kingcrunch
Well-Known Member
I guess you realize why i decided not to write about this project at our "Mopar-Forum"...
1985 D150 "Mr. Curtis" race truck with a 2015 6.4
- Thread starter kingcrunch
- Start date
-
I guess you realize why i decided not to write about this project at our "Mopar-Forum"...
kingcrunch
Well-Known Member
Recent news:
I will have to investigate what's going on inside the SRT-10 Dana 60, because when i try to turn one disc, the other turns the same direction.
I kind of expected an open diff... now i want to know if it's a limited slip (good) or something worse (a spool would be really bad).
It also has some play between the pinion and the ring gear, not bad but noticeable.
I will have to investigate what's going on inside the SRT-10 Dana 60, because when i try to turn one disc, the other turns the same direction.
I kind of expected an open diff... now i want to know if it's a limited slip (good) or something worse (a spool would be really bad).
It also has some play between the pinion and the ring gear, not bad but noticeable.
autopar3000
Well-Known Member
Love this build!
Buschi340
Well-Known Member
but note we have a bunch of MF spys here but they do never look in the HEMI swap section i guess
kingcrunch
Well-Known Member
but note we have a bunch of MF spys here but they do never look in the HEMI swap section i guess
They would aready know IF they read my blog. Obviously they don't.
kingcrunch
Well-Known Member
Struck me a few minutes ago:
My 6.4 came without a power steering pump.
It looks like the donor car had EHPS or Electro Hydraulic Power Steering.
This is an electric pump providing the hydraulic pressure for a "regular" hydraulic assisted steering rack. Yay.
So instead of a pump my engine has an idler where the power steering pump would go on a similar engine:
You can see it very clearly on the drivers side of the motor (right side in image) above the A/C-compressor.
I know how to fix this: Mopar RL181778AB 2011-2013 Challenger with 6.4L, just like 340 USD ... used ones seem to be scarce and Rockauto already has the best price for a new OEM Mopar part.
I could sink several tenthousand dollars into this thing right away. I'll try to avoid that...
My 6.4 came without a power steering pump.
It looks like the donor car had EHPS or Electro Hydraulic Power Steering.
This is an electric pump providing the hydraulic pressure for a "regular" hydraulic assisted steering rack. Yay.
So instead of a pump my engine has an idler where the power steering pump would go on a similar engine:
You can see it very clearly on the drivers side of the motor (right side in image) above the A/C-compressor.
I know how to fix this: Mopar RL181778AB 2011-2013 Challenger with 6.4L, just like 340 USD ... used ones seem to be scarce and Rockauto already has the best price for a new OEM Mopar part.
I could sink several tenthousand dollars into this thing right away. I'll try to avoid that...
Struck me a few minutes ago:
My 6.4 came without a power steering pump.
It looks like the donor car had EHPS or Electro Hydraulic Power Steering.
This is an electric pump providing the hydraulic pressure for a "regular" hydraulic assisted steering rack. Yay.
So instead of a pump my engine has an idler where the power steering pump would go on a similar engine:
You can see it very clearly on the drivers side of the motor (right side in image) above the A/C-compressor.
I know how to fix this: Mopar RL181778AB 2011-2013 Challenger with 6.4L, just like 340 USD ... used ones seem to be scarce and Rockauto already has the best price for a new OEM Mopar part.
I could sink several tenthousand dollars into this thing right away. I'll try to avoid that...
Awesome Build! we've also run into some of the "sticky situations" with the hemi swap. I assume you're aware the LP of the hemi pump is too high for a MII style rack, or a factory steering box. Whats your plans there?, (if you don't mind me asking?) we have been mounting a GM type II typically.
kingcrunch
Well-Known Member
If it does still fit when i'm done narrowing the '05s Ram crossmember, i would like to use the steering rack of a '05 Ram SRT-10 (shortbed, that's important).
It's been modified for a quicker ratio by SRT.
If it does not fit any more, maybe a custom steering rack is in order or i can find something else that works with the distances between the inner UCA/LCA pivot points.
