Your donations help keep this valuable resource free and growing. Thank you.
|
232 rebuild questions |
Post Reply | Page <1 78910> |
Author | |
billd
Moderator Group Forum Administrator Joined: Jun/27/2007 Location: Iowa Status: Offline Points: 30894 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
Check out my Eagle 4.0 swap threads for cam, rocker and pushrod info as well as how to check and correct rocker to valve contact. I found adjustable push rods won't work with a 4.0! The diameter is too large for the holes in the heads so I simply used MATH and lifter preload specs. I used H-S rockers and had to shim them slightly to "lift" them.
|
|
kronik
AMC Apprentice Joined: Jun/13/2011 Location: Oregon Status: Offline Points: 147 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
Thanks for all the help everybody, lots of great tips here. Please keep them coming.
I stopped by the machine shop and talked about the 2.3L piston. He said it will fit with very little machine work to the piston pin bore. Which is great because it opens the door to many more options on styles. Instead of only the cast ones with large reliefs I can get true flat tops or whatever else. Also different compression height can be found. It seems the forged ones are only a little cheaper than amc forged, with the machine work required it would put me right at the cost of Bulltear. However hyper pistons are only a couple hundred and I found cast replacements for around 75. So if you want a flat top without emptying your pockets, I think this is a good way to go. So far the build looks like this: Settled on .030 overbore to fit... Standard sized flat top hyper ford 2.3L SOHC pistons 4.0 head casting 7120. (My research tells me it’s 58cc, please verify). Offenhauser dual port four barrel intake With a flat top (-4cc), compression height of 1.590, gasket thickness of .040 and 58 cc chamber... I should have a compression ratio of around 10 maybe 10.2. I know what you are gonna say... that’s a lot of compression for a 232, and you’re right. Should be interesting, I already run premium gas in most my cars anyways. These are the only things I have so far. Still haven’t decided on a cam, but one that lowers my dynamic compression might be in order. Or found an exhaust header yet. I guess I need a 91 or newer 4.0 header to clear my left side starter. And the push rod issue with the 4.0 head. That should be fun. I have looked a little into roller rockers but can’t find a cheap conversion. Harland Sharp and 505 performance can be had for around 500. Maybe I will do that later down the road. Too bad sbc or sbf can’t be fitted. All these motor upgrades got me thinking about my tranny. What other options do I have with a pre 72? I know the pattern changed. I currently have a BW m-40. |
|
65 American
67 American |
|
billd
Moderator Group Forum Administrator Joined: Jun/27/2007 Location: Iowa Status: Offline Points: 30894 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|
|
kronik
AMC Apprentice Joined: Jun/13/2011 Location: Oregon Status: Offline Points: 147 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
Nice!
|
|
65 American
67 American |
|
farna
Supporter of TheAMCForum Moderator Lost Dealership Project Joined: Jul/08/2007 Location: South Carolina Status: Offline Points: 19611 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
You really don't have any tranny options. The M-40 was used behind 2V 290s and 304s, so you should be okay. The V-8 versions may have had more clutches in them than the sixes, I don't know. I'd verify which trans you have -- M-40, 42, 43 or 44. The 40 was typically used in 290 V-8 cars, 42 behind 199s, 43 behind 232s and 44 behind 304s. The higher number after the 4 doesn't necessarily mean it will handle more power, just that it is a variation.
You really should be fine with a higher power six as you are planning. A full race motor with sticky tires and good traction control might give you problems, but a street configuration shouldn't overtax a healthy M-4x trans. I upgraded a 196 from 135 to about 175 hp with an M-35 with no issues. You could switch to a manual trans, but would still be limited to just a few three speeds used by AMC. The only other option is if Modern Driveline still has a T-5 adapter. They made a few to adapt a Ford V-6 T-5 to the AMC small six bell. That would be a great trans choice! I'd go with an Isky 256 Super cam or the 256/262 or 262 Supercam... or something similar. The 270 HL would work, but for street use I really prefer something that comes in before 2000 rpm. 256/262 comes in at 1800 rpm, 256 Supercam at 1500. 262 and 270 come in at 2000... only 500 rpm difference in the top end (262 5000, 270 5500). |
|
Frank Swygert
|
|
DaemonForce
AMC Addicted Joined: Jul/05/2012 Location: Olympia, WA Status: Offline Points: 1070 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
Speaking of manuals, possibly the worst suggestion ever but could he use the mystery 3spd from a 72? I'm thinking it's a T-14 from the outline and 40+ years of yuck that make this look like such an antique golem but it doesn't resemble the hardware I found in the South yard CJ. This is still sitting in that Sherwood Gremlin so if you want it, get it soon. It's bolted to a rusted 232.
|
|
1971 Javelin SST
American 304 2v | FMX | AM20-3.31 1983 American Limited Jeep 4(.7)L S-MPFI | 1982 NWC T-5M (4.03/.76) | Dana30IFS/35-2.72 |
|
tomj
AMC Addicted Joined: Jan/27/2010 Location: earth Status: Offline Points: 7522 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
a T14 isnt a bad trans -- other than maybe the ratios suck, as i earlier claimed, if you push me i'll go COUNT TURNS and tell you fer sher -- and ought to hold up. six-bolt top cover, right?! not a horrid T96! aka SANITARY LANDFILL or better yet, scrap. anyway.
now i sound like a cynical salesmammal -- i have a nicely rebuilt AMC passenger car T14 here in Los Angeles i no longer need. has 5000 miles on it. |
|
1960 Rambler Super two-door wagon, OHV auto
1961 Roadster American, 195.6 OHV, T5 http://www.ramblerLore.com |
|
vinny
Supporter of TheAMCForum Joined: Jan/05/2012 Location: Calgary Status: Offline Points: 2837 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
Kronik I see that on the Rockauto and Northern auto parts sites the older than 84 2.3 L are SOHC and they have valve reliefs. On the newer 84 - 94 HSC 2.3 L they are flat top and 1.5 compression distance. I don't know what HSC stands for and I didn't see a piston diameter on them. What would you think about yes or no to the newer piston? Also I didn't see any piston listed with a .927 pin diameter which might be easier to bore to .931 than from the .912 pin dia's. Just hoping I might try the same one day.
|
|
billd
Moderator Group Forum Administrator Joined: Jun/27/2007 Location: Iowa Status: Offline Points: 30894 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
If it doesn't need a ton of material removed, this would do the trick, I suspect......
|
|
vinny
Supporter of TheAMCForum Joined: Jan/05/2012 Location: Calgary Status: Offline Points: 2837 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
What is that thing and how would you use it? You've got some nice equipment Bill.
|
|
Post Reply | Page <1 78910> |
Tweet
|
Forum Jump | Forum Permissions You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot create polls in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum |