TCCoA Forums banner

...oh yeah, it's another DOHC swap question, and other metaphorical pontifications.

8K views 48 replies 18 participants last post by  Raymondo112 
#1 ·
Hi.

At the expense of being bombarded with a Normandy-assault-size volume of verbal barrages...I have a couple of questions concerning...yes, the often-idolized, yet often-ridiculed DOHC swap.

And yes, I have perused the 'Search' function on numerous occasions...I've spent quite a bit of time looking in there, but have not really found what it is I'm looking for, so here I am.

I now own a '97 4.6 car. I also now own (for very little cash), a low-mile T45 5-speed out of a Cobra, and a 1994 Lincoln MK8 parts car, which includes a 108K-mile DOHC motor.

Thrown casually into this mix is my original 1992 5.0 car, which I'm really contemplating paying a group of gang members to break into my house, do a bunch of quasi-believable yelling and threatening, and have them steal this car, just so I can have an excuse to go look for something else that's more suitable for a DOHC swap...

Now that this is all out of the way, I'd like to hang onto the '92 5.0 car, and swap in the DOHC/5-speed combo (somewhat like Racecougar and his '90 Cougar), and just keep the '97 4.6 car as a relatively-untouched daily driver.

However, if I am going to have to completely rewire the '92 5.0 car with what sounds like either a 1996 or 1997 4.6 engine and related harness (which I don't have, and i'm not interested in using the MK8 wiring), I'll be honest with you, I'm not really up for this sort of thing, especially if I have to first clear out the existing 5.0 wiring, and attempt to splice it into the car. There are also some aftermarket stand-alone harnesses (or at least they look like a stand-alone), but once again, I'm looking at something of an investment vs. return, in that is this sort of thing even worth it?

....which brings me to the current DOHC swap searches; as it's been mentioned, ad-nauseam, that idiots first utilize the 'search' function here, and in this case, I have looked, and while there are countless mentions of these mythical DOHC swaps being performed, unless I skipped over something, and more than likely I did, all that really ever shows up are the occasional 'update' picture, and "ask so-and-so about what he did on his."

1. Is there a fairly-detailed swap thread out there, concerning the MK8 swap, either to a 1996-1997 4.6 car, or more-detailed version of Racecougar's work, where a 4.6 was swapped into an older Bird?

2. Unless I add a blower/turbo/whatever to the MK8 engine, is this powerplant monstrosity (in N/A form) really worth the effort? I'm recalling seat time spent in a customer's 1996 Cobra that I did a lot of work with, and it was a blast to drive. I wouldn't mind duplicating this car in MN12 form, as the MN12 has much better suspension than the covered-wagon Mustang platforms thoughout the years.

Any thoughts about this one?

3. Is it possible that the 4.6 DOHC and 5-speed would be a better idea for the 1997 4.6 car that I'm currently daily-driving now?

4. Sell the '92 and buy another 1996-1997 4.6 car? I'd like a Cougar this time.

As usual, any comments would be appreciated, and hey, it's not like we're doing anything else anyway, lol.
 
See less See more
#2 ·
1. Is there a fairly-detailed swap thread out there, concerning the MK8 swap, either to a 1996-1997 4.6 car, or more-detailed version of Racecougar's work, where a 4.6 was swapped into an older Bird?

2. Unless I add a blower/turbo/whatever to the MK8 engine, is this powerplant monstrosity (in N/A form) really worth the effort? I'm recalling seat time spent in a customer's 1996 Cobra that I did a lot of work with, and it was a blast to drive. I wouldn't mind duplicating this car in MN12 form, as the MN12 has much better suspension than the covered-wagon Mustang platforms thoughout the years.

Any thoughts about this one?

3. Is it possible that the 4.6 DOHC and 5-speed would be a better idea for the 1997 4.6 car that I'm currently daily-driving now?

4. Sell the '92 and buy another 1996-1997 4.6 car? I'd like a Cougar this time.

As usual, any comments would be appreciated, and hey, it's not like we're doing anything else anyway, lol.
1. "Is there a....", no. There is no one single all inclusive thread. You have to piece everything together from all the different threads.

2. Worth the effort? Lets just assume you're going to get tuned since you already know that the timing tables in the MN12 4.6 EEC are completely wrong for a DOHC engine----that said, you'll likely put down about 250 rwhp on 87, and maybe around 260rwhp on 93 octane BUT through a 5-sp trans. Use any auto, and drop-10-15rwhp from those figures. You tell us if it is worth.....

