SoCal Jet Boats
Tech Talk => Engine Mechanical / Electrical => Topic started by: Brad @ SCJB on May 11, 2011, 06:51:01 AM
-
I have a 4 bolt chevy 454...std bore.
I siezed the bottom end of it last summer. I had the forged crank turned 30 over on mains, and 20 over on rods.....the block got line bored, and rods resized.
Crank measures out to .027 and I have .030 bearings, but clearances are showing .0015 or .002 at best on the mains. Rods are .003 (ideal) with a .020 bearing. (Using tools, not plasti-gauge)
What do you guys suggest to do? Re-line bore the block? Turn a thou or 2 off the crank? Or just run it?
This is a mild build that's going in a cruiser.
-
have you swapped half of the bearing shell to another location to see if you can get any more clearance? can you get any 1 under bearings at .030? and i hate to say it, but, if you run really thin oil you mite be ok. but then again you have .003 on the rods so it would be a crap shoot. what is the size of the block now and what is the spec?
-
Buy .030X bearings for the mains and re-measure. I know you don't want to hear that but... :banghead:
-
Buy .030X bearings for the mains and re-measure. I know you don't want to hear that but... :banghead:
Aren't 30x's larger? That would make less clearance.
And no, no one makes .029 bearings. They make .019's or .021's...but no offset for 30 overs...
No sanding back sides of bearings either....the #5 thurst is too small too.
-
King MB-5147HP030X = .029
-
Google returns nothing on that number. Got a link to where I can buy them?
I'm on my phone so searching is limited.
-
First off.....
You had the the crank ground undersized, not oversized. Oversized bearings accept an undersized crank. You said you're using measuring tools I stead of plasti guage....what size is the crank? Did they truely take it .030 under or did they take it .028 or .029 under?
The "x" in x bearings indicate an X-tra .001" of clearance.....which based on your numbers, may still be on the tight side.
Always check the work of the machine shop....my experience has been that more often than not, they fawk everything up.
There are specs for rod and main bores withoutthe bearings in yet....confirm that they didn't fawk those up. While you're at it, check cam to crank distance and make sure they didn't move the mains too far up in the block....measure this at the front and the back to make sure they bored the mains straight. Then do the math and see who screwed up what up....clearly, something isn't right
-
http://www.kingbearings.com/contact.php (http://www.kingbearings.com/contact.php)
-
First off.....
You had the the crank ground undersized, not oversized. You said you're using measuring tools I stead of plasti guage....what size is the crank? Did they truely take it .030 under or did they take it .028 or .029 under?
The "x" in x bearings indicate an X-tra .001" of clearance.....which based on your numbers, may still be on the tight side.
Always check the work of the machine shop....my experience has been that more often than not, they fawk everything up.
I agree. Forking machinists :sly:
-
Pat....I said the crank is .027 on the mains....
-
Then they Fawked up the crank. And based on the fact that you have any clearance at all and the crank still turns in the block, the Fawked up the block too. A .027 under crank with a .030 bearing should have 0 - .0005" clearance....not .0015-.002 or whatever your measuring. A correct crank in a .030 bearing should have .003-.0035 clearance....but based on what you're saying....if your crank was a true .030 under, you'd end up around .004-.0055".
Fix it right
-
Then they Fawked up the crank. And based on the fact that you have any clearance at all and the crank still turns in the block, the Fawked up the block too. A .027 under crank with a .030 bearing should have 0 - .0005" clearance
I'm confused. Logic math says differently. Please explain.
-
This is how we came up with the clearance numbers..
-Mic'd the crank
-Then zero'd the bore gauge in the mic
-Torqued the mains down with the bearings in
-The difference the bore gauge showed determind the clearance
-
I'm confused. Logic math says differently. Please explain.
You're switching the over/under terms in your head. A .027" under crank is bigger than a .030" under crank. An x bearing has a bigger hole in it than a STD bearing. An 030" over bearing should yield the correct clearance (.0035 for this discussion) on a proper .030 under crank....but in your case, it doesn't. Based on this logic, with a .003 oversized crank(which you say you have....030 minus .027 = .003)...it should have no clearance in a .030 bearing...but you have clearance.....why?
