Lower rear engine mount, on the 480 this takes all the force. Inicialmente montaba el motor B28E, fruto de un consorcio denominado PRV (Peugeot-Renault-Volvo): un V6 a 90º de 2.8 litros de cilindrada, íntegramente de aluminio, con inyección mecánica K-Jetronic, y distribución por cadena, que desarrollaba 156 CV. The tripod thing, ignore the oil seperator hung on the leg. Vehículo de prestigio lanzado en febrero de 1982. Here are some pics (you can see the top of the set-up in the pic above). The other benefit being the engine moves hardly at all (good if a 5mm clearance is all you have). For the front wheel drive set-up, this completely eliminated torque steer, by directing the twist back into the suspension turrets. Though over 500lb/f might be a concern.įor the 480, i had designed a strut-brace, also tied into the firewall, that held two 740 engine mounts, one tied to the top of the head, the other to the gearbox bolts. I have a horrible feeling that more of the propshaft failures are related to movement, than, say just extra torque. Reading your thread, I'm more than a bit concerned about engine mounts. What day would swork for you?I have the rest of the week, and next off, so within reason can work around you. Somewhere about here should be some bellhousing related stuffs. That crack was due to bad engine mounts putting the entire setup out of line, might be worth a read through my two project threads (though I *think* you gave me advice on the tubby thread on 480CE and it hasn't moved for about 5 years now) but might be something useful in there. That's in Southampton so would be easier too. Thanks for raising these things, ideas are goodĬhris_C wrote:If you arn't scared of tigging, I have a broken 340 bellhousing that we can come to an agreement with My thoughts where to cast replacements in situ, using quite hard polyurathane, with bonding agent to really stick to the metal parts. I had assumed I would need to do some things, like manufacture replacements to the rubber 'flexi bits' at the ends of the propshaft. I imagine it would be possible to persuade the parts to be interchangeable, even if it means milling the Renault housing to fit the 360 parts. I guess it would be good to see a 360, and 340 clutch housing side by side. I'm not really clear on the difference between it and the 360, other than the 360 having a torque tube. I've owned a 340 before, so I know the setup, having changed a propshaft, and engine mount before. It would be handy if things would bolt together nicely like that, and I don't need to fabricate parts. That part should be reasonably easy to fabricate, since it doesn't rotate, and need not be balanced, though I would imagine distortion, from welding could be a problem. I agree the 360 drivetrain setup would be perefferable, having a torque tube to transfer torque back to the engine, is a good idea. V6 Man wrote:I suppose the main question is will the 360 clutch output shaft bolt directly to the 340 bellhousing? If so then a 360's drivetrain with its torque tube coupled with the Renault bellhousing would be better suited to take the power you hope to make.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |