Outer Limits 4x4 Board

I recently acquired an ls2 for replacement of the old 1FZ and have been having difficulty finding any information on this conversion. i understand that an ls1 and 454 made there way into an 80 but nothing as yet concerning an ls2.

To date i have found i will need to move the bellhousing/engine interface forward by 60-70mm and the transmission will also need to be moved forward requiring modification of the cross member and drive shafts.

Dellows automotive dont do a bellhousing for this combination and the marks kit is unsatisfactory. does anyone know of a company making one (foreign or domestic)?

The biggest hurdle for me in this conversion is the engine/gearbox coupling worst case will mean i have to make one, any info will be greatly appreciated regarding this.

Updates on progress will be posted in this thread for future reference.

Kind regards - Dave.

why is the marks kit unsatisfactory?

Several LS1 conversions have been done with it into 80 series, and an LS1 is very similar to an lsi in every way important for the conversion

Marks are the only company that do the adapter to a manual gearbox

with the marks kit's it will be close to 5k to mount the engine. i want to move the transmission forward, use gm flywheel and pressure plate and toyota cluth plate.

I will be putting a LS1 into my 80 and was going to use the marks adapters kit. Why is it unsatisfactory and why does the transmission have to move forward? I thought the bellhousing adapters moved the motor forward???

with the marks kit u also have to move ur gearbox forward 25mm, easy as piss to do

id also like to hear wats so bad bout the kit?

LS2 has been fitted to an 80 series Offroad race car here in WA, dont know how it was done http://www.flatoutoffroadracing.com/ get in touch with Frank via his website, he might be able to help you out and answer some questions

i understand that M.A.'s are in the business of making money and i wish them well however, to purchase the gear from them costs a LOT of money - i was hoping to do the whole conversion for <10k. their product may be very good but its going to cost more than the car is worth. are they really the only people around modifying the 80 for this engine?

i sent a message to flatout, currently waiting for a response.

i am keen to hear anybody's thoughts on this topic, criticism is good

cheers - dave.

When i did mine i used the marks adapter for the transfer case (i used the 4l60e auto) And made my own mounts for the engine, alternator stayed in stock location, AC comp had 5mm shaved off the mounts and it all just clears with the engine 10mm off centre towards passenger side. I alo use commodore thermo fans instaed of the mechanical one. Make my own wiring loom's (which are 99.5% plug in)

For the engine mounts i used the commo rubbers and basiacally just a right angle bracket off the chassis rails with some bracing.

I did mine for around $7k inc an 2nd hand LS1, doing all labour myself.

My suggestion would be buy the marks bellhousing adapter, use the commodore clutch, use marks blockhugger extraxtors (or make your own), make your own engine mounts and mod ac brackets, Use my plug in loom (if you are no good with electrics).

Steve

djroberts wrote:i understand that M.A.'s are in the business of making money and i wish them well however, to purchase the gear from them costs a LOT of money - i was hoping to do the whole conversion for <10k. their product may be very good but its going to cost more than the car is worth. are they really the only people around modifying the 80 for this engine?

i sent a message to flatout, currently waiting for a response.

i am keen to hear anybody's thoughts on this topic, criticism is good

cheers - dave.

mine cost me a tad over 8k using all marks stuff,

im running the toyota box

I got an email back from marks adaptors today and they reckon my standard gearbox won't be strong enough for the v8? I thought the 1hz gearbox was the same as the petrols box but with slightly different ratios?

Kitika wrote:I got an email back from marks adaptors today and they reckon my standard gearbox won't be strong enough for the v8? I thought the 1hz gearbox was the same as the petrols box but with slightly different ratios?

they are right.. the 1hz boxes are weaker than the 1fz and the TD boxes

ouch, that could be deadly too

musta got a dodgey flex plate? rest of the kit is still fine. well the bits the flex plate didnt take out!

According to our measurements we have taken the engine will need to be moved forward 60mm approx. (this was a coarse measurement) to clear the firewall. With regard to the marks kit they move the engine forward about 86mm.

Concerning the sump, marks will provide one modified with a pickup however, pictures on there site are unavailable. I have heard that the 'low volume oil pan' put on the Camaro will fit and clear any moving parts but needs to be modified to accommodate a dipstick. Is the sump marks modify originally a rear hump sump?

If anybody has any images of their conversion especially the sump and engine/gearbox interface it would be greatly appreciated.

