62 Cutlass flywheel lightening

Home Page Forums Discussion Topics – Ask the Experts 62 Cutlass flywheel lightening

Viewing 10 posts - 1 through 10 (of 12 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #11061
    62cutlassconvert
    Participant

    I am replacing my Roto 5 with a TH200. The torque converter will be bolted up to the original “flywheel” that the Roto 5 used. 61-63 Buick Flexplates don’t seem to be available or I would use one due to the decreased weight.

    Wondering if anyone has done this and lightened the “flywheel” since it will now have a Torque Converter bolted to it. If so how much were you able to take our of it and has it been a good result.

    Any info along this line is appreciated.

    #11064
    63cutlass
    Participant

    I have a 215 Buick steel used flexplate I will sell you. The cast Roto5 flywheel can not be machined thin enough to be used as a torque convertor flexplate without losing all integrity and strength that would be required. See my reply on the other Olds board to PM if you are interested.

    #11069
    62cutlassconvert
    Participant

    Thanks, I have sent a PM to you on the Classicolds site.

    #11204
    1f85olds
    Participant

    was just reading your post and
    was wondering if you where able to fit the TH200
    into a your 1962 olds cutlass.
    I have rebuilt my Hydra matic 3 times and would like to
    swap it for some thing better.
    OK Please let me know.
    Robbe

    #11209
    62cutlassconvert
    Participant

    Well, sorta. We’ve mocked up a stripped TH200 with a bare block and a D&D spacer, modified the orig crossmember mt a little/flipped the side brkts over/elongated the frame holes/ and moved it up one hole in the frame-I guess to the manual trans bolt holes, bolted it up with mtr mounts, pushed out the tunnel a little with porta-power/heat/hammer to get about 1/2″+ clearance min at all locations-can get more if needed, used a short gm mount and I think we have a good angle to the center support. Haven’t sourced a th200 detent or set up the linkage. Want to use orig shifter and should be able to, and will need to shorten the driveline to the center support. Rather than lighten the roto flywheel I am using the flexplate from 63cutlass above.

    #11211
    63cutlass
    Participant

    When you get your driveline shortened, it’s better to have the back end of the driveline instead of the front end shortened. That way you will partially avoid the acute angles that will arise if the front shaft of the driveline ends up shortened. Also try to set the drive line up so the rear u-joint and differential pinion angle are exactly the same. That’s the important one. Been there, done that…..

    #11212
    62cutlassconvert
    Participant

    So are you saying to move the center support back, leave the front shaft alone, and shorten the shaft from the center support to the diff? While trying to keep the angle down from the center support and up from the diff the same, doesn’t the “CV” joint setup at the center support help out with a off angle with the diff?

    #11214
    joe_padavano
    Participant

    [quote quote=11211]When you get your driveline shortened, it’s better to have the back end of the driveline instead of the front end shortened. That way you will partially avoid the acute angles that will arise if the front shaft of the driveline ends up shortened. Also try to set the drive line up so the rear u-joint and differential pinion angle are exactly the same. That’s the important one. Been there, done that…..[/quote]

    Sorry, but I have to disagree with this. The rear part of the driveshaft moves constantly due to rear suspension movement. Shortening the rear part makes the u-joint angles more severe during this motion. Once installed, the front driveshaft U-joint angles don’t change since the front driveshaft doesn’t move in response to suspension movement. Certainly check the angles of the U-joints in the shortened driveshaft, but I’ll bet they are nowhere near the angles in the U-joints in the rear driveshaft at the limits of suspension travel.

    #11215
    62cutlassconvert
    Participant

    To both points what seems to be very important is that shaft angles are as equal as possible at each end and that some angle is needed for the ujoints to function properly-straight at each other is not desirable. So, for example, if the front Dvshft angle at tranny is down 2 degrees the back should be up 2 degrees creating two theoretical lines that are parallel.

    #11216
    63cutlass
    Participant

    Joe Well, you are dead wrong in your assumption, have you done this swap, or are you assuming this as a fact? You are right about the front shaft angles not changing, but you have to consider that the front shaft (which is the shorter of the two already) will be even shorter, thus the angle of the joint at the trans end will be pushing the limit for acceptable angle. This becomes even more important because the factory design of the engine/transmission mounting is set at a 6 degree downward slope, not a the 3 degree industry standard. Even if the front shaft u-joint doesn’t move it still has to be in the acceptable range of angle to avoid vibrations. Running the rear u-joint and pinion yoke angle the same, with the CV joint in the middle taking up the slight differences that occur with suspension movement is the best way. After buying two drivelines assemblies and trying three sets of different driveline combinations when doing my T5 swap, that’s what I recommend from experience.

Viewing 10 posts - 1 through 10 (of 12 total)
  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.

Recent Articles

Turbo System Safety Checks

Turbo System Safety Checks

The safety components of the factory designed turbo system have some interactive groups of safety "c...(read article)

Engine Front Drive Pulleys

Engine Front Drive Pulleys

The standard drive pulley has one groove. It drives the water pump/fan and alternator or generator. ...(read article)

1961-1963 F85 Car and Option Prices

1961-1963 F85 Car and Option Prices

Attached to this article is PDF file containing an extensive list of car and option pricing for 1961...(read article)

Recently Active Members

Profile picture of rusty63
Profile picture of 62cutlassconvert
Profile picture of joe_padavano
Profile picture of JimNoel
Profile picture of steveharclerode

OldsJetfire Forum