Builds Isuzu 4HE1TC into FJ62

[SuperHatch]

Clearly the A440F worked with the Isuzu but I had six reasons to go with the AW450:

1) I had essentially a brand new AW450 so I preferred to use it rather than the A440F with more than 100K miles on it.

2) The AW450 that I have came with a PTO that I would like to use.

3) I felt that the AW450 would work better with the Isuzu diesel as it was designed with shift points to match the torque curve of the diesel.

4) The AW450 is an electronically-controlled transmission which I prefer and will lock up the torque converter in 2nd, 3rd, and OD as it comes from the factory. Because it is electronically-controlled, it is easy to add torque converter lockup in 1st gear also.

5) Because it is electronically-controlled, I don't have to deal with the touchy TV cable like on the A440F.

6) And finally, it is heavier duty than both the A440F and A442F (See Fromage's thread).

7) Shorter 1st and taller 4th gear ratios as well...

For some reason that I don't understand, when Isuzu designed the 4H series, they placed the gear train that drives the IP, cam, oil pump, and power steering pump at the back of the engine rather than at the front as in the 4BD series and most other engines. This resulted in a totally different back end and also results in the problem of the starter location.

Better coolant flow in/out of the water pump without having all the gear train to go around?
Puts the oil pump at the rear closer to the sump, minimally reducing the time it takes on a semi-dry start for the oil to get into the pump and then into the motor?
Just a wild guesses on my part.

 

[astr]

7) Shorter 1st and taller 4th gear ratios as well... .

Forgot that one!

7)Better coolant flow in/out of the water pump without having all the gear train to go around?
Puts the oil pump at the rear closer to the sump, minimally reducing the time it takes on a semi-dry start for the oil to get into the pump and then into the motor?
Just a wild guesses on my part.

Sounds good to me!

 

[slcfj62]

They are totally different and not interchangeable. For some reason that I don't understand, when Isuzu designed the 4H series, they placed the gear train that drives the IP, cam, oil pump, and power steering pump at the back of the engine rather than at the front as in the 4BD series and most other engines. This resulted in a totally different back end and also results in the problem of the starter location.

I understand the difference for the side of the bell housing that mounts to the motor. What I was wondering is if the bell housing side that mounts to the transmission is the same for both engines. In other words, would a bell housing for the 4BD series mount an A440F without an adapter?

Thanks.

 

[astr]

AW450 as a 5-speed?

I've been tied to my desk and not able to get to the shop to get some real work done so I've been reading manuals, trying to understand how the AW450 really works. It appears that the AW450 (and A442F) are just a 3-speed transmissions with an overdrive unit stuck on the front. The rear of the transmission provides the 3.02 reduction in 1st gear, the 1.55 reduction in 2nd gear and 1.00 or direct drive in 3rd gear. It almost looks like the overdrive was an afterthought spliced on to the front of the 3-speed. Even the naming convention for the components would suggest that. The "Input shaft" is not the shaft at the front of the transmission but the shaft just behind the OD unit.

Under the factory configuration, the only time that the OD gears are activated is when the rear of transmission is in 3rd gear (direct drive). When OD is active, the front planetary gear set spins the "Input shaft" faster, resulting in the 0.70 overdrive.

I'm wondering what would happen if the OD gear set was engaged when the rear of the transmission was in 1st or 2nd? You would effectively have 6 forward speeds (and two reverse):

1st - no OD = 3.02
1st w/ OD = 2.11 (3.02 x 0.70)
2nd - no OD = 1.55
2nd w/OD = 1.09 (1.55 x 0.70)
3rd - no OD = 1.00
3rd w/OD = 0.70 (1.00 x 0.70)

The 2nd w/ OD is probably too close to standard 3rd gear to be be worth bothering with, however the 2.11 ratio achieved with 1st plus OD may be worth considering. You would effectively have a 5-speed automatic.

I have no idea if this change could be implemented or if the results would really be beneficial. What do people think?

 

[astr]

I understand the difference for the side of the bell housing that mounts to the motor. What I was wondering is if the bell housing side that mounts to the transmission is the same for both engines. In other words, would a bell housing for the 4BD series mount an A440F without an adapter?

Thanks.