3. For the complexity involved in either donor car, you'd be better off with a PI engine IMO. I get the vibe that you don't want to deal with "nitty gritty details" or "hassles". The DOHC alone (let alone the 5-sp trans) is 120% full of those two things.

4. Getting a 4.6 96/97 MN12 would simplify A LOT of things if you're serious about this.

Besides you'd have to do a heck of a lot more to "match" the feel of that Cobra with the DOHC. It likely had gears, and with the lighter weight, well it's just like more torque multiplication.
 
#4 ·
2. Worth the effort? Lets just assume you're going to get tuned since you already know that the timing tables in the MN12 4.6 EEC are completely wrong for a DOHC engine----that said, you'll likely put down about 250 rwhp on 87, and maybe around 260rwhp on 93 octane BUT through a 5-sp trans. Use any auto, and drop-10-15rwhp from those figures.
Idk about 235 rwhp then again I'll be making two more runs on the mustang at work soon. With my mods through my built auto what you see in my sig is all I could squeeze out of it (with a conservative tune) heat soaked, but my next couple of runs are going to set new "base line" numbers for work soon to come. I'll be running an unloaded pull on the mustang dyno to simulate dynajet numbers, and get weather corrected SAE numbers now that we have a new weather station add on.

I'll also be the first to try out our new built in Wideband AFR since I have tuned out rear o2's, it will be interesting to compare "professional lab quality" to my Zeitronix setup.

Back to the OP, good luck I can't decide for you, but I enjoy my DOHC swap everyday. I would swap to stick (TR-6060) but with my bad left foot/handicap I can't push the clutch, maybe someday I'll do a hand lever hydraulic clutch and/or dual clutch plate setup. Time will tell.
 
#3 ·
My answers would very closely resemble those already posted by GM. It can certainly be done in your '92 5.0L car, but it's a heck of a lot of work. It would be MUCH easier to start with a 4.6L MN12.
 
#5 ·
It's been years, but I think mine put down 243rwhp/246rwtq when it was a stock NA, stock 4R70W, 4.10:1 arrangement.
 
#6 ·
EvilMooseofDoom said:
Is there a fairly-detailed swap thread out there, concerning the MK8 swap, either to a 1996-1997 4.6 car, or more-detailed version of Racecougar's work, where a 4.6 was swapped into an older Bird?

SCTBird1994 has a really nice build thread over on SCCoA--->>My Latest Project..

He's using the 4.6L DOHC & 4R70W from a Mark VIII in his 1991 Thunderbird..

I don't know if it goes into detail enough for you, but it's definitely worth checking out..



Rayo..
 
#8 · (Edited)
I don't know if it goes into detail enough for you, but it's definitely worth checking out..

Rayo..
I'm not trying to have a complaint moment, even though I make complaining a higher art form...I guess with the amount of swaps I've seen over the years, and all the other work/swaps/tech/etc that I've gone through on message board after message board, I guess I'm still a bit shocked to see that people will to to the trouble of telling other people about their exploits...but do it in such a manner that often does not help anyone else who might be wishing to duplicate the first person's efforts.

"I did such and such swap! It was a difficult task, aye, and many dubloons were spent, many a tear was shed, and many a wife were divorced, but I've done it, and I've done it in such a way that it will actually be more confusing to anyone else following my work as compared to if I had never done it at all! Arrgghh! Pieces of Eight!!"

Anyway, you get my point.

Beyond that, I thank all of you for participating. I find myself with a fresh new pile of parts that could be turned into something good and fun to drive, but only if I can separate the time away from my job, my wife and kids, and my horrific writing career to put something together.


http://www.sccoa.com/forums/showthread.php?t=110455&highlight=latest+project

I'm looking at that right now. Am I correct in suggesting that in the first picture or two, that the passenger-side harness which runs over that side shock tower is the main lead from the ECM?

This thread is enlightening, but once again goes back to what I'm saying: There are extreme 'before and after' shots, where major steps have been done, and the photos skip 8 or 9 steps. Argh. Oh yeah...and he never finished the car. Curses.


