518 in an A body

-

oldkimmer

FABO Gold Member
FABO Gold Member
Joined
Nov 11, 2006
Messages
23,969
Reaction score
8,141
Location
Kindersley, Saskatchewan,
Has any 1 ever thought of spacing the K member down like the Hemi Darts and Cuda’s. That should give a lot better trans angle. Maybe u wouldn’t have to cut the hoop above the tranny. Just my thoughts. May be a good idea or a not so good of an idea. Or maybe it’s just plain stupid. Kim
 
The Hemi cars didn’t. But with the A518 and the A500 the overdrive section is so much bigger that the mount is quite a bit lower. That’s why I asked this question. Kim
 
Is the transmission mount lower on the trans itself? Not trying to be my usual difficult self but it seems if you lowered both and could get away without notching anything, it would be a win-win! But that is just my thought, not actual experience. I'll be quiet now and listen and learn. Thanks for posting this question. Bob
 
Bob, yes the mount is lower because the OD unit is that much bigger. The tranny and the mount would be that little bit lower because the upper brace would still be in there. But I don’t know if it would be too low. I’m just thinking out loud. Kim
 
I get it now. IF the whole brace had to be redone with it in the stock mount location, it might look like a 4WD with a transfer case hanging underneath there. I've got an A518 in the back of the garage but no A-bodies to wiggle it into. I'll keep watching and see what the outcome is. IF you had the rear axle under the springs and a straight axle, it would work out fine...it was a gasser style you were building,right?:)
 
I think you'd have to lower it a long way because the width limits you as well. These photos show my modified tunnel with the A500 installed. It is shoved over to the drivers side in these photos. You can see how it was widened all the way to the inside bolts.

Cley
20180323_103140.jpg
20180323_103151.jpg
 
Cley, how thick is that top brace. I believe the Hemi cars had the K frame lowered 1/2 inch or maybe more so the hood would close. Kim
 
The top brace isn't more than a half inch I dont think but I still dont think the width of the OD section will fit unless you remove the sides of the brace.

Cley
 
What concerns me about this idea of using spacers is that the self centering feature of the K member bolts would no longer exist. This means that the K member could be bolted in out of square to the chassis, causing the car to crabwalk or just handle strangely.
 
If you're thinking about driveline angles, I don't think it will be an issue.... because
On my 108wb Barracuda, I am hanging a GVod off the long tail extension, and that makes my driveshaft around 3ft long. And my car is lowered an easy 2 to 3 inches. And I have been able to minimize the angle related vibration and oscillation to just barely perceptible. And most of the time, the CenterForce flyweights are covering it anyway, lol.

Another thing about the dropped K , that I was thinking about is that; as the K goes down, the body goes up... taking the UCA up with it. And when that happens the camber changes, pulling the top of the wheel inwards. And after a re-alignment,that might work fine in a straightline with a frozen shock. But what happens in a bumpy turn; IDK.
Well I sorta do; have you ever watched the steering of a Mopar as it's leaving the starting line. As the front goes up, it steers one way, and when it crashes down, it steers another. It's all over the place and IDK how the driver keeps it straight, if it bobbles from the line. Now imagine that in a bumpy turn.
I mean IDK, just asking.
If you manufacture your own K-spacers, you can put a centering ring on the frame side, and duplicate the centering device on the bolt-head side.
 
I don't think 'creating a whole new set of issues' is worth it to not having to simply clearance the tunnel.
Besides your car will look like a 4x4 when you're done, handling is down the drain, steering column needs to angled down, and the spindles are getting too short resulting in much more camber-change during suspension movements. You might as well get a pickup in the first place.
 
I spoke with Chris at US Car Tool yesterday about the 518 cross member. He stated clearly the sheet metal in the tunnel would not have to be removed with the use of their Crossmember. I asked him if they have additional pictures of the tranny installed or how many total cars their shop has installed this in and he said one. The customer’s Dart was the reason they developed the cross member.

He then went into more detail stating the following disclaimers

- all vehicles have variation is the tunnel area
- hammering on the tunnel may be necessary
- grinding on the tranny to releave ribs and protrusions to mitigate interferences
- interferences with the speedometer cable or elections speed sensor will have to be overcome, may require metal work on their bracket depending on the customers parts used to get them to fit
- drive line angles have to be checked and adjusted due to engine cradle and motor mount variations (differences k member vs aftermarket k member QA1)
- warned that there will be several trial fitting several attempts to get the tranny to fit.
- not required but recommended - remove the pinched and spot welded seam above the Bellhousing and motor. They weld the seam 100% solid from the the inside to make the car more ridged and to allow them to remove the seam. At the minimum he recommended bending the seam forward towards the engine bay where the bolts are located to faciataite bolt up.

The moral of the story. They have installed one on a custom build where they has the car 100% stripped down and sold many that have not been returned. This is not a bolt in and go install. Expect tweaking and problem solving to get the tranny in the car. Think ahead or wait to purchase the components you are going to use for the TV lever, gear selector and speedo cable.

I’m going to buy one but I’m going into it with my eye wide open.

found this back from 2012...did not look up the part but there is some information here
 
are there any upper ball joints that have longer shanks? possibly in the oval track parts? the spacers are not more than 1/2"...
reading about that trans crossmember, there is no mention of spacing the k-frame. if you were to use the 67-72 K-frame, use a thinner engine insulator. or fabricate one.
 
I looked at another duster with the motor out. It has spool mounts and it appears that the saddle could be ground down some so the mount would sit lower into it. Not sure if doing that would cause oil pan issues with the Center link or not. Also the mount that fits into the saddle could be trimmed on the bottom. Kim
 
could "drop" the center link, cut at each side and drop it with rectangular tubing(?), drill holes in sides and put the center link ends in. I can draw it better than I can explain it!
there is probably a picture somewhere. done maybe for a BBC in a Chevy II?
 
I did a 727 to a518 swap in a E-body (73 challenger). There is a lot more room there than in A-body. There is a nice write up on the web about this(727 to A518 swap – a novice guide). It may be useful for small details after you do the installation - controls, piping etc.
One idea is maybe looking at a A500 unit instead of A518. It is smaller, based on 904, lower first gear. Have one in my 91 D150 and its a good running transmission.
Also make sure you get the hydraulic version of these units, not the electronically/computer controlled later units. The electrical connector has to be with 2 or 3 pins, no more.
I am happy with the A518 and 340 in my challenger. Nice hwy cruiser.
 
-
Back
Top