SII 109 project

[greenmeanie]

Ok Yorker here we go with my own thread. My apologies for any bad forum etiquette.

In that this potential truck has a Ford V8 I am obviously perusing T.A.W. website in great detail. Naturally I will have a bucket load of quetions.

First off though is there any reason other than gear ratios that you would chose an NP435 over a T-18? While T.A.W. seems to have chosen a T-18 it her web page does not give any preference reasons other than gear ratio that I can find. I am still reading however.

As I like the idea of retaining the LR transfer box I am tempted to go the T-18 route as I have an obvious resource for info on the build to adapt the two boxes together.
Cheers
Gregor

[leafsprung]

I like the NP435 better. Its a little shorter and shifts nicer (in my opinion than the T-18. But its personal preference. I also would put a SBC in a rover over a ford V8 any day of the week. The process for making the adaptor for either transmission is the same, so that shouldnt be an issue in your decision.

[greenmeanie]

Thanks Ike,
The only reason I'm takling Ford is that the truck already has a 289 fitted. If I was starting from scratch I would probably be going diesel but that would break the bank on this project right now.

The truck has the 289 fitted to a series box which I know is going to be a problem si I'm looking for some stronger cogs.

Cheers
Gregor.

[leafsprung]

Not like SBCs are expensive, sell the ford and buy one, or sell it and buy a diesel, you could get a running 6AT for a couple grand. I have a friend who is selling his diesel 109 project. Its a sprung over 3 door on FJ60 axles with a cummins/NP435/HR rover t-case.

-Ike

[greenmeanie]

Thanks for the info Ike.

Other than personal preference is there any fundemental reasons the Ford is bad. I got the impression from a picture on your website that you don't like 'em. I can't say I'm a huge fan or anything but just looking for some solid inforamtion to base my decisions on.

I would be interested in seeing some more info on your friends project. My issue is that I really need a SW as it is to become a family vehicle. I know conversions can be done but, as always it comes down to comparing what you've got to start with to where you want to get to in a budget. Converting a 2 door to a SW sounds like it could get expensive.

Cheers
Gregor

[leafsprung]

Which picture was that? Ford v8s are not bad per se. However the SBC has the advantage in parts interchageability and aftermarket support. Which is why you see a lot of SBCs in ford hotrods . . .

[yorker]

If the Ford engine is OK I doubt I'd bother changing it for a SBC. I've never had any great affinity for SBC or Ford Small Blocks. Either are ok, I'd go with what you have. They are all light duty car/truck engines and will work well enough in any Land Rover.

It might be worth running the serial #s on the 289 though just to see if it is something that might be worth more to someone doing a resto on a Mustang or something.

The NP435 is better then the T18 IMHO. I may end up using a T18 for my 109 but only because it is available locally I'd prefer the 435.

FWIW Ford Fuel injection is pretty simple. Speed density or mass air...

[yorker]

Which picture was that? Ford v8s are not bad per se. However the SBC has the advantage in parts interchageability and aftermarket support. Which is why you see a lot of SBCs in ford hotrods . . . Yup same reason you see ford 9" rear ends under mopar hot rods and others...

Gregor FWIW here is a lightweight a friend of mine is building, it is where my Sals went:

http://www.landroverusaforums.com/forums/showthread.php?t=535

Ike- how did the FJ60 axles work out on your friend's 109? I have been looking for a set for my Ambulance I found a set of free floater FJ60 axles on Long Island which kind of intrigue me. - I might use the set of FJ40 axles I already have but I'd like to reserve them for an 88".

[greenmeanie]

Well there's a rather nice looking project for sale on line right now in Ohio. A 67IIA 109 with galvy bulkhead, chassis & B-pillars for about the right price. Two questions:
1. Does anyone know the guy who's offering it?
2. I am sure it was on here that there was a thread showing a blue coil sprung series station wagon. Does anyone know who that is and where the pictures are.

Cheers
Gregor

[TeriAnn]

First off though is there any reason other than gear ratios that you would chose an NP435 over a T-18? While T.A.W. seems to have chosen a T-18 it her web page does not give any preference reasons other than gear ratio that I can find. I am still reading however.

I didn't so much choose a T-18 nine years ago when the conversion was done as Timm Cooper recommended the box and I went with his recommendation. He stopped recommending the box years ago. The T-18 is a very rugged box but the shift pattern is very loose and you have to shift by guessiing where the gear should be instead of by feel.

