Piston and rod install

[Glenwood]

Something doesn't look right. The clearance cannot possibly be .0345 and the plastigauge shows about .0015. I've triple checked my math and it looks right so my measurements must be off. I'll get a mic and check it again more carefully.

 

[Challenger340]

OK, so basically a stock 413 build with mild Cam, but upgraded Rods(eagle) and Pistons(2.06" C.D.)
IMO,
* Shoot for a minimum .002" Vertical Rod Bearing Clearance, again here, Bearing "COOLING" on the H Eccentricity Rod Bearings, and measured PHYSICALLY using a Bore Gauge(NOT MATH)
If you were using stock "P" eccentricity Bearings then fine at the .0015" because of the greater degree of change over closer to the parting lines, but you are using "H" Bearings, so IMO, .002" as a minimum for cooling.
* Mains as close to .0025" to .003" as you can get(big diameter bearing speed @ 2.750" Diameter, and again here Brg cooling)

ANY cast Iron Cylinder Head is more than capable of Flowing enough cfm to support 400-450 hp if that is your target goal. Even the old 516's with the small 1.60" Exhaust Valves can do it, but obviously here FAR BETTER with minimum 1.74" Exhaust and 1.81" even better.

WHO Pin-Fitted the Eagle Rod small Ends ?
The Pistons ?
NO, they are NOT "ready to run" new OOTB, and if you read the supplied Eagle literature they will specify .0009" to .0015" and to adjust as req'd ?
Most Eagle H-Beams are only factory fit at around .0002" to .0003" and TIGHT ?
I would suggest .0008" to .0009" as good for a stock'ish street build.
Did you notice the Pins fit kind of "tight" in the Rod small ends ? or did your Machinist adjust them ?

 

[Glenwood]

OK, so basically a stock 413 build with mild Cam, but upgraded Rods(eagle) and Pistons(2.06" C.D.)
IMO,
* Shoot for a minimum .002" Vertical Rod Bearing Clearance, again here, Bearing "COOLING" on the H Eccentricity Rod Bearings, and measured PHYSICALLY using a Bore Gauge(NOT MATH)
If you were using stock "P" eccentricity Bearings then fine at the .0015" because of the greater degree of change over closer to the parting lines, but you are using "H" Bearings, so IMO, .002" as a minimum for cooling.
* Mains as close to .0025" to .003" as you can get(big diameter bearing speed @ 2.750" Diameter, and again here Brg cooling)

ANY cast Iron Cylinder Head is more than capable of Flowing enough cfm to support 400-450 hp if that is your target goal. Even the old 516's with the small 1.60" Exhaust Valves can do it, but obviously here FAR BETTER with minimum 1.74" Exhaust and 1.81" even better.

WHO Pin-Fitted the Eagle Rod small Ends ?
The Pistons ?
NO, they are NOT "ready to run" new OOTB, and if you read the supplied Eagle literature they will specify .0009" to .0015" and to adjust as req'd ?
Most Eagle H-Beams are only factory fit at around .0002" to .0003" and TIGHT ?
I would suggest .0008" to .0009" as good for a stock'ish street build.
Did you notice the Pins fit kind of "tight" in the Rod small ends ? or did your Machinist adjust them ?

The rods, pins and pistons were supplied, checked and adjusted by the machine shop. The 1.094 pins were not overly tight to install.

What is your opinion on using open vs closed chamber for this application? Pump gas is about 93 octane at the highest around here.
Pistons are .019-.020 in the hole with 6.77 valve reliefs. I was thinking about the purple 509 hyd cam which has an lsa of 108* and duration of [email protected].
Car is automatic w/2400 stall, 3.55 gears and 26" wheel at the moment.

 

[miller]

Something doesn't look right. The clearance cannot possibly be .0345 and the plastigauge shows about .0015.

What Challenger340 is telling you is on the mark. Now for your quote...that is exactly why I won't even touch plastigage! Doing even a basic engine build, for the critical bearings, need to know exactly what clearance your getting.
Even using a good set of mics, I'll admit, run into some that didn't know how to use them (like a C-clamp!). But, that's beside the point. Thumbs up to you for trying, but a caliper, and that plastic stuff don't cut it. Your experiencing that now.
Wonder about your mains? (Just looking at you NOT having any problems with your first build.) Sorry...always had a problem believing someone else's numbers, but my own.
It would be better to make sure it's right, now, than later.

 

[miller]

What is your opinion on using open vs closed chamber for this application?

That will depend on a few things in your build...CR ratio your looking at, pistons, and what each head chamber will result (regarding CR). Just need to look at a goal, what results you want, and use one of the CR calculators.

 

[Challenger340]

The rods, pins and pistons were supplied, checked and adjusted by the machine shop. The 1.094 pins were not overly tight to install.

What is your opinion on using open vs closed chamber for this application? Pump gas is about 93 octane at the highest around here.
Pistons are .019-.020 in the hole with 6.77 valve reliefs. I was thinking about the purple 509 hyd cam which has an lsa of 108* and duration of [email protected].
Car is automatic w/2400 stall, 3.55 gears and 26" wheel at the moment.

