Ghia Trans Swap ?

[David Follett]

I am considering putting a converted T4 engine in my '69 Ghia. The engine is currently in a '74 Bug and was wondering if there would be any advantage to also use the Bug trans and if it will fit with out changing drive shafts and or axles.

[sideshow]

The beetle is a three bolt nose cone/pan, ghia is two. An aftermarket thrust plate is is the simple patch. Other than that they are very close in fit an function.

[David Follett]

Thank you for the reply.

[FJCamper]

Hi Dave, Sideshow--

The 1973 and up Type 1 transaxle has the three-bolt nose cone. The '72's and down have the two-bolt nose cone, until sometime way back (beyond your question) the nosecone attachment was different.

I have this on the tip of my frontal lobe right now because we have a road racing '73 Super Bug and we had to buy one of the 2-bolt adapters so we could use the far more common 2-bolt nose cones.

The 3-bolt is supposed to be stronger, but we compensate for that with transaxle straps, Kafer bars, etc. (The etc might mean strong language, extra bailing wire, Super Glue, wooden wedges, and masking tape.)

Haven't broken a 2-bolt nose cone yet, and we started campaigning in 2002.

FJC

[Marc]

Because of the redesigned mainshaft bearing it can be problematic grafting the 2-bolt nosecone onto a late trans - simplest/best solution in my opinion is the aftermarket urethane conversion mount. The little spacer tubes may be a loose fit in the urethane, though (so no matter how tight you get the hardware there's still some slop). I just wrap the tubes with metal-foil duct tape to increase their OD enough to make them a snug push-fit, seems to do the trick...although I haven't used one with a high-powered engine yet.
Also, the front ground strap doesn't seat well with this mount and your `69 chassis won't have the stud on the frame horn to put one from a sideplate stud like the late cars use. Weld on a stud, or simply route the strap to the chassis end of one of the rear mount bolts (I'm assuming you'll be using the early style cradle/rear mounts, the late stuff is too cushy for hi-po)
You'll get a longer TOB lever in the bargain; with the short pedal hook of the `69 cluster this yields a ~10% reduction in pedal effort but correspondingly less travel...you might need to remove the travel stop from your clutch pedal if it drags going into Reverse.

`74s were notorious for a weak Reverse - is that healthy in the donor trans?

[Bruce2]

You'll get a longer TOB lever in the bargain; with the short pedal hook of the `69 cluster this yields a ~10% reduction in pedal effort ....

The lever arm on the 69 trans measures 73mm from center-to-center. The 74's arm is 90mm. The 74 arm is 23% longer so you get that much less pedal effort. Upgrade to the mid 75 and later arm (100mm) that's 37% less pedal effort.

.... but correspondingly less travel...you might need to remove the travel stop from your clutch pedal if it drags going into Reverse.

That would only be a concern if he's still using the original clutch. Unlikely today. The original clutch in 69 used coil springs to create the clamping force. Today, nobody makes clutches like that, they're all diaphragm springs. Diaphragm spring clutches require less TOB travel to actuate, so that's why VW increased the clutch arm in the first place in 1973. Using the short clutch arm increases the possibility of breaking the diaphragm spring in your clutch due to over-extension.

[Marc]

...Unlikely today. The original clutch in 69 used coil springs to create the clamping force...

Agreed. But there are other variables which could cause such a problem, I was only pointing out that if the pedal has a travel stop it can be removed/tweaked if necessary. Diaphragm covers can be "overcentered" if pushed too far, so this isn't anything to mess with without just cause.