CLOCKING THE ENGINE TO YOUR ADVANTAGE

Bill Hincher · Post by **Bill Hincher** » Tue Feb 13, 2007 9:51 am

now that you can select what transmission you want to use for your 4G63 narrow block, why not take this one step further?

Because of the available bellhousings up until now, you were forced to run your engine straight up and down, but in its original configuration ( like the Eclipse) the engine was 'clocked' forward about 15 degrees.

Well, the reason I bring that up is, by clocking the engine to the right side of the engine bay by 15 degrees you shorten the engine, its not as tall and the engine intake manifold moves away from the master cylinder.

By shortening the hieght of the engine, you can now lower it in the engine bay, raise the rack and pinion steering and place the turbo on top of the exhaust manifold without cutting up the hood.

It seems to me to be a win/win situation because the engine cooling system ( ports in the cylinder head) are designed to run at that 15 degree angle

It would be easy to do by rotating how the trans is indexed to the bellhousing.

It would put drifting the 4G63 ahead of everything else

Post by **DJpowerHaus** » Wed Feb 14, 2007 4:28 pm

I always wanted to tilt the engine like you mentioned Bill. Here is a picture of the tilt with the RX7 transmission (from behind):

Rotating the transmission would make it more upright. The problem with this is that the shifter actually compensates for most of this tilt. Tilting the engine would make the shifter point towards the passenger. I'm not sure how the shifter sits on a B2600 transmission. Either way I'm sure its not an unsolvable problem.

Even though I have to one day redo my engine mounts, I'm going to keep the engine the way it is. Really don't want to have to revise all my IC and water pipes again.

Bill Hincher · Post by **Bill Hincher** » Wed Feb 14, 2007 4:58 pm

Yeah, Thats what I am talking about Mike, you are forced to comprimise the RX7 trans, you dont need to do that with the R 154

what I was talking about was rotating the R-154 to the left by indexing the bellhousings I have .

In other words, rotate the engine to about 15 degrees to the right, like it sets in an eclipse ( tilted forward) to lower the CG of the engine and make it more compact for smaller engine bays

the engine would rotate right and the trans would rotate left making the shifter go straight up and down

Post by **DJpowerHaus** » Wed Feb 14, 2007 5:04 pm

If it would be offered with engine mounts and a transmission crossmember I'd definatly give it my seal of approval.

Bill Hincher · Post by **Bill Hincher** » Wed Feb 14, 2007 5:06 pm

Might as well build an engine cradle with the front rack and pinion set up so it would bolt up in any import.

dont get me started

peregrine · Post by **peregrine** » Wed Feb 14, 2007 5:17 pm

Bill Hincher wrote:Might as well build an engine cradle with the front rack and pinion set up so it would bolt up in any import.

dont get me started

By all means, please get started

Bill Hincher · Post by **Bill Hincher** » Thu Feb 15, 2007 11:09 am

I dont think we are on the same page

I am not talking about the RX7 trans, I am talking about the R 154, I dont care about the drain plug in the trans or how the trans is clocked.

I am talking about clocking the engine, my offer was to create a bellhousing that does NOT make the engine stand straight up and down, my offer was an option to rotate the position of the engine so it was shorter in size

It would be thinking out of the box, creating new data, providing a new way of thinking, providing more options

GRNDSM · Post by **GRNDSM** » Thu Feb 15, 2007 2:54 pm

Bill,

First, I have to question your point about DSM engine being tilted ~15deg. That would mean ~2.5” difference in height between the intake and exhaust side of the head… And I think that most people here will agree that it isn’t anywhere near that much!

At best, there is 2-3 deg of “tilt” going on there… So going beyond 5 deg (or so) tilt would require some oil and cooling system considerations. Not a huge deal, but I would not say that it would be returning it to a “stock configuration”.

Next, if you look at a relatively “square” shape of the top of 4G63 engine, it shows that it will require a significant tilt in or order to reduce the profile of the engine! For instance, when you showed completely square top in your sketch, you demonstrated my point. The engine profile in your sketch is actually HIGHER than before. The 4G63 profile isn’t quite as bad as you show it (since it isn’t actually square), but I calculated the need of tilting the motor over 19-20 degrees to actually reduce its profile! And that is a fairly extreme tilt!

I agree that tilting of the engine can offer some benefits (like if you need to clear difficult to relocate components). But the shape of 4G63 engine makes it nearly impossible to tilt to it to reduce its overall profile!

There have been numerous in-line engines that were tilted (a.k.a. slanted) in their OEM application (Dodge slant 6, Porsche 924/944, my own TR7, many BMWs, just to name a few), but if you notice, those engine had very different profiles (when compared to 4G63).

BTW, I am all about thinking outside of box. But I also want to bring-up some realism to some of those ideas

.

And I am sure that I am taking for many people here when I say: "keep them coming"!

Bill Hincher · Post by **Bill Hincher** » Thu Feb 15, 2007 3:46 pm

well, I aint married to it leon, I just thought it was a cool idea

GRNDSM · Post by **GRNDSM** » Thu Feb 15, 2007 4:01 pm

But it IS a cool idea! And it is definitely something worth keeping in mind when one is designing some oddball application and needs more clearance on one side of the engine. But I doubt that there would be a large demand for something like that.

Bill Hincher · Post by **Bill Hincher** » Thu Feb 15, 2007 4:04 pm

hey smog, take a look at a generic import pick up truck, a Toyota, nissan, mazda, chevy luv, all that stuff, it all comes with a generic front suspension with torsion bars and front steering, it would make a great contribution to a workable engine cradle

jeffball610 · Post by **jeffball610** » Sat Feb 17, 2007 1:03 pm

In the DSM application, I think the reason the engine is tilted is due to the hood design. That's why they got "the buldge" in the hood. That's there simply to clear the timing gears. There is some compensation to the oil pan with this tilt though. I don't think it is benefitial in the RWD world though.

A generaic cradle might be something to look at. Most engines run a rear sump oil pan and the 4G is a pain in this aspect. I would think motor mounts and a rear sump pan would be a better route to look to. Especially for those who want to set the motor back further and maybe even cut out the firewall to mount the motor. In my particular application, I really need a sway bar and would like some rack and pinion action. My engine crossmember is something that can be modified or even cut out and replaced with some rectangular tubing. However, if there was a 4G rear sump pan and pickup, I could probably get away with not having to replace anything. Except maybe the steering setup.