Early B Body Tubular K Frame Options
- Thread starter scot
- Start date
Mike67
Well-Known Member
I have the QA1 which I beleive said it would fit a 65 and up.... but there is no signigicant weight savings.
Mike67
Well-Known Member
You are correct, was going off memory and thought ir said 65...
That 1 3/4" makes a 4 speed tough to put in or remove with trans cross member in stock location .
I made motor mounts from patterns off a 66 hemi k member and welded them to 65 k member.
I made motor mounts from patterns off a 66 hemi k member and welded them to 65 k member.
scot
Well-Known Member
Thanks guys. I'm putting together a Gen2 Hemi/4 speed car and have heard clearances get even worse when you move the engine back with a 66-later K frame. I couldn't find anything online for a tubular K for a 62-65, but thought I'd ask in case there was something I missed or didn't know about. I am surprised QA1 doesn't make one.
Cut the stock K-frame. That way the pan comes off easy. Make the tunnel bigger. Shield fits better with an auto. More room make removal easy.
View attachment 623676 View attachment 623676
scot
Well-Known Member
So I had a thought over the weekend about putting the QA1 66-70 K-Frame in and using a elephant ear to mount the engine. I'd really like to make some header clearance and use any oil pan I want. Thoughts ?
Mr Belvedere
Well-Known Member
I have the whole QA1 front end kit installed on my 64 Belvedere with a 440 auto. Had to modify the trans mount and shorten the driveshaft. It's pretty tight around the trans and the top of the tunnel.
Probably easiest for you to just go motor plate then you can place everything where you need it to be.
skicker
Well-Known Member
- Local time
- 4:02 PM
- Joined
- Dec 15, 2011
- Messages
- 1,285
- Reaction score
- 2,836
- Location
- Cumberland, Maryland
There's nothing wrong with using an engine plate along with an aftermarket K frame...
Notice the tubular bracing bolted to the transmission ears in dvw's post above...I'd say that is absolutely the best way to make sure there is zero engine movement front to rear...
His 64 is one of the best engineered with attention to detail cars I have ever seen...copy anything he has done if you can...
Notice the tubular bracing bolted to the transmission ears in dvw's post above...I'd say that is absolutely the best way to make sure there is zero engine movement front to rear...
His 64 is one of the best engineered with attention to detail cars I have ever seen...copy anything he has done if you can...
19polara64
Well-Known Member
DVW. Do you have the measurements for the cutout?
I'm doing the cut out like Doug did his car and I agree anything this guy says to do go for it also follow him and follow 5.7 they both know what they are doing. Class acts when building mopars.
ckessel
Well-Known Member
Something to ponder on if you are going to put the tubular unit in. What happens when you put a floor jack to it like you would on the regular k-frame. I asked this to a rep from QA1 a few years ago at the SEMA show. He said as long as you bridge both tubes you should be ok. Should be ok. Might want to ask them about it to see if its changed or any other builders of those types of units. For me, thats the jacking area when I lift the front of the Mopars.
Mr Belvedere
Well-Known Member
I was using a piece of wood along the whole tube and now I have a cross beam adapter for my floor jack.
It gave me more room, was a bit lighter than the factory k frame, looks snazzy (lol), and I didn’t need to use an A body specific oil pan for my 470 (using a Hemi 6qt. pan from 440SOURCE) which the idler arm clears by a good distance.
Similar threads
