Close



Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 26 to 35 of 35
  1. #26

    Default

    Very interesting. Looks like the BMW 325IX was only imported into the US from 88-91. Would make getting getting hands on the parts tricky. A parts car would be ideal. I don't see a front driveshaft in you last picture, or was that just to show the Getrag 262/265 bolted to the t-5 bellhousing? I wonder how much room the front differential takes up?

    Jess
    Previously owned;
    1979 Mustang, v6 swapped to EFI 393, custom installed m122 blower, 4r70w trans, Megasquirt II, T-top swaped in.
    1990 Mustang, 545 BBF, C-4 with brake, ladder bars.
    1983 Mustang, 1984 SVO Mustang
    1984 Mustang convertible, v6 swapped to 351
    1986 Mustang GT, 1989 Mustang GT convertible
    1992 Mustang coupe, 4 swapped to 302

  2. #27
    FEP Super Member xctasy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    Dunedin 9011, New Zealand, South Pacific
    Posts
    3,350

    Default

    Hmmm, Jess, here's how it goes.

    I guess on reading, there's a BS element.


    Let me explain...

    This is sadly not proper 460 Big Block Weapons grade munitions, but is good enough for anything up to about 320 lb-ft in a AWD car according to the guys that ran them in the awd BMW 5 series cars.


    You can also have a ZF awd automatic, which is much stronger, quite reasonable, or the stick shift 260 AWD Getrag.

    The 260 is a short housing beefed up 240 series Getrag trans with a very short centre section, and a one piece case. Ford F150 4.9/MN12 Tbird style ToyoKogyo Mazda and 2001 onwards 5R55 style all in one casting gearbox.

    Although its very strong, its doesn't have brass synchros like the 262/265. And its been made one piece for strength, lightness and NVH reduction.

    So to fit a 260 awd 325iX to a Ford, it'll need the old AOD to Big Block 460 trick of cutting the bellhousing off, and using the center spigot to hold a 17 mm adaptor plate or direct bolt to whatever Ford bellhousing.

    Despite the numerical sequence, all the 262 and 265 gearboxes were earlier two piece gearboxes, and exceptionally strong white box goods for common West German and English consumption.

    For Opels, Volvo's and BMW's, Getrag made a common 262 stamped gearbox with a detachable bellhousing. 262 or 265 were its call names, but the early ones were stamped 262. Then the non dog leg 265 came out, same transmission. Brass sychro rings, very tough.

    The early two year only Getrag "262 case" was the 262 Volvo 4 speed M50 1975-1977

    The Getrag 265 was the Volvo 5 speed M51 also used in the BMW 1977-onwards E23 "7 Series" and 1976- onwards E24 "6 Series". Early ones were all stamped 262. Then the 265 change, without the dog leg

    Then Jaguar used it non log leg style, with 265 stamped on its 5 speed in line six cylinder cars from 1983 to 1996. Same as Opel's and BMW's

    BMW Getrags for its little M60 derived 20 degree in line sixes, later called the M20. Same as the M21 Lincoln L series Turbo Diesel.

    All that stuff got a downgraded Getrag 240 and 260 series transmissions supplied when the 2002 replacement E21 came on line.

    The 240 series, E21's
    The 260 series, the nastly low reving Ford Fairmont 3.3 style Eta engine 325e/528e etc,

    Redline 4700...sounds like a NAStruck movie script



    the e stood for error...

    and the non e 325i's after the proper high preformance engines returned in 1987.


    The 325iX (1987-1991) transmission was in fact changed to an integrated one piece alloy casting which first came out in the eta 325e.

    Although it lookes like the same box as the integrated casting Getrag 240, from the little 318I/320i/323i, and is non dog leg first,
    It is officially a 260 Getrag sadly. Internally, similar, but not the same.

    The only 262/265 Getrag 5 speed and AWD version was this prototype Manta 400 4WD layout,



    and I guess BMW wanted to ensure it met its 145 pound increase weight target

    the Getrag 260 four wheel drive S54 engine 325Ix buildup post!

    https://grassrootsmotorsports.com/fo...p/87203/page1/










    Video's

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tXwKkOo18JI

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wo3FRxbux00

    This last video is somewhat controversial

    https://youtu.be/cwbIW1Zma0U

    Audis response...

