PDA

View Full Version : Ford 289 in a 109. One cylinder gone. Back to 2.25?



1967IPA
08-14-2011, 09:24 PM
Upon removing the final spark plug for re-fitment, I discovered - after much consternation - a cylinder packed with crud. Rust, mineral deposits, oil - you name it. I am thinking this is an overall indication of the internal condition of the motor. I planned on replacing all of the peripherals - carb/water pump/starter/fluids etc. on the 289 and giving it a "go"
Now, I am thinking about picking up a rebuilt long block 289 for $400 or whatever the locals are asking here in LA - but thought it could be an opportunity to get back a bit of originality from the PO swap-happy ways. 2.25 petrol? Thoughts?
I know I'd have to get motor mounts welded on - not too big of a deal cosidering the rest of the driveline was never upgraded/strengthened.

Apis Mellifera
08-14-2011, 10:25 PM
I'd like to see photos of the conversion. Was the gearbox and transfer case from the Rover retained?

That said, you could get a complete 302 for a few hundred. If you decide to go back to the 2.25, I'd be interested in the conversion pieces.

1967IPA
08-14-2011, 10:37 PM
The original gearbox and transfer cases are intact and working OK, apparently. Thanks to the stock 2 barrel carb and a restricted gas pedal articulation. I'll post some images tomorrow.

Apis Mellifera
08-14-2011, 11:08 PM
That's what I thought (and was hoping for). I have a 302 I was planning to put in my MGB, but if there's an easy conversion out there, my SIII could use one as well.

O'Brien
08-15-2011, 12:34 AM
hey Michael!

cleanse your mind of going to the 2.25. even with your overdrive you're not going to enjoy driving your 109 around LA if you can't drag it up to 60mph. your wagon would have had the 2.6 6cyl in it originally, but good luck sourcing one of those! You've already got the adapter for the ford motor on your bellhousing, so you should probably stick with that. find a nice 289 or 302 off craigslist and go to town. otherwise, if you're thinking about a motor swap, might as well go for a 200 or 300 Tdi. you've got the advantage of the 6cyl firewall which provides a bunch more room. just food for thought! also, let me know if you're around sometime this week, would be great to cruise over and have a couple cold ones and talk rovers! :cheers:

Donnie
08-15-2011, 07:05 AM
Upon removing the final spark plug for re-fitment, I discovered - after much consternation - a cylinder packed with crud. Rust, mineral deposits, oil - you name it. I am thinking this is an overall indication of the internal condition of the motor. I planned on replacing all of the peripherals - carb/water pump/starter/fluids etc. on the 289 and giving it a "go"
Now, I am thinking about picking up a rebuilt long block 289 for $400 or whatever the locals are asking here in LA - but thought it could be an opportunity to get back a bit of originality from the PO swap-happy ways. 2.25 petrol? Thoughts?
I know I'd have to get motor mounts welded on - not too big of a deal cosidering the rest of the driveline was never upgraded/strengthened.
I have a 302 in one of the trucks that I was trying to sell a while back...I stopped running it because of a bad frame.. It was done by a pro shop in State College, Pa...no change was spared...It was the sweetest running Rover that I have..I encourage you to find another 302 & go with that...If you drive it with moderate concern for the drive train it will be a pleasure to drive.. Mine was..If you are looking to off road & rock climb with it it will break parts..Driven like you love it, It will last for years. Plus 302 parts are CHEAP & they are easy to work on...The weak link in the 302 is the lower end...They need REGULAR on time oel changes..& the engine will outlast your stock frame.Donnie

TeriAnn
08-15-2011, 11:30 AM
Timm Cooper dropped a 302 into my 109 back in 1999 and I've never looked back and never got nostalgic for the old 2.25L boat anchor.

But my conversion is very different from yours. It includes an American light truck gearbox designed to handle the power of my 302 and more. A Land Rover transfercase with Ashcroft high ratio kit to provide better highway cruise RPM without loosing low range ratios. A Salisbury rear end for much needed additional strength (Salisburys were stock fitment to SIII 109s and is a straight bolt on upgrade, axle assembly + rear drive shaft).

It would be real hard not to break gear boxes and rear axles with your current set up, even detuned like it is.

Returned to stock 2.6L six or with a 2.25L swap you will have a comfortable highway cruise of about 50-55 MPH and would need long freeway on ramps unless traffic is slow. Fuel mileage would be about the same.