So far as question #3 and #4 are concerned, I already own a '97 4.6 car, so a proposed DOHC swap would be much easier. I know we're all batting around what might appear to be ridiculously-low RWHP numbers, but I've got quite a bit of seat time in a few different 1996-1997 Cobras, and with just a few mods, they're almost a bit too quick for daily-driver/street duty anyway. I'd like to build my own version of that model of Cobra, but with increased interior and trunk room, not to mention a more-comfortable ride, especially around the misery that makes up the streets around my town.

I'd like to do something fun with my mom's old '92, but unless I wish to spend a small fortune building a pushrod Windsor, installing a heavy 460, or just biting the bullet and tossing a SBC in there, there's not really any reason for my hanging onto the car. I'd like to see if it might be possible to do a 4.6 swap, but not to the point where I've got the entire front half of the car apart in order to make it happen, I simply don't have the time for it, nor do I have the space to keep a half-stripped car parked in the corner of a garage somewhere.

And for some strange reason, I've been having 4.6 stuff quite literally dropping out of the sky, and into my driveway for little to no cost. Hell, the '97 4.6 NPI is almost just perfect for the area around here, but I wouldn't mind rowing my own gears a bit, and make it just a bit quicker.
 
#10 ·
My advice would be if you want a DOHC 5-speed bird, swap it into your 97, or get another 4.6 bird to start with. If you are just looking for more power, an explorer PI swap would be a direct bolt-in swap for your 97, and would get you almost as much power with no re-wiring at all. Doing a PI swap with some better cams will actually get you more power than the stock DOHC 4.6, again without having to re-wire anything. Doing this swap into the 92 would be way more work. As for what needs to be done, if you are starting with a 4.6 car, the easiest way to do the swap is to remove the old SOHC 4.6 with the engine harness still attached, label all the connectors, then lay the harness across the DOHC motor, and modify the harness outside of the car so everything plugs in, then you drop the DOHC back into the bird with the harness already attached, plug it in to the existing Tbird wiring, get a tune, and an rpm switch to operate the IMRCs if you are keeping them, and then you are done. Swapping it into a 5.0 car will require first completely rewiring the car as a 94+ 4.6 car, and then doing all the engine swap work from there.
 
#12 ·
Being so new to this hobby, I am trying to understand the thought process that goes into this decision. My '97 is a blast to drive, even in stock condition. What would be the advantages/ disadvantages of a supercharger as compared to an engine swap, if one of the main goals is to preserve/improve the driving experience. I see lots of info about HP, but what about mid-range torque? Thanks for this educational moment. KF4sign (Warren)
 
#13 ·
If you do a PI engine swap without a tune, or gears, or converter, then most of the time it will drive exactly the same and will have similar mid-range power and torque. The DOHC is actually down on mid-range power compared to the 2V, but it more than makes up for it with upper rpm power, so with drivetrain mods, it can be a lot faster and a lot more fun. For mid-range power and keeping drivability, nothing beats a positive displacement blower like the SVO or the TorkTech kit, but many of our cars are getting higher mileage and people may not be comfortable bolting a blower on a 150K+ mile 15+ year old engine, and if you have to swap the engine anyway, you might as well upgrade it to a PI motor. This way you have more performance, and a newer engine, and still have the ability to bolt a blower on it if you want.
 
#15 ·
For a daily driver, you will not be spending much time over 3300 rpms; so the car will feel more sluggish around town, because of the lower midrange power.

Eliminating the IMRCs makes it worse.

A PI swap is much easier. (On a 96, anyway)
 
#16 ·
A DOHC swap isn't that much more difficult, it's only a few more wires and a bit more patience on a 94/95 or 96/97 4.6 car. The 5.0 chassis I'm sure could be adapted just like the 3.8 but at that point you'd be doing like RaceCougar did and rewiring most of the car.
 
#17 ·
Y would rebuild the 5.0 with better parts it should be a good platform for the upgrades for the 5.0 also the trans. Not to compared for the electrical nightmare for swaping a dohc into it. If it is a tremic t45 the bell housing should bolt off and swap on a bell housing for the 5.0 that you have in it. The down side to that did the car come with a 5 speed to start with if not you wound have to find a donor car that was a 5 speed. if it is a 5 speed see if the t45 can swap the bell housing from the 4.6 to the 5.0 bell housing. I found out that the t45 t56 bell housing could come off but i am not sure on the year of car you got your t45 from. the t45 that came out of my mustang when i got that t56. the bell housing from the t45 came off and a 5.0 bell housing went on i am not sure where to get one other than jeggs or summit. I know those two sites has a lot of parts for the 5.0 for engine. go that route
 
#32 ·
I'm done with small-block Ford pushrod engines. The 302 is essentially a 54-year-old block design which should have never really been stretched for 40-something years, at least without some meaningful redesign, or at least a stronger block. And while the 351W isn't a bad block to start off with, for some strange reason, it costs a small fortune to build one.