I would think Tim @ FHO would have pin-fit the Rods ? He does good work in my experience, but I can't quantify what as you said "not overly tight" is for clearance ?
Just trying to Dot I's and cross T's to help you, again, maybe ask Tim if he did it ?

My opinion on open vrs closed chambers would probably be the same as anyone else's, while the closed chambers quench characteristics are an asset, the benefits are limited with cast iron approaching 10:1 on pump gas dependent upon how much Cylinder pressure you are bleeding off with the Camshaft ? And make no mistake here the 93 Octane rating available to you here in Canada is done so using Ethanol or Hydroxide group derivatives.... NOT pure Benzene rings(Gasoline), so proper jetting can be a bear without an Engine Dyno session to tune for it accurately.
In my experience,(and I haven't used one since the early 80's), the .509" with 248* @ .050 duration makes decent power up top..... but it is a pretty darn lazy Camshaft down low ? and Brake Vacuum is even worse ? IMO, Pretty BIG/LAZY darn Camshaft for a 2400 stall and 3.55's.... but the short 26" will help ?
You may wish to go see what the .509" does to Dynamic Cylinder Pressure on whatever targeted Static Compression Ratio/Head combo over here:
Static C.R. here: http://www.wallaceracing.com/cr_test2.php
Dynamic Here: http://www.wallaceracing.com/dynamic-cr.php

I thought this was a 'stock'ish' type build ?
400 to 450 hp goal ?
IMO,
248* @ .050 is getting up there a bit ? and would want Headers, Good Intake, 10:1, 3,000+ rpm Stall, etc., etc. and on 108* LSA Brake Vacuum is limited
just say'in....
might be some better grinds to look at ?

 

[Glenwood]

I would think Tim @ FHO would have pin-fit the Rods ? He does good work in my experience, but I can't quantify what as you said "not overly tight" is for clearance ?
Just trying to Dot I's and cross T's to help you, again, maybe ask Tim if he did it ?

My opinion on open vrs closed chambers would probably be the same as anyone else's, while the closed chambers quench characteristics are an asset, the benefits are limited with cast iron approaching 10:1 on pump gas dependent upon how much Cylinder pressure you are bleeding off with the Camshaft ? And make no mistake here the 93 Octane rating available to you here in Canada is done so using Ethanol or Hydroxide group derivatives.... NOT pure Benzene rings(Gasoline), so proper jetting can be a bear without an Engine Dyno session to tune for it accurately.
In my experience,(and I haven't used one since the early 80's), the .509" with 248* @ .050 duration makes decent power up top..... but it is a pretty darn lazy Camshaft down low ? and Brake Vacuum is even worse ? IMO, Pretty BIG/LAZY darn Camshaft for a 2400 stall and 3.55's.... but the short 26" will help ?
You may wish to go see what the .509" does to Dynamic Cylinder Pressure on whatever targeted Static Compression Ratio/Head combo over here:
Static C.R. here: http://www.wallaceracing.com/cr_test2.php
Dynamic Here: http://www.wallaceracing.com/dynamic-cr.php

I thought this was a 'stock'ish' type build ?
400 to 450 hp goal ?
IMO,
248* @ .050 is getting up there a bit ? and would want Headers, Good Intake, 10:1, 3,000+ rpm Stall, etc., etc. and on 108* LSA Brake Vacuum is limited
just say'in....
might be some better grinds to look at ?

Tim looked after the rods & pins. They wouldn't go in dry but slipped in snuggly with oil.

I picked a mic and checked each rod journal and each rod individually. Clevite's instructions says to insert the bearings dry. I had already lubed the backsid of each half so i cleaned everything and started checking with a dial bore against the mic. Each rod has .002 clearance so I guess I'm good to go. Just waiting on the stretch gauge to arrive.
After each bolt is checked loose, are the rods installed on to the crank and then torqued and checked for stretch? I'm not clear on the procedure.

Mild build might be a better term than stock. I don't have power brakes so not really concerned about vacuum. I sent some info to hughes and they recommended this cam.

This is with open chamber irons and my 2400 stall. Maybe the lower duration is a better fit for my set up?

 

[Glenwood]

I think this cam might work best for my combination with iron heads. Thoughts?

Just realized the fields didn't copy with the image.
Here's the specs. Intake closed at 39* and should give me about 170lbs of cylinder pressure with the 906 heads.

Hydraulic Flat Tappet. This high performance street cam likes 2400 RPM stall, 800 CFM carb, dual plane intake and headers. Makes un- equaled power to 6200 RPM with proper valve springs.

• Advertised Duration (Int/Exh): 268/276
• Duration @ .050 (Int/Exh): 226/234
• Gross Valve Lift (Int/Exh): .494/.513
• LSA/ICL: 110/106
• Valve Lash (Int/Exh): Hyd/Hyd
• RPM Range: 1800-6200
• Includes: Cam Only

Part Number: 10230703
Previous Part Number: 60303

 

[miller]

Going to say sorry, Glenwood...guess I tossed a wrench in the works. After the fact, now. Yeah, I know all the 'instructions' tell you to install the bearings dry. I measure mine dry, but with the sharp edges rods usually have, the thin coat of lube on the backside of the bearings, simply make it easier, to slip them into place. Just something I've always done, no matter what type engine. If the parts fit right, that lube gets pushed out anyway. Main thing is, you know what your clearance is, now.