If I were to do it all over again and money were no object I suspect I would go with the 1995 or newer version of the NV4500 five speed with Timm's adapter. If I were to do it over again with a 4 speed I would pick the close ratio NP435.

Close ratio? Yep. A T-18 has a 6.32:1 granny first gear, which using 4.7 R&P & C or later suffix transfercase provides a low range first gear ratio of close to 70:1. Stock for a Series IIA is 40.7:1. I find 40.7:1 to be too tall for much of the more technical off road driving I do. But 70:1 is much lower than I need and with V8 torque it is hard to keep the pedal still enough to apply steady power. For the kind of technical driving I do I've tended to prefer a gear around 55:1. I just never use low range first. What good is having a gear you almost never use?

Actually I use first gear high range a lot on the trail because the axle ratio (with Ashcroft kit in the transfercase) is very close to stock series low range second gear. If I'm traveling with Series LRs who are using low second I easily go the same speed in high first. If they drop to low first I can usually drop my RPM to idle or near idle and travel at the same speed. My engine has more torque at idle than a 2.25L has at peak so dropping that RPM works when trailing with stock Series rigs. When I travel with stock Series rigs I never need to drop ino low range. I carry four gears I don't use in that kind of situation.

Close ratio NP435 first gear is 4.78:1, granny first is 6.69:1 (Ford version), Suffix C & later low range transfercase ratio is 2.35:1 and the stock series R&P ratio is 4.7:1.

Therefore the low range first gear axle ratio for the close ratio Ford version of the NP435 is 53:1 and for the granny gear version is 74:1

If you are building a serious rock crawler 70:1 or 74:1 is good to have but for a Dormobile that occasionally does moderate rock crawling the 53:1 ratio is more useful in more places and still much superior to the stock 40.7:1

Anyway, that's what I would do if I were to do it over again. I stayed away from recomendations on my gearbox web pages because I don't want to limit people's ideas and their needs are likely different from mine.

By the way, it is T.J.W. My middle name is Jennifer :)

[TeriAnn]

Which picture was that? Ford v8s are not bad per se. However the SBC has the advantage in parts interchageability and aftermarket support. Which is why you see a lot of SBCs in ford hotrods . . .

I often times think it more a matter of if you were raised in a Ford household or a Chevy household.

In a Series rig Chevy has the advantages of being slightly shorter, the rams head exhaust manifold and rear sump. Ford has the advantage of a easily accessible distributor, slightly less weight and I think a 302 is slightly narrower.

Small block Fords have lots of parts interchangeability. For instance my engine is a 1970 Mustang long block with mid 1970's timing chain cover & front auxiliaries from an econoline van, a Bronco oil pan and 1991 Mustang fuel injection system that includes the manifolds & distributor. One of these days I plan to install a 351 cam. But yes there are less versions of the Chevy small block.

Speed parts? Most speed parts add power to the high end by stealing it from the low end. You need to look very carefully at the resulting idle to 3000 RPM curves before plunking down money on speed gear. But there are lots of after market parts for the 302.

I think the engine choice between small block V8s is mostly a personal preference and not a technical preference.

[leafsprung]

Speed parts? Most speed parts add power to the high end by stealing it from the low end.

Not speed parts per se, general aftermarket. SBC parts are very cheap and plentiful.

[yorker]

Close ratio? Yep. A T-18 has a 6.32:1 granny first gear, which using 4.7 R&P & C or later suffix transfercase provides a low range first gear ratio of close to 70:1. Stock for a Series IIA is 40.7:1. I find 40.7:1 to be too tall for much of the more technical off road driving I do. But 70:1 is much lower than I need and with V8 torque it is hard to keep the pedal still enough to apply steady power. For the kind of technical driving I do I've tended to prefer a gear around 55:1. I just never use low range first. What good is having a gear you almost never use?



The trucks these granny low four speeds were originally in were usually used as a 3 speed with an optional extra low gear. The shifter knobs were sometimes marked L-1-2-3-R which sort of reflects this philosophy. In practice you rarely used L but it was there if you needed it- three speed trannys were common on other vehicles at the time so it didn't seem so strange to use only 3 of the 4 gears in day to day use.

FWIW whenever someone who is used to one of these 4 speed transmissions uses one of my land rovers they always complain that the LR is too highly geared.... So like everything else I guess it depends what you are used to.:rolleyes:

For most people like you say the close ratio is probably a far more practical choice. With the granny low 4 spds it might be nice to have a secondary OD to split them. Maybe the Ranger torque splitter or something like that vs. the Roverdrive or Fairey?

[greenmeanie]

First of all, thank you guys and gal for the information.
Secondly, please accept my apologies TeriAnn, I got a little fooled by the caps A in your name.

I am gradually building a spec for this vehicle.
For emissions reasons I am looking at a 67 or earlier vehicle and I think a pre 67 engine. Arizona seems to be getting more in line with California these days in regards to emissions. It also has to be a 109 Station Wagon as it is really to become a family vehicle.

Given its expedition orientated type build I think the close ratio box is the way to go. Does Tim Cooper have a web site or does he offer stock adapters for Rover transfer cases to US gearboxes? I want a rear Salisbury and may have a line on a front too.

As far as engines go I am an expat Scots so the only V8 I ever new in my house was an old mil spec low compression Rover 3.5L lump. That doesn’t bode well. I’m rather ambivalent about Ford vs Chevy although my driving factor is that the project I have found has a galvanized 1987 110 chassis with 200tdi mounts so I suppose cost and whatever fits with the minimum butchering and cost is the way I’ll go. I must be going native or something because the redneck in me has a desire for oodles of power and torque from a V8 as opposed to a diesel.

I found this (see pictures.) on line for $4500. It would make a fun project as the hard part of putting the series body on the 110 chassis has been done. It’s also already a hybrid so I wouldn’t have the usual heartache about modifying or restoring a leafer. It’s only issues as I see them are:
1. It’s not a leafer. Coils seem terribly modern but I suppose they are good and open up some options.
2. It has a SIII bulkhead. I really prefer the SIIA dash so I would have to sell this one (shouldn’t be that hard.) and obtain another. Ike, do you have any IIA bulkheads or do you only accept restoring cores supplied by the customer?
3. The rear cross member is made out of checker plate. It’s quite ugly but I suppose it is functional.
4. Am I right in saying that ditching those alloys and putting the original 16” steel rims on would bring the wheels back under the arches? I don't do flares on series rigs.http://www.roversnorth.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=555&stc=1&d=1201722939

http://www.roversnorth.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=556&stc=1&d=1201722939

http://www.roversnorth.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=557&stc=1&d=1201722939

http://www.roversnorth.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=558&stc=1&d=1201722939

Upside down damn it.
I’d love some comments. I suppose I should move over to the hybrids if I get it. NCRover's truck would have a big brothre.

Cheers
Gregor

[leafsprung]

the hard part of putting the series body on the 110 chassis has been done

Thats the easy part really. Looks like a viable project. The early wheels will help but the coilsprung axles are significantly wider. Makes for a stable ride.

[greenmeanie]

My next question is what is the length of a series gearbox?

For some unexplainable reason right now I fancy keeping my red and yellow knobs so want the series transfer case. I also quite fancy the idea of the NV4500 with more gears. This is, of course subject to length restrictions.

I am also looking at comparing things like the NP435 with the Ranger box but again only subject to length.

The final product I am shooting for is along the lines of this beastie:
http://www.eastcoastrover.com/Thompson109.html (http://www.eastcoastrover.com/Thompson109.html)

From their web site it seems they manage to use the Defender axles with series steel wheels.

My wife's requirements so far are: comfortable seats (Taken care of) something less noisy than my 101 and most of all it MUST have aircon.

Cheers
Gregor

[yorker]

http://www.pirate4x4.com/forum/showthread.php?t=624371

There is another one for you to mull over.:D hehe...

Here are pics of the Np435 my friend Rick is using in his lightweight, I think the adapters Ike made were shorter? Ike is this one of yours or Cooper's? :confused:

Rick also has a T18 mated to a LT230 with an adapter that was made by Rovertracks a while back. I'm not sure what the length of that is but any of these should fit in a 109.

[yorker]

http://seriestrek.com/109/tranny1.jpg

http://seriestrek.com/109/np4351.jpg

http://seriestrek.com/109/together4.jpg

http://seriestrek.com/109/together3.jpg
There is another NP435 to series trannsfer case adapter, a bit shorter than the one Rick is using too.

Mercedes Jim has the above build documented here:
http://seriestrek.com/109.html

Another build for you to check out:thumb-up:

[greenmeanie]

Yorker,
You area veritable fount of projects!

So from what you are sending me I take it most people end up going the NP435 route. Have you found anyone using a NV4500 yet or is it too long/ too expensive?

Well so far I would be inthe hole for:
$4500 for the project
$1300 to ship it.
That's $5800 before starting. I'm in two minds but it would be a fun project. Does anyone know of saomeone wanting to swap a good/perfect IIA bulkhead for a newly galvanised SIII. I just couldn't face a plastic dash.