Our options currently are:

-move the engine and transmission forward as a whole but encounter problems with the gear and transfer levers.
-space the engine forward and shift gearbox/transfer forward (like the marks kit)
-cut the firewall and set the engine back with the gearbox/transfer in its original position.

Pro’s and con’s can be discussed.


Many thanks - Dave.

crankycruiser wrote:

Kitika wrote:I got an email back from marks adaptors today and they reckon my standard gearbox won't be strong enough for the v8? I thought the 1hz gearbox was the same as the petrols box but with slightly different ratios?

they are right.. the 1hz boxes are weaker than the 1fz and the TD boxes

not in the 80 in the 100 they are weaker they run the r series box(r150)

the 80 series has the h series box in all models
with slightly diferent ratios

the 1hz box is fine if it is out of an 80 series and is the big H series box

the only difference in the 80 boxes is the op shaft, the 1hz runs an 11 inch clutch which would not hold the power, change the op shaft to the td or petrol model and run the 12 inch clutch, keeping the 1hz box is much better first gear ratio is lower

I feel your pain, I fitted a 1UZ V8 into my 75 series and was faced with similar problems.
In the end I used a Dellow bellhousing kit and decided to modify the firewall to move the engine back rather than moving the gearbox foward and messing with driveshaft lenghts etc...

ads80 wrote:the only difference in the 80 boxes is the op shaft, the 1hz runs an 11 inch clutch which would not hold the power, change the op shaft to the td or petrol model and run the 12 inch clutch, keeping the 1hz box is much better first gear ratio is lower

yes this is true the only diff is the spline not strength

rather than change the shaft i just got a custom clutch made, 12inch with a fine spline center (1hz) thats what i did lot less stuffing around

djroberts wrote:http://www.flatoutoffroadracing.com/200 ... report.htm

i wanna put a 6L in my 105 series and have major doubts bout the marks kits also. i am not a fan of the crappy 2 flywheel job with a bodgy input shaft extender. cant be good with decent power avaliable at revs. this link is exactly what i pictured in my head. let alone the price they're asking for this junk. eww.

i dont really wanna mess with the fire wall trying to find ~60mm on a road registered car. so i recon im going with the gearbox move. but i havent really had a good look as such yet. maybe a little firewall 'massage' wont hurt to much and gearbox move wont be as extreme.

lettuce know how you go anyhow. i think this is a great mod. and twin turboing it will be better.

MaccA

**ORSM45 - the gentleman i bought my ls2 off had a 105 with the 6L. from what i gather, the 100 was designed to have the v8 put in them so i don't think room is as critical as in the 80. the chassis rails are wider (his was an IFS originally with the 4.7) and the firewall is different (both advantageous). he wanted to keep the original auto and after much delegation ended up running the 6L with the 4.7 throttle body, sensors, computer etc. because communication between the Toyota box and GM engine management was incompatible. as you would expect, power would be down somewhat.

if you want to know any more just ask.

i think the inverted supercharger with top mounted inter-cooler is the way to go ide like to join the 600hp club

-Dave

djroberts wrote:According to our measurements we have taken the engine will need to be moved forward 60mm approx. (this was a coarse measurement) to clear the firewall. With regard to the marks kit they move the engine forward about 86mm.

Concerning the sump, marks will provide one modified with a pickup however, pictures on there site are unavailable. I have heard that the 'low volume oil pan' put on the Camaro will fit and clear any moving parts but needs to be modified to accommodate a dipstick. Is the sump marks modify originally a rear hump sump?

If anybody has any images of their conversion especially the sump and engine/gearbox interface it would be greatly appreciated.

Our options currently are:

-move the engine and transmission forward as a whole but encounter problems with the gear and transfer levers.
-space the engine forward and shift gearbox/transfer forward (like the marks kit)
-cut the firewall and set the engine back with the gearbox/transfer in its original position.

Pro’s and con’s can be discussed.


Many thanks - Dave.

heres a handy link on oil pans
http://ls1tech.com/forums/conversions-h ... -pans.html

this is my sump. its the bigger sump that holds more oil, and rear drop (obviously)

I just got a price from marks for the sump...
$795!!!!

What is yours out of exactly cranky? And how much dosh did ya pay?

I also got the instruction manual from marks for the conversion if you wanted to have a read djroberts. I don't think the gearbox movement is much and they massage the firewall to make the extra space.

