[Sub-titled "rolled my body and got naked" (the frame).]

1956 Canadian Dodge (Plodge) two door wagon. I love my new Rotisserie, I could not continue building without it.
Turns out the sweet spot (were the Dakota and Plymouth) frames are the same width, is 18 " back from the centre line of the front wheels. (I hope!) The frame is cut 4 " long for overlap.

Nice!!

What's going to power this beast?

Hi, thanks for the replies. I was starting to think that I was married again, ......no one would talk to me.

Power is a 1992 318 5.2 fuel injected magnum. This will be my first FI project, so it will be an interesting adventure!

the underside of your wagon is really solid. looks like a great start ! my first and only FI conversion was with my best bud's 55 chevy. we used an LTI and a conversion harness from those guys in arkansas, plus a shop manual for a cadillac [the same engine was used in it] the local chevy dealership tossed my way. that took many consultation phone calls, plus lots of reading up on my part to get a grasp on how the "foreign" brand does things. i learned stuff i didn't want to know ! but in the end, it was a sweet running ride. keep us up to date on your progress, please.

Thanks moparx.

The underside picture is misleading, it was taken after the repair. it was bad.



My plan (?) on the FI is I have taken all the electronics off the Donner vehicle and left most of them still connected to the engine, it's not going to be a pretty sight under the hood, and mount them in the Plodge. I am hoping to trick the computer into thinking its still in a Dakota.

I will keep you posted as I go along, working on the frame now, contrary to popular belief (mostly mine) the Dakota rear axle (two wheel drive) will work width-wise, with ford deep offset wheels.

My 1st EFI swap was the 90 Dakota stuff in my 48 Plymouth coupe. That has worked out pretty well. I used everything from the Dakota. A 92 is a bit more complex then the 90 was, the 92 is OBD2 while the 90 was OBD1. I believe as long as you are using the Dakota stuff it will still work out well, its when you start swapping other stuff in that causes the problems.


My current build is 39 Dodge truck sheet metal on a Dakota Chassis. I'm using a 91 Dakota donor, which is also OBD2. One of my issues is the donor was a V6 5 speed, and the drive train is a 5.9 auto from a 97 truck, so the V6 stick computer won't work. The 97 uses a digital speedometer and came with a Hot Wire harness. The 91 Dakota dash doesn't have a digital speedometer, and the remaining instrument cluster is incompatible with the 97 requirements. The Hot Wire harness is a stand alone unit unit requiring only a few wire connections to the truck harness. I really didn't want to use the Dakota dash anyway....

On top of that, I can't use the Dakota heater system (its too wide and doesn't conform to the firewall), and the steering column is too long and without a tilt I need for my 39 truck cab, so I'm using a different steering column and the wiring doesn't match up. It doesn't help that I don't have a wiring diagram for a 91 Dakota, there has been too many wiring changes from the 87 Dakota FSM I have. I thought I could clean up the under dash wiring harness, but there is this under dash control module causing a problem or 2. If I wasn't cheap (and broke) I'd just buy a $250 wiring kit and be done with the whole mess. I'm having fun now!

It is unfortunate that winter has come and the truck is sitting outside, too far away to be pushed in or out of the garage, and too far away to reach with my electric or air, and I'm a wimp, so its cold out there. Come on spring!

Keep moving forward, its nice to see guys making progress. Gene

OBDII didn't become mandatory till 1996 and a couple of manufacturers put it in in 95.

No one had it in production in 92.

I think you are confusing throttle body fuel injection (LA motor) and port fuel injection (magnum engine).

The mixing and matching is the kind of trouble I am trying to avoid.

Gene, I think I have a 92 shop manual, I could scan the pertinent wiring diagram page if it would help?

Nice looking toy.

I give you fellas lots of credit.

I go the other way and run from the modern electronics.
I have a few 60's, & early 70's cars, trucks, & drive trains.
I'm still learnin' how that stuff goes together & werks.

Old Ray, at this point if I can get a pin out for the rear body harness plug at the firewall for the 92 Dakota, that would help. The 87 didn't have a connector there, and that would save me from undoing all the wiring to the rear of the truck.

