Jump to content

1951 Fargo 400cid on Dakota chassis


f_armer

Recommended Posts

Well I started my project. Harvest is delayed due to snow and rain. So I thought i'd get a jump on my winter project. 

Dakota was a long box regular cab. 

Had to shorten frame. 

Cut welds at front clip pulled rails, shortened and rewelded.

 

20180302_130310-800x450.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Easiest way to mount engine with a motor plate I made. Lots of room for exhaust I hope. Planning on using 78070 hedman hugger headers

Centered engine in frame then found the fuel tank would interfere with driveshaft so I offset the trans mount to clear. 

Engine is slightly angled.  Hope that's not a prob. 

20181003_145757-800x450.jpg

20181003_145815-450x800.jpg

20181003_192424-800x450.jpg

20181003_192721-800x450.jpg

20181005_120050-800x450.jpg

20181005_121609-800x450.jpg

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

if you engine is centered. tranny is off center, your phasing to the rear end is going to be so far out of whack it will have drivability issues...the engine should be offset the same as the tranny......offsetting left to right and up and down is legit..and a combination of both is legit, what is not legit is unequal parallel lines...

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Plymouthy Adams said:

if you engine is centered. tranny is off center, your phasing to the rear end is going to be so far out of whack it will have drivability issues...the engine should be offset the same as the tranny......offsetting left to right and up and down is legit..and a combination of both is legit, what is not legit is unequal parallel lines...

I know its not recommended, i suppose if worse comes to worse i'll cut a new motor plate with the proper offset.

Next is cutting firewall out of Dakota cab and welding it in Fargo cab. If the offset is a problem then i'll correct it then.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, f_armer said:

I know its not recommended, i suppose if worse comes to worse i'll cut a new motor plate with the proper offset.

Next is cutting firewall out of Dakota cab and welding it in Fargo cab. If the offset is a problem then i'll correct it then.

 

I suggest before you go further to read up on driveline phasing....could save  you a whole lot of rework down the road when everything is least accessible...further, on the Dakota grafting..you will find the Dak a lot wider than stock...NOW is the time to get all your measurements in order, on paper and do the math...this is a Dakota firewall in a 48 bz cp.

 

I also recommend that the mount plate employ as isolation mount of some sort...that thing is going to be wickedly harsh to drive. in that configuration, add in out of phase driveline...you may get to know a few ditches up close and personal given it does not throw you left of center first.

 

 

 

Edited by Plymouthy Adams
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

43 minutes ago, Plymouthy Adams said:

 

I suggest before you go further to read up on driveline phasing....could save  you a whole lot of rework down the road when everything is least accessible...further, on the Dakota grafting..you will find the Dak a lot wider than stock...NOW is the time to get all your measurements in order, on paper and do the math...this is a Dakota firewall in a 48 bz cp.

 

I also recommend that the mount plate employ as isolation mount of some sort...that thing is going to be wickedly harsh to drive. in that configuration, add in out of phase driveline...you may get to know a few ditches up close and personal given it does not throw you left of center first.

 

I actually have done some research on the subject and the conclusion is there might be a slight vibration. Like i said it'll be an easy thing to correct, and I may address it if it is a problem.

Maybe you should do some research on race cars, they often mount the motor plates solid to the frame. Actually not so uncommon on some street cars also. I'm not expecting this to be as quiet as a Bentley on the road. 

Do you really think mounting the engine solid to the frame will put me in the ditch, or cross the centerline?? Wow. 

 

edit: rereading this comes across as snippy, that is not my intent.

Edited by f_armer
Link to comment
Share on other sites

race car and street  car  is not in the same class......if this is strickly a vehicle to be used for racing....then I withdraw all comments and suggestions but I assure you I would not want to be in that rig pedal to the metal with out of phase driveline..….but if for the street, trust me you need to address a few more items a bit closer to detail...will not be me backing up is all I can say...but so far...you build is a bit of cart before the horse in a couple areas.  Again not saying a direct mount will not work..just saying it is going to be a harsh ride....wish you the best...

 

solid mount will not put you in the ditch....it is the out of phase that will do that for you..sorry I was just trying to help....

Edited by Plymouthy Adams
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Another fellow Canuck enjoying our early winter up here! It's been a beyond bad start to our fall season, and I've all but given up thinking the truck will be back on the road, but here's hoping!

 

Plymouth is giving some good info, and believe me,..as a guy that's stripped his truck down more then once, it's so much easier to correct things now, rather then later.  Your engine plate looks great, but static mounting an engine like that will cost you a fortune in dental work, as you will amplify every tick and twist in that engine throughout the body, and I also think your going to have a very hard time keeping your water pump from leaking, as that plate will constantly flex with the engine and likely degrade any gaskets well before they should be changing.  If it were me, I would go back to hunting for a way to use the original side mounts, and yes get the offset correct, or you may also never keep a u-joint in it long enough to enjoy a long cruise.

 

Nobody wants to dis on your build, it's looking to be  a very cool start, but if we can save you from future aggravation then that's what being here is all about! 