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IMfUrS98Kbk

  3. #28

    Default

    1984_Ghia_Ford_Vignale_Mustang_01 looks like a Subaru SVX facelifts

  4. #29
    New User
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Location
    Lawrence Swamp. Amherst, MA
    Posts
    22

    Default hello again (wuz heard a cry from long ago)

    Late to the show ("Yeah, I know, but the other thread woulda added 5 more yrs...
    I see the red frnt drive shaft in the 2nd to last pic above (the all wheel drive wiki).

    I've heard the few 'viscous coupled' (just porche, wolwo &...audi? is it?) have the mid ships 'nut'
    & the hydro lines all going out to each wheel it go from (nevah seen'em)...

    Y not hook oneadem uptoa efi v8 ina fox?
    Seems lighter and EVEN MORE to the stated yr round usability.
    Easier to spray off the salt @ day's end on our continent (for the other
    interest, long term life time).
    Chad
    Seek: fox station wagon (esp LTD/Marquis)
    Maintain, upgrade ol Bronk
    chrlsful@aol.com

  5. #30

    Default

    This guy has had this combo for a while, I would contact him.

    https://www.yellowbullet.com/threads...street.808818/
    82 ford fairmont futura
    quicktime turbosystems 70mm turbo
    10.67@128.38

  6. #31
    New User
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Location
    Lawrence Swamp. Amherst, MA
    Posts
    22

    Default AWD fox

    Quote Originally Posted by slomont View Post
    This guy has had this combo for a while, I would contact him.
    https://www.yellowbullet.com/threads...street.808818/
    Not the direction I'd go at all, but very interesting rig.(5 - 10 psi is my rate of speed)

    That's helpful, nevah knew GM had the viscous couple...will certainly ck that prt out.. Wonder
    how they set the whole thing up (what sends the juice to center diff, what sits at the 4 wheels, etc)?
    Thanks for the post-back !
    Chad
    Seek: fox station wagon (esp LTD/Marquis)
    Maintain, upgrade ol Bronk
    chrlsful@aol.com

  7. #32

    Default

    Would an AWD Areostar 4.0 work. I know the wheelbase is 18" longer.

  8. #33
    FEP Super Member xctasy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    Dunedin 9011, New Zealand, South Pacific
    Posts
    3,350

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Messe View Post
    Would an AWD Areostar 4.0 work. I know the wheelbase is 18" longer.
    Front Aerostar IFS for AWD has the same issues IRS systems have for Foxes....Width.

    Ranger FX4 and 95-2001 Explorers and the carry over FX4 and short wheel base Sports with the later IFS are really 58.5" track vehicles with offset changes.

    Torsion bars are very unpredictable, Mopar (all the re-unitized 1960 to the before Aspen 1978 based M body's had large camber change longitudinal uni-body torsion bars), Alfa Romeo (1976-1989 Alfetta variants of the 75, Guilletta, Alfa 6 rear drive compacts, same issues) and VW and Porsche (All air cooled Dak Daks, 356's and the 901 based 911/930, same issues but different configurations).


    Each spent years perfecting them, but the Ranger/ X-splorer steering rack and the AWD axle is narrow and an easy swap. The geometry is risky due to chamber changes, acceptable for an SUV before the late 90's 23 psi tire litigation writ against Fords Explorer, but the Aerostar has a much more stable system with no torsion bars.







    The true goodness of Fords MN12, VN1, and the extra work on the IFS Explorer was over shadowed by other matters, but Ford really did some big work on getting the front suspensions systems tracking well with the rear axle configurations.


    Track width for a later 5.0 is 56.9 or 57.9 inches front and 57 inches rear.

    Foxes are generally 4 lug while SN is 5 lug


    The AWD Areostar track is much wider than the Fox 4 SN95.

    The SN95 is 0.75" wider PER axle, so its IFS track should be 59.4 if same offset wheels are used.



    New Edge is another 1.5" wider PER axle pover the Fox, so 60.9" should be the target front track width.

    Nearly all 5 lug Mustang wheels are backspaced for Fox 4 SN95 or NewEdge SN99 so everything is changed to suit the platform changes.


    Yes, the VN1 Windstar/Aerostar IFS was essentially a front mounted steering gear amalgam of short arm long spindle wishbones on a Ranger base with Mustang II/Fox rack and pinion steering.

    That chassis was a twin section straight through uni-body, so meeting the parts up with the Fox front chassis might be an issue.

    https://www.locostusa.com/forums/vie...=9269&start=75
    Quote Originally Posted by locostusa.com
    Aerostar front diff looks most interesting.....Aerostar front track is quoted as 62 inches......