I've pretty much decided I needed to start at the fuse box and wire everything from there. I have most of the circuits laid out, its just a matter of getting everything in the right place and splice a bunch of wires. Gene

Your probably right, but the 92 harness is different from the 90 harness, and both were 3.9 throttle body motors. The 92 also has an underhood fuse box that the 90 does not have. My 93 port injected 3.9 has a different computer then the 90 or the 92, which both appear to be the same. Gene

My last hot rod truck was carbed, and it didn't like any brand of carbs. I think I rebuilt or replaced a carb every year. After 12 years of fighting with carbs, I was ready for something that worked. The efi in my 48 Plymouth coupe works well.

I would have went with fuel injection way back in the mid 80s if there had been an affordable way to put a system on a Mopar. It still irritates me that there isn't a kit for Mopars to convert over for less then a grand, but you can convert over a GM for less the $500 with all new stuff. Gene

Gene, looks like the 1992 has a 50 pin rectangle bulkhead, I have scanned it , easier I think to email it to you as an attachment. If so email address please, thanks.

Old Ray, The tail harness I have is separate from the 50 pin bulkhead connector. This one is a blue connector with 17 pins (I'm attaching a picture of it, you might have to click on the attachment thing to see it.), It came through the lower firewall near the steering column with its own plug.

If I use the email system through Moparts, it uses Outlook Express, so I will include my email address here. It should show up as a link you can click on and send directly to me.

poorboysweldingshop@yahoo.com

....email sent.

Thank You, that helps a bunch!

Sorry I hijacked your thread. Gene

Nice work Old Ray, keep the updates coming.

I go get some more popcorn ready.

SO! Not sure if i should ask this or not (under the heading of don't ask a question you don’t want to hear the answer to!) I am putting the running gear and front subframe from a ‘92 Dakota (with change to 5 stud wheels) in my ‘56 plymouth 2 door wagon. The “experts” said the Dakota diff is to wide but by using deep offset ford wheels (centering hub cut out 1 mm) it fits fine. Turns out the Dakota leaf rear springs are EXACTLY the same length as the Plymouth but the Dak springs have more arc, so to get as slammed (low) as I would like the rear of the springs are to high. So I could do many other things that involve money, ...or flip the rear spring mounting bracket over (they will still fit inside the body) and use the Dak springs bolted rather then welded, (just in case). Will it work?


,

Yes, as long as the flip doesn't interfere with the car body, since the shackles and brackets are above the frame. Flipping the rear shackles will change the pinion angle some, as well, which may or may not be a problem. You can flip the front brackets as well, if it would help.

I bought a set of 2" lowering blocks with the U-bolts & nuts, and free shipping included for something like $30 off ebay a few months ago. I looked but, no longer have the link. I did a google search, a generic ebay listing showed up, and I scrawled down the list until I found what I was looking for, make sure there isn't one with a better price a little farther down the list. Gene

i don't see why that won't work ray. use grade 8 bolts and steel lock nuts that have the last couple of threads deformed [grade 8 as well] at final assembly. torqued at the proper value for the bolt size, and with as many bolts as you show, the shackles aren't going anywhere. A-bodys had the shackle hangers bolted on from the factory, so if it was good enough then, your solution will be good enough now.

Thank you Gentlemen, good input. I had to move the spring mount pads on the diff tube so the brackets are off and I will reset the pinion angle (3 deg?) when all done and weld them on. Front spring mounts still need bottom holes drilled in the frame so will look at flipping them as well. I have ordered lowering blocks from eBay, should be here in a week or so. Living in a (beautiful) small town in the hinterlands makes parts sourcing "interesting"!

Set the pinion angle 2-3 degrees down from the angle of the transmission main shaft centerline, with the rear end supporting the weight. If you do it just hanging, the angle will be wrong. I get to buy a set of 6 degree wedge plates to correct my pinion angle because I got in a hurry and didn't have weight on the axle. Yea, it changed that much from just hanging to having the chassis weight on the axle! Gene

I had already decided and built exhaust outlets (kina NASCAR style) in front of the rear wheels, I knew this was going to cause problems and I was right, the frame is in the way and there is no way to work around it, and one of the body mounts is also right there (pix 1) and my new springs are very close but I want IT! So, I think I have come up with this brand new idea, cut a hole in the frame and put a sleeve in, and then put the body bracket back on. Well, not so fast cowboy, after cutting the hole I search google and it turns out this is old hat, look at the cool exhaust passage kit. ( pix 4), Makes me feel better though.

