Page 4 of 43
Re: Eric's '90 80Q turbo-to-be... eventually
Posted: Tue Apr 24, 2012 8:15 am
by bernie
elaw wrote:Bernie,
I guess the part I still don't understand, and I should probably go look at my 80 before I say this, but I thought the 80 shifter basically sat right on the center tunnel and not on a "pedestal" like your pics show. But that's probably just my lack of understanding / poor memory.
The sheetmetal in the pictures is unaltered from stock. The "pedestal" is there as Hanz und Franz built it. There is just enough room to allow the linkage rod to pass underneath when fully forward, as we installed it.
elaw wrote:So the 4 bolts coming up from below, those are holding the "bucket" on? It looks like those are going through existing holes?
I seem to recall they were factory holes. In any case, even if you do have to drill, they are simple to poke through. I have to go look again, but I *think* they are studs on the factory cast-aluminum bucket.
Re: Eric's '90 80Q turbo-to-be... eventually
Posted: Tue Apr 24, 2012 8:29 am
by elaw
Bernie,
Thanks!
I just bought this:
http://www.ebay.com/itm/97-98-99-00-01- ... 2a1c32a7b5 which looks like it's the right thing. I guess I'm gonna find out! The price was right too, although the "bucket" is surprisingly cheap brand-new - I found it at one online seller for $66.00.
Re: Eric's '90 80Q turbo-to-be... eventually
Posted: Tue Apr 24, 2012 1:35 pm
by bernie
Nice snag, Eric! That looks about like what we got then bodged the 4kq stuff into it.
If you come up with more details on shortening that last drive shaft, I would be most obliged. Like I said, I have just about given up on finding a factory solution. However if Hank can keep one in a single piece on his beast, it should be good enough for our little project!
Re: Eric's '90 80Q turbo-to-be... eventually
Posted: Tue Apr 24, 2012 2:57 pm
by elaw
Yeah I'm pretty excited about that shifter setup. I had designed a real Rube Goldberg-style linkage and even started building it, but there were a few loose ends that were proving difficult to figure out. I think the 4KQ-shifter-in-a-bucket setup will be a lot cleaner.
One thing you might find interesting... you know the metal arm with the ball on it that's on the transmission end? I of course already had one in my 4KQ, and the urquattro tranny I bought came with one too. ETKA says they're the same but they're not! The urq one is a little shorter, which should yield shorter shifter throws, which will be a good thing.
Re: Eric's '90 80Q turbo-to-be... eventually
Posted: Fri May 04, 2012 4:38 am
by elaw
Bernie,
Upon further consideration, I've decided that your approach requires far too little effort, and is much too likely to work well. So I've decided to go a different route.
Seriously... I've gone and bought one of the shifter assemblies from a 5KQ that has the stabilizer rod going to the transmission, and I'm going to see if I can make that work with the A4 "bucket". In one regard the install might actually be easier, as the 5K shifter only attaches to the car at one point. The downside is I need to get a "boot" setup to accomodate two linkage shafts from the transmission and not one. The boot that came with the bucket is backwards - the stabilizer is on top and the shifter rod is on the bottom. But I think I might be able to graft the 5K boot on there somehow.
Stay tuned to hear how this all works out... and try not to laugh too much! 8)
Re: Eric's '90 80Q turbo-to-be... eventually
Posted: Fri May 04, 2012 4:48 am
by elaw
So here's a question, if anyone knows...
Those A4 axles I mentioned a few posts back... there's something "interesting" about them. The outer CV joints seem able to slide back and forth about 1/4" on the axle. My question is, is that normal?
Now I know what you're thinking, the CV joints are junk. And in fact one of them is, it feels like crap when you move it around. But the play is *not* in the joints - I pulled the boot back and the whole joint can actually move in and out about a quarter of an inch on the axle splines.
I took them apart and the dished washers and plastic thrust washers are present like they should be. However, I removed the same parts from the CQ axles I had around and the plastic washers from the A4 are shorter than those from the CQ. If I assemble one of the A4 axles with a washer from a CQ axle, the CV joint has almost no slop.