I have a (legal) copy of PerformanceTrends SuspensionAnalyzer 2.4 that i will feed with the data (read: each suspension pivot points location) and work out a geometrically proper solution.
As for the line pressure:
I think every pump can be disassembled and modified to either increase or decrease pressure. For example on (early model) Saginaw pumps, all you had to do was change the shim behind the spring in the pressure valve to (in most cases) decrease the pressure so there is more "feel" in the steering.
While this is the ultimate route i would want to go - because i want to be able to just buy stock components to replace broken stuff - i would not have a problem tearing into a pump and see what could be done to adapt it.
The pressure lines are probably another custom job...
It's been modified for a quicker ratio by SRT.
If it does not fit any more, maybe a custom steering rack is in order or i can find something else that works with the distances between the inner UCA/LCA pivot points.
I have a (legal) copy of PerformanceTrends SuspensionAnalyzer 2.4 that i will feed with the data (read: each suspension pivot points location) and work out a geometrically proper solution.
As for the line pressure:
I think every pump can be disassembled and modified to either increase or decrease pressure. For example on (early model) Saginaw pumps, all you had to do was change the shim behind the spring in the pressure valve to (in most cases) decrease the pressure so there is more "feel" in the steering.
While this is the ultimate route i would want to go - because i want to be able to just buy stock components to replace broken stuff - i would not have a problem tearing into a pump and see what could be done to adapt it.
The pressure lines are probably another custom job...
Last edited:
sounds like a solid plan! we had type II pumps laying around for $90 so we took the easy route.lol i know some companies make in-line pressure reducers but we hadn't tried them. I sell the 6.4 pump you mentioned for the same price as rock auto, so wasn't a super cheap fix knowing it would need modified anyways.
We're lucky enough to have a few local shops that still do custom PS hoses.
anyways good luck! following closely!
kingcrunch
Well-Known Member
Removed the SRT-10 axles diff cover last night and checked what i got myself: Absolute mayhem in a can!
4.56 gears with a limited slip differential.
There's zero wear on the teeth, no debris on the magnet. That combination should result in a rocket sled. Probably undriveable in the rain...
4.56 gears with a limited slip differential.
There's zero wear on the teeth, no debris on the magnet. That combination should result in a rocket sled. Probably undriveable in the rain...
Buschi340
Well-Known Member
is such an SRT axle ( charger / challi ) comparable with a 8 3/4 for instance? measures? ( i didn't know that srts have Retro leaf springs at all 
is such an SRT axle ( charger / challi ) comparable with a 8 3/4 for instance? measures? ( i didn't know that srts have Retro leaf springs at all
The axle is from an SRT Ram truck, you are correct the SRT challengers and chargers do not use leafs.
kingcrunch
Well-Known Member
The LX platform essentially uses a 30 year old rear axle design of Mercedes Benz.
It first saw the light of day in the W201 chassis (190 series). I have one of these small MBs and they drive awesome.
It's a limousine for four people and zips around corners like a small two-seater. Every now and then i am thinking about putting a turbo on the small 1.8L four cylinder...
Essentially, today everybody uses a variation of this ingenious design. In fact at one point of this project i was looking into the W211s (E-class) rear axle subframe.
Anyhow:
The Ram SRT-10 is a "regular" Ram 1500 with the beefy, boxed steel LCAs, custom spindles for massive 15" rotors and monster four-piston calipers, the actual Viper V10 (there is a "truck-V10" which is not the same engine), the axle shown above (a Dana M60), traction "bars" and a fifth shock to help dampen wheel hop on traction loss.
What i am replicating is a Chevy C10 with SRT genes and the body of an '85 truck. (I started out with 70s trucks but kind of fell for the 80s design lately.)
Stuff that Dodge never cared about after the Lil Red Express and it's brethren (Warlock, Midnight Express, etc.).
The C10s have a nice double-A-arm front suspension, long rear trailing arms with coil springs and a panhard bar.
There's tons of stuff for these and you can build a "race" truck by ordering parts out of a catalog...