So the question is; what will have most strength etc, the heavy pipe welded into the frame (Plan A no flanges) or two half pieces with flanges per each (tube type) frame rail bolted in like the kit (Plan B)? (or some combination of pipe and flanges “Work in Progress” ) Thanks.

,
,

I'm a welder by trade, my vote is for welding the sleeve.
The problem with bolting stuff together on a hollow box (like the frame) is is that you almost have to have a spacer inside the box at each bolt to keeping it from crushing the box frame (like it looks like your shackle bolts are doing). The advantage with adding the extra brackets to the frame is that it spreads out the load to a wider footprint. Bolting the extra plates on was just a way around welding them in place.

That said, after the pipe is welded into place, adding a 2nd plate to the inside and the outside, then welding the outside of those plates (I would weld all the way around the extra plate) would add a lot of extra strength. Your cutting a pretty big hole in the frame, spreading the load a bit more wouldn't hurt. Gene

i'm with gene on this. if you look close at the first couple of pics, you can clearly see the front spring mounts are crushing the sides of the frame rails, including the washers used under the bolt holes. this area needs welding of all the components in my opinion. this area of the chassis is highly stressed, especially after the exhaust cut out, so failure in this area must be avoided.

OK. Old ray and I have been communicating by email. But just in case someone is following along and wants to know a good fix for this, I feel the need to include what I would do here. Understand, this isn't the only way, but its how I would do it.

He has removed the shackles. He will be using lengths of pipe just large enough for the bolts to pass through. If there are threads cut into the pipe, cut them off, start with full thickness pipe or tube. Grind clean all areas that will be welded, at least 1/2" all around the weld area.

Enlarge the shackle bolt holes on the outside of the frame (the non-shackle side), just large enough to insert the pipe through. It is not necessary to enlarge the holes for the shackle side of the frame. Through these enlarges holes, use a punch or a piece of pipe and be sure the shackle side of the frame is flat. It should tap flat pretty easily. You can use a flat plate against the frame to be sure you don't bend it too far.

Insert the pipe through the enlarged shackle bolt holes and be sure the bolts pass through without dragging on the sides. Be sure the pipe is square to the frame surface and bottomed out against the shackle side of the frame. Weld around the tubing for all 4 bolt holes on the non-shackle side of the frame, and grind the surface flat.

Weld the exhaust tube to both sides of the frame, leaving a little of the tube above the frame surface. Cut 2 plates, one for each side of the frame. With the close proximity of the shackle to the exhaust tube, I would at least extend the non shackle side out 1" past the shackle bolt holes. The shackle side either needs to be cut short enough to not interfere with the shackle mounting after its welded, or it needs to extend out far enough for the shackle to mount flat against it. If it extends out far enough for the shackle to mount on the plate, you will need to transfer the shackle bolt holes to the plate (I'll cover that later).


The thickness of the plates should be 1/8" or 11 gauge. Any thicker is a waste of material and is more difficult to work with. The plates need to extend out forward and rearward at least 1" (1 1/2" would be better) beyond the exhaust tube welded to the frame, and should match the top and the bottom of the frame. If it includes the shackle bolt holes, it needs to extend at least 1" beyond the farthest away hole (or however far you need for the shackle to lay flat without encountering the weld seam.

Then cut the hole to fit over the exhaust tube and the existing weld, and trim the plate to match up with the frame. Both plates will have to sit tight against the frame to be effective. If the shackle ends up sitting on the plate, I would do the shackle side first. Position the plate over the exhaust tube, align it with the frame, clamp it tight against the frame side and weld to the exhaust tube. Then weld all around the outside of the plate. With the correct size drill, use the shackle bolt hole spacers as a guide and drill the holes through the shackle side plate from the outside. Make sure the shackle bolt holes line up and you will be able to bolt the shackles on the frame. This is the time to "adjust" the bolt holes.

Once you know the shackle will bolt on the back side, remove the shackle, and follow the same procedure for the front plate, position over the exhaust tube, position the plate to align up with the top and bottom of the frame, clamp tight, weld around the exhaust tube. Weld around the outside of the plate, and drill the shackle mounting holes using the bolt hole spacers as a guide to drill the holes through the front plate from the shackle side. There will be no need to weld either side of the shackle bolt holes to the plates. Bolt on the shackle to the frame with grade 8 hardware.