Option #1. Find a 2.6L petrol six or a Rover 3L petrol six and bring the truck back to stock. Pro, if you can find an engine it is likely the easiest swap and the six gives you noticeably more power than the 2.25L petrol. Con: The engines are hard to find, Many parts are no longer in production, so are hard to find and expensive and adjusting the exhaust valves are a pain but not doing it results in burnt exhaust valves.

Option #2 Swap in a 2.25L petrol engine which is your lowest power option. The four cylinder & six cylinder use different bell housings which are integral to the gearbox. So you may need to either replace your gearbox or rebuild it with a different bell housing. Pros: You end up with a LR engine that will not overtax your drive train and the 2.25L is more common than the 2.6L engine. Cons: Least power. Factory parts are being discontinued and many aftermarket replacements are of questionable service life. Parts are expensive and getting more so.

Option #3 Replace the existing engine with a rebuild, detune it as best you can and restrict it to partial throttle opening. Pros: easiest cheapest fix, parts are easy to find & cheap. Cons: Kind of like hitching a hobbled horse to a buggy. Sometimes you might be tempted to lessen the hobbles or it might get away from you breaking the gearbox, rear axle & rear diff carrier.

Option #4 Since your truck has a six cylinder engine bay, replace the engine with an early small displacement Chevy in-line six. (194, 230 or 250 Cu In versions). the 292 version is a bit too powerful for the stock drive train. The Chevy 6 is just a tad long and you should go with an aluminum cross flow radiator sitting on top of the front cross member. Use an electric pusher fan. You will likely need to hunt for a Scotty's adapter (http://www.expeditionlandrover.info/Scotty%20Conversions.htm). With the 292 or the 250 version and a lead foot you would want to upgrade the gearbox and rear end. Pros: plenty of power to push your truck around in traffic. With higher gearing a good highway cruiser. The smaller versions of this engine family won't overtax your drive train as much but you still have to have a gentle accelerator foot. CONs: It is easier to brake drive train parts. Done right you should upgrade to a beefier gearbox and rear end. These engines are about 50 years old and it could be that parts may be getting harder to find.

Option #5 Get yourself a 5.0L V8 and do the conversion right. A 5.0 because it has a roller cam and today's oils are not friendly to flat tappet cams. Use a Ford version of one of the strong light truck gearboxes (http://www.expeditionlandrover.info/gearboxSwap.htm) This will allow you to use off the shelf bell housing and clutch. You will need to adapt the throw out bearing fork to allow the Series slave cylinder to push it. Get the appropriate adapter to fit the LR transfercase to the gearbox (http://www.expeditionlandrover.info/advance_Adapter.htm). Bolt on a Salisbury (stock SIII 109) rear end on the truck, and probably have a custom rear propshaft made for the actual transfercase to rear end distance.

For gearing you have 3 good choices: Swap the stock Series 4.7:1 ring and pinion gears with early coiler 3.54:1 R&P. This will give you good highway gearing but you will loose a lot of low range capability for the trail. Or Add an Ashcroft high ratio kit to the transfercase (These days you usually by a complete converted transfercase with is bolt on). This gives you very close to the same highway gearing as the 3.54 R&P but leaves your low range the same. OR buy a Santana or Santana clone overdrive (http://www.heystee-automotive.com) and add it to the stock transfercase and end up with basically a 5 speed gearbox. The Santana's are known to be able to stand up to the more powerful small block V8s.

Pros: You can do the speed limit uphill, shorter on ramps are no problem, the engine weight is about the same as a 2.25L engine so no suspension worries, and the drive train is beefy enough to handle the engine so the rig is a LOT more dependable and trouble free.

Cons: Purists will put your truck down as not being a real Land Rover.

Oh and you can easily convert either the Chevy six or a V8 conversion to power steering (http://www.expeditionlandrover.info/PowerSteering.htm) and get rid of the steering box sitting next to the side of the engine. A Range Rover P38 steering box out of a wrecking yard is the current hot ticket.

There are other conversions you can make but these are the more common paths to take.