But i don't like the round and curvy C10s. I don't like the look of Chevy trucks. I like Dodge trucks.
But Dodge never cared to put a good suspension under their trucks until 2014.
Back to topic.
I feared i would have to re-wire the engine harness, to move the ECU to the driver side of the engine compartment.
The LX-cars have the engine computer on the passenger side.
On the passenger side in a truck there's the heater box on the firewall, heater hoses (heat!), wiper washer reservoir and not really that much space for a large ECU.
Jumping into cold waters i decided to tear into the engine harness and begun unwrapping it to understand wire-routing and have a look how good my chances would be, to relocate stuff.
It turns out to be a major pita.
But then, solutions came right around the corner.
Measuring from the center of the engine bay to the passenger side inner fender i found a distance of about 31".
Which means that the piece of engine harness that connects the engine to the ECU has to be around 30-31" long.
It was not from the factory, because the wiring takes a strange down-and-upward-route.
Unwrapping helped understanding why it did that and showed that it was not really necessary. Unwrapping also disclosed, why the harness feels so stiff:
The glue from some of the shrink-wrapped connections seeped out and glued some of the wires together. Realnice.
I also had to physically move some of the wiring on the passenger side valve cover further to the back of the engine, there's enough slack in the wires to do that.
But you will have to move the harness-mounting-pins:
For that i ground a needle point on a piece of hard steel wire, so i could lift the zip-tie-like retainer.
It's mostly untangled by now and ready to be re-wrapped.
I now have the required length of wire and can place the ECU on the passenger side inner fender.
During that process i also found a solution for the heater hoses.
These would make a loop right where the ECU will be located and the heat from these hoses does not play too well with any kind of computer i think.
To my fortune, the engine brought all the necessary parts with it to do this:
Routes the heater hoses neatly over the heater box to the backside of the engine, where the heater hose connections are located. Win!
It first saw the light of day in the W201 chassis (190 series). I have one of these small MBs and they drive awesome.
It's a limousine for four people and zips around corners like a small two-seater. Every now and then i am thinking about putting a turbo on the small 1.8L four cylinder...
Essentially, today everybody uses a variation of this ingenious design. In fact at one point of this project i was looking into the W211s (E-class) rear axle subframe.
Anyhow:
The Ram SRT-10 is a "regular" Ram 1500 with the beefy, boxed steel LCAs, custom spindles for massive 15" rotors and monster four-piston calipers, the actual Viper V10 (there is a "truck-V10" which is not the same engine), the axle shown above (a Dana M60), traction "bars" and a fifth shock to help dampen wheel hop on traction loss.
What i am replicating is a Chevy C10 with SRT genes and the body of an '85 truck. (I started out with 70s trucks but kind of fell for the 80s design lately.)
Stuff that Dodge never cared about after the Lil Red Express and it's brethren (Warlock, Midnight Express, etc.).
The C10s have a nice double-A-arm front suspension, long rear trailing arms with coil springs and a panhard bar.
There's tons of stuff for these and you can build a "race" truck by ordering parts out of a catalog...
But i don't like the round and curvy C10s. I don't like the look of Chevy trucks. I like Dodge trucks.
But Dodge never cared to put a good suspension under their trucks until 2014.
Back to topic.
I feared i would have to re-wire the engine harness, to move the ECU to the driver side of the engine compartment.
The LX-cars have the engine computer on the passenger side.
On the passenger side in a truck there's the heater box on the firewall, heater hoses (heat!), wiper washer reservoir and not really that much space for a large ECU.
Jumping into cold waters i decided to tear into the engine harness and begun unwrapping it to understand wire-routing and have a look how good my chances would be, to relocate stuff.
It turns out to be a major pita.
But then, solutions came right around the corner.
Measuring from the center of the engine bay to the passenger side inner fender i found a distance of about 31".
Which means that the piece of engine harness that connects the engine to the ECU has to be around 30-31" long.
It was not from the factory, because the wiring takes a strange down-and-upward-route.