Repeat the process on the other side. Gene

exactly how i would do it. a little extra work, but well worth it in the end.

Anti crush sleeves and stiffening plate installed, I feel better now, thanks guys. (Bolts are just posed for the photo op!)

,img][/img]

That looks great! Good job! Gene

Glad I save the Dakota springs off the rear, I might attempt this conversion also. I was going to re-arch the originals on Plazakota.

Keep the up dates coming and love the pics, thank you

Thanks. Parts came today.
Hope to have more pictures for Monday.

So, under the heading of “the plans of mice and men” ! It snowed most of last week and the internal (me) and mostly external (others) strongly suggested that I plow the rather long driveway on Sunday. So not much accomplished in the shop. Just some mock up pictures, the pinion angle and side to side dimensions and welding of spring perches is NOT done. I want the car low and the conventional wisdom is the frame must be 4 inches or more from ground level, The ‘56 Plymouth rocker sills extended 2 inches past the bottom of the frame so the frame has to be at 6 inches, accomplished this with 4 inch lowering blocks.

Gene mentioned about pinion angle and the danger of setting it without the body on and I tried pulling the shackles back into approx ride height but only got a couple of inches. I’m not putting the body back on to set the pinion so I’m going to roll the dice and fake it, I’m thinking of 0 degrees with the shackles pulled back and some weight on the rear of the frame, it might settle to 3 degrees (maybe) springs are actually very flexible up and down.

The bubble flare on the brake lines came as a rude surprise! So more new tools. I have only tripped over the emergency cables 66 times so far #####.

, , ,

have you considered the scrub line ? it looks like you are dangerously close to going over on it. as to the pinion angle, you might get lucky, but you may have to angle mill the lowering blocks to adjust it once you get the body on. just something to think about.

Yes, I will get to that can of rotten worms soon.

It is the old you have to do this before you can do that story.

To install the Dakota front frame section (many measurements and angles taken from the donor) the existing frame has to be at the desired road height as a fixed reference. The original Mopar body is channelled over the frame and the rocker sills sit below the bottom of the frame (by 2") so to get ground clearance (of 4") at the bottom of the rocker sills, the bottom of the frame should be at 6". (4+2). I hope!

Thanks for the input.

When you moved the rear end of the leaf spring upwards you tilted the line between the ends of the leaf spring. The leaf spring mostly deforms perpendicular to this line. So by tilting this line you have added a bunch of roll steer. it works like this: When the spring compresses, the center of the spring moves backwards and so twists the axle with the axle moving rearward.
This steers the rear of the car in the direction the axle is now pointing. It is a pretty weird feeling to turn the wheel a certain amount and then as the car rolls outward towards the outside of the curve, the rear end also moves outward. In effect, both ends of the car are steering.

I first noticed this on my '64 D100. When it is heavily loaded it gets pretty unstable going around curves. When going downhill around a curve towing a trailer it becomes a hair-raising experience.

R.

I imagine it would, i think I have had some vehicles before like that, just never knew what caused it.

I think you are right about my spring realignment, I did not know that, I learn new things everyday. (still)

By way of a meager self-defense (or just a poor justification) the front of the rear springs are located same as the original and the frame at the rear does kick up some so the difference from original to modified is bad but not as bad as it looks.

Thanks very much for the input I appreciate it.

OK, I'm looking at your last pictures. The 4" lowering blocks will add a lot of leverage to the rear axle on the springs under acceleration, and when stopping. I believe this could create a lot of wheel hop in both conditions. The blocks may amplify the rear end steer as well (something I didn't think about).

How much ground clearance do you have for the frame as it currently sits? Have you taken into account how much the chassis might lower with all the weight on it? Gene

Yes, all good questions of great concern (especially to me). The good news is that although not easily, it can all be changed (fixed) if necessary. Sometimes there are too many variables and unknowns without continuously replacing the body. Have to have a starting point somewhere.

Because the body sits down and over the frame, without the body / engine the frame ride height now is at 6 inches ground clearance and the bottom of the rocker sills is at 4 inches. Subject to change, see next paragraph.

Something to keep in mind is that I have not started on the Dakota front sub frame transplant (soon, it's under 6 feet of snow) many dimensions to duplicate and match that will determine everything. The front springs on the Dakota are being held at original ride height by all thread. Dropped spindles will become optional if necessary at that time. Thanks, Gene.

....so some progress, ready to weld (and fish plate) as of today. More pictures coming.

,,,

I was having trouble with my vertical welds and asked Gene for advice which he kindly offered, not perfect (never is) but they are getting better, thanks Gene.

Once I had the two pieces located I did not want to move them until securely attached which meant working at floor level. I have to say that it took a major toll on a 74 year old body that also can't see all that well, but a least I'm still doing it.

Unfinished start of repair.

I'm happy to hear my suggestions helped.
You have a few years on me, but I can already feel the effects of getting older. Some things are getting tougher to do, but you just have to keep pushing through, or nothing will get done. Gene

well said gene !

Dakota sub-frame to '56 plymouth frame splice with paint. Took much longer then expected (of course), welds not close to perfect but will do, rolling on the floor not easy for this old turd.

Question: Do you think two coats of paint will make for a stronger join ?

,

Yes! Two coats of paint will keep the rust at bay better then one coat of paint (and it looks better too), and one coat of paint is much better then no paint (unless you paint like I do). Gene

Just a short update with info from another thread I posted here and some new issues, for anyone else doing a similar project. The 5.2 magnum installed into the frame (complete with attachments in probably a futile attempt to trick the computer) for the first time (of many) in the original location (wishful thinking), it sits to far forward, so re-positioning plates are fabricated and moves the engine 6 inches to the rear. Re-install and see that the engine now sits very high, looks like I can get it a inch lower by re-drilling the motor mount long bolts holes (small block GM bolts fit and cheap), and see that one of the re-positioning plate is too close to the oil pan, so remove drill and and trim. To be continued.

,

....waiting for parts,....did the exhaust this week. (Oh, my shop is a mess.)

[quote=Old Ray]....waiting for parts,....did the exhaust this week. (Oh, my shop is a mess.)

my shop is slooowly getting cleaned up, so don't feel too bad about yours. the exhaust looks like it turned out pretty nice.

So; transmission crossmember installed AND:

A journey way way outside of my comfort circle.

I decided to try and fabricate my own shortened drive shafts. Have you ever had the feeling that maybe you shouldn’t be doing something. I have absolutely no idea if it will work, …..thought I had it all in phase until i forgot that mother mopar uses a master spline on the slip yokes. Oh well, maybe plan B.

Why run a steady bearing? Why not just a one piece driveshaft? How long is the overall length?

The internet (so it must be right, right?) says anything over 54 inch should be two piece, which I would have ignored, but the two piece was out of the donor Dakota and because the engine/trans sits high I think the extra u-joint helps spread out the downward angle (kind of like some 4 x 4 drive shafts.

I have a wide selection of Mopar 1 piece driveshafts that are well over 60" long. In fact, its pretty difficult to find them under 60" long. Longer driveshafts are simply a larger diameter. I have one out of a van that is over 72" long, but its about 4" in diameter. I have a 62" long driveshaft I built that has spent many years under a few big block dirt track cars. A longer then 54" one piece driveshaft has never been a problem. Gene

Do you mean that the internet is wrong (or maybe I read it wrong)

Can I use what I got if it doesn't vibrate too much? (not much chance of that.)

THANKS or all your input, I appreciate it, and just trying something new and different was kind of fun. Might just use the car as a tug around the yard, should be OK for that.

PS: Gene, you never told me that the engine in a Dakota is offset from the factory to the pass side?

Double PS: Please keep in mind that I live in "resume speed" Canada and parts are not readily available locally.

Yes, you can use the driveshaft you have.

Sorry, nearly all the modern era factory Mopar motors are offset to the right, as you are sitting in the car/truck, guess I never gave it any thought that others might not know that. Now someone is probably going to tell us the right had drive motors are offset to the left. The offset was originally for steering column clearance. Probably started when the V8 first showed up.