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

After rereading my post i want to clear up a potential misunderstanding.

After mounting my engine parallel, and centered, i had to move the trans tailshaft about a 1/4" to get driveshaft to properly clear fuel tank.

Looking at my post it looks like i offset rear of trans the amount of that trans mount i made.

That mount is offset because the original dakota driveline is approx 2 1/4" to pass side

The pinion on rear is approx 1 1/2" offset to pass side.

So to line up driveline exactly with rear (i know its not required as long as everything is parallel) I'll still have an offset trans mount.

I just want to say that the engine is not sitting at the extreme angle maybe some were thinking it was. It was very slight and im sure it would be fine as is.

But just to be sure i will take the time and redo the mount so everything is parallel.

 

I just never expected the fuel tank to interfere after all my initial measuring

Link to comment
Share on other sites

the Dakota is offset at the axle and also offset at the engine...they are not same the same offset you  have found out....phasing is keeping the extended parallel lines of the offset of each continuing through each component for accuracy.  often is it best mark you frame with a dot of white paint when setting components to maintin these lines and allow for a quick reference as you progress on the build.  1/4 does not sound line much...but that 1/4 is very much amplified when you look at the imaginary line from the tranny output to the center of crank pulley nut some 5 feet in run....continue this error for the next 5 feet of your driveshaft and you will see how much of a real error 1/4 will be from front to rear...so if you were to spend a few more minutes here ensuring the engine will run true parallel to the center line of the frame as will the rear axle pinion run on its parallel line center to the frame you should not experience any vibrations or premature wear.  GIVEN you stay within the angle of the driveshaft for the RPM in which you intend to run.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

55 minutes ago, Plymouthy Adams said:

the Dakota is offset at the axle and also offset at the engine...they are not same the same offset you  have found out....phasing is keeping the extended parallel lines of the offset of each continuing through each component for accuracy.  often is it best mark you frame with a dot of white paint when setting components to maintin these lines and allow for a quick reference as you progress on the build.  1/4 does not sound line much...but that 1/4 is very much amplified when you look at the imaginary line from the tranny output to the center of crank pulley nut some 5 feet in run....continue this error for the next 5 feet of your driveshaft and you will see how much of a real error 1/4 will be from front to rear...so if you were to spend a few more minutes here ensuring the engine will run true parallel to the center line of the frame as will the rear axle pinion run on its parallel line center to the frame you should not experience any vibrations or premature wear.  GIVEN you stay within the angle of the driveshaft for the RPM in which you intend to run.

I concur

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wow this is just like my build except you have a nice lift and a good place to work! 

 

Great progress! I look forward to seeing how you attack the same problems I had to solve. I fitted the body first based on the front tire location, then the floorboards and bed sorta at the same time. I also made some extra work for myself by shortening my frame and bed.

 

I had a 408 smallblock stroker in a ‘72 demon. The 1972 biscuit mounts lasted a few years then the torque pulling up on the driver’s side eventually ripped the mount apart. Rubber parts ain’t what they used to be so it would rip a new anchor mount every six months or so. I would put it in reverse and when I let the clutch out the shifter would lean way over! I got tired of that and put in solid steel mounts. They only lasted a week before I had had enough. 

 

Under power the solid mounts weren’t too bad but at idle everything in the car hummed shook and rattled. It was like the worst annoying flowmaster cruising drone times a hundred. Bolts and screws all over started to loosen and back out- for real. It was like going from a 2009 harley roadking to a 1968 ironhead sportster. So much less comfort and enjoyment. If it was only for racing or driving to shows then go ahead and do the solid mounts. It is kind of different and neat but very hard on you and the rest of the truck.

 

My 400 based 512 in my C-series/89 dak I used polyurethane spool mounts. The engineering was pretty simple and I was even able to cut apart the v6 mounts for parts. 

 

I also ran a 7.5” ford rear in a 73 swinger. It was the right width, bolt pattern, and gave me 3.73 limited slip for pretty cheap and held up fine to a warm 318. The pinion was offset about an inch too far. It had decent manners on surface roads but on the highway it had a bad rhythmic thrumming vibration that is no fun and I’m sure was hard on the 904 transmission. 

 

So I have learned these lessons the hard way. What you are talking about will work fine- the truck won’t break in half from all the motor and driveline vibrations but don’t try and daily drive or road trip it like that, and make sure if you sell it they sign an AS IS no returns or complaining form ;)

 

Anyway, your truck is super cool and the build will be fun- especially since you have such a great indoor work space and it looks like maybe a laser or water jet too?!

 

radar

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Also- what are the specs on your 400? I always wanted to build one for their giant bore size but stock weren’t they like 200hp 300ft/lbs? Basically a hotrod slant six?

 

Your welding and fabrication are top notch too- super impressive 

Edited by Radarsonwheels
Link to comment
Share on other sites

there were three builds for the 400,  2bbl version, 4 barrel version, 4 bbl with HP cam.   remember, at this time the HP numbers were a bit different...the y are expressed in Net and not Gross and the call for smog controls resulted in lower CR engines....the net rating shaved about 50HP off the rating number.   This pleased the govn't and the insurance folks..