Unwrapping helped understanding why it did that and showed that it was not really necessary. Unwrapping also disclosed, why the harness feels so stiff:
The glue from some of the shrink-wrapped connections seeped out and glued some of the wires together. Realnice.
I also had to physically move some of the wiring on the passenger side valve cover further to the back of the engine, there's enough slack in the wires to do that.
But you will have to move the harness-mounting-pins:
For that i ground a needle point on a piece of hard steel wire, so i could lift the zip-tie-like retainer.
It's mostly untangled by now and ready to be re-wrapped.
I now have the required length of wire and can place the ECU on the passenger side inner fender.
During that process i also found a solution for the heater hoses.
These would make a loop right where the ECU will be located and the heat from these hoses does not play too well with any kind of computer i think.
To my fortune, the engine brought all the necessary parts with it to do this:
Routes the heater hoses neatly over the heater box to the backside of the engine, where the heater hose connections are located. Win!
kingcrunch
Well-Known Member
I decided to try and keep the original crossmember (relieved of the UCA mounts).
The LCA mounts would have to be relocated on the crossmember (or redesigned) to accept the '05 1500s LCAs and act as the front mounting point.
This way all i would have to do is finding a way to install the rear LCA mounting point which could be transferred over from the 1500.
Incidentally the frame rails (well, really thick square tube for the 1500) are the same height... but not much more.
I'll go hunting for some D150 frame rails, from the cab forward.
I need to box the frame in a few places and i need to do it in a fashion that will work with German regulations.
The LCA mounts would have to be relocated on the crossmember (or redesigned) to accept the '05 1500s LCAs and act as the front mounting point.
This way all i would have to do is finding a way to install the rear LCA mounting point which could be transferred over from the 1500.
Incidentally the frame rails (well, really thick square tube for the 1500) are the same height... but not much more.
I'll go hunting for some D150 frame rails, from the cab forward.
I need to box the frame in a few places and i need to do it in a fashion that will work with German regulations.
kingcrunch
Well-Known Member
So i began cutting that 1500s chunk of frame and after two hours i got me something to make something else from:
This is one of the control arm mounts, that will be welded to a piece of plate which will be welded to the frame.
And this is the brace, that will be modified quite a bit.
About 2.56" will be cut from the middle and the bolt holes need relocating by 1.38" each.
This way the control arm mounts will fit inside the frame rails, just like on the 1500.
And there's more cutting ahead:
I need at least one set of the UCA mounts from that hunk of metal. And if all else fails, the crossmember as well.
This is one of the control arm mounts, that will be welded to a piece of plate which will be welded to the frame.
And this is the brace, that will be modified quite a bit.
About 2.56" will be cut from the middle and the bolt holes need relocating by 1.38" each.
This way the control arm mounts will fit inside the frame rails, just like on the 1500.
And there's more cutting ahead:
I need at least one set of the UCA mounts from that hunk of metal. And if all else fails, the crossmember as well.
kingcrunch
Well-Known Member
I don't any more think it will fit.
The track width on a 1500 is 68". Add 2" of wheel offset and you get the front axle width of 70".
Substract 5.3" (total shortening required to get the rearmost of the front suspension crossmembers between the frame rails) and you get
a one inch smaller track width (64.7") compared to the original setup which is 65.7".
All in all it leaves me with a front suspension almost 6" too narrow.
Moving the lower control arms outboard will probably move the location of the spring out of reach of the upper spring cup on the factory crossmember.
Argh!
The track width on a 1500 is 68". Add 2" of wheel offset and you get the front axle width of 70".
Substract 5.3" (total shortening required to get the rearmost of the front suspension crossmembers between the frame rails) and you get
a one inch smaller track width (64.7") compared to the original setup which is 65.7".
All in all it leaves me with a front suspension almost 6" too narrow.
Moving the lower control arms outboard will probably move the location of the spring out of reach of the upper spring cup on the factory crossmember.
Argh!
kingcrunch
Well-Known Member
After hours of taking measurements and doing calculations (simple stuff) i figure i might have a way to make it fit, IF the spring perches are lining up close enough.