So I've got two theories: 1) the A4 outer CVs normally have free play on the axle, or 2) someone before me pulled the axles apart and reassembled them with the wrong washers.
Anyone got any ideas on this?
Re: Eric's '90 80Q turbo-to-be... eventually
Posted: Fri May 04, 2012 8:31 am
by pitts
Having no experience rebuilding any axle... it doesn't make sense that it would slide on the splines... they are not greased or designed to resist wear in that fashion... at least that is how it is in my mind... it seems that if it were allowed to slide and wear, there would be serious slop problems over time with relation to how the axle will turn the cv cage...
but maybe someone who has handled some A4 axles can chime in...
Re: Eric's '90 80Q turbo-to-be... eventually
Posted: Fri May 04, 2012 3:41 pm
by elaw
Here are some photos showing what I'm talking about with the axle. These are with the inner part of one of the A4 CVs on one of the A4 axles. Also I should mention I measured the play and I was off by a bit, it's more like 1/8" than 1/4".
Here are two pix of the position the CV sits in, one when it's against the plastic washer and the other when I push it so it's against the snap ring:
The above pix were taken with the plastic washer that was on the axle when I got it.
Here's a pic comparing the size of the washers. A4 on the left, CQ on the right:
As you can see, the CQ one is just about 1/8" higher.
And, a shot with the same parts as in the above pix except with the CQ plastic washer in place of the A4 one:
In that picture I'm not lifting up on the CV part, that's it's resting position. There is no detectable play.
I suppose the answer is just to get some CQ washers and throw them in there, but I'm puzzled as to why when when it's assembled with all the original components, there is free play.
Re: Eric's '90 80Q turbo-to-be... eventually
Posted: Fri May 04, 2012 3:46 pm
by mrmotorhead13
I've assembled quite a few halfshafts and never seen one that slid like that so I'm going to go with your guess #2. Allowing it to slide would beat the hell out of the circlip which isn't how they're designed to be used. Probably a cheap rebuilt axle.
Re: Eric's '90 80Q turbo-to-be... eventually
Posted: Fri May 04, 2012 4:02 pm
by elaw
Well I just discovered something very interesting!
For the A4, that plastic washer is different depending on whether the car has an automatic or manual transmission. These axles are theoretically from a manual car, and they do have the correct inner CVs for a manual tranny. But the remark in ETKA for the washer for the autobox version says "25.1x6.95", and the smaller washer measures just under 7mm thick. The washer for the manual-trans version does not have a note, but... is the same washer used on a CQ!
So it sounds like your rebuild theory may be correct... and when they rebuilt it, they put the wrong washers in. Either that or this is a "frankenaxle" someone made from parts - I did notice the large clamps on the outer CV boots are "universal" ones and not standard-issue VAG/Lobro. Well at least it's easy to fix!
Re: Eric's '90 80Q turbo-to-be... eventually
Posted: Sat May 05, 2012 4:22 am
by elaw
Bernie,
Hey can I ask you a question? What axles are you using in the front of your 80?
On a 4KQ the fronts and rears are the same length, just swapped from side to side. But I've measured all the axles I have and was surprised to find the CQ rears (presumably the same as 80 rears?) are entirely different lengths from the 4KQ axles. I had thought the CQ rears would work in the front of my 80 but now I'm beginning to wonder...
Re: Eric's '90 80Q turbo-to-be... eventually
Posted: Sat May 05, 2012 6:55 pm
by bernie
elaw wrote:Hey can I ask you a question? What axles are you using in the front of your 80?
I used the 80's rear shafts, swapped by side. Meaning, RR went to LF, LR went to RF. I really can't speak to the length of the CQ shafts, I always thought they were the same lengths as the sedan's.
BTW I have some measurements of bare shaft lengths, including what I think will work for our LR problem child. Measurements taken with no cvs on the shafts, to the extreme ends of the shafts.
80Q RF 521mm, ~20.5"
80Q LF 534mm, ~21"
B5S4 rear 537mm, ~21.125"
Desired length LR B3 w/Urq diff 496mm, ~19.5"
I arrived at this by putting nearly every shaft I own into place with an inner and outer cv on it, regardless of correct inner diameter. I had an old 4kq rear (?) shaft that fit beautifully, but it only has the 100mm inner. So to shorten the B5S4 shaft to the same dimension, I believe will work. I took the time to verify the cv's were mid-stroke. I'm willing to go with this length for our shaft welding adventure.
