Attempting a SHO swap into an e30

[rubydist]

that's good news that you can use the stock SHO flywheel. Tom (OffRoadSHO) has some bushings that fit in that hole in the crank, maybe you can modify one of those to work. they are just oilite bushings.

the water flow needs to go down that tube in the engine "V" - that is how the heads are cooled. the 90* thermostat cap I found just turns the orientation of the radiator hose so it does not point right at the firewall. another alternative would be to modify the waterpump housing to allow the radiator/recirculate decision to be made there, and just cap off the location where the current thermostat is.

 

[Hambler]

Does anybody have an MTX lying around that they could take a measurement for me? I already sold mine and forgot to measure the radial distance from the center of the input shaft to the starter mounting bolts. I could try to figure out myself where they should be by holding the starter up to the flywheel, but it obviously would be a lot easier to just measure where the factory thought it should go.

 

[Hambler]

Quick update here: tomorrow morning I'm waterjetting the basic shape of the adapter plate out of 1/2" aluminum, and then it will be on to the mill to get dimensionally accurate holes. I waterjetted a plate of thin aluminum that slipped over the dowel pegs and had a hole in the middle, which allowed me to measure to the crankshaft of the engine and input shaft of the transmission to make sure the two bolt patterns are perfectly centered on each other- which they weren't. I'll just shift the two patterns relative to each other in autocad. The pipe is a slip fit over the input shaft of the transmission and just extended it out so that I could get a reading.

 

[Dannyboy]

I'll be watching your build closely. You seem like a guy that might actually finish his project! I'm starting a similar project of my own. Maybe we can help each other out along the way. Good luck Man!

 

[Hambler]

I'll be watching your build closely. You seem like a guy that might actually finish his project! I'm starting a similar project of my own. Maybe we can help each other out along the way. Good luck Man!

Thanks, I have the transmission bolted onto the engine and have a clutch package figured out. Unfortunately this week I'm losing my space I had at my school, so I am trying to figure out somewhere I can put everything and continue the project. What are you working on?

 

[Dannyboy]

@Hambler 58 Bugeye Sprite with a 92 3.0 T-56 tranny. IRS rear end out of an older Z. Have a Super Charger but probably won't use it. Full custom tube chassis. It probably won't look much like a Bugeye when I'm done LOL! Right now It's just a pile of parts, but it's all there. Or at least that's the pile I have amassed, subject to change of course. I want a track day car with a license plate!

 

[Hambler]

@Hambler 58 Bugeye Sprite with a 92 3.0 T-56 tranny. IRS rear end out of an older Z. Have a Super Charger but probably won't use it. Full custom tube chassis. It probably won't look much like a Bugeye when I'm done LOL! Right now It's just a pile of parts, but it's all there. Or at least that's the pile I have amassed, subject to change of course. I want a track day car with a license plate!

What's your reason for the t56 out of interest? Have you adapted it yet? But that's an awesome build! I've always loved bugeyes. Are you concerned about the weight of the SHO in the bigeye?

 

[Dannyboy]

@Hambler I put a 98 all aluminum 4.6 DOHC Cobra motor with a T56 in my buddies old style Cobra kit car. (talk about a bada$$ car!)
My payment was that I got to keep the Super Charged 427 Windsor stroker motor and T56 tranny that came out of the car. So thats how I ended up with the T56. But a SBF has been done so many times I just decided to sell or save the Windsor for something else.
I'm deffinatly worried about the weight of the SHO, but also the T56! Both are very heavy. I plan on putting the motor and tranny, pretty far back in the chassis. I'll figure out the best place for it as far as distribution and handling and that will determine where the seats end up. Quit possibly in the trunk! Lol!
I haven't started fab work yet but I'm getting close. The decision to do this project was only made a week ago when I decided to take a chance and look to see if there happen to be any SHO's on my local Craigslist. So when I found a running driving car for 250$ the decision was made! Then I figured out that he was selling the SHO to get a new tranny for his truck, a tranny that I just so happened to have laying around the shop, so we traded and I drove it home last Saturday! I've never had a deal happen like that before. Just feels like it was meant to be!
With the T56 I'll never have to worry about to much torque coming from the SHO, and drivability should be a lot better, especially when it comes to shifting at a very high RPM. That was actually one of the biggest reasons I want to use the T56. It will shift smooth at 8500 RPM. I can attest to that. A T5 will not, I can attest to that to! Lol!
I know that part will be hard but it can and has been done. It takes a bellhousing adapter and a tranny plate. It will only work with the Cobra R version of the T56, which is what it came out of.