Cheers
Gregor

[TeriAnn]

Not speed parts per se, general aftermarket. SBC parts are very cheap and plentiful.
OK there are more companies in the market selling Chevy engine parts than Ford engine parts. But it is more like getting a choice of 2 dozen manufacturers instead of one and a half dozen manufacturers and prices are slightly more cut throat in the Chevy parts market. But parts for both types of engines are off the shelf in any North American auto parts store and about one tenth the price of the equivalent Land Rover engine part.

Every small town with a mechanic has someone experienced with the American small block engines, American small truck gearboxes and every auto parts has them on the shelf or in the warehouse for cheap.

Bottom line with both Chevy and Ford small blocks is that with a bit of bulkhead fabrication they fit a Series engine bay, if you don't get crazy with speed parts they have more power at idle than the 2.25L does at peak, with low compression heads (regular grade petrol) & a 500 cfm four barrel jetted properly they get the same fuel mileage as a 2.25l ( or at least mine did city & highway), if you learn EFI they can get better fuel mileage (about 2-3 MPG highway and as much as 5-6 MPG better city or on the trail), they weigh close to the same as the 2.25L petrol (with aluminum heads the Ford is nearly 50 pounds lighter), parts are plentiful, cheap and everything is a lot more robust.

But any conversion is only as good as the system approach used to design it and the skills of the fabricator.

Both Ford and Chevy work fine and it is mostly a matter of an individual's tastes and emotional prejudices. I was raised in a Ford household and I like the idea of a distributor in easy reach without removing the bonnet.

I just wish Americans had a choice of cheap small diesels in the 200hp @4000 RPM & 300 lbft @ 2300 RPM range that got 25 miles per US gallon or better in a Series rig. That runs on used french fry oil. :rolleyes:

[yorker]

Yorker,
You area veritable fount of projects!

So from what you are sending me I take it most people end up going the NP435 route. Have you found anyone using a NV4500 yet or is it too long/ too expensive?



Sure there are some who have used the NV4500, I just am more familiar withthe 4 speed swaps because $ for $ I think they are the way to go. There is no real reason why you couldn't use a NV4500

here you go nv4500:
http://www.expeditionlandrover.info/lonn_V8.htm


and just for kicks- since this is such a cool thread here is some Ford Fuel injection stuff for you:
http://www.fordfuelinjection.com/?p=6

[TeriAnn]

I am gradually building a spec for this vehicle.
For emissions reasons I am looking at a 67 or earlier vehicle and I think a pre 67 engine. Arizona seems to be getting more in line with California these days in regards to emissions.

California does not require emisions testing on anthing older than 1974 so my 1970 block puts it legally in the no testing required catagory. Howerver, I have fitted a 1991 Mustang EFI system which constantly tunes the engine for both power and low emissions and I have retained the PCV system so the engine runs much cleaner than it did in 1970 when the engine was built and in 1960 when the Land Rover was built. I would have installed the EFI's EGR system except that the cylinder heads don't have EGR passages. Anyway California tests 1974 & newer engines or vehicles which ever is newer and the vehicle must meet the emissions requirements for a vehicle built in that newer year. A LR aluminum V8 would require sealed fuel tanks, charcoal canisters and catalyic converters among other things.

I agreee with you. Best to stay legal within your state and any state a future owner might reside in.



Does Tim Cooper have a web site or does he offer stock adapters for Rover transfer cases to US gearboxes? I want a rear Salisbury and may have a line on a front too.

Timm Cooper does not do the Internet, web site or email. Rovers North sells his disc brake conversions but that's about it for other companies carrying his products. He does have an adapter for the NV4500 and for the NP435.

Series Trek, http://seriestrek.com (http://seriestrek.com/) has an adapter for the NP435 and he is on-line. He is in the process of engineering a conversion for the Mercedes 617 engine that a lot of people are following with great interest. It is a difficult conversion that a lot of experienced fabricators won't touch. But bit by bit, Jim seems to be working out the problems. If he offers a conversion kit it might become quite popular with the 109 crowd.

Best of luck with your project!

[TeriAnn]

For some unexplainable reason right now I fancy keeping my red and yellow knobs so want the series transfer case. I also quite fancy the idea of the NV4500 with more gears. This is, of course subject to length restrictions.
Timm Cooper is the only person I know of who has an adapter to mate a NV4500 to a Series transfercase. Everything is too long for an 88 but fits well in a 109. I think you would have to buy a gearbox with adapter mounted from him.



