BW vs Torqueflite

Snout on TC converter is huge over the wee BW. So TC won't fit inside the pilot. Either grab a late crank or machine the earlier crank to fit.

Samuelsc360 wrote: OK. Looking at the torque converter I see what you mean now. Is milling the hole larger all that has to be done?

Yep, I will be doing that for my 69 390 crank, when I have my engine built. The dimensions are in the American Performance magazine. There are reprints on ebay and some AMC distributors have them as well.

This is what first yields complete visual inspection from the engine side.
The flywheel bolts typically match the spec of the harmonic balancer bolt up front, which is not something to usually think about but worth noting here as a similar balance must be struck perfectly with the rear of the crank. The early and late cranks differ as they are either "flat" flange(slight recess) or "volcano" with the 1971+ common V8 spec for all L6 and V8 manufactured products. Both flanges are 4.544" rounds. The pilot bearing for an early crank seems impossible to find but it's a 1.061" bore with an unavailable oil impregnated bushing milled to a .75" ID. The later spec cranks feature a 1.811" large bore and 1.048" deep bore with a common oil impregnanted bushing milled to handle period common manual transmissions like the T-17x, T-4 and T-5 assemblies around .590 or 19/32" input shaft specs.

If you are planning on bolting up these transmissions, keep in mind that you may need to manufacture a new bearing for the old pilot design if you attempt to extract it with a puller or have the crank bored to late spec and possibly rebalanced to handle an OE replacement bushing for easy swap and replacement. It is my opinion that any crankshaft with the volcano flange deserves to be neutral balanced for compatibility and longevity sake with more modern and feature rich manual transmissions. The automatic transmissions that were offered for the earlier era engines are quite durable but extremely heavy and locked to that paradigm. They will not carry over to the newer era AMC volcano style crank flange and even then, there may be serious issues acquiring the correct flexplate for that application. The later 3/4/5spd automatics may carry over to the earlier crank design with a bit of engineering but will almost certainly require reboring the crank to match late spec.

Remember, the point of the small deeper bore is primarily to fit pilot bushings to the manual transmission input shafts. The larger bore is for bulky Chrysler torque converter noses but the Toyota transmissions use both. The 232 engines all appear to share the early flat flange design, so they share the same issue when attempting to make the jump to a modern automatic. Good luck.

Roger, what is the adapter for in your diagram?

Samuelsc360 wrote: Roger, what is the adapter for in your diagram?

It's to adapt the early Gen II V8 crank flange to use the later Torquflite transmission rather than the original Borg Warner.