IT'* DONE!!

I bought a newish pump off of Ebay. Funny thing is...it'* from a -65. A near perfect replacement that I can't use in its entirety. But I sure as hell can use the cover! (I'm not complaining...the pump cost me 24 bux shipped. The cover alone would have cost 4 times that from the dealer). Everything is assembled up, ready to be mated. Though I do have some concerns.

Biggest concern is the coffee can. MLBB sent me Ben'* old can, and looks to be in mighty fine shape. But remember that video I posted a few responses ago? My rebuilt unit has play in that area as well...though nowhere near as much. I reused all the old thrustwashers and replaced all the missing or damaged ones, so I know that isn't the issue. I am hoping the slop will go away once all the clutches get broken in, but if it ain't supposed to be there, now would be the time to tell me.

Actually, that is my only concern. I tfollowed the ATSG pretty much to the letter...I even colored in it to make the pictures more appealing As an upgrade, I also added a big 'cooler to the front, along with my HUGE eninge oil cooler (Don has seen those projects and was quite pleased with my work).

In a few more weeks Jinx will either be one helluva athlete...or scrap. Anyone wanna place wagers?

I've gotten a few PMs regarding the use of -65 components in a -60. So for the benefit of everyone, here are my findings.

The -65 pump body appears to use the latest -60 design. The housings are near identical with the exception of filter bosses. The cover of the -65 pump is also slightly redesigned with extra webbing, but will physically bolt to the latest -60 body. The key difference is in the impeller design. -65s use 11-vane impellers, whereas the -60 uses 9. This explains why the -65 does not suffer from cavitation at high RPMs like the -60. BUT, for the moment anyways, you CANNOT use the -65 impeller on a -60. This is where another key difference comes into play...the oil pump shaft on the -60 is actually larger in diameter.

What I would like to see is a -65 oil pump shaft and how it compares to the -60. If the shaft can physically fit into the -60 guts, then just maybe builders can utilize the -65 oil pump and be rid of cavitation.

I don't have my camera with me (it'* on loan) so I cannot provide pics like I normally would. Don stopped by here recently and I went over my findings with him, and he was amazed at how little the designs changed, but changed just enough to where you can't crossbreed easily.

I just looked at both the ATSG manuals (dunno why I didn't look at the pump shaft before ) and they do appear to be different other than the diameter of the gear going into the rotor.
The taper at the other end of the pump shaft (torward the torque converter) is represented differently in the illustration. The fatter portion of the shaft that keeps it in place is also shown as slightly different on the torque converter side. And finally the seal rings are different.
These issues may be trivial but we're not going to know untill someone tries it.

I have been wanting to try and use the 11 vane pump for the longest time. The 60e wasn't made to shift high as shown with the LQ1'*. And I know from experience that at 6.6k, that trans is not happy.

The taper appeared to be the same between the two models. Don, however, saw the -65 impeller and the FIRST model -60, which has no taper at all. The first -60 model is the least desireable of them all, as they were based on the original -60, or 440T4.

ANOTHER difference...and thank goodness I just noticed it...is that in order to use the -65 cover on a -60 pump, you have to drill one hole in the cover for a bolt that the -60 uses but was deleted in the -65. Looking over the two, I doubt it would have made any difference by leaving it. But I take no chances. Well, not when it comes to a project that has taken many months to do.

Don shared his thoughts on the coffee can slop....anyone else got any insight?

I would do whatever it takes to be 100% sure about that slop. Sorry I don't have any info..

Other than that... if it'* together..how come it'* going to take "weeks" to get running?

Reason 1: I am going to New York City for a week for work stuff. I leave tomorrow morning, and I won't be back until the 4th of July.

Reason 2: I am repairing/upgrading front suspension. The ENTIRE suspension is being rehashed. Already installed NOS GM struts (got the goahead from a GM tech that they are "decent", so I may as well use them), and strut mounts installed. I am also prototyping an aluminum STB (running it on the gold SSE right now and have been for the past few weeks with no issues at all), and I am going to give the Energy Suspension grease caps a try on the ball joints and tie rods. In fact, most of the suspension is done now, just got to tie up a few loose ends.

Reason 3: While the car is in the garage, I might as well look at the fuel pump connections. I know for a fact they are bad, and probably part of my fueling issues.

Reason 4: Remember at SEBF 2K6 me bypassing the oil cooler completely? I gots a new cooler and I need to modifiy the factory lines (good thing I saved them). I also need to repair a power steering line.

Reason 5: New air intake of my design. This requires a total throwaway of the canister purge system. So instead, I am put an inline filter on the vapor line with a check valve and then to the intake. Simple and still functional (will still be controlled via PCM).

I think those a good reasons why it won't be running anytime soon. I am looking at turning the key around the end of July, perhaps even August. I've said it before that Jinx is a testbed of ideas. The hybrid L27 was a start. The Frankensteined trans, if successful, could open up a few more options for the 92-93 crowd for a better shifting trans. Besides, I'm in no hurry. Gas prices haven't quite come down enough yet.

Same thing with mine after 90k now I have 160k on it still running good.

dont do the ball joint caps grease WILL leak out gardually trust me i did do the tie-rod boots those i do recomend
heres a pic