If you really look and start measuring, that Dakota crossmember under the motor is not centered between the frame rails either, it is also offset a couple inches towards the passenger side! It really becomes apparent when you try to center the front frame horns, one will be longer then the other, and at a different angle. The new frame horns and the Dakota's original frame and crossmember on my 39 pickup all looks pretty goofy hanging out where everyone might see them, good thing the grill shell and my hand made lower grill piece is hiding most of it. I'm trying to go fenderless with this pickup, fenders would have made things a lot easier, too bed the fenders I have are so rough. Gene

AH, what fun would it be if everything was easy? Yea, I know what your thinking, "It would be nice if at least some of the stuff was easy." I think "cheap", "easy", and "cars" are all mutually exclusive terms. They just don't fit together well. Gene

It still is, .......because I'm using the Dakota front frame and engine more or less in the original location I can see where the offset is required for clearance for the steering shaft to the rack.

Thanks for your help and assistance.

So the plan was to use the gas tank out of the running Dakota donor but the tank was too wide to go in between the frame rails. A couple of days (or more) surfing the net looking for a tank that would take the Dakota fuel pump as it use a return line type of fuel injection (the limit of my knowledge). It use's a big dumb round nut to hold the pump in and I could never find a definitive answer just hints, that a Jeep Wrangler - YJ from 1987 to 1995 had the same nut. Both kind of Mopar-ish though and the dimensions were workable. Found a couple of used tanks on EBay but no one would ship to Canada, until a new listing said they would, ....by ......(WAIT FOR IT) ......United states postal service!

Built brackets and mounted the tank (took a week) and removed the Dakota pump, it is too tall, so now what? The OEM Jeep pump (would have to buy) has no return line so major re-plumbing would be required, so I disassembled the Dakota pump, the two haves of the pump bracket slide up and down from the factory (wonder why?). So I re-drilled the screw holes and shortened the pump casing. Will it work, who knows, but it fits the tank now. All of this took a lot longer then I can begin to tell you, a week ago I couldn't even spell fuel injection and now I am taking the pump apart, nuts.

The shortened pump and the jeep tank.
,

there is no reason i can think of your pump mods wouldn't work. in fact, i think you did good ! that jeep tank looks like it belongs there.

So, I wanted to use some wheels off a Mark 7 LSC on my plymouth wagon but the rear ones were in pretty bad shape. Couple of years ago I saw a ad on Kijiji for a guy doing powder coating so i sent him a email and some pictures and asked if he could fix them. He came back with, ………………………...quote: “Those are turds”.

I knew that, and that was why I was asking him, ….so much for customer service. I got around to looking closer at them and it was the clear coat that was blistering. I sanded it off and used some paint remover, so what do you think of my turds now? Before and after.

,

Nice work and a nice touch using the R/T center caps.

Thanks, they are not really R/T centre caps, they are the original LSC caps with R/T decals on them. Worked out well, but it was partly in self-defence, as I anticipated having to explain to those that noticed what LSC meant.

Do those wheels have a "BBS" marking on them? If so, they are high quality German wheels.

R.

Great project!

Some (major) progress.........I think ? ........The body is back on.

Getting the body back on is major progress! Now you get to make everything else fit. Let the fun begin! Gene

it looks like your ride height target has been met. as gene said, now the fun really starts ! good progress.

So, as earlier mentioned, at great effort on my part, I wanted to run the exhaust out in front of the rear wheels. Thus the reinforced holes in the frame, so with the body off I could see that the leaf spring might come up and hit the exhaust pipes. so I flatten them somewhat . Fast forward to the body back on and Mr. Murphy showing up. The spring is right in the middle of the exhaust hole in the frame, no way to put the pipe in. PILOT ERROR ! And almost no space between the spring and the frame, maybe 1 1/4", never get any kind of round pipe in there ?

So I consulted with my resident technical expert (Gene) and (I hope) that the sq inches opening of 2 inch pipe is almost the same (restriction) as 3 pieces of 1 in by 1 in square tubing. So after many redesigns I have an over the spring Rube Goldberg (anyone remember) contraption, with some of the internal walls removed were the pipes come in.

Some tweaks need, but will it work?

Area of 2" pipe is Pi x radius sqaured.
So size wise it's very close.
Turbulence in that fitting will be VERY high. I work with airflow and that doesn't look like good airflow. Is good airflow honestly needed?? What's the engine, stockish small block? What's the usage? More lower rpm than wound right out? Might be fine!

Same (almost) area of both are one thing, not the same as same restriction..

Sometimes, but not often, Murphy isn't paying attention and things just work out. Just a test fit but I'm a happy camper. Work in progress seats etc 1994 Mark viii into '56 plymouth 2 door wagon.