-
Yup....my logic is backwards. I'm still learnin. Bare with me.
-
That's why i'm here sweetheart
-
Brad your thinking of the crank in terms of the bearing, if they cut the crank and it is .027 that's closer to a crank that was cut to .020! That's why your math isnt adding up! if it was over cut it would be .032, and closer to a crank that was cut to .040...hope this helps
-
TTT Let's get back on topic. Should he buy another set of bearings? HAve his crank ground a little more? Cut the block another .001?
-
wouldnt cutting the block yield a different timing chain set? I would say at this point i would have the crank turned!
-
Fukk it, this is makin my brain hurt. I need some sleep.
I'm gunna plastigauge it with a twizzler and call it good. I need a fuckin river trip...bad.
-
He needs to measure and measure some more and see where the errors (yes, there are several) lie, and have them corrected.
-
you might wanna plastigauge it with one of your dogs hairs, because a twizzler is gonna make a very very very flat spot!
-
wouldnt cutting the block yield a different timing chain set? I would say at this point i would have the crank turned!
yes, but the block has already been cut....so first step is to see how bad they dicked that up....check diameters as well as alignment (referenced off of the cam journals, for lack of a more reliable reference in this case). Also, was it decked or bored? If so, it's very critical that the mains were
Done straight, or all other work (which SHOULD be referenced off the finished mains) will be inaccurate. All of this stuff needs to be checked before thinking about putting it together.
-
Was not decked or bored....only line bored. Replaced #4 cap. It was cooked bad.
-
are you getting a consistent measurement in all of the mains? Is that something that they got right? Or is it tapering down?
-
MMMM twizzlers.
-
Not that I am watching this post and PMing behind everyones backs or anything!
-
Number 5 tapers .0005 all others have no taper wether from main to main or within each main.
-
ron have an iced mccafe for me would ya?
-
Not that I am watching this post and PMing behind everyones backs or anything!
Haha...HB57 has been helpin me out with this build.
Josh, we only got the one measurement after the line bore. Before the line bore we got many different measurements...then figired out I needed the line bore....maybe I can coax hime over with in n out and diet dr pepper to measure it for me again....ill throw in a pack of twizzlers too ronnie.
-
Was not decked or bored....only line bored. Replaced #4 cap. It was cooked bad.
I disagree with changing the reference point (mains) without correcting all the other things that need to be square and aligned to the crank. If that was my block, it would probably be in the trash at this point. I can't stand shops that don't understand how things work
-
clearance issues is always a fun topic! Brad if your half asleep it might be time to either take a nap, or hit the pipe lol! Measure, Measure, Measure!
-
I disagree with changing the reference point (mains) without correcting all the other things that need to be square and aligned to the crank. If that was my block, it would probably be in the trash at this point. I can't stand shops that don't understand how things work
Well, you're quick to jump to conclusions there buddy. Why do you assume its junk and the shop fubar'd it up? I know you are bitter about machine shops, but reserve your emotions here. I'm not fond of throwing this block in the trash either as you suggested.
-
Brad, in the interest of saving you time, I will sell you the blower motor. $3k short $6k long, $9k hook up fuel line and wires and go. I need yours as a core. 8-71 dominators............ Credit card via PayPal do it as a gift.
-
I got a check at home waiting for you.
-
Brad, in the interest of saving you time, I will sell you the blower motor. $3k short $6k long, $9k hook up fuel line and wires and go. I need yours as a core. 8-71 dominators............ Credit card via PayPal do it as a gift.
DO IT, DO IT
-
Pat, do you know what the finished align hone ID should be if correct? Or anyone?
PS LBHSBZ is a machinist, he has tighter tolerances than those that are not machinists. His opinion counts, even if you do not agree.
