PDA

View Full Version : Shifer assembly



Smokedaddy
08-29-2011, 12:05 AM
I was asked if I would shorten this. It's a shift linage assembly for a BMW. It is probably pot metal, it is not magnetic. Looking for some suggestions on modifying it, if you have any.

http://i688.photobucket.com/albums/vv241/TheOriginalSquattingDog/aaP8280096aa.jpg

-SD:

PS: ... can't spell either.

PixMan
08-29-2011, 12:34 AM
Knowing BMW, that's probably cast aluminum. Taking 4" out of it should be no problem. Fastening it back together afterward, not so much. ;)

I think you could get it quite strong if you could make up little tie bars to lie in the U-channel, then screw through the wall into your new tie bars. Does the part have that channel on both sides?

The easiest thing, if it is aluminum, might be to find a good TIG welder.

Smokedaddy
08-29-2011, 01:12 AM
I am a TIG welder, just never welded aluminum and I don't have a HF machine anyway. It might be cast Magnesium too, dunno. Yes, there is a channel on both sides (it's like a small I beam). I wonder if something like Dura Fix would work, use some of the scrap that I cut out and make flats to weld in the channels with Dura Fix.

wierdscience
08-29-2011, 01:16 AM
BMW is also very fond of Magnesium,so you might want to do some simple tests before whipping out the TIG torch.Scrape a small pile of shavings off with a knife and see if they light with a match.

CCWKen
08-29-2011, 01:52 AM
It doesn't look like it would be that hard to make one of those from scratch. Even as a weldment--Keep the original as is. A single bar with a forged flat for the ball and you're halfway there. The pivot can be turned down. Think about duplicating the function, not the form.

I doubt that's pot metal. Either aluminum or mag alloy. Ditto doing a mag test though if you plan to weld. Magnesium doesn't stop burning until it's gone. :eek:

A.K. Boomer
08-29-2011, 09:14 AM
yes when you take a look at what your all removing there really isn't going to be much left so I would seriously consider building one.

It's hard to say what BMW is using as material - Iv seen them get carried away in area's that don't really matter much and then seen them using boat anchor material on area's that do (un-sprung)

This post has me curious --- I shortened my shifter on my BMW 1600-2 for quicker throws but I don't understand why someone would be shortening the stablizer mount??? (unless some kind of major modification --------- ?)

winchman
08-29-2011, 01:30 PM
Have you considered how shortening the shift lever support will affect its operation? I doubt BMW made it so long just for the fun of it.

I suspect it's long to minimize the effect of engine movement and vibration on the shifter, so shortening the support may make it move around a lot more.

What kind of BMW is it used on, and why does it need to be shorter?

MotorradMike
08-29-2011, 02:34 PM
I'd do what Pixman suggested. 2 rods glued into the channels and pinned.


Have you considered how shortening the shift lever support will affect its operation? I doubt BMW made it so long just for the fun of it.

I suspect it's long to minimize the effect of engine movement and vibration on the shifter, so shortening the support may make it move around a lot more.

What kind of BMW is it used on, and why does it need to be shorter?

I'd bet it's an ergonomic mod.
At any rate, figuring out anything beyond the shortening isn't his problem.

Smokedaddy
08-30-2011, 09:46 PM
... for those asking ...

The car is a 1969 BMW 2002. It was originally an automatic. The only reason this is important is because the transmission tunnel is larger on the automatics than it was on the manual. The motor and tranny combo that is going in the car is a BMW M20 from a 1991 325i. The transmission is a Getrag 260 that comes with the M20 motor. This motor and tranny combo places the shifter approximately 4" further back in the transmission tunnel than the M10 with Getrag 240 that was stock in the 1969 BMW 2002.

-SD:

tdmidget
08-30-2011, 11:32 PM
So why mess up a classic car?

PixMan
08-31-2011, 12:09 AM
A 2002 eh?

Ever hear of my friend Roy Wicklund's car? Multiple Concours winner.

http://www.m2bmw.com/roy-wicklund.htm

His '88 E28 M5 is nothing to sneeze at either. Neither is his wife's. Nor his white "daily driver" '86 E28 M535is.

Bastid.

Helluva nice couple.

A.K. Boomer
08-31-2011, 12:52 AM
So why mess up a classic car?



Speed - power - fun...

A.K. Boomer
08-31-2011, 01:04 AM
... for those asking ...

The car is a 1969 BMW 2002. It was originally an automatic. The only reason this is important is because the transmission tunnel is larger on the automatics than it was on the manual. The motor and tranny combo that is going in the car is a BMW M20 from a 1991 325i. The transmission is a Getrag 260 that comes with the M20 motor. This motor and tranny combo places the shifter approximately 4" further back in the transmission tunnel than the M10 with Getrag 240 that was stock in the 1969 BMW 2002.

-SD:


Thanks - was racking my brain,

I believe my little 1600 had a getrag in it- was a damn tough trans and this was in my early years so I beat the living hell out of it and it took it - cant tell you how many of those little rubber drivetrain doughnuts I blew up -- I can still remember the symptoms of a mid car vibration and then pulling over to the side of the road and looking under to see a few nylon cords hanging from the rubber doughnuts and saying "crap --- not again":(
Too many launches off the line @ 500 rpm's past redline --- nice flywheel on those little pups:p

now that I think about it there is one thing I did not like about the getrag of that era and that is the very different syncro rings -- they were not conventional and they should have been - they were not a conical design - very strange and coated with some kind of moly impregnated material or some damn thing - maybe you can enlighten me - all I know is i had to be careful powershifting second gear or I would get a "clash" and that's after going into the trans and replacing that ring...