The 4BDx was never fitted with the AW450 so there is no A440F-compatible bell housing and torque converter available. The 4BDx engines came with automatic transmission manufactured by Jatco whereas the AW450, A440F and the A442F were all manufactured by Aisin, hence the interchangeability of bell housings and torque converters. The Jatco JR403RE that was mated to the 4BDx engines does have a removable bell housing so it may be possible to bolt it to a A440F with a simple adapter. You would still have to deal with the torque converter but that would probably be easier as it would most likely only require re-drilling the flex plate and possibly adding a spacer.

 

[SuperHatch]

I've been tied to my desk and not able to get to the shop to get some real work done so I've been reading manuals, trying to understand how the AW450 really works. It appears that the AW450 (and A442F) are just a 3-speed transmissions with an overdrive unit stuck on the front. The rear of the transmission provides the 3.02 reduction in 1st gear, the 1.55 reduction in 2nd gear and 1.00 or direct drive in 3rd gear. It almost looks like the overdrive was an afterthought spliced on to the front of the 3-speed. Even the naming convention for the components would suggest that. The "Input shaft" is not the shaft at the front of the transmission but the shaft just behind the OD unit.

Under the factory configuration, the only time that the OD gears are activated is when the rear of transmission is in 3rd gear (direct drive). When OD is active, the front planetary gear set spins the "Input shaft" faster, resulting in the 0.70 overdrive.

I'm wondering what would happen if the OD gear set was engaged when the rear of the transmission was in 1st or 2nd? You would effectively have 6 forward speeds (and two reverse):

1st - no OD = 3.02
1st w/ OD = 2.11 (3.02 x 0.70)
2nd - no OD = 1.55
2nd w/OD = 1.09 (1.55 x 0.70)
3rd - no OD = 1.00
3rd w/OD = 0.70 (1.00 x 0.70)

The 2nd w/ OD is probably too close to standard 3rd gear to be be worth bothering with, however the 2.11 ratio achieved with 1st plus OD may be worth considering. You would effectively have a 5-speed automatic.

I have no idea if this change could be implemented or if the results would really be beneficial. What do people think?

[SARCASM]Congratualtions... you just discovered how all of the toyota 6-speed AT boxes work. (Also MFRed by Aisin)[/SARCASM]

Seriously, that might be worth looking into. considering the trans is 100% electronically controlled, it might even be possible to do with an aftermarket transmission controller... like this:
PCS - Powertrain Control Solutions - Transmission Control

 

[SuperHatch]

Oh, and for what it's worth. Toyota created a "5-Speed" automatic for the 96-97 Lexus GS300 by doing exactly what you suggest, engaging the OD solenoid when in first gear to provide a new 2nd gear between the traditional 1-2. This was on the A350E transmission, which was basically a A340E with new logic. No hardware changes at all...

 

[astr]

Front-mounted starter done

Finally found a little time to work on the starter mount. It is made out of two pieces of 1/4" steel plate welded together and bolted to the side of the block using existing threaded bosses on the block. First photo is of the bracket. Should have taken the photo before painting the bracket black. Second photo is the bracket bolted to the side of the block. 3rd photo is with everything in place, including the flex plate.

I'm very pleased with how the mount turned out. It looks like the starter will easily clear the frame and can be installed and removed without even pulling the flex plate. The starter engages the flex plate fine and spins the motor without any trouble.

The next step requires the real commitment - pull the 3FE and see how the 4HE1 really fits. Maybe I'll get lucky and find that all this effort to mount the starter up front was unnecessary.

Looks like I'm going to have a nice running 3FE with 220K miles on for sale soon. I'll post an ad in the classified section but now would be a good time for anyone interested to check it out while it still is in the truck.

 

[doug720]

Astr,

Just eyeballing the picture with the starter and ring gear in place, I think everything is going to clear. My swap has the AC compressor in basically the same location.

I measured my 60 swap and found there was right at 13"from the crank C/L to the drivers side frame rail for a reference. I kept the rear trans mount/cross member in the stock location and just centered the engine a little to fit mt 4BD2.

Looks good and outstanding work, as usual.

Doug

 

[slcfj62]

Mounting the starter on the front of the engine is definitely thinking outside the box. What sort of creative plans to you have for the exhaust being on the opposite side of the engine?