That's it in a nutshell. Haha!

 

[Hambler]

That's a sweet deal, not a bad way to get an awesome engine and trans. I am by no means an expert on any of this, but a couple comments I have from what I've learned this summer: The t56 isnt really that much heavier than most 6 speed trans, if at all. It also is way more trans than a N/A SHO engine needs. I've never been able to find anyone that finished a t56 swap, and when I considered the transmission I forgot a ford version of it existed (I have a Camaro with a t56 and only thought about that). If you could find the infamous '96-'97 Aerostar bellhousing, you could consider doing a bellhousing to trans adapter which is obviously much easier than doing an engine to bellhousing adapter, but I didn't have a choice since the s2000 is an integral bellhousing. You could also consider getting your own bellhousing cast, by taking the one half of the SHO bellhousing and attaching it to the other half of the t56 bellhousing to make a pattern. I chose to use the s2000 trans for several reasons: It's lighter and smaller than any of the other transmissions I considered (350z, miata 5 speed) and it's a lot cheaper than a t56 (half the price about). Also from poking around on the internet, with an upgraded s2000 pressure plate and clutch disk, the clutch and trans will easily be able to take anything I throw at it with a N/A SHO. Boost would just mean a built trans and extreme clutch. Also the s2000 trans is from a 9000 rpm car, so it won't mind the revs of the SHO. I don't what your level of experience is in design and fabrication, but I've learned a lot adapting the SHO to the s2000 trans, especially from a very experienced faculty member at my University. If you have any questions about the process of how I figured it all out, let me know!

Also that's a heck of a deal for a running driving car, I thought I got a good deal at $300 for a car that had ran but didn't anymore. I was able to sell a lot of parts through the facebook groups off of my SHO.

 

[Dannyboy]

Honestly if it had been a T5 tranny that I had sitting here that's what I would be using. I would have just had to do alot of upgrading inside the T5 mostly for RPM. The T56 is great and actually light compared to other 6speeds, like a Richmond for example, but it's heavy compared to a 5 speed for obvious reasons. That's Apples and Oranges though. It's a good and bad problem in my case. Building my own chassis will allow me to design around the weight of the motor and tranny and having more weight on the tranny end will almost help the balance of the car. Either way, I think the benefits of the T56 outweigh the negatives, pun intended!
I know I'm no genius when it comes to any of this. Everything I know is just from experience, nothing formal. I do ok. I've been fortunate to pick up alot of knowledge as driver/rider having to set up cars and bikes. You'd be surprised how similar alot of it is. I will deffinatly be asking alot of questions, I'm sure.
Yea, I got a smoking deal on the car. So much so that I'm slightly tempted to sell it and grab a 3.5 Duratec and be done with it! But then it would be so ugly I'd just have to keep the hood shut all the time! That's no fun! I think with a SHO you have to open the hood alot wether ya want to or not. Lol!

 

[Hambler]

Yea the t56 is definitely a great trans, it just wasn't in my budget. I'm not familiar with the 3.5 Duratec, what did that come out of?

 

[Dannyboy]

The 3.5 (or 3.7?) Duratec kinda succeeded the SHO I believe. Actually I think the 3.5 is now an Ecoboost motor? I can't remember, one is turbo'ed making it an Ecoboost, one is normally aspirated making it a Duratec. I highly considered the 305hp 2011 -2015 3.7 (?) Mustang engine. All aluminum NA DOHC super light compared to a SHO. I think of it kinda like a perfected SHO. LOL! But the cool factor is just not there with the Duratec IMHO. Sure would be a much easier build, with a much better result though. Especially with the heavy, for my car, T56. I have already had a few offers to buy this SHO for enough to buy a low milage 3.7 that my tranny with a store bought adapter will bolt right up to. I'm torn to be honest. Another reason I haven't started the actual fabrication part of this build. My heart says SHO, my head says Duratec.

 

[Hambler]

Are you referring to the 3.4 v8 when you say it succeeded the SHO? Or a newer engine still? I would love to play around with a new twin turbo ecoboost engine, but its not in my budget. Ford offers stand alone engine management which would make it a relatively easy swap. I'm curious, do you plan on racing this car competitively, or is it just a fun car to have?