-
Well, you're quick to jump to conclusions there buddy. Why do you assume its junk and the shop fubar'd it up? I know you are bitter about machine shops, but reserve your emotions here. I'm not fond of throwing this block in the trash either as you suggested.
Because they moved the crank without moving the stuff that references off the crank. I'm not assuming the shop fubar'd it up, you told me they fubar'd it up with your measurements...this stands as a fact. The question still remains though...how bad they fubar'd it up.
The correct order of operation for block machine work is:
1: main bores...becuase all other operations reference from this.
2: everything else.
You can't do everything else, then do the crank. If one were to draw an imaginary line down the center of the cylinder bore, it should intersect the exact centerline of the mains. This is how it was done at the factory. When you leave the cylinders alone and remachine the main bores, you're moving the crank up in the block, so now our cylinder centerline intersects below the main centerline. This is what your block looks like now...and the decks aren't square to the mains either, which doesn't really matter in this case.
This is why you need to measure where the crank is now in relation to where it should be....to see how far they cut into the block when they did the mains. You need this information for several reasons...first one being....see if you can get a timing chain that's short enough to fit without an inch of slop in it, and secondly...to see how far you are away from square. I would probably allow a few thousandths, but not much more unless the bores and deck were remachined to square everything back up.
This will also change your compression ratio somewhat, because now the pistons be higher in the cylinder at TDC...it may be a problem, it may not...but we won't know without measuring it.
I have no problem with machine shops. I have a problem with machinists who don't "get it", and do work like this without thinking twice about it. Its hard work to do things right....people don't like to work hard.
-
Ooooohhhhh a check, we will have wait 7-10 business days. Don't worry I'm in bed with a banker, we may be able to cut a few days off of that!
-
Don't you all have jobs??? What are you doing playing on the computer at work? Brad is the only one that isn't logged in!! HAH
-
YEAH!!! GET BACK TO WORK!
-
Get some rest Bud! ;) I had to re read all this 3 times to wrap my head around it.
Pat is correct, I would be double checking to ensure the main bores are square fore and aft of the cam bores, and not tapered, etc. Other than that, assuming all is well there, the crank is .027 under, the bearings are expecting a .030 under crank and you still have clearance. I fail to see where the bearings could possibly be too thin to scotchbrite the backsides and taylor fit each one to the clearance you're after...... ???
Ray
-
I have a 4 bolt chevy 454...std bore.
I siezed the bottom end of it last summer. I had the forged crank turned 30 over on mains, and 20 over on rods.....the block got line bored, and rods resized.
Crank measures out to .027 and I have .030 bearings, but clearances are showing .0015 or .002 at best on the mains. Rods are .003 (ideal) with a .020 bearing. (Using tools, not plasti-gauge)
What do you guys suggest to do? Re-line bore the block? Turn a thou or 2 off the crank? Or just run it?
This is a mild build that's going in a cruiser.
Technically, the current combo and machine work as it stands could be made to work just fine as-is, given the day cruiser application and the (presumably) ~400 hp build.
That being said, I would suggest a different approach:
A crankshaft that is supposed to be turned to -0.030" and is only at -0.027" is absolutely not within tolerance as called out for a 0.030" undersize...and for which you paid. Based on that, you should, 1) take the crankshaft back to the shop and have them verify that the freshly cut mains are outside of specification, 2) the shop should then happily turn the crankshaft to a true -0.030" without further charging you, and, 3) your bearings will then allow a clearance that you feel comfortable.
It's that simple. :)
LO
-
STD crank main journals should measure 2.7489-2.7490, which would make a .030" under crank measure 2.7189-2.7190.
The Main bores, without the bearings installed should measure 2.937-2.938
crank centerline to cam centerline should be 5.150"... ... Measure the cam bearing bore and the front main bore, add 'em together and divide by two, then measure the short distance with some calipers between the main and cam bearings. Add these numbers together and you'll have the centerline distance. How does that compare to the blueprint spec of 5.150.
If you want to have even more fun, do this same thing at the back of the block (you'll have to knock out the steel freeze plug behind the cam) to compare your front to rear numbers to see if the cam is parallel to the crank.