Kitika wrote:I just got a price from marks for the sump...
$795!!!!

What is yours out of exactly cranky? And how much dosh did ya pay?

I also got the instruction manual from marks for the conversion if you wanted to have a read djroberts. I don't think the gearbox movement is much and they massage the firewall to make the extra space.

MIne is a rear truck sump (so chev truck im guessin ) got it off MUD000 for $350. they always come up cheap on ebay etc.

beware of the o ring for the rear drop sump oil pickup. mine was diferent, coundnt use the front drop o ring. the part number is listed on that site i posted up.

That flywheel flexplate set up could it be further strengthened by having posts connecting the flywheel and flexplate further out toward the circumference of both in 3 or 6 places

i can see how that massive failure could have occurred (the one in the pics of the race truck)
the flex plate in an auto is normally supported and held ridgid by the torque converter closer to its extremities reducing harmonics (flexing) and stopping ring gear failure and then eventual total flexplate failure

Now i know heaps of people are gunna pipe up and say but i have had this set up for x number of years with no problem well good on you
but it is all about saftey margin if it were my legs next to that tunnel i would be making it stronger all for the sake of about $50

x2

djroberts wrote:**ORSM45 - the gentleman i bought my ls2 off had a 105 with the 6L. from what i gather, the 100 was designed to have the v8 put in them so i don't think room is as critical as in the 80. the chassis rails are wider (his was an IFS originally with the 4.7) and the firewall is different (both advantageous). he wanted to keep the original auto and after much delegation ended up running the 6L with the 4.7 throttle body, sensors, computer etc. because communication between the Toyota box and GM engine management was incompatible. as you would expect, power would be down somewhat.

if you want to know any more just ask.

i think the inverted supercharger with top mounted inter-cooler is the way to go ide like to join the 600hp club

-Dave

hell yeah dave!! wouldnt we all.

mines a 4.5L auto with the solid front end. the body's may be the same but im not too sure. possibly have different firewalls. as i said, i havent looked yet. and dont have a v8 hundgy to look at to compare anyway.

more info would be great. thanks.

i am seriously keen on this conversion if i could do it without the marks kit. (and if someone wants to buy my engine, its just run in, only done 200,000 ) im not that scared of cutting and moving stuff to make it stronger for my peace of mind. once its in id be aiming for the 600hp (and then kilowatts ) club.

MaccA

thrashlux wrote:That flywheel flexplate set up could it be further strengthened by having posts connecting the flywheel and flexplate further out toward the circumference of both in 3 or 6 places

i can see how that massive failure could have occurred (the one in the pics of the race truck)
the flex plate in an auto is normally supported and held ridgid by the torque converter closer to its extremities reducing harmonics (flexing) and stopping ring gear failure and then eventual total flexplate failure

Now i know heaps of people are gunna pipe up and say but i have had this set up for x number of years with no problem well good on you
but it is all about saftey margin if it were my legs next to that tunnel i would be making it stronger all for the sake of about $50

infront of the flex plate (read bolted to it) is a solid plate just like the flywheel.......... u wont make it flex any less than that

crankycruiser wrote:

thrashlux wrote:That flywheel flexplate set up could it be further strengthened by having posts connecting the flywheel and flexplate further out toward the circumference of both in 3 or 6 places

i can see how that massive failure could have occurred (the one in the pics of the race truck)
the flex plate in an auto is normally supported and held ridgid by the torque converter closer to its extremities reducing harmonics (flexing) and stopping ring gear failure and then eventual total flexplate failure

Now i know heaps of people are gunna pipe up and say but i have had this set up for x number of years with no problem well good on you
but it is all about saftey margin if it were my legs next to that tunnel i would be making it stronger all for the sake of about $50

infront of the flex plate (read bolted to it) is a solid plate just like the flywheel.......... u wont make it flex any less than that

ok that would be better
if you look at the pics of the blown one it appears only the inner holes of the flex plate have been bolted to something (clean) the outer bolts on the circumference seem to be dirty like they were not used

perhaps they used a different set up to what you speak of??

Even so i think bolting the 2 plates together would offer more stability for the whole set up including the fly wheel they would help each other and be one linked rotating mass
it was just an idea to perhaps improve any weaknesses in the set up and reduce harmonics (which is why the one in the pic failed)
could not hurt right?