 

[shomethe$$$]

Both of you listen to your head, trash that p.o.s SHO motor and put in a later model Duratec Cyclone. Its almost double the power output with a few bolt on's and tune versus the SHO. 200 lbs lighter w/0 accessories, and only a few hundred dollars more. Hambler you have serious issues right now. The starter is going to mount in the front cylinder head. The other location required cutting the transmission and is in the way of the clutch fork, so basically your cut up trans is worth less than trash after this. You built a jig but no way to clock the trans, rotating parts require round holes not square. You made dowels but they are not hollow, so now you have do it all again unless you want think you have enough fasteners, so you just doubled your work. You still don't know if it will clear your firewall and steering rack. This kind of stuff should not be a part of your learning curve, this type of stuff can be done with simple planning.

I'm guessing you already put 40 hours into this, calculate about $30 an hour, that pays for almost two duratec cyclone engines. You have used 100k plus mile engine with no replacement parts when you could of had a 2006-up Cyclone engine with less than 20k miles The Ecoboost cyclone may not be in your budget (its not that good anyway, can't get big DFI injectors for it, for control pack is $2k) but a port injection cyclone engine w/ harness/Dash is cheap and you've already surpassed its cost in time alone. It's sad to see that you are our future engineers. Cast a bell housing? Who taught you that, you have no idea what your talking about.

@Dannyboy listen to your head, if you want cool, make your own intake and polish it, heck adapt the SHO intake to it (the port spacing isn't that different, only the water pipe needs to be cut from the plastic cyclone intake), put a supercharger on top it, but putting a 25 year old engine is just dumb and a K24 RSX would walk it all day. And get rid of the z rear end, stick to domestic like a Ford 8.8" IRS 4 bolt mount, 31 spline. You've picked a better transmission, with 32 spline upgrade and 6060 internals, oil cooler, that thing is almost bullet proof. You've paid say $1000 more after all this? You worry about weight? by the time Hambler make the adapter's it won't be that much heavier while you can get a T56 bell housing with not ***** adapter plate's for a duratec. Also, better than being stuck on the track with a blown older trans. It pays for itself. I think you have your head on right, you understand the balance a car or a swap needs. A great start.

Start your own thread, plenty of experienced non-SHO users here that will have more knowledge than any university professor that hasn't had real experience outside the classroom or track. The best employee's that have come through our doors didn't have the best education, we couldn't hold onto them even if we gave them our own salaries.

 

[Hambler]

Both of you listen to your head, trash that p.o.s SHO motor and put in a later model Duratec Cyclone. Its almost double the power output with a few bolt on's and tune versus the SHO. 200 lbs lighter w/0 accessories, and only a few hundred dollars more. Hambler you have serious issues right now. The starter is going to mount in the front cylinder head. The other location required cutting the transmission and is in the way of the clutch fork, so basically your cut up trans is worth less than trash after this. You built a jig but no way to clock the trans, rotating parts require round holes not square. You made dowels but they are not hollow, so now you have do it all again unless you want think you have enough fasteners, so you just doubled your work. You still don't know if it will clear your firewall and steering rack. This kind of stuff should not be a part of your learning curve, this type of stuff can be done with simple planning.

I'm guessing you already put 40 hours into this, calculate about $30 an hour, that pays for almost two duratec cyclone engines. You have used 100k plus mile engine with no replacement parts when you could of had a 2006-up Cyclone engine with less than 20k miles The Ecoboost cyclone may not be in your budget (its not that good anyway, can't get big DFI injectors for it, for control pack is $2k) but a port injection cyclone engine w/ harness/Dash is cheap and you've already surpassed its cost in time alone. It's sad to see that you are our future engineers. Cast a bell housing? Who taught you that, you have no idea what your talking about.

Start your own thread, plenty of experienced non-SHO users here that will have more knowledge than any university professor that hasn't had real experience outside the classroom or track. The best employee's that have come through our doors didn't have the best education, we couldn't hold onto them even if we gave them our own salaries.

Wow. I appreciate your suggestions, but I would like to point out a couple things: The starter mounting is not an issue, I simply mounted it to my adapter plate in the original SHO position, and notched the bellhousing a little bit- it did not interfere with the clutch fork at all. I understand rotating parts require round holes, but in order to be able to get accurate x-y positions, I used a square hole. The same jig also was able to locate the transmission center. I have enough fasteners I am not using a hollow dowel pin, and turning stuff on the lathe is the least of my issues. I have actually bolted the transmission to the engine already, and it looks like everything works great- I just stopped posting on here because there seemed to be a lack of interest.

