Your donations help keep this valuable resource free and growing. Thank you.
|
199 performance build |
Post Reply | Page 123 5> |
Author | |
HHaase
AMC Apprentice Joined: Oct/17/2012 Location: South Dakota Status: Offline Points: 100 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Posted: Oct/18/2012 at 5:54pm |
This is a bit of a continuation from a post I made in the 'racing' section.
Short version. Want to race an SX4 is rally-america, but am limited to 3358ci displacement in the 'rookie' classses. Original plan was a built AMC 2.5 but it was suggested to go with a 199 straight six instead. I'm really liking the idea of a the 199, since it's bumping VERY close to the displacement limit. The question is, has anybody done a modern performance build on a 199? The requirements are pretty simple. It needs to go into an Eagle SX4, can't be forced induction, and displacement can't go over 3313ci. This works out to 202ci (which is why I can't just use a 258 / 4.0) So here's my theoretical engine. I'd like to build a performance 199, possibly using a 4.0 head and multiport injection, and have it swap into a 258 equipped SX4. I'm not looking for high end horsepower, top speed isn't the concern, but want a broad powerband for rally type racing. I'm still researching the 199, so please jump in and correct me when I have incorrect info. But I know the 199 has a different bolt pattern from the 258. But apparently 199's and 232's were the same block with different rotating assemblies? Could I take a later 232, with the same bellhousing pattern as the 258, and de-stroke it with a 199 rotating assembly? I'd normally say I'd just change the transmission, but then I have to worry about what's compatible with the transfer case. Can the 199/232 block even take the 4.0HO heads? -Hans
Edited by HHaase - Oct/18/2012 at 10:25pm |
|
Wrambler
AMC Addicted Joined: Jul/02/2007 Location: West Virginia Status: Offline Points: 4197 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
What's the displacement using the 199 crank in the 232?
Short stroke, bigger bore. The 199 engine won't bolt up to a 72 & up trans, stick shift can probably be adapted, but the clutch will be on the smallish side. Not much room in a pre72 bellhousing. The 4.0L head is doable. |
|
Wrambler
69 AMC Rambler 4.0L, 5 speed 2015 Grand Cherokee Limited 2019 Chrysler 300 |
|
farna
Supporter of TheAMCForum Moderator Lost Dealership Project Joined: Jul/08/2007 Location: South Carolina Status: Offline Points: 19610 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
The early 199/232 is the same block and bore, different crank/rods/pistons. Those use the "small" bell pattern only used on the small Nash L-head six and AMC sixes up to 1970. You can change a 199 into a 232 and vice versa easily -- as long as the block is pre 1971!!
In 1971 AMC increased the deck height of the six cylinder block by about 1/8" so it could be stroked to 258 inches. The 71+ 232 uses the longer pre 71 199 rods on the 232 crank to maintain the 232 cubic inch displacement. The 258 uses the pre 71 232 rods. So you can't make a 71+ block into a 199 without custom length rods to decrease the effective stroke. There might be a rods out there that will work, but you'd probably need custom pistons. 4.0L rods won't work -- they are the same length as 199/71+ 232 rods. I don't think you can deck the block by 1/8", but you can have one sonic checked to find out, or if you have an old 258 block just have it decked and see what's left. The deck doesn't need to be real thick, but I don't know what minimum thickness would be acceptable... maybe 1/8"?? 4.0L heads will fit on ALL 199/232/258 blocks with no problem. On a pre 71 block you'll need to measure for pushrods. On a 72+ block the 4.0L pushrods work fine. I don't know what transmissions might bolt to the old six bell that would work with a transfer case. No auto will, only manuals. A T-14 will, but the Jeep T-14 uses a longer input shaft and won't work. You'd need an AMC car T-14 then rebuild it with the Jeep output shaft and t-case adapter. The T150 (sometimes called 150T) will work. That's a standard AMC bell trans, and would be your best bet. Both of those are just three speeds. A Ford four speed used mainly behind the 300 six in trucks (some cars, like the Granada used it also) will supposedly bolt up. It uses the T-14 pattern and can be identified easy enough -- 4th gear is overdrive. Modern Driveline was working on a T-5 adapter for TomJ, so you might ask him about that. |
|
Frank Swygert
|
|
HHaase
AMC Apprentice Joined: Oct/17/2012 Location: South Dakota Status: Offline Points: 100 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
Yep, came to the same conclusion just before reading your regarding that I'd have to use the older 199/232 block. At least now I know better what I'm dealing with if I proceed with this. Great to know the 4.0 head will bolt up, my assumption is that I'd have to use 4.0 pushrods and camshaft due to the different rocker setups. If that assumption holds true, then it makes things even easier for me as there's no shortage of 4.0 cams out there. Since I'd be converting to EFI at that point, I'm not worried about losing the mechanical fuel pump drive. (Edit: I'm wrong on the pushrods, will have to measure them due to different deck heights between the blocks, and different rocker arm setups)
I wonder how hard it would be to fab up an adapter plate between the 199 and a stock SX4 transmission. Never needed to use an adapter plate before, so not sure what other issues come up when you use one. -Hans Edited by HHaase - Oct/18/2012 at 10:27pm |
|
amc67rogue
AMC Addicted Joined: Nov/05/2008 Location: Phx. AZ. Status: Offline Points: 1578 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
There was someone in Phx. that made an adaptor for the early 199-232 that bolted to the slant six torqueflight . The starter is on the same side.
|
|
Keith Coggins 67Rogue X code
|
|
HHaase
AMC Apprentice Joined: Oct/17/2012 Location: South Dakota Status: Offline Points: 100 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
Been google digging, haven't found anybody yet that does an adapter.
That's the crux of using the 199, is I have to get it onto the transmission. Not many options for transmissions that bolt to the NP119 transfer case. Hmmmm...... -Hans Edited by HHaase - Oct/18/2012 at 9:48pm |
|
tyrodtom
AMC Addicted Joined: Sep/14/2007 Location: Virginia Status: Offline Points: 6199 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
My question is why a 199 ? If the limit is 235 ci, why not build a 232?
Or use a 4.0 block and 199 crank. I don't know if a 4.0 block can be decked that much. But you'd have big bore, good breathing head, strong 199 crank, it'd have to be a quick reving combination.
|
|
66 American SW, 66 American 2dr, 82 J10, 70 Hornet, Pound, Va.
|
|
HHaase
AMC Apprentice Joined: Oct/17/2012 Location: South Dakota Status: Offline Points: 100 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
I just double checked the limit in the rule book to make sure, and it's actually 3313cc (not the 3358 I originally quoted). This works out to 202ci. This is the reasoning behind the 199, it's as close as I can get to the limit with an AMC block.
Using a 4.0 with the 199 crank...... hmmmmm, the question there would be the connecting rods. The 4.0 already uses the same rods as the 199 used to. Not sure what the crank throw is on the 4.0. I'll dig the numbers up and see what I can find. -Hans
Edited by HHaase - Oct/18/2012 at 10:29pm |
|
HHaase
AMC Apprentice Joined: Oct/17/2012 Location: South Dakota Status: Offline Points: 100 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
Nope, not going to work. Even if I could get rods to work it it, the bore and stoke alone on the 4.0 would put me at 212ci using the 3" stroke of the 199. That isn't even factoring in the volume of the head chambers. That has me back at looking into the possibility of extended rods to run the 199 crank in a 258 block. And the deck height increase between the old and new blocks was .25" so I doubt I could shave that much off a 258 block. I'm basing this on the rod length change in the 232's which went from 5.875" to 6.125". So with a 199 crank in a 232/258 block, I'd need a rod length of 6.375 to de-stroke it back down to 199ci. Either that, or custom offset pistons. Either way, this is adding up pretty fast when it comes to custom parts. -Hans Edited by HHaase - Oct/18/2012 at 10:51pm |
|
HHaase
AMC Apprentice Joined: Oct/17/2012 Location: South Dakota Status: Offline Points: 100 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
Well, I'll be damned.
Rods from a 250/287/327 V8 are a possibility. 6.375" length, same pin type and pin diameter. No idea on the crank end measurements though. Still, worth a deeper digging. Ok, enough posting for all this stuff for tonight. Making my head explode. -Hans |
|
Post Reply | Page 123 5> |
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 |