|
Mike, your question generated irresistable curiosity on my part. It's hard to reply when the question gives little clue as to what kind of usage the result is to satisfy. You mentioned "almost bolt-in" which suggested a minimalist project having the least alterations necessary to have a workable V8 engine and driveline present. Hence I assumed keeping the suspension and steering.
Now that you've let on that front suspension and steering is eligible for complete replacement, that eases many of the shoehorn issues. Straight line acceleration is spoken of. That clarifies matters. Exhaust headpipes if forward originating could go outboard of the frame horns and pass rearward above or below the lower suspension wishbones, inboard of the springs. If beginning aft of the suspension, they could go outboard and then down and to the rear.
Clearance between the unibody frame rails at the rear of the engine bay remains an issue because their top edge sweeps up past the height of the exhaust ports and manifolds, so the engine width issue remains, unless you cut the front frame away and fabricate a new, wider (or lower or tube trusswork) frame structure from the firewall forward. I gather that the Duett sta wags were dropped onto a separate frame. This suggests building a separate frame and dropping a 544 body shell, minus (rusty?) floorpan and tunnels, down onto it. So there's a complete change of focus for you, from a bolt-in engine to bolt-on 544 coachwork on a new chassis.
There's no way a near minimalist, bolt-in V8 and driveline swap is going to be serviceable in depth while still installed in the car. But this was true of air-cooled VW engines and drivelines. And one of the traditional purposes of swapping in a US V8 in Euro and UK cars was to get rid of frequent, in-depth power plant servicing chores. My 37-yr old 289 has yet to be rebuilt, same for clutch and tranny. YMMV, as Phil puts it.
All the old Mopar hemi engines are very wide and very heavy, even the smaller-block Dodges. I have a '57 392 here, that I dismantled at the seller's and transported in pieces. It's a hernia machine. There was a Brit Hemi V8 of 2.5L made in the early 60's by Daimler. It would not perform differently than a modern 2.5 L inline 4. The early 70's Triumph Stag 3L V8 was wide, low-powered, and troublesome. Later 60 deg V6's and the VR6 are better bets in the 3L range. A stroked 302 Ford with lightweight heads and other parts, fuel injected, pre-installed in a Ford mule until sorted out and proven reliable, then shoehorned into a 544 prepared with new front suspension and modified bodywork, would seem to fit your clarified vision. The trick is to keep your mind and eye open to all the options of scope and detail, and weigh them against what you want to get out of the project, both in the designing and building, and in the results on the road. Who you want to impress with it, including yourself, is part of that.
Now go find a 544 and scope it out.
|