While the 4.6 isn't the greatest power-producing monsters out there, the fact is that this engine platform is one hell of an engine, in that Ford was actually trying to sneak some good ideas into the motor, the problem is that they only worked for the 4.6...and not the 5.4. Ford is finding themselves out of a very key market in that not a single f**k is given about any of the mod motors concerning modern-day hot-rod builds, nothing like the LS engines from Chevy...which is a design I believe was somewhat-swiped from Ford, when it unceremoniously dumped the Windsor platform, after milking it for four decades.

My advice would be if you want a DOHC 5-speed bird, swap it into your 97, or get another 4.6 bird to start with. If you are just looking for more power, an explorer PI swap would be a direct bolt-in swap for your 97, and would get you almost as much power with no re-wiring at all. Doing a PI swap with some better cams will actually get you more power than the stock DOHC 4.6, again without having to re-wire anything. Doing this swap into the 92 would be way more work. As for what needs to be done, if you are starting with a 4.6 car, the easiest way to do the swap is to remove the old SOHC 4.6 with the engine harness still attached, label all the connectors, then lay the harness across the DOHC motor, and modify the harness outside of the car so everything plugs in, then you drop the DOHC back into the bird with the harness already attached, plug it in to the existing Tbird wiring, get a tune, and an rpm switch to operate the IMRCs if you are keeping them, and then you are done. Swapping it into a 5.0 car will require first completely rewiring the car as a 94+ 4.6 car, and then doing all the engine swap work from there.
I've been staring at the MK8 engine bay a bit...not liking the room it takes up anyway. Given that the '97 already runs pretty well...and how I'm not complaining too loudly about what space the 2V does take up...I'm going to abandon the DOHC idea, as I'm not really too keen on $1200+ for a set of DOHC cams, and ditto with the SCP headers, either (not a fan of the integral cat manifolds of the DOHC).

I am looking at combining the DOHC short block with either NPI or PI heads, however. I like the idea of dropping some weight off of this car.


I think you should keep it a secret if you go the SBC route in your '92 LOL
Ssshhh. I don't think anyone else heard anything.
 
#19 ·
The stock mark viii integrated cat fits fine as long as you insert the steering shaft afterwards, and have the wiper cowling removed, and use an engine load leveler, or drop the car on top of the motor installed on the subframe. Or get Kooks, not a cheap option but it fits equally tight.
 
#21 · (Edited)
I find it a tad ironic that the people that write the most thorough mark viii swap threads end up not completing the task.
 
#25 ·
They can get stuck either way; The 97 engine I started with had one stuck in each position. :)

There was so much crap in there I had to use a paint scraper to find the screws to take them apart. :(
 
#28 ·
racecougar said:
Bingo. Honestly, I haven't even considered writing another article after attempting to get two of mine posted to the tech articles section here about a decade ago.
If it's any consolation..I've found most of your "how to" or "this is how I did it" posts very informative..

I also agree with SCTBird1994 though...

There's a point where you have to draw the line between spoon fooding, and helping someone out that's willing to put in the effort to turn the wrenches..

Then again there's some of us that like to be different, and don't want to hand over our playbook so someone else can copy our work.. :zdunno:



Rayo..
 
#31 ·
If it's any consolation..I've found most of your "how to" or "this is how I did it" posts very informative..

I also agree with SCTBird1994 though...

There's a point where you have to draw the line between spoon fooding, and helping someone out that's willing to put in the effort to turn the wrenches..

Then again there's some of us that like to be different, and don't want to hand over our playbook so someone else can copy our work.. :zdunno:

Rayo..
Agreed, entirely.


However, believe it or not, given my 2004 join date, while I've not been that active in here, there are a couple of sites in which I've invested...everything.

I've gotten burned, almost every damn time. Not by the rank and file that inhabit them, but by idiot admins who were simply in charge because they were a personal friend or something. I've written articles, I've given as much tech advice as I possibly could, hell, I've sent out parts for free at times, for strangers I'll never meet, or never speak to over a phone.

