Hey Guys, finally got to do something on the 142e. Pulled the tranny from the 144 parts dog,and bolted it up. As usual Murphy reared his ugly head. It used the pukey small drive shaft so I'll have to change the trans flange to the bigger type. Still tossing up between the 4.10 and the 3.73 out of a 164. I guess it should pull the 3.73 but I'm steering towards the 4.10 just for more response and driveability. Bolted down the shifter and yahoo the passenger will have to change gear. Didn't realise the shifters were orientated towards the driver LHD,RHD duh, have to get the LHD shifter back from Neil. Nice to see the 164 size top balljoints, going to fit 164 rotors and calipers. Tried on both S80 mags with spacers and Regulus 240 mags, tuff call, I reckon S80s with 205/50s painted that charcoal 850r color would look ok, what do you'all think. Cheers.

Was curious, what is it about the shifter that makes it favor LHD?
Seems that the ones in my boxes of parts don't favor either LHD or RHD.
Was yours possibly bent by a previous owner?
--
Tom - '60 544, '68 220S, '70 145S, '86 745T, '06 Mazda MPV

If you are going to do the brake swap, I suggest you use the complete 164 stub axle, hub, rotor & caliper assembly between the 140 control arms .... the vented 164 rotors aren't a direct bolt-on swap with the 140 ones, I gather (different hub size ?)

I have this setup on the front of my 144 & the brakes are brilliant.

I run 205/65x15 tyres on mine (on Sirius alloys) and the rolling diameter calculates out as virtually identical to the standard 165R15 tyres - only 2 digits difference in calibration factor on my Terratrip (251 vs. 253) which equates to less than 100m difference over a measured 5km.

I reckon you would could lose a fair bit of "punch" going to the taller diff ratio .... although I must admit that I do like the 5th gear in the Celica box behind mine on the highway, compared to the M40 that was in my previous car :o)

Dave

Cheers Ken, I'll be using it on road. My 164 is stock height but I like the idea of the E having that lowish and fat look. Yea the 15"s are Virgos which at the moment have 195/60s on them.I will try the 3.73 either wheels and see how it feels. Looking forward to see how a 130HP B20 goes.Still toying with the idea of RHD conversion, I have all the bits and would be relatively easy.

A most excellent plan,the extra horses will make
the gearing work out just fine.
Now about that 164 or 25mm front bar,and
some weld to reinforce the A arm bar mount....
Regards
Ken
--
69-145-S ; 71-145-S ; 72-145-E ; 72-1800-ES ; 87-245-DL

Shed Rat
All in all sounds great.
I think the best wheel/tire choice is going to depend on the intended purpose.
And the wheel size and use may dictate the appropriate rear end.
The 205-50-{16}?? S 80 wheel works out to a 24 inch wheel & actually
the stock 195-60-15 on the Virgo's?? is a 24.2 inch wheel.
A little short on specifics here,but....
IF my assumptions are correct....
A bit short/small I get 1 in 25 or @ 4% small for a 140 chassis.
The rear ratio difference, I get .37 in @ 4 or @10% taller.
Using the 24" wheels and the 3.73 would net 6% taller
gearing,the car lowered 1/2 inch,and lighter wheels,
with less inertia due to the smaller diameter and
lighter wheels.
All in all a good thing as long as you don't load it heavily
or head out to rough dirt roads.
Another possibility would be to slap some 195-65-15's
on the Virgo's,go with the 4.10 and maintain the
versitility that was designed into the chassis.
Some thoughts,I notice these 4 cyls are sensitive to
changes in wheel size and weight.
Ken
--
69-145-S ; 71-145-S ; 72-145-E ; 72-1800-ES ; 87-245-DL