,,

In probably a futile attempt to trick the engine management computer into thinking it's still a Dakota (and save a couple of dollars) and because it is a plug and play system I used the Dakota dash gauges module. A lot of work to try to NOT make it look like a dorky add on crappy thing. Not sure if I was successful or not ? (I dislike body work)

looks to me like you did a pretty good job !
i dislike bodywork as well, so i limit mine to the use of hammers, prybars, and grinders. you have way better skills than i.

It’s coming out super cool thanks for sharing.

My 54 is also on a dakota front suspension/steering. It drives really nicely you’re gonna love it.

As usual it is two (maybe) steps forward and at least one back. I hate Murphy. Keep in mind this is a work in progress and not a photo op.

I ordered one double and one single steering u-joint and a 3/4 DD shaft off eBay and I had a old hiem 3/4 shaft support bearing from a previous project. When I test fitted the shaft to the bearing it was not a press fit and the shaft just turned inside the bearing. Much confusion over reduced shaft size on the net that I never did understand. So I installed everything and applied permatex bearing mount and it worked well (to well). After curing overnight I could not turn the steering wheel, I had inadvertently got some chemical into the support bearing. I don't know where the hiem joint (in picture on the A arm) came from and was going to order a new one but they don't come with a locking collar (for the small shaft) and could not find definitive dimensions so ordered a stock car firewall style. Its in the modified old bracket now.

I am using the complete Dakota original wiring harness (trying to trick the computer) and the main block plug fit (with some grinding) the original wire plug hole.

Unfortunately the inside half of the plug had a very short wire harness to the fuse box so to avoid rewiring it went into the kick panel, not great but it will do. Please note my first re-upholstery job for this project on the new kick panels . Good enough for me.

The Dakota gauges installed in the modified Plymouth dash. Came out OK.

OFF TOPIC, but of interest: I often get sidetracked on other small things, the fuel injection intake was ugly bad dirty dull, so a couple of minutes a day I would brush / spray, paint remover, grease remover, thinners, varsol, oven cleaner. and anything that I didn't know what it was on. it still looked bad but test primed with acid etching primer and then some wheel paint. Wow!.
,

your dash looks super installed ! i like the AC ducts on each side as well.

the steering shaft support heims are .007 oversize in case you are painting your shaft. i have found if a guy uses a new 3/4" heim, sometimes those are too tight, and won't go over the shaft.
what i have also found, is a "slightly" used 3/4 heim has just the right amount of wear to fit over the stainless shaft. i also prefer a teflon lined heim over the standard non-lined one for steering.
it seems to smooth things up some.
you are making more progress than i am on my humpback or charger resurrection. all my effort most of the summer has been directed to getting garage things rearranged, and home projects.
i have two weeks left, then go in for a surgery that has a 8-12 week recovery time.
it's not real serious, but it will make me bonkers until i can FINALLY get back to FUN projects.
as to the locking collar, the ACE hardware on the corner has 3/4" locking collars, but they have a 3/4" hole through, not a "double D". if a guy wanted something like that, it needs to be custom made.

keep up the great work !

Thanks for the comments. Good luck with the surgery.

I had a bum scope last month and apparently I din't follow the prep directions correctly, because when she was finished , the doc turned the camera sideways to take it out to teach me a lesson.
Hurt like hell.

Never really thought about the locking collar idea but how would you attach it to hold the inner bearing race?

Thanks.

the locking collar doesn't attach to the inner bearing race. it is used sometimes as an added insurance to keep the shaft length in position in case something happens.
it doesn't really matter if the shaft turns in the bearing, or the bearing turns in the heim [we are talking the .007 oversize heims here], as there is not much continuous movement.
i don't like the shaft turning inside the bearing myself. when that happens, i mark both sides of the shaft where the heim will be, take the shaft off, then chuck the shaft in the lathe and use a serration tool to make serrations on the shaft in that area. reassemble the heim on the shaft, and the serrations make the heim a light press fit.
taking into consideration most don't have a lathe at home, mark the shaft where the heim will end up, then take a sharp center punch and make several deep punch marks on both sides of the rounded portions of the double D shaft.
put a tiny dab of red loctite on each side, tape the joints where the bearing is on both sides, tap the heim into position with a section of 3/4" water pipe.
when done, wipe off the excess loctite [making sure none got under the tape and into the bearing race], then stand, or hang, the shaft vertically. this insures any loctite that may run out will run down the shaft instead of migrating into/around the bearing and race.
don't know if this will be helpful to you or not.