1967IPA
08-15-2011, 10:16 PM
Thanks for all the replies - I've enjoyed reading all responses and will make a decision soon on which route to take and how much $$ to commit. I've been convinced not to go back to the 2.25L...permanently. I do value ths forum for just this reason. Educated, yet enthusiastic members. Makes me value the Rover community that much more. I've been an auto enthusiast for a bit now, through various (unnamed!) makes/models/years - yet I find the Rover community chock full of splendid characters.
-Michael

Cutter
08-15-2011, 10:35 PM
I run a 2.6, the added power is nice but limited, and it so damn thirsty. I can cruise at 60- 65 easily on flats with a high output ratio, but it drops to 50 on an extended climb. Mind you this is the Euro spec engine so the NADA is better on the highway. I would honestly recommend against a 2.6 if you have to repower, there are better options.

mongoswede
08-16-2011, 08:29 PM
other motors that have caught my interest as possibilities pending research:

GM 4.3 or 3.8 V6
Merc OM316 (think thats the one) 5 cylinder turbo diesel
4bt, 6bt

TeriAnn
08-16-2011, 10:37 PM
other motors that have caught my interest as possibilities pending research:

GM 4.3 or 3.8 V6
Merc OM316 (think thats the one) 5 cylinder turbo diesel

The 4 cylinder version used in the Mercedes 240D, OM616 is rated at early- 65 HP @4200, late- 72 HP @4400, 97 lbft @ 2400 RPM. The late version will provide about the same power as a stock 2.25L petrol engine. SeriesTrek used to make an adapter for this engine to LR bell housing. I have no idea how many were ever made.

The OM617, 3L diesel was rated 123 HP @ 4350 and after Aug 1983 the power was bumped slightly to 125 HP. Torque was 170 lb/ft @ 2400 RPM.

There is a step by step buildup thread at: http://www.expeditionportal.com/forum/threads/8169-109-Expedition-rig-build




4bt, 6bt

ISUZU 4bd1 maybe?? It was used in some Australian army Land Rovers prior to 1994.

The Cummins six is a big heavy motor that most people consider too heavy for a Series suspension. I know one person in Canada who has done it though.

greenmeanie
08-17-2011, 01:25 AM
[QUOTE=TeriAnn;73467]&nbsp;</P>
<P>Option #4 Since your truck has a six cylinder engine bay, replace the engine with an early small displacement Chevy in-line six. (194, 230 or 250 Cu In versions). the 292 version is a bit too powerful for the stock drive train. The Chevy 6 is just a tad long and you should go with an aluminum cross flow radiator sitting on top of the front cross member. Use an electric pusher fan. You will likely need to hunt for a <A href="http://www.expeditionlandrover.info/Scotty%20Conversions.htm" target=_blank>Scotty's adapter</A>. With the 292 or the 250 version and a lead foot you would want to upgrade the gearbox and rear end. Pros: plenty of power to push your truck around in traffic. With higher gearing a good highway cruiser. The smaller versions of this engine family won't overtax your drive train as much but you still have to have a gentle accelerator foot. CONs: It is easier to brake drive train parts. Done right you should upgrade to a beefier gearbox and rear end. These engines are about 50 years old and it could be that parts may be getting harder to find.</P>
<P>&nbsp;.[/QUOTE

To correct TAW parts for Chevy 6s are still commonly available. You can even buy new long and short blocks. Speed parts are available but take more research and hunting down. It takes a lot more money to build a hot inline 6 than a V8 purely due to limited suppliers. For a 109, unless you are a bit daft, a stock 250 or 292 with a decent carb on it should have all the power you need.

TeriAnn
08-17-2011, 04:10 AM
To correct TAW parts for Chevy 6s are still commonly available. You can even buy new long and short blocks. Speed parts are available but take more research and hunting down.

Thanks for adding that. I had no idea what the current state of parts for a 50ish year old Chevy in-line six engine.



It takes a lot more money to build a hot inline 6 than a V8 purely due to limited suppliers. For a 109, unless you are a bit daft, a stock 250 or 292 with a decent carb on it should have all the power you need.

My Land Rover mentor who is responsible for at least 80% of everything I think I know about Land Rovers and turning a wrench was James "Scotty" Howett who developed the "Scotty Conversion", manufactured and distributed Scotty adapters. Scotty always told customers not to use the 292 version of the engine because it was too powerful for the Land Rover gearbox to reliably stand up to. He recommended the Chevy 250 as the largest member of the family for his conversion.

Also to avoid mid '70's and newer cylinder heads. During that time the factory recast the heads with different water passages so they would run hotter. It is a SMOG emissions thing that tended to cause converted LRs to overheat on summer desert runs.

