I'd like to add the T56 Magnum is a bit longer and makes any driveshaft angle problem worse. On the One Lap Camaro we had a u joint angles of 9 degrees front and rear, had a bad vibration at 57 mph. Reducing it to 8 deg is getting us by, but the trans needs to be raised to fix it totally. With the trans tail down, the pinion has to be nose up, this puts the driveshaft rising to the rear.
We have the ATS crossmember and it's the lowest thing on the car, lower than the exhaust.
Wow Dave, those are some serious angles. Mine was in the 7 range and I wasn't happy with it. I have some engine harmonics between 2650-2950 that compound it. I dropped my pinion angle down to .5 up to reduce the working angles and it improved it considerably. I ran out of threads on my adjusters but have new ones sitting here. My next plan is to lower the pinion to -.5 where I've basically taken the pinion out of the equation and that will lower the front working angle to 3.5-4 with a rear of approx .5. If I'm still not happy I'll lower the pinion angle to -2 and that will give me working angles of approx 2.5- 3 front and back. They wont' be equal and opposite but they will be small. From my research, when driveshaft speeds get to only 4000 rpm they don't recommend working angles over about 3 degrees. That's only approx 85mph with a .64 overdrive. Of course that's for silky smooth factory applications with miles and miles of reliability. When angles get so huge the driveshaft has to slow down and speed up more dramatically even with equal and opposites. It's one of those deals where I'm running solid body mounts, engine mounts, and QA1 rod ends to harness the power but want super smooth high speed drivability. That may eventually mean some tunnel mods to get those working angles minute. I'll try to remember to report back after my changes. Not sure when I'll get to it.
Back in the day -- they called what you're trying to do (getting the frame up into the car/or body down over the frame to hide it and reduce the ride height) - CHANNELING....
Mock it up and see for yourself. It's hard to speculate with so many different variables in this thread. Cutting the tunnel is the last resort but many times needed. How many times have you seen DSE slice up a tunnel.
Mock it up and see for yourself. It's hard to speculate with so many different variables in this thread. Cutting the tunnel is the last resort but many times needed. How many times have you seen DSE slice up a tunnel.
well since my floor is sitting in a box in my garage I thought it might be something to look into with the floor still out..
I cannot find any pics, but there is no reason at all to not raise the tunnel a 1 1/2" or so to the tail of the transimission. Makes for more clearance when it is time to service the clutch also..
We just cut the top hat off the tunnel a 1" or so down the side, and make a wedge filler from the firewall to the back of the tranny.
I cannot find any pics, but there is no reason at all to not raise the tunnel a 1 1/2" or so to the tail of the transimission. Makes for more clearance when it is time to service the clutch also..
We just cut the top hat off the tunnel a 1" or so down the side, and make a wedge filler from the firewall to the back of the tranny.
That is pretty elaborate. Sometimes lsee is more. You could cut it from the firewall back to the tailshaft, not even cut it off, rais the front and put a wedge in it.
Like I said, there is no real reason to limit this area.
Brian Hobaugh SCCA National Tour June 2014
First Hemi 'Cuda Convertible Ever Built
Short clips: Goodguys Pleasanton autocross and pit videos
Linear Mode
