Can't align Torque Converter bolts with Flex-plate Holes

[Cubic_Cleveland]

I opened the two holes on the bell-housing where the guide pins are at because the bell-housing wouldn't pull up to the block. Any ideas on this?

Now take the bellhousing off and throw it away, you've ruined it. Those holes are a tight fit on the dowel pins for a reason.

I noticed that too, surprised it wasn't mentioned earlier. Something is defnately amiss if the bellhousing won't go over the dowel pins, that is a symptom, not a cause.

[user-612937456]

Are you sure the snout on the converter fits all the way into the hole in the center of the crank? Both diameter and depth correct?

Haven't looked at that. That's definitely something to look at.

I have seen this many times most of it being paint on the pilot of the new converter and occasionally rust inside the crank pilot hole. Try emory cloth on both surfaces and dry fit it before trying to put it back in.

[91stang]

10 bucks the converter is not seated fully!

[Dan Timberlake]

I opened the two holes on the bell-housing where the guide pins are at because the bell-housing wouldn't pull up to the block. Any ideas on this?

Now take the bellhousing off and throw it away, you've ruined it. Those holes are a tight fit on the dowel pins for a reason.

==================

Looking at the KJ's pix I was thinking the dowels are all that aligns and centers the bellhousing to the block ( and crank).
Enlarging the hole diameters would allow the trans to be off center from the crank, and it would not take much of that to create a bind.

[Alan Roehrich]

I opened the two holes on the bell-housing where the guide pins are at because the bell-housing wouldn't pull up to the block. Any ideas on this?

Now take the bellhousing off and throw it away, you've ruined it. Those holes are a tight fit on the dowel pins for a reason.

==================

Looking at the KJ's pix I was thinking the dowels are all that aligns and centers the bellhousing to the block ( and crank).
Enlarging the hole diameters would allow the trans to be off center from the crank, and it would not take much of that to create a bind.

You are correct. Bellhousing bolt holes are clearance holes, and do not provide alignment. The dowel pin holes in a bellhousing are the only thing that correctly aligns the bellhousing with the block, and as such, the crankshaft. Enlarging those holes in the bellhousing will lead to all sorts of problems.

[user-612937456]

I opened the two holes on the bell-housing where the guide pins are at because the bell-housing wouldn't pull up to the block. Any ideas on this?

Now take the bellhousing off and throw it away, you've ruined it. Those holes are a tight fit on the dowel pins for a reason.

==================

Looking at the KJ's pix I was thinking the dowels are all that aligns and centers the bellhousing to the block ( and crank).
Enlarging the hole diameters would allow the trans to be off center from the crank, and it would not take much of that to create a bind.

Enlarging the dowel pin hole diameters is not idea but may be necessary if there is interference with a new mis-machined part. I have probably installed more than 10,000 transmission over the years this is unlikely causing the bind as most transmissions have excessive tolerance even with a new converter and pump bushing. On fords the most like scenario of mis-located dowel pins will be the center of the flywheel broken out after being run for a while. The binding is probably not from lateral or side to side location but from the converter not being seated or the pilot binding if you can rotate the converter some I would rule out the converter being all the way down and look at the pilot area but the tranny has to come back off and you can check both. Also not sure what converter and bell housing you are using but there ate 2 different size V8 bell housings and some larger converters can bind in the smaller bell housing

[peejay]

And then think of all the Turbo 350s and 400s out there with scattershields on them, and the only thing holding the trans coaxial with the engine are the front pump bolts...!

[tenxal]

And then think of all the Turbo 350s and 400s out there with scattershields on them, and the only thing holding the trans coaxial with the engine are the front pump bolts...!

Are you talking about the J&W Ultra Bells?

[BlackKnight]

Update: I found the problem and it was what I suspected; the input shaft is slightly too long and was in so tight I had to tare the tranny down to get it separated. I checked the fit between the torque and crank and it's fine. Reassembled everything with the original input shaft (non-hardened) and it went together as usual but, I took it back out because I'm making over 870 hp and need a hardened input shaft. I bought the shaft from an Ebay company, and it's apparent their machining process is off.

[BlackKnight]

Also, I didn't enlarge the dowel holes from the front (where the bell housing mates to the block). I machined it from the rear to match the from area so that I could close excessive gap. The new race block has longer dowel pens than the 69 (SBF) block I previously used.

[mike hohnstein]

Before you try to assemble again, place the converter against the flex plate to verify pilot slip fit and bolt hole fit. Much easier this way.

[BlackKnight]

I found the real problem. The converter snout is designed for a 1/4" motor plate and I don't have a motor plate. They asked me if I had a "motor plate", not if I have a "mid plate", and I said yes, so they designed the converter for a 1/4" motor plate. I guess there was a simple miscommunication own both parts but, for all who don't know; when ordering a race converter and they ask "do you have a motor plate", and you don't have a mid plate, your answer should be NO.

[Kevin Johnson]

That's a hell of a commute from TX to CO.

[woody b]

With 870 horsepower you should install a mid plate, if rules, and space permits.

[sanfordandson]

I found the real problem. The converter snout is designed for a 1/4" motor plate and I don't have a motor plate. They asked me if I had a "motor plate", not if I have a "mid plate", and I said yes, so they designed the converter for a 1/4" motor plate. I guess there was a simple miscommunication own both parts but, for all who don't know; when ordering a race converter and they ask "do you have a motor plate", and you don't have a mid plate, your answer should be NO.

What did you think a "motor plate' was that compelled you to say yes?