The final product I am shooting for is along the lines of this beastie:
http://www.eastcoastrover.com/Thompson109.html (http://www.eastcoastrover.com/Thompson109.html)

It is a lovely looking vehicle that you could not legally register in California.



From their web site it seems they manage to use the Defender axles with series steel wheels.

The pre Disco II & pre RRII coiler wheels have the same bolt pattern as the Series rigs. My 1960 109 has had steel Discovery I wheels since early 1996. But the wheels on that vehicle could easily be Defender steel wheels as well. Except for the Discovery I steel wheels, the Wolf wheels and an early RR Classic steel wheel all the LR steel wheels look prety much the same and would be indistinguishable in a low rez jpeg taken of a vehicle.

[Willard]

I have been watching Jim's post and have one of his MBTB adapter - the series Transfer case. I am now rethinking this whole process and might just end up with either a Ford 302 or CHevy 350 (leaning to the ford as i have had several)
My 109 will have a V8 bulkhead out of a Defender 90 so i might be ok in the refabricating my bulkhead deal.
Now just to find a number for Timm.
I am intereted to see what adapters are out there as well for the conversion. I might avoid the T18 (although i never have had a problem with it in the past) but we will see.

All in all the conversion (aside form the adapter) will cost me about 2K less than the same MB conversion, that is if i rebuild the MB engine.
TeriAnn, been a long time reader of your website (actually it gave me the V8 idea) any ideas on the adapters? i would like to keep the Series transfercase at least.

[yorker]

TeriAnn, been a long time reader of your website (actually it gave me the V8 idea) any ideas on the adapters? i would like to keep the Series transfercase at least.

http://www.landroverusaforums.com/forums/showthread.php?t=535

There is the Lightweight project- that is using the tranny and adapter I pictured above- Bought from Timm Cooper. Mercedes Jim bought his adapter from Ike Goss- it is nice, contrast the two adapters in the pictures in my post. Ike's is shorter which may be of some benefit to some swaps.

Maybe you can talk Ike into making one for you. :D

I think those are the only adapters out there right now to mount a NP435 to a Series T case.

There used to be some adapters to mount the T18 to the coiler LT230 transfer case. Or you can make the LT230 a divorced mount t-case.

Other than that you'll have to fab your own adapter or go to a different transfer case all together.

--------------------------------

TeriAnn- what MPG are you getting now with EFI? Can you break 20mpg highway or is 17-18 tops?

[greenmeanie]

The next question concerns the gearbox output shaft. Are all these conversions using a modified output shaft, a stubby adapter shaft or do the 10 spline set ups match?

If nothing else I am tempted to build up a drivetrain to have under the bench while I find a victim to inastall it on.

Cheers
Gregor

[yorker]

NP-435 info:
http://www.novak-adapt.com/knowledge/np435.htm

loads more info:
http://www.novak-adapt.com/knowledge/knowledge_gateway.htm

[Willard]

http://www.landroverusaforums.com/forums/showthread.php?t=535

There is the Lightweight project- that is using the tranny and adapter I pictured above- Bought from Timm Cooper. Mercedes Jim bought his adapter from Ike Goss- it is nice, contrast the two adapters in the pictures in my post. Ike's is shorter which may be of some benefit to some swaps.




Thanks Yorker.

[greenmeanie]

Well after a bit of dredging around I fainlly settled on a 67 109 SW with a Chevy 292 mated to a series transmission. I am a little concerned about the longevity of this set up so am looking at other drivetrains. As it will take another month or so for it to get here (I really must finish my 101's rewire now) I having fun planning a few mods to make it more comfortable and driveable in the Phoenix heat. On paper I think I have already spent a years salary.

In the interests of my education I was thinking about the common knowledge that the series box is considered weak, or at least limited in its hp/torque capacity. When these boxes fail what is the failure mode? I have a distant memory about the layshaft but I would like to know how they actually fail.

Cheers
Gregor

[madp]

For what it is worth, my brother just imported my dad's series 1 '88 from Australia that he had installed a Holden(read Chevy) 260 or 292 six in it about 30 years ago, then drove around the outback for 2 years in it, and then it was used for a work truck for a long time. I remeber him telling us that the only problem with the six was the fuel consumption, and that the series 1 had weak axel shafts, so he always carried extra. That Motor/tranny set up still works great to this day.

[greenmeanie]

Thanks for the information MadP. It's nice to get another reference to get one's confidence up.