    Only Aerostar diff ratio listed anywhere is 3.73 and that may be a bit limiting.
    But with an overdrive fifth gear 3.73 is still a practical ratio.

    Dana do list three reverse rotation type (2) ratios for this diff, 3.07 3.27 and 3.73

    The AWD option forced a complete redesign of the VN1 IFS

    Here is the first version on a Studebaker Champion full chassis.



    see https://studebaker-info.org/Tech/Fra.../aerosusp.html

    https://jalopnik.com/at-3-900-could-...e-y-1839690315


    Quote Originally Posted by jalopnik.com
    When Ford was designing the model, they naturally sourced as many parts and subsystems from other, existing models in the effort to shave off costs and development time. That meant that the van used a lot of parts from the Ranger pickup and Explorer SUV, including the drivetrain and some of the steering and suspension bits.

    Both of those small trucks were body-on-frame, however, and Ford felt that form factor would limit available interior space so in the Aerostar the parts were bolted to a proprietary uni-body structure. Frame rails were welded below to aid in distributing towing loads across the undercarriage. As designed, the Aerostar could tow up to 5,000 pounds. This unique chassis carried the Aerostar through more than a decade of production across just a single iteration.





    The awd version
    parts too were an amalgam.

    Description of Item:1996 Ford Aerostar - El Cajon, CA

    "http://sandiego.freeclassifieds.com/classified_ads/Vehicles_For_Sale/Minivan/pD470565N1KRB0OU5HwEbw==#"


    "http://sandiego.freeclassifieds.com/classified_ads/Vehicles_For_Sale/Minivan/pD470565N1KRB0OU5HwEbw==#"

    "http://sandiego.freeclassifieds.com/classified_ads/Vehicles_For_Sale/Minivan/pD470565N1KRB0OU5HwEbw==#"


    "http://sandiego.freeclassifieds.com/classified_ads/Vehicles_For_Sale/Minivan/pD470565N1KRB0OU5HwEbw==#"

  9. #34

    Default

    this thread has receive many AMAZING posts since the last time I visited it. Well done!

    Too bad noone has ventured to build a bolt-in option. Imagine how much better the average fox would do in the 1/4 mile or on the roadcourse with the benefit of AWD.

    I think about this every time I lean on my tired old 86 and it manages to put a pair of 245/45/17's up in smoke while going 35 MPH down the street. Entertaining yet annoying. That vehicle will eventually see a 353 with somewhere around 500 HP under the hood. Even a 315/35/17 will have its work cut out and then some. Ah well, a guy can dream of better ways to plant that kind of power to the ground.
    Last edited by erratic50; 02-19-2020 at 07:00 PM.

  10. #35
    FEP Super Member xctasy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    Dunedin 9011, New Zealand, South Pacific
    Posts
    3,350

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by erratic50 View Post
    this thread has receive many AMAZING posts since the last time I visited it. Well done!

    Too bad noone has ventured to build a bolt-in option. Imagine how much better the average fox would do in the 1/4 mile or on the roadcourse with the benefit of AWD.

    I think about this every time I lean on my tired old 86 and it manages to put a pair of 245/45/17's up in smoke while going 35 MPH down the street. Entertaining yet annoying. That vehicle will eventually see a 353 with somewhere around 500 HP under the hood. Even a 315/35/17 will have its work cut out and then some. Ah well, a guy can dream of better ways to plant that kind of power to the ground.
    I think http://vb.foureyedpride.com/showthre...pe-Build/page1 onwards is really a summary of all that.






    The basics are there. This is what reverse engineering is about.

    I'm certain a lighter gearbox Nissan Stagea AWD or Skyline style, that has a drive shaft on the right hand side, would liberate space.

    The front mounted steering box should stay, and the zone is halfway between the R32-R33-R34 Skyline


    "https://www.google.com/url?sa=i&url=https%3A%2F%2Frawbrokerage.com%2Fprod ucts%2Fppg-nissan-skyline-gtr-rb26-sequential-transmission-6-spd&psig=AOvVaw3epRf-Xw_jra3DopNglQgt&ust=1582354984588000&source=image s&cd=vfe&ved=0CAIQjRxqFwoTCIDLyvOJ4ucCFQAAAAAdAAAA ABAK"




    and the MTX75 version of the Scorpio/Sierra XR4X4i, and Escort Cosworth 4X4.



    Actually, the Ford Focus V8 conversion with the front drive IFS and its front half-shafts and McPherson struts still attached.





Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •