I need the information to confirm the design of a monocoque body that I am having made to take Range Rover, Disco and Defender running gear. If I have the installation angle I can project from the engine mounting position and comfim that the position of the transmission mounting bracket holes is correct.
I'm guessing you're talking about modified monocoque design, with unit body construction atop a frame, such as RRC and Disco, as opposed to frameless design witth front and rear subframes.
If you're refering to the angle between crank centerline and axle centerline, It isn't an issue in the Defender (non monocoque) because of the huge clearance between the bulkhead and transmission bellhousing. Range Rovers and Discos were mounted well over the top of the bellhousing and have painfully little space, especially obvious when trying to pull an engine out of a Range Rover. Without knowing what the angle actually is, it has to be pretty small if any. Having had the entire front end off my Defender, I'd say the engine is pretty damn near flat. Doesn't seem it's much different in either of my son's Disco or RRC either.
Since you're building your own, don't you pretty much have a clean sheet of paper?
Thanks for your response. "My" monocoque has neither a frame (chassis) underneath nor subframes. It is a monocoque as per a normal car or Jeep Cherokee since the mid 80's. The engine mounts pick up on a longitudinal member that is an integral part of the body and the Rover suspension arms mount to the body via similar reinforced brackets.
The engine / transmission may look horizontal, but its not. If you check to 2 top bolt holes of the 3 where the transmission brackets bolt to the chassis you will see that they are not parallel to the top of the chassis thus indicating a slope, albeit a small one.
I need to be accurate with these positions as the Land Rover suspensions, axles and engine / transmissions must bolt straight in. Accurate repeatability is essential.