I'm actually getting paid to work on this project, and I haven't heard of a summer internship that will pay me $30/hour, so please let me know where I can find that, I am very interested. This is still the cheapest option I know of. As for casting a bellhousing, I know of a guy that melts down pistons and does one off casting for pretty cheap- I haven't researched the shrinkage tolerances of it, and how much post casting machining it would require, but it is a valid option. My adapter plate is 1/2" aluminum, so it only weighs a couple pounds- not really an issue, in fact its basically insignificant to the weight of an engine/trans combo.

I appreciate your suggestions, but when you start making accusations against me and things you don't have knowledge of, I start to get a little annoyed, although I understand that's the way the forum world works- people like to sit on their computers and call other people out that are trying something new, I just think it's a shame. The Faculty Member at my University is actually a very talented drag racer, engine builder, and engineer with a lot of real world experience outside of the school. I entirely agree with you that education is worthless without real world experience, but that doesn't mean everyone with an education is worthless.

I am going to continue working on my project, and if Dannyboy decides to use the SHO engine, I will help him in whatever way I can. I am going to stay positive, and realistic, and try to help people work towards there goals, and if you are not going to do the same, I'd appreciate you not commenting on here anymore.

 

[shomethe$$$]

I will call you out and whoever you get your advice from, you take a hard turn with that soft chassis with that much SHO weight, you will break the front lug bolts and crash. You have no idea what 200 extra pounds will do to handling. Good luck with your 180hp clunker that handles like a truck. It not a lack of interest, its that your getting bad advice and posting it. You should stop posting until you have real experience to back it up like the rest of us.

 

[rubydist]

wow, this thread took a quick turn to the dumper...

if adding 200 lbs to the front of a car will cause the lug bolts to break off, then you better stay away from the fat chicks! seriously, that is just a stupid statement, and just points out that none of us is as smart as we think we are.
of course adding a couple of hundred pounds will affect the handling, but not in a way that cannot be corrected if its important to the guy.

I agree that the SHO motor is nothing special compared to today's technology (except for the gorgeous intake) but if he wants to use it, offer input that is helpful, not bashing.

 

[shomethe$$$]

Well I've done the swap and never ever would of thought that I would break lug nuts on the same turn I took for 5 years, I fixed that, then it broke something else. I stiffened every part I could but thing was just too nose heavy. May sound stupid but you let someone in that car not knowing what could happen, your liable.

 

[black92]

Please do not stop this build. Take the given advice as something to be cautious about but do not let it stop you.

 

[rubydist]

shomethe$$$, a little simple math will let you know that you are wrong if you think the bolts broke from the extra 200 lbs of engine weight.

First of all, in this case, there is not 200 lbs of extra engine weight. The SHO motor weighs in almost the same as the 5.0 V8 at around 450. The E30 could be had with a M10 that weighs around 320 lbs or a M20 that weighs around 400. So the SHO at most will be 75 lbs more than what the E30 might have had from the factory.

The weight distribution from the factory on the E30 is around 55/45 with the M20 engine and it weighed between 2400 and 3000 lbs depending upon year and equipment. So 1650 front and 1350 rear fully dressed with the M20 engine. Add the SHO motor and let's say its 1750 up front. That's a 6% increase in the load on the front tires/suspension. There is no way on earth that a car company would design a vehicle with lug bolts that would fail with a 6% increase in loading.

And, the 1992 SHO, according to the only hard data I have right here on this forum, has 2260 on the front and 1260 on the rear for its 3520 lbs. So, even if the E30 gets more nose-heavy than stock with the SHO motor in it, its nowhere as nose-heavy as the SHO is (by 23% less). So, there is no need to be concerned about breaking lug bolts due to overloading them in this case.

So, you might be asking "why did my lug bolts break?" and the answer to that is usually because some idiot overtightened the lug nuts and overstressed the bolts. The typical garage guy will run the lug nuts on with his impact wrench and then put the torque wrench on them and go click click click click click and think they are torqued perfectly by the air wrench. He is wrong. They will all be too tight, and if they are 130 or 140+ lb-ft instead of the 90-100 that they should be, its only a matter of time until one or more of them break.