He recommended the four cylinder "Iron Duke" engine for 88 conversions and the 250 or smaller in-line six for 109 conversions. Later in life, his early 80's, he discovered the Mercruiser marine engine family of larger 4 cylinder engines and recommended Mercruiser converted to automotive use as the engine of choice to use with his conversion in both 88s and 109s.

martindktm
08-17-2011, 05:50 AM
Do you know Teriann if the iron duke is lighter than the 2.25 Rover?

TeriAnn
08-17-2011, 10:04 AM
Do you know Teriann if the iron duke is lighter than the 2.25 Rover?

Sorry I do not. I do know that GM made a lot of different four cylinder engines and all were more powerful than the 2.25L petrol engine. But you need to be careful with some of the older ones because unique parts have gone NLA.

What Scotty referred to as the Iron Duke was basically the in-line six minus 2 cylinders and shared parts with the six cylinder models. Sorry I don't know which vehicles that were sold with.

I was mostly interested in how to fix my truck. When I visited we would start out with tea and biscuits and chat. Then after a few cups go out to the shop where Jim explained what was wrong with my truck this time and how to fix it. He was very good at teaching me. In the beginning, he had to make sure I know how the tools worked and that I know which ones to buy.

daveb
08-17-2011, 10:31 AM
the iron duke/mercruiser engines weigh in under 300lbs as a long block with carb and manifolds. yes they are lighter than a 2.25.

I have been messing around with these engines for 10 years now and have figured out most of what is needed to make one work. That said though, I am giving up on them in favor of a 200tdi and am selling my whole collection of GM 4 cylinder stuff. It all needs work at this point but I have everything needed to put together a great motor. Most of the parts area readily available though some things are getting hard to find. Wear items like bearings and such are all easy and cheap to get.


Do you know Teriann if the iron duke is lighter than the 2.25 Rover?

mongoswede
08-17-2011, 11:51 AM
The Cummins six is a big heavy motor that most people consider too heavy for a Series suspension. I know one person in Canada who has done it though.

this one?:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ocNoI8XAuiI

martindktm
08-17-2011, 02:04 PM
LAst time I mess with the 2.5 Gm`s It was when I used to own Pontiac Fiero`s.

Momo
08-17-2011, 02:26 PM
Michael, 289s are like peanut butter & jelly sandwiches... cheap and satisfying! It wouldn't be worth it to go back to the 2.25 IMO.

By the way, this 109 you have... where did you pick it up? I remember one for sale awhile back that had a 289, I think it was in Tujunga or something. I never did hear back from the seller when I called to inquire.

And if Matt gets to come see it, I want in. Matt and I have been talking about getting together over Rovers and beers for years now and he may never buy another one, so this is a good opportunity to see your truck and crack a couple cold ones and maybe even get Matt back into the fold!

I Leak Oil
08-17-2011, 02:28 PM
That looks like JL's truck. Quite the beast! That's a little more than a simple engine swap though.


this one?:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ocNoI8XAuiI

O'Brien
08-17-2011, 02:39 PM
Momo, check my signature man! and yes michael, lets get something setup. We can talk rovers, and maybe even walk over to the Red Lion!
:gulp:

1967IPA
08-18-2011, 12:30 AM
Matt / Momo -

Let's do this! I'd be keen on showing you guys the Rover. It's a unique one to say the least. Some different directions, etc that this truck could go.
It's always good to talk Rovers and knock back a couple of cold ones.
This weekend could be good - you guys around?

- Donovan

1967IPA
08-18-2011, 12:53 AM
Momo -
To answer your question, I picked it up here in the neighborhood - Silver Lake. It'd been hiding being a bunch of Corvairs for years and years. Took an alternate route back to the house one day because of construction (never ending here in Los Angeles) and happened upon the Rover. A couple of knocks on the front door and 15 or so minutes later of conversation and we had a deal. I'll tell ya more over a cold one.
-Donovan

Momo
08-18-2011, 10:58 AM
Sounds good Donovan. Friday afternoon or Sunday afternoon, either is good for me. Matt has my cell number. I'd love to see your truck and hear more.

Hey Matt, I thought you had liquidated. Glad to see it's not true!

greenmeanie
08-19-2011, 11:55 AM
Thanks for adding that. I had no idea what the current state of parts for a 50ish year old Chevy in-line six engine.



Scotty always told customers not to use the 292 version of the engine because it was too powerful for the Land Rover gearbox to reliably stand up to. He recommended the Chevy 250 as the largest member of the family for his conversion.

