Slant Six Forum
https://slantsix.org/forum/

Quicktime bellhousing
https://slantsix.org/forum/viewtopic.php?t=37989		 Page 6 of 7
Author:  DadTruck [ Tue Mar 01, 2011 11:18 am ]
Post subject: 
hello old6rodder
did you get the QT RM-7072 housing?,, how is the fit to the slant crank case?
and are these made to take the standard slant 122 tooth flywheel or will they accept the 130 tooth?

This maybe more of a group question,,,,, I am familiar with the concept of centering the housing bore to the engine crankshaft but I saw it mentioned earlier in this post ( I think) that some one was checking the relationship of the housing to itself.
Is that just checking the roundness of the main bore and the flatness of the mounting faces? What else could be verified without knowing the original design geometric tolerancing?





thanks
Author:  Old6rodder [ Tue Mar 01, 2011 10:38 pm ]
Post subject: 
Quote:
hello old6rodder
did you get the QT RM-7072 housing?,, how is the fit to the slant crank case?
and are these made to take the standard slant 122 tooth flywheel or will they accept the 130 tooth?

This maybe more of a group question,,,,, I am familiar with the concept of centering the housing bore to the engine crankshaft but I saw it mentioned earlier in this post ( I think) that some one was checking the relationship of the housing to itself.
Is that just checking the roundness of the main bore and the flatness of the mounting faces? What else could be verified without knowing the original design geometric tolerancing?

thanks
Howdy,

It'll be another week or so before I can get back to my hobbies, lots of work to catch up on, from my bench absence during November and December for float building.
Initial observation of the bell shows a disparity between the clutch pivot stand mounting hole centers and those drilled in the bell's flange. Nothing else leaps out at me, but I'll know better when I get to fitting it. My own pivot stand set-up is different anyway so that won't effect me.
Here's a picture of mine for comparison to the one earlier in this post, it looks as if they both have those holes too close together for the stands they've supplied ........

Image

Image


I went thrugh this thread and didn't find a centering reference, but I expect the only thing they could be refering to would be the nose cone hole center as relates to the locating pin holes. The "square" of the unit should be a given.

If by 130 vs 122 tooth you mean the early vs later ring gears, I'm not aware of a difference in the functioning diameters of the two. I've swapped both with impunity (along with their respective starters of course). That said, I suppose I could simply be ignorant of such a difference and've gotten away with it.

As to the starter fitment question earlier in this thread, eyeballing appears to show the hole in the engine plate tight enough to accomplish that. With the bell lip itself providing "squaring" that should do the job. If it still worries one it'd be easy enough to cobble up a simple bracing spacer at the other end of the starter. Actual assembly will confirm or not of course.

Other than that it looks as if the long screws supplied for the upper bell may prove a bit short, an easy enough fix at good hardware stores.

I'm looking forward to diving into it, as I'm having a steel flywheel made up to go with. 8)
Author:  DadTruck [ Wed Mar 02, 2011 12:59 pm ]
Post subject: 
old6rodder

clicked on your photo links,,
that is a neat old school / but also rear engine dragster,,,
saw the shots of the exploded clutch,, what happened there? ,, that had to make a noise!

regards
DT
Author:  slantzilla [ Wed Mar 02, 2011 2:25 pm ]
Post subject: 
122 tooth flywheel is stock Slant, 130 is small block/383.
Author:  DadTruck [ Wed Mar 02, 2011 8:11 pm ]
Post subject: 
I agree

the 130 and 122 ring gears have the same tooth pitch, and spacing,,so if there are more of them, to fit,, the 130 has to have a larger diameter,, so it will also need a starter location on a different radius from center.
Author:  Old6rodder [ Wed Mar 02, 2011 9:55 pm ]
Post subject: 
Thanks for the ring gear info guys, I knew there was a different pitch (and therefor, count) on the two slant ones but had never taken the time to count'em, just swapped starter and all.

Thanks, DadTruck, it's a fun ride. There were actually quite a few middie builds back in frame rail days, many of'em still running when slingshots started coming in. They'd pretty much disappeared by the time the slingshots were narrowing their rear ends though.

I blew the pressure plate twice at one meet, my own laziness. I'd modified my original clutch linkage for more travel and hadn't put in a new pedal stop, thus hyper-extending the pressure plate (with predictable results).

I'd figured I could just remember not to push it too far. I only forgot twice ......... :oops: The first one was staging, and stayed inside the can. The second one was reaching for second gear at 5500, and put my scatter shield to the test. Through a freak twist of the shattered bell that one also scrapped a brand new engine.