There's actually some psychological work done on this phenomenon, on which I've written a small research paper, but I'll not bore everyone to death with that...just know that it explains, almost to the very last detail, why everyone who posts on a message board behaves the way they do, whether they're the greatest guy ever, or the biggest prick in the seven lower hells.

To that end, knowing what I do now about message board behavior...I am still continually astonished as to what people will do for others, simply trying to be helpful. Aside from legendary internet pissing matches which take all the attention at times...it's still phenomenal to see what devotion people will give to assisting other car owners, even when the targets of their attention are occasionally absolute idiots.

My personal frustration is just with how they're written at times. If you're going to write it, write it. If you're not going to, don't, and if you're going to just stop halfway through...then delete what you've posted.

I'm really a lot like Yoda in this one. Do it, or don't do it. Make the attempt, and if you complete it, hell yes, and if you fail miserably, hell yes again, as a least you're attempting to help, and failure can at least show others what not to do.

But don't try.

I couldnt tell you how many times Ive given a bunch of information about everything necessary to complete the swap over private messages or threads like this one .. and then I never hear back from those people. I dont mind helping when I see an effort being made, or when people contact me directly .. but im not willing to write a technical article with step by step, including pictures without some form of compensation.
Once again, to paraphrase Yoda: Simply don't do it. While you've realized that writing massive articles for message boards doesn't pay you a damn thing, yet the message board makes money from your free labor via' page hits/advertising dollars...once again, nobody is pointing a gun at your head to make you help.

I'm curious about what you did with that one car, simply because I've somehow ended up with a crapload of parts and cars in the space of two weeks, and I'm curious if it might be a feasible idea to whittle all of this stuff down to two cars, and make two great ones out of a giant pile of garbage. What you posted, in the original thread anyway, showed me that I have no business attempting that kind of swap, therefore you did actually help me, and I seriously thank you (and the rest of you here as well) for the time you've put in to answer my questions.

See? Glass is always half-full, sir. Half-full.


Bingo. Honestly, I haven't even considered writing another article after attempting to get two of mine posted to the tech articles section here about a decade ago.
Exactly.
 
#29 ·
I couldnt tell you how many times Ive given a bunch of information about everything necessary to complete the swap over private messages or threads like this one .. and then I never hear back from those people. I dont mind helping when I see an effort being made, or when people contact me directly .. but im not willing to write a technical article with step by step, including pictures without some form of compensation.
 
#43 ·
No, something is going to happen. The DOHC in the '92 definitely isn't one of them however, and more than likely, the DOHC (heads, anyway) aren't going into the 1997. However, since I already own them...I'm still juggling, but leaning towards the MK8 short block and either PI or NPI heads, and maybe cams. I'm kind of happy with the way the car drives right now.

Getting back - was the Windsor pushrod design overdue to be retired (and it wasn't 54 years either, but more like 40!), or did Ford drop the ball dropping it? Can't have it both ways, ya know.

RwP
1. The windsor is around 54 years old....now, but spent around 41 years in production, with several variations.

2. Ford dropped the ball in not updating the windsor, as it was fairly a space-saving design. The vast bulk of the 4.6, 5.4, AND 6.8 V10-equipped vehicles out there are major pains in the ass to work on.

3. While Ford did do some good things in designing the 4.6, 5.4, and V10...they were designed for a future that did not match what the competition was doing in the way of power output...at least in the case of the LS, anyway. The 4.6 is an excellent engine, gets great gas mileage...but is still down on power when comparing at least the 5.3 LS engine...unless you add a turbo or blower.

I really like the 4.6, and like the V10 for some strange reason...but I've been disappointed in every 5.4-equipped vehicle I've ever driven, especially when compared to the 5.3 trucks from Chevy.

The Navigator 4V 5.4's are out of the discussion here, simply because they're so ridiculously-huge in external dimension.


Well, that was quick.
Well, I love the way the DOHC looks under the hood...but the less fabrication work the better, and there's still the whole "Jiminy Freaking Christmas, there's no room to work on it!" thing. I've got more time to look at both cars this week, hell, who knows. One of the ideas might involve parting out the '92 for parts for the MK8, I really like the MK8 interiors. This is a weird thing, I've never actually owned three cars at one time that I could turn into toys, but at least one needs to go, possibly two.