Also to avoid mid '70's and newer cylinder heads. During that time the factory recast the heads with different water passages so they would run hotter. It is a SMOG emissions thing that tended to cause converted LRs to overheat on summer desert runs.



My 109 ran a 292 for at least 20 years before I got it. A horrible conversion it was but it did use the Scotty's adapter to the stock 6 cyl drive train. The front prop was shot at the slip joint and some of the splines in the stock Rover type rear axle were half gone but I put that down to a complete lack of maintenance and lubrication. With all things powerful it comes down to the right foot.

The 70's heads are fine for normal use. The casting wall thickness only really becomes and issue once you get into skimming and lump porting. The heads to avoid are the ones with the integral cast manifolds. They don't flow well and they crack.

250s rev a bit higher than 292s which makes them more suited to the stock Rover gearing.

I hopped up the 292 but I have beefed up the drivetrain too.

O'Brien
08-21-2011, 09:33 PM
:thumb-up:

had a great time hanging out with Michael this evening, talking rovers and knocking back a couple cold ones. looks like a really amazing NADA 109. Body panels are in amazing shape, seriously beautiful fenders!!! We were too busy talking rovers for me to snap too many pictures, but here's one of his 109 and one of both our trucks. super great to connect with another member of the brotherhood and talk oil leaking beasts! disregard all the empties in the colossal front bumper of his :)

1967IPA
08-23-2011, 01:46 PM
Yeah! It was a good time, Matt. I was as amazed as you when I got into seeing just how straight these panels were. Who knew middle doors on a 109 could hold up like these have!!

Upon digging a little more into the motor and conversion details there was some good, some bad and some worse.

I removed all the ancilliarys, intake and exhaust manifolds - down to the bare short block.

One cylinder is fouled and essentially it's solidly seized (one piston) Also - the conversion plate has a couple slots in the top half - I can see the flywheel. Interesting...or not.

Now, the big question. I'd like to get it running around town, to the beach, etc. Thinking that because I've made a $$ goal for myself (and my wife) in order to get this on the road.

That being said, I'd rather be underpowered with a 2.25 or 2.5 and therefore less likely to break components of the driveline (add'l $$) if I dropped in a fresh 289 or 302. I'd also be keen on getting the footwells back to stock form, as they've been hacked a bit when the PO squeezed the V8 into the space. I planned on replacing some of the sheetmetal anyways, as there's a bit of rustiness/small holes present.

Down the road when I can throw a bit more money at it - the 200 or 300tdi would be an appropriate upgrade. But for the next year or so, I'd be OK running a stock-ish set up.

Now - who's got a nice condition 2.25 or 2.5 petrol sitting on an engine stand or a pallet waiting for a home in the SoCal area?!?! Also - in need of a deluxe bonnet in Marine Blue! This one is NICE, but has a lame square hole cut for venting. Wouldn't mind getting it patched, but I haven't heard of anyone good with this particular alloy here in Los Angeles.
Any direction would be appreciated.

Cheers,
Michael

ca_surveyor
08-23-2011, 05:26 PM
Sorry I missed the straight panels and of course the cold beverages. Been working hard on mine. I know that Javier has been looking for a 2.25 in SoCal, but not much response.

Apis Mellifera
08-23-2011, 05:33 PM
Let's see some more under hood pictures of that V8.

TeriAnn
08-23-2011, 08:22 PM
That said, you could get a complete 302 for a few hundred. If you decide to go back to the 2.25, I'd be interested in the conversion pieces.

If you are interested in learning more about Series engine conversions, including the small block Ford I have a section in my web site dedicated to the subject. With pictures.

http://www.expeditionlandrover.info/#engine

Apis Mellifera
08-23-2011, 08:28 PM
Yes, I saw that, but there is only one picture of a 5.0 engined Series.

TeriAnn
08-24-2011, 08:29 AM
Yes, I saw that, but there is only one picture of a 5.0 engined Series.

Well 2 of the engine itself actually. One looking down after a EFI conversion and one from the front with the vehicle front clip removed. Sorry, I hadn't realized you were looking for 5.0 eye candy and not information on how to do the swap and end up with a reliable LR.

If you just want pictures of a Series with a 5.0 in it, my web site is full of them. as my truck has a 1968 302 with 1991 EFI.