Do you think Hal would be willing to do one for me, or share his info so we could use his method?
Thanx!
Re: Eric's '90 80Q turbo-to-be... eventually
Posted: Sun May 06, 2012 5:42 am
by Hank
The easiest way to achieve the right axle length is to just send me the axles with the desired length. Here are some that I did last week. The ones in the middle are urS inners with 80q outer splines. There you have it, 108mm cups compatible with your setup.
I have a pretty good process for cutting them, pressing them together, welding them and pinning them in order to get them to hold up to the 700ft/lbs that my URQ puts out.
Re: Eric's '90 80Q turbo-to-be... eventually
Posted: Sun May 06, 2012 4:32 pm
by elaw
(Axle length post)
I've removed this post because I realized a lot of the info it contained was wrong. Look about 8 posts farther down for some good info re axle lengths...
Re: Eric's '90 80Q turbo-to-be... progress, finally and WTF?
Posted: Fri May 11, 2012 3:30 pm
by elaw
Well... there's been a some work here and there going on "behind the scenes" but all the while the 80 has been parked at the back of the driveway, waiting for the 4K to go away so it could move to the "working spot" in front of the garage. Well... it's waiting no more!
It was already sans engine, now it's in position to be worked on, wheels are off, exhaust is off, and the coilover suspension is next... I've got a buyer for it who's been incredibly patient and soon he'll be getting his stuff.
But you won't believe what I saw when I removed the heatshield under the driveshaft... something I thought was only found on those fancy models with 20-valve engines:
Yes, a carbon-fiber driveshaft! How weird is that?
Sadly it'll have to be removed to accommodate the 016 transmission, so the "coolness factor" will be lowered just a tiny bit.
Re: Eric's '90 80Q turbo-to-be... progress, finally and WTF?
Posted: Fri May 11, 2012 3:34 pm
by mrmotorhead13
elaw wrote:It was already sans engine, now it's in position to be worked on, wheels are off, exhaust is off, and the coilover suspension is next... I've got a buyer for it who's been incredibly patient and soon he'll be getting his stuff.
:woowoo:
But you won't believe what I saw when I removed the heatshield under the driveshaft... something I thought was only found on those fancy models with 20-valve engines:
Yes, a carbon-fiber driveshaft! How weird is that?
Sadly it'll have to be removed to accommodate the 016 transmission, so the "coolness factor" will be lowered just a tiny bit.[/quote]
Damn... and my 20V car doesn't have one! If it weren't so damn big I'd buy that off you too.
Re: Eric's '90 80Q turbo-to-be... balljoint confusion
Posted: Sun May 13, 2012 9:50 am
by elaw
Okay so... it seems mr. 80 needs new front ball joints. Normally a simple thing to deal with, but here's what makes it complicated: I'm switching the front steering knuckles over to CQ ones as part of the 5-lug conversion.
Now I didn't think that would make it complicated, but I now see that CQ and 80 front balljoints, even though both cars have cast control arms, are different! Although from the photos on parts websites I sure can't see any difference. :tard:
I thought I'd seen this discussed here before but searching didn't yield any results. Can someone in-the-know tell me what front ball joints I should be using, or at least what the considerations are... besides the CQ ones costing $20 a pop more than the 80 ones...
Re: Eric's '90 80Q turbo-to-be... balljoint confusion
Posted: Sun May 13, 2012 8:45 pm
by mrmotorhead13
I think the CQ ones are offset like the B4 cars are and the 80/90 ones aren't. Don't take that as gospel though, that's just something I think I remember reading here.
Re: Eric's '90 80Q turbo-to-be... balljoint confusion
Posted: Mon May 14, 2012 5:49 am
by elaw
Nah, they're both offset. Here are a couple of pix from my favorite parts supplier:
Left one is 80Q, right one is CQ, both are left side. They look pretty darn similar to me, but have different partnumbers and different prices. I am 99% sure the difference is not the diameter of the part that goes into the steering knuckle, AFAIK they're both 19mm.