1. ... okay

2. No, I have three jobs and three kids, between that, I dont have much time for anything anymore.

3. You can lead a horse to water ..

4. Ask away, if youre legitametely interested in persuing this dream, your questions will be answered - in the end you may realize the time and money is not worth the effort.

5. Mine is one of the few builds that still exists with pictures of progress - it was just a different way of doing it. I have built 2 DOHC swapped Tbirds - the first one you will never find pictures of, and the car was wrecked about a year after I finished the build. Both of my builds were based on wrecked Marks using the Mark wiring and PCM, the latter cost me $300 for the Mark I used to strip all of the parts from, everything else in my build such as the brakes and Cobra intake cost extra .. but the base swap cost me $300 for all of the parts I needed and the Tbird was free.

6. I finished the build. I just didnt feel that people were extremely interested at the time, as I have to take pictures, host them on a website, write the captions and all of the other work associated with sharing my project. Oh, and the kicker, I took my car to a show not long after it was finished against 7 other Tbirds .. lets just say my fruit of labor lost to my buddys 5.0 Tbird with a butterfly headliner, primer paint job, fishing gear in the backseat and a wood walking stick holding up the hood. That pretty much sealed the deal for me.



Its one thing to make an effort, and decide when its time to cut your losses and abandon a potential project before you devote your life savings to the effort - I am a master of time and resources, I have had several vehicles donated to me for free, my labor doesnt cost me anything but time and the knowledge I have gained over the years has provided me everything I need to know about swapping parts, re-wiring electrical systems, what works and what doesnt - without having to rely on anybody else for information. This puts me at an advantage over anybody else, whereas in your situation you have to ask questions - but like I mentioned before, I have provided countless hours of time providing information to others who have attempted the task, by all means .. ask away if you have questions, im not here to discourage you.
2. Agreed. It's getting a bit ridiculous that one has to do that here of late, isn't it?

4. The underhood harness isn't what's scaring me right now, it's sorting out what gets pulled behind the dash, what gets joined with the engine harness, etc, etc.

5. crap, out of time.

IMHO, It's Much better to do the suspension, brakes, and drivetrain upgrades/mods first.
.
Thank you. Foundation First.
 
#39 ·
I enjoy project threads and the accompanying pictures too but it's easy to criticise someone for not including step by step pictures during a project. It's a different scenario from the other side of the monitor when you're actually juggling parts, tools, fluids, time, a two ton car and a camera all around you. Picking up the camera to take quality pics of tightening each TTY bolt really becomes low priority, if not a complete hassle, when you're just trying to get it all done for the day. I know most of my projects have lots of befores and lots of after shots and little in between too but it's not for lack of TRYing, I'm just too busy DOing.

Build threads shouldn't be read as stories. There's seldom going to be character development, heros, villains, climaxes and yes, conclusions. They're public journals to get the jist of the work being done.
 
#41 ·
That would be if any of us was ever "done" with mods. :)

The engine swap is just one part.

IMHO, It's Much better to do the suspension, brakes, and drivetrain upgrades/mods first.
.
 
#42 ·
IMHO, It's Much better to do the suspension, brakes, and drivetrain upgrades/mods first.
.
:uppoint::uppoint:

I agree 100% with this.

What good is a fast car that spits drivetrain parts out, or that can't even turn a corner? Or that's sitting on the side of the road with the tire out the top of the front fender?

Or one that won't stop?

Suspension AND brakes. Drive train second (except as with suspension and brakes). THEN worry about the grunt under the hood.

RwP
 
#48 ·
One of the major flaws in our cars' drivetrain design is the Looong driveshaft. :D

Because it was so long, they made it "collapsible" which meant it was two pieces of sheet metal crimped together with RTV between them for "damping". (it's in the spec sheet, the collapsible part, the rest I seen.)

I've failed two, one by spinning it inside itself. I thought it was the tranny slipping under high power. (stock +pi intake, lol) It came out in two pieces.

Thinking about it, I have two good trannys... Yay!

The other DS vibrated like crazy; I ended up taking out the tranny rear bushing, the diff, and the wheel bearings before I figured it out. (I'm still using the halfshafts...) This one was one piece, but it rattled like a baby rattle; search my vibration problem, and you'll see the old posts, lol.

I bought an aftermarket aluminum DS (for all cars, at this point...), and haven't had any issues.

Other than burning up my freaking direct clutch, lol.
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top