Failed to check if they do... and it's not too easy for me to decide what's good and what is not good alignment:
The Dodge Van lca fits no problem and it's spring perch is 1/2" further outboard. But the 1500s lcas spring perch is another inch outboard.
That's no problem with the 1500s frame because the upper spring perch is attached to the frame at an angle. On the D150s frame it's almost at a right angle to the floor.
I will have to make custom mounts for the LCAs and the UCAs, but i end up with about the same track width i have in the rear: 68" with 55mm offset wheels (2.83" backspacing, provided i understood backspacing correctly).
The bad thing is, i just cut my jig apart. Yay.
Failed to check if they do... and it's not too easy for me to decide what's good and what is not good alignment:
The Dodge Van lca fits no problem and it's spring perch is 1/2" further outboard. But the 1500s lcas spring perch is another inch outboard.
That's no problem with the 1500s frame because the upper spring perch is attached to the frame at an angle. On the D150s frame it's almost at a right angle to the floor.
I will have to make custom mounts for the LCAs and the UCAs, but i end up with about the same track width i have in the rear: 68" with 55mm offset wheels (2.83" backspacing, provided i understood backspacing correctly).
The bad thing is, i just cut my jig apart. Yay.
Hellcat Cuda
Well-Known Member
I love your project. Would loved to have dropped a gen 3 in a 78 Lil Red Express I instead sold. That said, I think it would be easier with better end result to mount the D150 body and bed on a late model frame. You should consider that. Seriously.
lilredridinghoo
Well-Known Member
welcome - herzlich willkommen und viel Spaß
Buschi340
Well-Known Member
Not the baddest idea. But who likes the easy way 
kingcrunch
Well-Known Member
Well, i would. If the VIN would be attached to the cab of the truck. But it's part of the frame. And with the VIN goes the model year of the vehicle.
With the model year there comes a whole catalog of regulations to fulfil.
Obviously regulations for a 2005 vehicle are much stricter and harder to meet with a homegrown vehicle, than regulations for a 1985 made vehicle.
Not the baddest idea. But who likes the easy way
That's the point. Easy would have been to buy a late model Denali truck, lower it and go racing. Or a '05 Ram SRT-10. But they are heavy and ugly.
kingcrunch
Well-Known Member
... I don't know what to say.
With the LCAs positioned so the track width is allright, there's a misalignment in the spring perches of 4.5" present.
Meaning the LCAs spring perch is 4.5" further outboard than the frames spring perch. Second, on the 1500s frame the spring perch sits at an angle and it is straight on the D150.
I fileted the spring perch of the donor frame but it's even shorter...
Right now i don't know what to do.
With the LCAs positioned so the track width is allright, there's a misalignment in the spring perches of 4.5" present.
Meaning the LCAs spring perch is 4.5" further outboard than the frames spring perch. Second, on the 1500s frame the spring perch sits at an angle and it is straight on the D150.
I fileted the spring perch of the donor frame but it's even shorter...
Right now i don't know what to do.
kingcrunch
Well-Known Member
I'll revisit using the stock Ram lower control arms, with the ends cut off to make room for custom made ball-joint-"pieces".
In a first attempt to get the Ram spindle in there, i cut the cast-iron ball joint adapters from 1500 lower control arms and bolted them to Van LCAs.
There's all kinds of problems width the width of the VAN-lca and the spindle.
But there should not be any problem with the D150 control arms, because these are narrower than the VAN-lcas.
I am thinking about having these cast-iron pieces made from real steel with a little modification of the bolt spacing, so they fit the bolt pattern of the strut rods.
The frame side of the strut rods will be retained with ball-bearing-ends made for hydraulic cylinders.
I recently noticed i don't have the RC (regular cab) Ram SRT-10 spindle, but the QC (quad cab) spindle.
There is a difference between the two, the RC spindle is cast differently and incorporates a 1" drop, while the QC spindle retains stock (i compared it to stock 1500 spindles) height.
In a first attempt to get the Ram spindle in there, i cut the cast-iron ball joint adapters from 1500 lower control arms and bolted them to Van LCAs.
