hi im new to the v8 scene and im hoping you will be able to help me with my question
basically im building a fwd 1981 metro with a rover 3.5 v8 under the bonnet but having problems with finding a fwd gearbox that will fit a 3.5 v8
i know the princess gearbox will fit under the block but trying to find one of those gearboxes is near on as rare as rocking horse sh*t, so are there any other gearboxes that can be used for fwd?
Wouldn't it work having the engine pointing longitudinally in the normal v8 position (squeeze it in some how lol) and having an lt77 box, then a tranfer box to redirect the motion to a front axle? Maybe a shortened axle from a small four by four, adjust the gearing etc....
By which time you may as well have put an axle in the back and have the transmission from the proper end rather than the front.
Much easier to mid mount the engine in a subgrame and use a renault transaxle for which there are adaptors available.
Personally I wouldn't use a Metro shell unless you do some serious stengthening to the front end as they tend to fold up very dangerously in a frontender.
ppyvabw wrote:Wouldn't it work having the engine pointing longitudinally in the normal v8 position (squeeze it in some how lol) and having an lt77 box, then a tranfer box to redirect the motion to a front axle? Maybe a shortened axle from a small four by four, adjust the gearing etc....
By which time you may as well have put an axle in the back and have the transmission from the proper end rather than the front.
i was thinking about just making it RWD but dont think that the engine will fit like a normal V8 plus i would need to find a rear axel and diff unit the same length as the metro
may be a silly question but is the PG1 gearbox the one that is found in the MG zr?
lee wrote:
i was thinking about just making it RWD but dont think that the engine will fit like a normal V8 plus i would need to find a rear axel and diff unit the same length as the metro
may be a silly question but is the PG1 gearbox the one that is found in the MG zr?
mid engined like Kevin says.
Surely there aren't many FWD gearboxes to chose from that will take that much torque. It'll be dead within a week. Maybe from 'hot hatches' but still....
Were Metro 6R4s based on the original metro shell or were they completely different? Could roughly follow that design.
lee wrote:
i was thinking about just making it RWD but dont think that the engine will fit like a normal V8 plus i would need to find a rear axel and diff unit the same length as the metro
may be a silly question but is the PG1 gearbox the one that is found in the MG zr?
mid engined like Kevin says.
Surely there aren't many FWD gearboxes to chose from that will take that much torque. It'll be dead within a week. Maybe from 'hot hatches' but still....
Were Metro 6R4s based on the original metro shell or were they completely different? Could roughly follow that design.
there is the four cylinder leyland princess gearbox that would fit and work with the 3.5 V8 but trying to find one of those gearboxes is like looking for a needle in a hay stack
yea 6R4's were based on a metro and from what i have read used a jaguar xj220 lump in the rear of the car
ppyvabw wrote:By which time you may as well have put an axle in the back and have the transmission from the proper end rather than the front.
By which time you no longer have a Metro!
It would probably be easier to do that, and it would probably drive better too, but I can see the attraction of doing it the hard way and keeping it FWD, and honestly saying you have a RV8 powered Metro (rather than a metro look-alike!)
As for alternative gearboxes to the Princess box, there can't be that many surely? How many manufacturers other than BL put the gears in the sump?
I am not 100% but Austin 1800 (landcrab) might have a suitable box as well. I believe it is more or less the same as Princess. Not sure though if you have any luck sourcing one. NONE will fit directly as already pointed out, see pic below: http://www.geocities.com/jharkola/image ... rover5.jpg
Early Saabs had a transaxle in front of the engine which in effect is back to front.
Later Saabs used the now more conventional transverse layout, the gearbox/final drive unit from a 2.3 Turbo might be worth looking at as the power and torque would have been similar to a standard/ mildly modified rover V8.
Personally I would still favour the mid engine layout if there is enough room behind the front seats, easy enough to get the dimensions of the length of a Rover V8 and Renault transaxle, at least you would know it would work and the car would have great balance and handling potential.
The Metro 6R4 was a V6 with the 4WD trans under the engine if I remember correctly.
Surely any FWD box will have the limiting factor of tyre traction and on acceleration the front wheel will spin so easily that there will be a limied strain on the box (perhaps blow the diff if one spins more than the other)
Or
Knowing that Metros crumple so much in a front impact
Use someting like a Renault or VW box with the engine behind the box and move the seating, pedals, steering rearwards thus a( getting you benihd the crumple area and b) putting the weight more central in the chassis
With a LSD you may get better traction off the line but expect to see a lot of smoke coming off the front wheels and fit a rev limiter as you will overrev it when it lets go!
Ian
Owner of an "On the Road" GT40 Replica by DAX powered by 3.9Hotwre Efi, worked over by DJ Motors. EFi Working but still does some kangaroo at low revs (Damn the speed limits) In to paint shop 18/03/08.