1967IPA
08-24-2011, 02:03 PM
Here's a few shots of the engine bay (Apis)

I'm wishing the PO had done a better job of cutting/fabbing these footwells properly.

Yes, you can actually see the flywheel in the gap of the adapter. Not too sure about that one.

Overall, it's just SUPER tight in there with the panels + trans cowls + manifolds on the block. If I can't get to a spark plug, that's a problem.

TeriAnn - you modified these panels, I would imagine? If so, would you happen to have any images for reference?

Cheers,
Michael

TeriAnn
08-24-2011, 02:44 PM
Overall, it's just SUPER tight in there with the panels + trans cowls + manifolds on the block. If I can't get to a spark plug, that's a problem.

TeriAnn - you modified these panels, I would imagine? If so, would you happen to have any images for reference?


Mine has lots of room around the spark plugs. The engine sits closer to the frame centre line and the stock steering box is removed (power steering box added to the frame near the radiator).

Sorry no pictures. What I do have is step by step instructions, including dimensions, describing what has to be cut and new metal added. Anyone who can cut & weld should be able to easily follow the description.

For example:

"In order to fit the larger American V8 bellhousing and to centre the engine more within the frame, the bulkhead has to be modified for more clearance in the bellhousing indentation. A small block V8 will need a bulkhead indentation that is 3 inches wider to the right and an inch higher clearance where the bellhousing passes through.

The bell housing clearance indentation needs to be modified to allow centring of the V8 engine and space for the larger bellhousing. For my bulkhead, a vertical cut was made near the centre of the indentation. Next the welds that held the right side of the indentation to the rest of the bulkhead were carefully removed allowing the removal of the right half of the bulkhead indentation. A new cut in the bulkhead was made three inches to the right of the edge of the stock bulkhead indentation edge that carefully followed the factory cut. The edges were formed and the right half of the indentation panel was welded back into place along the new cut three inches to the right of where it was previously positioned. A three inch wide flat sheet of steel was welded into place to cover the new three inch gap between the right and left sides of the bell housing indentation. At this point the the bell housing indentation looked factory stock but was three inches wider on the right side.

The new edge of the indentation comes to the edge of the Kodiak heater mounting flange. The heater did not need to be moved or modified from it's original location. The end result as a indentation about 25 inches wide. This is plenty for a small block Ford or Chevy but a GM 6.2 V8 diesel will need an indentation about 29 inches wide which will require taking a couple inches off the already narrow left side foot well. The other option is having the engine sit forward of the stock indentation and use a Defender front radiator support and bonnet.

The Ford or Chevy bell housing needs more clearance along the bottom edge of the bell housing indentation than the stock Rover one does. The horizontal flange that goes into the passenger compartment was cut out. One inch of metal was cut out of the bell housing indentation along the top of this cut and the flange was welded back into place. Basically the stock shape was retained but it now sits one inch higher and three inches wider.

This completes the bulkhead modifications."

Apis Mellifera
08-24-2011, 06:10 PM
Anyone who can cut & weld should be able to easily follow the description.

Well, I've been welding and wrenching for about a quarter century, including building a Locost, and I don't know about anyone else, but I like pictures. The old adage "a picture is worth a thousand words" is an old adage because it's true.

I'll take a poorly written but illustrated description over one penned by Shakespeare himself any day.


1967IPA: Do you have a picture of the exhaust prior to disassembly? It looked as though yours had a U bend in the pipe. Also, did you have the stock steering box? Pictures of that area?

Thanks,
Matt

1967IPA
08-24-2011, 06:38 PM
Apis -

The exhaust manifolds were mounted flipped. In other words, the exhaust pipes dumped out the front of the block and then down. A u-shaped turn down, if you will. I think that would be a headache to re-mount in this fashion, since the gaskets would have to be hacked up to make space for the spark plugs after mounting on the opposite sides. All this hacking!! I think it would may be wiser to go with the Falcon exhaust manifolds that dump straight down against the block and then y-pipe it after that.

I do have the stock steering box location - no changes there, although there's a remote oil filter mounted to the wing just above the steering linkage. Not sure an image would help ya. You can see the frame is notched to accommodate the oil cooler hose elbows. That remote filter hose then runs out the grill into an oil cooler mounted to the front apron. I have a sneaking suspicion this thing ran hot. I'm going to have the radiator flushed/boiled out - there's tons of mineral deposits clogging up the interior.

-Michael