That's what I do on everthing I build!

_________________
2 Mopars come with Spark plug tubes. One is a world class, racing machine. The other is a 426 CI. boat anchor!

12.70 @ 104.6

Thanks for the updates and pics, DI! Nice craftsmanship.

I always torque those bolts to 65-70 ft-lbs, and use Loctite. Haven't had one come loose in maybe 12 yrs.

Lou

_________________
Home of Slant6-powered fun machines since 1988

this is just an idea,
there are upsides and probably downsides...

but instead up cutting up a $600.00 blowproof housing, that may have already crossed over to the world of unobtanium,
to make a 130T flywheel fit.

why not cut up a $50.00 slant six aluminum flywheel housing to make a 130T flywheel fit in it, and add a blowproof cover to the
aluminum housing to get the desired level of safety protection.

My thought is, since a 130T flywheel fits within the diameter of the slant six block bell housing bolt pattern, as it does on the QT RM-7072
a 130T flywheel should fit with in the same bolt pattern on a stock aluminum slant six bell housing.
With the obvious exception of the starter area, which needs to be modified in either case to allow the 130T flywheel to fit.

The other two areas of concern for fitment are:

1) the stock slant bell housing is aluminum, so it will have thicker walls at the mounting bolt bosses compared to the QT steel housing.
If the internal bosses do need to be cleared away, strength could be added back by reaming the bolt hole inside diameters then
pressing in hollow dowels to allow the mounting bolt to pass through. The steel dowel will act as a compression limiter to take the clamp load.
and reduce the likelihood of cracking at the thinner boss area.
If one needs to get into the actual housing area to make clearance, one could cut in the clearance then TIG on external patches.


2) The stock slant aluminum bell housing may tapper back too quickly and not allow room for a larger clutch pack.
Don't have a measure of issue level on this one.

Is this feasible? I don't know, just brainstorming at this point in time.
I have a block and spare crank in the parts bin and a 130T flywheel in the garage attic.
when time permits I'll dig into this further

_________________
Doo Ron Ron and the Duke of Earl are friends of mine.....
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uX8Nj8ABEI8

I am fairly certain that is the case. But it may be that someone can give it a try ??

_________________
2 Mopars come with Spark plug tubes. One is a world class, racing machine. The other is a 426 CI. boat anchor!

12.70 @ 104.6

If I ever do this, my approach will be to simply grind the existing starter location on the QT bell and relocate the holes. Maybe weld an ear or two on to reinforce/extend the metal if needed. Probably you could make it so that you could use either flywheel by leaving the original starter holes intact (or minor mod to go back). Cut the nose off the starter or grind it down to fit. I already run a mini starter w/o a nose and it works fine. Maybe it is the late model truck starter, but either way...

My 2 cents,

Lou

_________________
Home of Slant6-powered fun machines since 1988

Interesting, but IMO the steel hollow dowels effectively would solve little, as any cracking in that area of alum flange would not be from normal bolt compression, unless a crack already existed, or the surface was irregular for some reason upon tightening. Furthermore I would be suspicious the dowel addition itself might partially weaken the alum structure itself for our intended main purpose, of resisting a FW/clutch failure.

Yeah, I don't think I would be hacking up a factory alum bell unless I were to weld more material on. This is really only for super high HP cars, as 9" clutches (HD ones) can handle at least 250 HP. For $600, I'm sure you could get a killer custom 9" clutch made that would anything a NA motor could dish out and would bypass all this bellhousing schtuff.

Lou

_________________
Home of Slant6-powered fun machines since 1988

so if a capable 9 inch clutch is only a phone call and a check in the mail away,
why is there a 12 page post on this topic?

just asking,,,

and FWIIW,
I called the Quick Time Sales dept to ask if the RM-7072 was available to order, they confirmed that it is no longer available.
I then asked to speak with an engineering tech person as there is an idea that was floated on a forum that I participate in that would
make the QT slant six bell housing useful.

They connected me with a tech named Cy. We discussed how the 122T flywheel has almost zero performance clutch and flywheel options and
that the 130T flywheel would open up a lot of options for clutches and flywheels.
The response was that they are always interested in customer feedback and he will bring the idea up to re make the RM-7072 around the 130T flywheel
with the product management team. He gave me his e mail address and I sent him a link to this topic.

_________________
Doo Ron Ron and the Duke of Earl are friends of mine.....
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uX8Nj8ABEI8

If they make one dedicated to the 130t flywheel I'd hop on board.

_________________
Official Cookie and Mater Tormentor.

The stock aluminum bell will not house a 130T flywheel and associated clutch.

I would like one whether its 122t or in the 130t configuration.

If they were to make more of this part.. 130t seems like a no brainer to me


Greg

_________________
http://www.youtube.com/hyperpack

I don't think it is as easy as it sounds. Multiple setups have been tried and the only one that really held up under hard use is the McLeod stuff. The clutch disc is not so much the problem the pressure plate. No bolt in Slant 6 setups are worth much for performance use. McLeod will make one if we buy 100 of them at @ 350 each. Anyone win the lottery yet?

If you have a custom one made it may work? But you then will always need those custom parts. Maybe not a big deal to you, but I like getting parts that are readily available from many vendors.