Yes it is. I always get a idea that I had not thought of, like the serrations, unfortunately I had tried the loctite but being a Klutz managed to get into the bearing. The firewall stock car support does come with a with a locking collar attached to the inner bearing race. So its all in now and seems good. Thanks,

Not sure how I'm only just seeing this thread now, but I wish I had the space, equipment, and skills to do this to my '55 Plaza wagon.

Thanks for the post ....... you also need the stubbornness, ignorance, and stupidity to keep on doing it, not counting the thousand and thousand of dollars, the only good thing about getting old is that for the most part the family is out on their own and after working for a long time you now have time to do what you want.

Space, equipment, and skills are all acquired things. You get them because you have determined that you want them.

I've been doing these old car conversions for many years. I work out of a 2 car garage with a cement driveway. My tool box is a very old 10 drawer Craftsman top chest, and a used 6 drawer bottom box someone gave me. I also have a welder, a bench vice, an air compressor, a plasma cutter (something I didn't have until 1/2 way through my building years), and an assortment of welding clamps.

My skills are 80% learned by experience. You just can't be afraid to screw something up. Success in the little things is what keeps you involved. A bunch of successful little things gives you the experience and confidences to keep moving forward.

The 1st major project I did came out of a junk yard, so I figured I couldn't hurt it in any way. The most I would loose was my time and a few bucks worth of parts that I might not be able to resell after removing before I would send the project back to the junk yard.
Every build brings with it more and different challenges, and plenty of new learning experiences. Its those things that keep bringing me new projects.

My son did a 57 Dodge wagon on original suspension (rebuilt) with a disc brake conversion and has a modern Hemi. You don't have to do a front clip if you don't want to. There are many levels between the stock original and a full blown frame off build.

If you decide to commit to building your wagon, there are people here that have experience. They are more then ready to share and help guide you through the level of build you would like to do. Gene

I did my 54 C-series on a dak. It was a lot more hands on and involved than just dropping the body on!

You can read the whole saga on the flathead dodge site. https://p15-d24.com/topic/47345-512-cid-c-series-on-dakota-chassis-build-thread/

Poorboy helped me out a lot in the beginning too. .

I was posting there weekly or more for over a year- every system adapted & fabricated sometimes twice when an idea didn’t work!

Feel free to PM me any questions or to get my phone # here if I can help I’d be happy to.

Radar

Just a short useless boring update. The rear wheel wells were rotten but repair panels are either not available or expensive, thinking outside of the box it turned out that early C10 are very close to the same profile and cheap. Only a purist might be able to see the difference.



Turns out that my stubbornness and cheapness backfired, ... the diff is to wide and the wheels to big and I could not remove the wheels. So, plan "B", an added on latter model C10 panel. Cheap. Not so stock looking now.

As long as you never park beside an original one, only you and maybe 3 other people on the planet will ever know.

I think it's a brilliant solution.

Kevin

The early one does look a little better tho. Could you have raised it an inch or so?

Did you jack the car up by the bumper or with a floor jack? I couldn't get the back tires off my 66 New Yorker unless the suspension was hanging.

Kevin

When I patched the wheel well openings in my son's 56 Dodge panel, I found a set of patch panels off a 65 Mustang worked nicely, they only had a single wheel lip that stuck out from the body sides almost 2" and looked like they belonged there. Sorry no pictures, that was almost 20 years ago!. 65 Mustang stuff was cheap at the time. Gene

Thanks, I lifted on the frame so that the axle was hanging, undid the shocks, and had to use a bottle jack between the frame and the diff, to take the tires off. Not what I wanted to be doing on the side of the road at night in a rain storm.
The car is severely lowered with Dakota leaf springs. The wheel-wells might be ugly but it worksl. (kind of like a Nomad).

Yes, that's what hot rodding is about, thinking outside of the box.

So I see that I have not done a update for some time. Some small progress, maybe, I tend to get distracted with things that might be interesting. like door and wall panels and back up camera.
The front door window rubbers is another horror story. Gas tank filler is done and working on brackets for front bumper. Stereo sounds GREAT. Minus 25 Celsius this week, no shop work.

,
,[