I am looking at the fuel consumption issue right now. The previous owner gave a ROM of 16mpg with a light throttle driving around at about 55mph. I'm not sure I'm really a light throttle person. I have bought the book by Leo Snatucci (Sp?) on the engine to build my knowledge before digging in with mods so hopefully will avoid makign stupid mistakes.

I am currently thinking something along the lines of a better set of manifolds & a fuel injection kit. The fuel injection sounds a bit modern and all that but if it gets better fuel economy I'm all for it. The truck will also have to pass emissions in Phoenix and I'm willing to bet that a decent injection system will make that a breeze compared to fiddling with the carb.

THe heads on these are not known for great flow characteristics in stock form. There are companies that will also do head work from mild to wild depending on what you are shooting for so I will investigate this to make her breathe a bit better and get the compression ratio up around the 9.0 mark.

I am shooting for better breathing, combined with more efficient fueling and a raised compression should = more efficiency = more mpg.

I already have an anual nightmare getting my non emission equipped 101 through the 76 standards each year. She gets there but it takes a lot of fiddling.

Cheers
Gregor

[yorker]

The 292 has all kinds of potential and is a great old school truck engine too.


Preliminary 1/4 mile testing has resulted in a 10.04 @ 137+ mph.
- This makes it the Quickest & Fastest, Full Bodied, Chevy 292 Straight 6cyl (http://www.customdesignperformance.com/leo/leo.html). Powered Car in the Country!

[greenmeanie]

1000 hp. Aye that would about do it for me. Now about those disc brakes?

[c-delta]

Got the V-8 and other ideas and know-how from TeriAnn site too.
The set-up I have in the photos is the GM-350 eng, th350 trany
and a Ashcroft 230 part time t-case. The 350-230 adapter was
something Ashcroft (UK)had as a prototype.

I'm in no-way satisfied with the mpg (about 10mpg) I get with this
109 so I'm all ears on this EFI talk.

I'm looking at a 110SW build-up and looking into the 250 and 292
engines for better mpg and room under the hood.

[leafsprung]

You can acheive better than 10 without EFI. There should be little to no difference in MPG between EFI and a properly tuned carb. Provided all other things are equal. Your auto certainly wont help your economy. It takes power to run that TC. What ratio is your T-case and axles? If you have a 1.2/1.4 LT230 with 4.7 axles, the extra revs could also be killing your MPG. My 57 109 on 37s will return better than 15 on the highway. A friend with a stock height 109 with an SBC gets 18-20mpg hwy and its carbed. . .

[groundhog]

If one goes with a SBC are better brakes necessary? Can you use a power booster? I have driven an 88 with stock brakes with the booster and a tap on the pedal about threw me through the windshield. What about brake fade or factoring in the extra weight of my 65 109? I want to use my recon military axles and drum brakes, but the rest of the system is up for a complete rebuild.

[yorker]

Got the V-8 and other ideas and know-how from TeriAnn site too.
The set-up I have in the photos is the GM-350 eng, th350 trany
and a Ashcroft 230 part time t-case. The 350-230 adapter was
something Ashcroft (UK)had as a prototype.

I'm in no-way satisfied with the mpg (about 10mpg) I get with this
109 so I'm all ears on this EFI talk.

I'm looking at a 110SW build-up and looking into the 250 and 292
engines for better mpg and room under the hood.

What size are your tires? what gear ratios are you running- it sounds like you are running your engine well out of its ideal power band for cruising. What RPM are you turning at road speed? you should be able to get at least 15...

http://www.mpgresearch.com/viewforum.php?f=33

You don't happen to have a th350c do you? a lock up torque converter couldn't hurt things IMHO...

[c-delta]

Leafsprung--Yorker,
thanks for the feedback. The engine is running at 2500rpm at
about 53-55mph, my Disco runs 65-70mph at 22-23rpms.
The TH-350 is the old type so can't go with the lockup converter.
Ashcroft set-me-up with the highest gear ratio for the LT-230..
one down from the highest he had.

I think I'm going to go with a high diff ratio rear--3.54, alot of highway
driving. Putting the 500cfm carb in I think I screwed-up and didn't go
with the manufactures procedures. At ideal (looking into carb) I can see
the jets dropping large drops of gas into the manifold..I know that isn't
right. Mechanical fuel pump so I think it's not the fuel pressure and just
the floats are jammed from the insulation.

anyway don't mean to hijack this post.

[Donnie]

If you are running a 350 auto, why not use a 700r4, you would have a lower 1st gear and overdrive 4th and a lock up converter..the 700 is 4 or 5 inches longer & would require some major moving things around??????????????