Not any kind of cam knowledge on my end, so I'll leave that to guys who do know!

I get a kick out of the newish ideas on bolt stretch measuring, vs torque. Measuring bolt stretch is something I had to do, all day long, but on a round motor crankshaft bolt. Only one eight inch bolt, that held the two halves together.
Myself...I'd just torque 'em...but, that's just me.

 

[Glenwood]

No worries Miller. I don't know if it really matters whether the backside of the bearings are lubed or not for running the engine. When I mic'd the crank and checked the rod with the bearing back lubed, it still gave me a .0015. That's when I did some reading and saw clevite's instructions, so I cleaned them all off thoroughly and re-measured. I wouldn't have thought that lubing the backside could throw the measurement off.

I'm with you on torquing, but having little experience with engine assembly and after market rod bolts, I'm not sure if torquing to spec is good enough. Seems to me to be a good idea for a high performance build, but maybe overkill for a mild build like mine? I get the concept of bolt stretching and accuracy for torquing, just not sure on the procedure for using a stretch gauge. Trying to find one locally is another story. Seems like no one around here sells decent tools for machine work anymore, so it's a waiting game for orders from the US.

 

[dieseldazzle]

I've never used any lube on the backside of bearings. Not saying it's wrong. I'm not a machinist nor an engine builder, I'm just an assembler and assembled over 100 motors with only two failures. If the lube on the back is ok then I've learned something new today, which is why i love this place

 

[miller]

No worries Miller. I don't know if it really matters whether the backside of the bearings are lubed or not for running the engine.

Thanks! And, it doesn't matter. What it boils down to, is simply the engine builders preferences. Just measuring things up, and slapping 'em together, all comes into play on getting one together...and, it actually running for awhile. I only chose my 'methods', that I believe gives the engine it's best chance to live. Had to work with too many others, that had their ways, totally opposite, from me.
You still only getting .0015 on the rods? How do the crank journals look...should be polished, smooth, enough to drag the tip of your fingernail across, and feel nothing. Should almost be able to shave, looking at them. That smooth, and straight. I usually redo mine, even after getting 'polished', by hand with wet 600 grit. But, again, that's just me.

On the rod bolt thing, sure, some will dis-agree with me. Just doing a good job of torquing them, would be fine. Wet, or dry, using the amount for whichever way...wet is prefered, since it allows lube on the threads, them slipping into place, as the tightness is applied. Also gives a truer torque result.

The stretch bolts I had to work with, could easily understand, since they did the tightness bit, on an actual 'clamping' part on those cranks.

 

[Glenwood]

rods have .002 now without the lube. crank looks highly polished to me.

Decided to pop the crank back out and clean the backside of the mains and re-measure. Sucks because I already installed the rear main seal.
Main bearing clearances are .003 on all five.

 

[miller]

Your bearing clearances are good, but if you need the practice...
.003 on the mains is slightly on the high side to me, prefer .002-.0025, but 3 is still perfectly okay. Just more room for oil, right! Evil thoughts on my part, but you might consider which oil, and weight, your going to run through it. VR1 is the only oil I've ever used...break-in with 30w, then 40w. Keep in mind, even the 40w, after it get to temp, is more like 20w!
All sounds good to go. The crank should rotate pretty easy, even with the rear seal in place. How about the piston/rod...pistons should move back and forth, with no resistance, if there's enough clearance on the pins.

 

[Hemirunner]

Just my opinion,
But I would NOT be very happy with .0015" Vertical Rod Bearing Clearance.
WHY ?
Show me in the "specifications" where .0015" is acceptable ?

Just make sure that "column" in those specifications, is clearly marked for a 550-600 HP @ 6,000 rpm, Aluminum Headed 440 Stroker Engine OK ?

I don't know much about the Engine Combination / Horsepower aspiration you are targeting ? and granted, I haven't read back to find out what you are building here ?
I've only seen a few pics in this thread.....
but from those I see a "stroker" build of some type ?
and from the Flat Top Pistons ? I am assuming also some kind of Aluminum Head ?
Camshaft for rpm ?
Extra RPM = HEAT in the Oil
Extra Load = HEAT in the Oil
Remember here,
The ONLY way Engine Bearings COOL is by the free flow of new and COOLER Oil "IN" .... predicated on the ability of the HOT oil to get "OUT"

Ditto on DITCH the Plasti-gauge.
Get a Bore Gauge and physically measure the Vertical Bearing Clearance, if it is .0015" ? You have some options to decide upon.

Agree on the clearances. Switching to an HXN bearing will get him what he needs. I disagree on the plastigage comment. For the average joe who doesn't have the experience with precision measuring equipment, it's a great tool and contrary to the wives tails, pretty damn accurate.