 

[astr]

Astr,

Just eyeballing the picture with the starter and ring gear in place, I think everything is going to clear. My swap has the AC compressor in basically the same location.

I measured my 60 swap and found there was right at 13"from the crank C/L to the drivers side frame rail for a reference. I kept the rear trans mount/cross member in the stock location and just centered the engine a little to fit mt 4BD2.

Looks good and outstanding work, as usual.

Doug

Thanks for the compliment. If you look back to Post #481 I show where the frame rail is located. I'm assuming that I won't have to install a lift to clear the front dif but I may still have to do something so that the ring gear clears the steering tie rod - not sure yet.

 

[astr]

Mounting the starter on the front of the engine is definitely thinking outside the box. What sort of creative plans to you have for the exhaust being on the opposite side of the engine?

I'm planning to address the exhaust problem once the engine is in the truck. There is precedence however as the 3B that was available in the 60 series also has the exhaust on the right side.

 

[slcfj62]

I didn't realize the 3B had the exhaust on the other side. That is encouraging. So your FJ62 has no lift? Not even an OME? You know you are going to get some questions about making those starter brackets to sell, right? If you get this engine in your FJ62 successfully, I will be one of them. The fact that this engine will bolt up to my A440F transmission is almost too good to pass up.

Of course, we can always hold out optimism that the thing will fit with the starter in it's original position.

 

[astr]

I didn't realize the 3B had the exhaust on the other side. That is encouraging. So your FJ62 has no lift? Not even an OME? You know you are going to get some questions about making those starter brackets to sell, right? If you get this engine in your FJ62 successfully, I will be one of them. The fact that this engine will bolt up to my A440F transmission is almost too good to pass up.

My FJ62 has no lift at this time and I'm going to try and do the swap without any lift. I think the pan will clear but, as I mentioned before, there could be a conflict between the flex plate and the steering tie rod. Maybe lifting the front of the engine will be all that is necessary to clear the flex plate.

A lot of people don't like the idea of the front-mounted starter because of the humongous flex plate and the potential safety problem. I personally don't see it as that big of a deal. I haven't yet stuck my hand into the ever-present fan so why would the gear be a problem? The flex plate location will require that I use an e;lectric fan. Actually, I'm more concerned with something hitting the flex plate and bending it. I may want to install some type of armor on the bottom to protect it.

As with all the other stuff that I had to make, I'll post the drawings so people can make their own. I can also send a cad file to anyone who wants one.

It would be a lot easier to make up a bunch of these because once the mill and press brake are set up it isn't that much more effort to make up a bunch.

 

[astr]

..Of course, we can always hold out optimism that the thing will fit with the starter in it's original position.

LOL And I'm going to win the lottery!

 

[slcfj62]

If the flex plate turns out being too low, maybe it could be mounted in the fan position. I would imagine that the belts would be able to transfer the energy to the crank?

 

[John Smith]

If the flex plate turns out being too low, maybe it could be mounted in the fan position. I would imagine that the belts would be able to transfer the energy to the crank?

No, they won't.

 

[Nexxussian]

If the flex plate turns out being too low, maybe it could be mounted in the fan position. I would imagine that the belts would be able to transfer the energy to the crank?

Only if you change over to some sort of cog belt drive.

Kinda spendy and a PITA, but could be made to work.

ASTR, is there a smaller flexplate that will mesh with that starter?

I know it wouldn't work with that bracket, but could be a potential solution if the flexplate you have winds up with ground clearance "issues".

 

[slcfj62]

How long is the 4HE1TC compared to the 3FE? It's 4 cylinders vs 6, so the engine is probably shorter. Is it also lighter? I'm wondering if the 4H engine is shorter than the 3FE if things can be moved forward far enough so that the starter clears the tunnel?

 

[AppleTech]

How long is the 4HE1TC compared to the 3FE? It's 4 cylinders vs 6, so the engine is probably shorter. Is it also lighter? I'm wondering if the 4H engine is shorter than the 3FE if things can be moved forward far enough so that the starter clears the tunnel?

Don't know the numbers but I can pretty much guarantee you it is much heavier - diesel engines are always heavier because they are built stronger to be able to withstand the compression that is necessary for the engine to function. Remember, the only thing that causes the cylinders to cycle is the compression created by the piston moving upwards, causing the fuel to ignite under said pressure.