There's all kinds of problems width the width of the VAN-lca and the spindle.
But there should not be any problem with the D150 control arms, because these are narrower than the VAN-lcas.
I am thinking about having these cast-iron pieces made from real steel with a little modification of the bolt spacing, so they fit the bolt pattern of the strut rods.
The frame side of the strut rods will be retained with ball-bearing-ends made for hydraulic cylinders.
I recently noticed i don't have the RC (regular cab) Ram SRT-10 spindle, but the QC (quad cab) spindle.
There is a difference between the two, the RC spindle is cast differently and incorporates a 1" drop, while the QC spindle retains stock (i compared it to stock 1500 spindles) height.
Coronet 500
Well-Known Member
Try this, it helped me when I did one on my car.
racing aspirations » Classic Suspension Geometry Calculator
racing aspirations » Classic Suspension Geometry Calculator
kingcrunch
Well-Known Member
I am so wary of the results with the front axle with this project that i don't even trust the measurents i take or calculate and do it over and over again.
I even take measurements from pictures (like comparative: If this number of pixels equals this measurement in inches, there is a factor that can be calculated and used on every other measurement in that picture, as long as the measurement is not taken over a perspective in the picture).
What i worked with was a calculation of 1.42" for the addition of axle width in installing the wheel bearing.
I only have LCAs and a spindle, no wheel bearing or rotors yet (too expensive right now, i'm broke).
So i took the 68" track width of the 1500 and went backwards with the measurements i have at hand and calculated that each wheel bearing PLUS the thickness of the rotors flange would add 1.42" in width.
And that gave all kinds of problems.
For example, the 1500s LCAs would have to come very far outboard, resulting in a high misalignment of the spring perches.
On the other hand, the modified VAN-lca-solution would have left me with too narrow a track width.
Now i think i found that i was all wrong.
According to taking several measurements from pictures (i stayed in the same plane of view) the wheel bearings add 2.04" instead of 1.4".
Which gives a go for the VAN-lca-solution.
But with these different numbers i want to go and make sure the 1500s control arms don't accidentally fit after all.
Assuming the rotor flange thickness to be 10mm (0.39") and re-doing the calculations on that base data i have to move the 1500s control arms INBOARD by an inch from what i thought where they would sit.
Leaving me with an estimated 3.5" misalignment (if you want to apply that to the picture, the spring wire is 0.87").
And i need to know if that takes me back into the ballpark of getting a spring in there without it binding up.
I fiddled with photoshop but it left me with no result...
I even take measurements from pictures (like comparative: If this number of pixels equals this measurement in inches, there is a factor that can be calculated and used on every other measurement in that picture, as long as the measurement is not taken over a perspective in the picture).
What i worked with was a calculation of 1.42" for the addition of axle width in installing the wheel bearing.
I only have LCAs and a spindle, no wheel bearing or rotors yet (too expensive right now, i'm broke).
So i took the 68" track width of the 1500 and went backwards with the measurements i have at hand and calculated that each wheel bearing PLUS the thickness of the rotors flange would add 1.42" in width.
And that gave all kinds of problems.
For example, the 1500s LCAs would have to come very far outboard, resulting in a high misalignment of the spring perches.
On the other hand, the modified VAN-lca-solution would have left me with too narrow a track width.
Now i think i found that i was all wrong.
According to taking several measurements from pictures (i stayed in the same plane of view) the wheel bearings add 2.04" instead of 1.4".
Which gives a go for the VAN-lca-solution.
But with these different numbers i want to go and make sure the 1500s control arms don't accidentally fit after all.
Assuming the rotor flange thickness to be 10mm (0.39") and re-doing the calculations on that base data i have to move the 1500s control arms INBOARD by an inch from what i thought where they would sit.
Leaving me with an estimated 3.5" misalignment (if you want to apply that to the picture, the spring wire is 0.87").
And i need to know if that takes me back into the ballpark of getting a spring in there without it binding up.
I fiddled with photoshop but it left me with no result...
Last edited:
-