 

1974 horsepower 400 440
2-barrel 185 @ 4,000  
4-barrel 205 @ 4,000 230 @ 4,000
4-barrel HP 250 @ 4,800 275 @ 4,400
 
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

oh yeah....they are....the 4 bbl HP  versions had a few tricks up their sleeve common to a majority of Mopar builds over the ages that prove high reliability and high performance.  items as roller timing chains, chrome moly rings, windage tray, longer split duration HP cams, two plane intake manifolds, forged steel crank over stock cast, dual snorkel air cleaner... and of course the upgrade in 73 across the board to electronic ignition just to highlight a few of the differences.  The two barrel and standard 4 bbl used the came components with the difference being the intake.   Many did not like the thermoquad of this era but that is just because they did not understand or know how to tune it...once properly set they perform years on end with high reliability.  Like all the cars of the era, they were detuned from the factory to pass emission..performance suffered.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This 400 4bbl is out of a 1978 new yorker. Its stock. It did have the lean burn computer on it but got converted back to regular electronic  It has very few miles on it. Interesting thing is i presumed it had a cast crank, and when i swapped pans i never checked if it was forged or cast, but just yesterday i noticed it looks like a forged crank damper on it. I wonder if maybe by fluke it got a forged crank from factory. Build date is 77. Ill check next time i pull the pan its just on temporary anyway.

Kind of interesting story behind it, my father bought the new yorker new, we had a camper trailer and he wanted more power, so within the first year of buying it he bought a 1970 chrysler 300 with a 440, pulled it out, had it rebuilt to hp specs and swapped engines into the new yorker. He put lower gears in it also. Needless to say it was probably the quickest new yorker in the country. 

The 400 went into the 300, and never got driven much. Ended up pulling the 400 out of the 300 and here it is.

Ill prob run the thermoquad for starters, love the howl they made when 4bbl opened up.

The 440 i ended up putting in my 1971 satellite, which was a 318 car to begin with.

 

I think ill have enough hp for this little truck for now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Radarsonwheels said:

Wow this is just like my build except you have a nice lift and a good place to work! 

 

Great progress! I look forward to seeing how you attack the same problems I had to solve. I fitted the body first based on the front tire location, then the floorboards and bed sorta at the same time. I also made some extra work for myself by shortening my frame and bed.

 

I had a 408 smallblock stroker in a ‘72 demon. The 1972 biscuit mounts lasted a few years then the torque pulling up on the driver’s side eventually ripped the mount apart. Rubber parts ain’t what they used to be so it would rip a new anchor mount every six months or so. I would put it in reverse and when I let the clutch out the shifter would lean way over! I got tired of that and put in solid steel mounts. They only lasted a week before I had had enough. 

 

Under power the solid mounts weren’t too bad but at idle everything in the car hummed shook and rattled. It was like the worst annoying flowmaster cruising drone times a hundred. Bolts and screws all over started to loosen and back out- for real. It was like going from a 2009 harley roadking to a 1968 ironhead sportster. So much less comfort and enjoyment. If it was only for racing or driving to shows then go ahead and do the solid mounts. It is kind of different and neat but very hard on you and the rest of the truck.

 

My 400 based 512 in my C-series/89 dak I used polyurethane spool mounts. The engineering was pretty simple and I was even able to cut apart the v6 mounts for parts. 

 

I also ran a 7.5” ford rear in a 73 swinger. It was the right width, bolt pattern, and gave me 3.73 limited slip for pretty cheap and held up fine to a warm 318. The pinion was offset about an inch too far. It had decent manners on surface roads but on the highway it had a bad rhythmic thrumming vibration that is no fun and I’m sure was hard on the 904 transmission. 

 

So I have learned these lessons the hard way. What you are talking about will work fine- the truck won’t break in half from all the motor and driveline vibrations but don’t try and daily drive or road trip it like that, and make sure if you sell it they sign an AS IS no returns or complaining form ;)

 

Anyway, your truck is super cool and the build will be fun- especially since you have such a great indoor work space and it looks like maybe a laser or water jet too?!

 

radar

I thought was interesting you were doing more or less same thing as i also.

I started by shortening my frame to exact wheelbase as original truck, then set driveline in on blocks to get my aprox squat, then fitted the body to the approx ride height i wanted. Lots of measuring! As you read above, i wanted to center the engine, but found fuel tank clearance issue, so will redo front mount plate.

I am considering cutting the floor out of dakota box and grafting it into the 51 box. It will be very shallow, 

I farm and need large shop as i do all my own repairs its 60w80L18h

The cnc is a 4x8 plasma table, i built the table and bought a bulltear gantry to put on it, i think he calls them starlab now.

 

http://www.plasmaland.com

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Man I wish I had my driveline or a mockup lump when I started fitting my body I might not have channeled it down quite so far! Good stuff though I look forward to seeing your progress. 

 

Why not just put the fuel tank behind the axle and dump the exhaust in front of the tires?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.

Terms of Use