It does look like the CQ ones are the same as the B4 90, for what that's worth.
Re: Eric's '90 80Q turbo-to-be... balljoint confusion
Posted: Mon May 14, 2012 7:35 am
by my2000apb DrBeastCar
80/90/cq are offset the b4 3 bolt stuff is much straighter
Re: Eric's '90 80Q turbo-to-be... look ma, no suspension!
Posted: Fri May 18, 2012 4:16 pm
by elaw
Ding dong! It's 8 PM... do you know where your suspension is?
Because it isn't on the car!
Hmm... it seems the brakes and spindles are missing too, as well as the axles. And exhaust. And engine. The transmission and rear diff are still there but we plan to correct that over the weekend.
Tons of stuff getting removed to make room for different stuff!
Speaking of different stuff, here's one I call "hubapalooza":
You're looking at B5 A4 rear hubs in the 80 rear carriers, and UrS hubs in CQ front carriers. I figured with all the turbo-ism this car is going to be experiencing, it wouldn't hurt to beef things up a little in the front.
I also owe a debt of gratitude to all the folks who have documented how to do this conversion - thanks to you guys achieving "5 lug status" has been relatively painless. Here's hoping that achieving "urquattro driveline status" is equally painless... yeah, right!
Re: Eric's '90 80Q turbo-to-be... look ma, no suspension!
Posted: Sun May 20, 2012 5:34 pm
by elaw
Axle length redux...
I made a post a little higher up with some numbers for axle lengths that I've since realized are incorrect. But here, without further ado, are some *correct* numbers... mostly. One number is estimated - it's in parentheses.
Code:[/quote]
Car/position Length w/CVs* Bare length
-----------------------------------------------
B3 LR 20-7/8" 20"
4KQ LR 21-1/8" (20-1/8")
B3 RF 21-3/8" 20-1/2"
B3 LF 21-7/8" 21"
B3 RR 22-1/2" 21-5/8"
4KQ RR 22-9/16" 21-9/16"
[/quote]
* Length with CVs is measured by setting the axle upright on a flat surface, inner CV down, and pressing downward until the inner CV bottoms. Length is then measured from the surface the axle is sitting on to the outer CV's surface that mates up with the wheel bearing. This is different from the way most rebuilders/manufacturers measure axles, but it seemed the best way to me to compare the 4KQ-type axles that have a threaded part sticking out of the end of the outer CV and the B3-type ones that don't have that part.
You'll also note in the above table I used the term "B3". I have now measured complete sets of 80 and CQ axles and the lengths of the axles from both cars are the same. I'd guess B3 90 axles would be the same too but I can't say 100% for sure because I don't have any to measure!
Re: Eric's '90 80Q turbo-to-be... look ma, no suspension!
Posted: Mon May 21, 2012 5:52 am
by elaw
So again on the subject of axles... it seems like the snap rings on the outer end tend to get pretty chewed up when the CV is removed:
...but I don't see those snap rings included in CV kits or for sale from aftermarket suppliers, which to me indicates people generally don't replace them. Am I worrying about nothing?
Re: Eric's '90 80Q turbo-to-be... look ma, no suspension!
Posted: Mon May 28, 2012 6:44 am
by elaw
Hey can someone school me on something? The front mounts for the rear diff vs. transmission mounts. They look the same. 034 sells mounts that they say can be used for either. But in ETKA they're different partnumbers and the mounts aftermarket suppliers sell are all labeled "transmission mount" not diff mount.
If I buy "transmission mounts" and install them in place of the diff mounts what will happen? Will my car explode in a huge fireball like in the movies? :tard:
My guess is they're dimensionally the same but the diff mounts are softer since they have to support less weight. But I'd like to hear from someone that actually knows what they're talking about, unlike me.
Re: Eric's '90 80Q turbo-to-be... look ma, no suspension!
Posted: Mon May 28, 2012 7:09 am
by mrmotorhead13
I've been driving my 90Q around for about 6 months with the same mounts front/rear... no ill effects so far.