrote: Would be a game engineer who approved that one (would be concerns about rotation of the two top bolts). Would love to see a pic of that mate, sounds like a simple solution (as opposed to tig welding). Would it not be possible to drill new engine lower mounting holes? (Just a guess).

I will ask my engineer when he turns up. I can't see it being a problem, as all the bolts are there to do is hold the tranny and engine together. If they knock back my setup I would question why they don't require tabs welded to the transmission to be x-rayed like on steering components. As for redrilling the mounting holes, I don't know. I have never really considered it as an option so haven't investigated whether it's feasible or not.

Thanks for that BenT, Very helpful! Good question the bloke on the forum asked, what's the purpose of the VSS and what happens if you just ignore it?

Eng may be concerned with rotation between the gearbox and the engine. Engine obviously rotates on power deliver. The connecting bolts will feel that torque (ie; engine housing will rotate a little, takes box with it). Issue (Maybe) with your setup is the tabs aren't welded, so the Gbox might rotate about the tabs (ie; they act as pins). That doubles the torque carried through the top bolts.

Only torque taken by the connecting bolts though is 'play' between engine and Gbox. Not a major issue since the Gbox is rubber mounted too (ie it's easy to rotate the whole casing on it's axis) so it doesn't restrain the engine much (so less torque build up).

IMO, the setup is 100% adequate, so argue hard if he thinks otherwise!

Ado

ado250 wrote:Thanks for that BenT, Very helpful! Good question the bloke on the forum asked, what's the purpose of the VSS and what happens if you just ignore it?

Eng may be concerned with rotation between the gearbox and the engine. Engine obviously rotates on power deliver. The connecting bolts will feel that torque (ie; engine housing will rotate a little, takes box with it). Issue (Maybe) with your setup is the tabs aren't welded, so the Gbox might rotate about the tabs (ie; they act as pins). That doubles the torque carried through the top bolts.

Only torque taken by the connecting bolts though is 'play' between engine and Gbox. Not a major issue since the Gbox is rubber mounted too (ie it's easy to rotate the whole casing on it's axis) so it doesn't restrain the engine much (so less torque build up).

IMO, the setup is 100% adequate, so argue hard if he thinks otherwise!

Ado

I can see your point but I haven't experienced any problems with it so far, and I have given it some stick off road and on road. I haven't done a LOT of kms though they have been reasonably abusive.

The two top bolts are captured through the bellhousing, and even though they might be seeing more load than usual I doubt that it would be double the load due to the bottom bolts can be torqued up enough so that the friction between the bellhousing and the engine block seems to have stopped the two (engine & tranny) rotating under torque.

Would welding tabs on be a better way to go? I would say yes. But this is working for me so far, YMMV.

Paging droopypete ... didnt you drill and tap new holes into the block for the lower two bolts. (no adapter plate required ?) and you can use a standard gearbox housing (provided the top two holes are reamed to the correct size) ..

Also I had a feeling there were also two locating pins in the gearbox as well

i had 2 wings ally welded onto the bellhousing !!
then drilled out bolt holes , large enuff to accept locating dowels !!!

moose wrote:i had 2 wings ally welded onto the bellhousing !!
then drilled out bolt holes , large enuff to accept locating dowels !!!

There is always one that has to be different ... ;^D

Yes, in statics, friction is always your friend!!!

Load certainly won't double overall, but may do so (ignoring friction) due to engine rotation only. As you found though, prob. no issue and it would be a finicky eng to pick you up on that.

Ado

love_mud wrote:Paging droopypete ... didnt you drill and tap new holes into the block for the lower two bolts. (no adapter plate required ?)

Close, but not quite.
Mine was the easiest of the lot.
The top holes line up.
The bottom holes don't, the 1.6 (with the larger flywheel) has a wider bellhousing than the 1.3,
Bolt it together using the top bolts only, then run a drill from the rear through the standard 1.3 gearbox lower bolt holes all the way through to the block then put a bolt through with a nut on the end, finished.

Not quite, where the bolt exits the block the surface is curved (as in not parallel with the back of the bolt head) so I made a tubular sleeve that was cut square at the bolt head end and curved to match the profile of the block on the other, finished, easy!
No messing around with welding or adapter plates, it has to be good.
Peter.

droopypete wrote:

love_mud wrote:Paging droopypete ... didnt you drill and tap new holes into the block for the lower two bolts. (no adapter plate required ?)

Close, but not quite.
Mine was the easiest of the lot.
The top holes line up.
The bottom holes don't, the 1.6 (with the larger flywheel) has a wider bellhousing than the 1.3,
Bolt it together using the top bolts only, then run a drill from the rear through the standard 1.3 gearbox lower bolt holes all the way through to the block then put a bolt through with a nut on the end, finished.

Not quite, where the bolt exits the block the surface is curved (as in not parallel with the back of the bolt head) so I made a tubular sleeve that was cut square at the bolt head end and curved to match the profile of the block on the other, finished, easy!
No messing around with welding or adapter plates, it has to be good.
Peter.

I might have a look at that Pete, sounds pretty good.

Do people have issues with the starter motor?

The ones I have heard start up have a noise like the starter motor isn’t lined up now that they have the 1.6 in. I want to do the conversion, but don’t want to be worried out wearing out starter motors of flywheels.

So this is a problem that cant be fixed!?!

So this is a problem that cant be fixed!?!

Dunno, but there are two options on the starter motor, mod the sierra one of fit the vitara one, believe there is two different vitara ones but not too sure.

I just bought an 1.6 engine and adaptor kit to drop into my 96 Sierra. After talking to the bloke at suzisport, where I purchased it all, he told me it will be a straight drop in with no problems. During the conversion I will be fitting a HD Clutch, Machine & lighten the flywheel, and replacement of the input shaft seal.

Now after reading this thread it appears I shouldnt have many problems with this and after fitting my 32/36 Webber I should be much happier again.

NOW FOR MY QUESTION...

Is there anything during this conversion I should look out for?

I take it u are doing a 1.6 carb swap?

Shouldnt have many dramas.

I am doing a mpfi one at the moment. wiring is sometimes a pain.

I think with carb you will only need a fuel cut off wire to watch out for and maybe fuel pump if not on head.

Yeh with the conversion I fit the 1.3 head so that should be fine and by the sounds of what the guys at suzisport told me it should be a piece of piss. Thought I might fit a secondary fuel pump anyway to help stop carbi failure when going up hills etc along with modifying the carbi...

I also installed my vit engine the same way as pete. Easy 2 do and the 8 valve was definatley a huge improvement over the 1300. I had a weber on the 1300 and it use to go great (not so great offroad yes even with mods) now I have the 1600 I dont have to change down gears up hills anymore. Its a whole different car to drive very impressed
Nik