Replaced it with a Spec set-up that season and am adding a steel flywheel this year.

I'll let you know how much space there is between the slant ring gear and the QT bell when I mount it up if no one else mentions it first. That'll give you a dimension to work with.
Author:  Dart270 [ Thu Mar 03, 2011 6:04 am ]
Post subject: 
In case there is confusion here, the 130 tooth flywheel is the V8 flywheel for 10.5" clutch, and it will not fit inside standard Slant 6 bellhousings. Only the huge and rare truck BH's will fit the 130 tooth and larger 143 tooth flywheels.

IIRC, the early cars had some 121 tooth with a direct drive starter (different pitch), and this may be the same in Aussie for several years after that. Around '62, US cars got the 122 tooth with gear reduction starter.

Lou
Author:  sandy in BC [ Thu Mar 03, 2011 7:34 am ]
Post subject: 
Canadian cars had a Prestolite starter with different flywheel until 65. I gave mine to Greg Mader. (oops)

I have 2 truck BHs and big flywheels .......I use them for counterweights on shed doors. If anyone needs one bad.......
Author:  Old6rodder [ Thu Mar 03, 2011 10:25 am ]
Post subject: 
OK, early was 121, 122 was later, and 130 is just plain bigger.

Thanks Gentlemen, I'll add the info to my notes.

I must say that I'm surprised a one tooth difference in pitch (roughly 0.82%) was so visually noticable, even to a pattern maker's eye.
Author:  Exner Geek [ Thu Mar 03, 2011 5:22 pm ]
Post subject: 
I believe that the 60-61 Slant Six flywheel acutally has a 148 tooth ring gear, that's why the teeth appear to be markedly smaller.
Author:  Old6rodder [ Thu Mar 03, 2011 7:45 pm ]
Post subject: 
Quote:
I believe that the 60-61 Slant Six flywheel acutally has a 148 tooth ring gear, that's why the teeth appear to be markedly smaller.
That'd make a bit more sense.
Author:  Dart270 [ Fri Mar 04, 2011 6:54 am ]
Post subject: 
Thanks, Seymour. I was hoping someone would check/correct me on that.

Lou
Author:  Charrlie_S [ Tue Mar 22, 2011 9:07 am ]
Post subject: 
Quote:
Someone sent Ross a /6 bellhousing with a 5.600" input bearing retainer hole. I'm wondering who came up with that and what trans used such a large IBR? Anyhow, this means the QT bell has a 5.6" hole and comes with adapter rings for the smaller IBRs. There are multiple 3 and 4-speed bolt patterns on the back of the bellhousing so most any factory Chrysler trans should fit. .
I have no idea, who that might have been. I sent Ross a A-833od bell and the Mopar prints for the belhousing. I just checked the bellhousing, that Ross returned to me, and it has the 5.125 center hole. Maybe they have another application in mind, that would require the larger hole.
Author:  Old6rodder [ Tue Mar 22, 2011 10:29 am ]
Post subject: 
Quote:
Quote:
Someone sent Ross a /6 bellhousing with a 5.600" input bearing retainer hole. I'm wondering who came up with that and what trans used such a large IBR? Anyhow, this means the QT bell has a 5.6" hole and comes with adapter rings for the smaller IBRs. There are multiple 3 and 4-speed bolt patterns on the back of the bellhousing so most any factory Chrysler trans should fit. .
I have no idea, who that might have been. I sent Ross a A-833od bell and the Mopar prints for the belhousing. I just checked the bellhousing, that Ross returned to me, and it has the 5.125 center hole. Maybe they have another application in mind, that would require the larger hole.
It appears that the larger hole is to allow for an adapter ring insert. The oversized hole in the bell has a stepped lip that fits the stepped lip on the outsides of the two rings (for the two factory 3 & 4 speed nose sizes) they supplied with mine. That lip also makes the rings a "captured" fit piece, not needing to be welded in, thus changeable.

This makes even more sense if you're entertaining the notion of a possible "conversion" model at a later date. Far easier to simply make another ring and poke different mount holes. That ring could even be fitted backward into an additional plate, if needed to space a longer nose out.

All in all, a well thought out piece it seems.
Author:  daniel_depetro [ Tue Apr 12, 2011 9:38 am ]
Post subject: 
Glad to see this finally became a reality!
Page 6 of 7 All times are UTC-08:00
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Limited
https://www.phpbb.com/