I like the new Bell even if I have to modify the starter pocket. As has been said to me multiple times; Almost everything we do as a performance upgrade has to be modified to work, even from new. Wiesco pistons for example.... Once I install mine I will have several things I like and need. 1) Starter in the high location so I don't have to modify my headers. 2) The ability to walk into any parts store and buy a decent clutch or order one of a hundred different high performance clutches from many suppliers that will hold up to 900 HP if I need it. 3) A Blow proof to keep my toes attached to my feet. 4) A 10.5" clutch and a 9.5"built to the same strength.... ect. Which one would you take? The bigger one everytime.

Just my opinion. I like the bell. If they make it a bolt in for the 130T flywheel, that would be awesome! Thanks for contacting them John.

_________________
2 Mopars come with Spark plug tubes. One is a world class, racing machine. The other is a 426 CI. boat anchor!

12.70 @ 104.6

I didn't post this earlier but at the time I bought mine I did call QT and discuss this bell with them. They confirmed it is capable of holding an 11" clutch but also that it had the starter positioned for a 122 tooth flywheel.

I told them "You probably aren't selling a lot of these as guys who want a performance bell also want a bigger clutch and that means a 130 tooth flywheel etc." I suggested they move the starter outwards...but as I did post earlier, I was getting the idea that they were getting rid of their stock and that is the opposite direction of new product development. That's cuz the guy there seemed pretty mum on the topic altogether.

Is QT gonna rework this bell and re-run a batch? I certainly hope so but the business case can't be great.

Correct, the stock slant bell will not adapt the 130T due to the clearances, and being cast aluminum, TIG welding is dubious at best
as you get blowouts from irregularities and casting flaws, from a mod standpoint, it would just be easier to use a $50 Junkyard LA Engine
bellhousing and work backward from there if modding rather than using say an adapter plate. Most guys would braze the cast aluminum,
and that is not as desireable. I think as Greg noted that they may have started with a common LA bell and then jigged the attaching blocks
into place for the slant bolt pattern, cut/weld and let it ride...

The main issue is the clamping force of the pressure plate on the 9 1/4" and 10" slant pattern... McCleod did a good job, but no longer made,
and follow ups as noted are an amalgam of redrilled flywheels and various brand vehicles for discs and pressure plates... for racers that is the
big thing getting to clamp after the shift and getting it to stay and not chatter... that being said it would help on a performance street car
too, and it is tough to get if you have a heavier car, more torque than the typical streetable build and better tires. As much as everybody
talks about HP on a clutch capacity, I'd rather hear about the torque and peak load it will take...just because it takes on a 250 HP small block,
that doesn't say it will hold during repeated hard launches of a 3500 lb car with 10" wide tires, and the engine sharply dumping it's peak torque on it...
which is one of the reasons I went to the big block clutch disc (and on recommendation from Dave M for clamping force and capacity to shed heat
due to surface area...along with stored energy due to weight of the flywheel to launch the heavy car), I know that my last slant would not exceed a
stock 383 in torque, so it should hold. But... you do have to be careful as the heavier springs can cause other issues (like folding over the stock fork
because the pressure plate said "NO" and your size 15 foot said "floor"...).

Like Rick stated availability of parts is the key here... at some point in the next 20 years, it's gonna get much harder to buy a useable 122T flywheel
that hasn't been rusted or resurfaced to death (new replacement ring gears were no longer available a decade back...), but 1968-1991 318/340
flywheels are still easy to get, and plenty of 3.9 and 5.2L Magnum engines after that, so that makes it easier for the car to last for our grandkids
or other enthusiasts to enjoy after we are gone.

On another note, I started using ARP Flywheel to Crank Bolts once I started into the 10:1 SCR + range of builds, the ARP bolt head makes it
nary impossible to drill for wires, and having cracked off 40 year old crank and pressure plate bolts while torquing them in place, I won't use them
unless it's a stock application...so loctite and/or the sheetmetal tap with the ears will be the key.

The starter pocket is deeper than the mini-starter nose, and would only support the stock starter nose, and the flange has about 3/8-1/2" of ledge
into the pocket, so the possibility of a noseless starter and new bolt holes could work... the issue would be making sure there is enough added material
on the flange, and/or in between the bolt holes...(remember we are talking about roughly a 1/2" offset center to center to move the 10T starter...
so with the starter stud/bolt being 7/16"...you're cutting it close with 1/16" of meat between the threaded bores...


Too bad we didn't tackle this a few years back, then they could have cranked out a few more of them once we worked out the bugs...and sold
more....but $800 per bell would have begged the questions in cost vs. the $500 AR Engineering LA to slant custom plates and the $50 318 bellhousing...
Just sayin'... (But I will wonder, if successful, how many people who bought them will mod them...)

It is rather ironic that just as someone (gregcon) figured out that the QT Slant Six bell housing could be modified by moving the starter bore out so a 130T flywheel would fit, it was being discontinued.
But if it is reintroduced as a 130T capable housing, they would sell.
The reason it did not sell previously is because it was designed around the 122T flywheel, which has no aftermarket support. If the QT slant six housing was introduced as a 130T capable flywheel housing a world of aftermarket clutches and flywheels opens. That would make the QT Slant Six housing attractive to buyers.

_________________
Doo Ron Ron and the Duke of Earl are friends of mine.....
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uX8Nj8ABEI8