Once you've got this centerline distance, then you can start looking for a shorter timing chain that will work for ya.
-
It's that simple. :)
LO
I don't think it is...if his crank is truely at .027" under, where is the clearance coming from that he's measuring? He shouldn't have ANY clearance with this crank if all else is correct.
-
the .027 number was an assumption off my backwards logic. so lets please disregard that number from here on out.
-
OK, whats the number then
-
OK, whats the number then
im thinking .033 ;)
-
the .027 number was an assumption off my backwards logic. so lets please disregard that number from here on out.
Brad you need to determine the main journal diameter before it can be shown whether the journal has been properly cut or if it is actually undersize as originally believed. The actual dimensions will determine the path taken. Regardless, it is fixable. Anything may be fixed in a machine shop. 8)
I don't think it is...if his crank is truely at .027" under, where is the clearance coming from that he's measuring? He shouldn't have ANY clearance with this crank if all else is correct.
Getting back to the point as originally perceived and discussed (debated) by me and your reply: If in fact the mains are 0.027" undersize, then whether they provide any clearance or not on paper is moot and the reference data you provided is too-little-too-late. The fact is that if there is a measured 0.0015" of clearance and IF the journals are -0.0027" then simply turning them to the high side of specification would give the main clearance desired by the OP. It really IS that simple. Ever hear of the K.I.S.S. method? We are building a day cruiser engine, not a swiss watch F1 engine.
LO
-
OK, whats the number then
I gotta bribe HomeBlown57 to come back over with his micrometer and measure my parts.
.....someone better run with that one.
-
Brad you need to determine the main journal diameter before it can be shown whether the journal has been properly cut or if it is actually undersize as originally believed. The actual dimensions will determine the path taken. Regardless, it is fixable. Anything may be fixed in a machine shop. 8)
Getting back to the point as originally perceived and discussed (debated) by me and your reply: If in fact the mains are 0.027" undersize, then whether they provide any clearance or not on paper is moot and the reference data you provided is too-little-too-late. The fact is that if there is a measured 0.0015" of clearance and IF the journals are -0.0027" then simply turning them to the high side of specification would give the main clearance desired by the OP. It really IS that simple. Ever hear of the K.I.S.S. method? We are building a day cruiser engine, not a swiss watch F1 engine.
LO
Yeah, I know, but if we start with high aspirations chances are better that we'll end up with something that stays together then if we start with compromises. Might as well do it right the first time, then there won't be a second time.
-
I gotta bribe HomeBlown57 to come back over with his micrometer and measure my parts.
.....someone better run with that one.
it's a good thing i read things literally, and dont hardly ever catch the hidden motive ;) I would recommend Ron as well! Seems like he knows what he's doing ;) Pun intended, or not!
-
it's a good thing i read things literally, and dont hardly ever catch the hidden motive ;) I would recommend Ron as well! Seems like he knows what he's doing ;) Pun intended, or not!
So...then one could assume that Ron knows his way around Brad's parts?
-
Like the back of his hand ;D ;) :thumbup:
Brad also knows that ron enjoys Diet Dr. Pepper whatever that means
-
The carbonation makes his parts tingle.
-
Carb KLEEN makes his parts burn! But cleans them thouroughly
-
So brad...did you find your tape measure to get a size on that crank?
-
Updates?
-
nope.....i still havent had a chance to get HomeBlown57 over with his bore gauge and mic's
i got bored the other day and threw some plasti-gauge in the mains...... they came out to .002
i gotta figure out if its the block or the crank.....because different shops did each one......so ill be sending the wrong piece to the shop that did the work.
-
I once threw plastigage in a .020 over bearing with a .010 under crank....said I had .0016" clearance when in reality I had .007" interference. Plastigage is worthless.....
-
Plastigage is worthless.....
I agree with you....it was purely out of curiosity.
-
HB57 just came by and we measured everything out. the block is off on mains 4 and 5. 1-3 are good.
Heres what we got:
Crank Main Journals are all consistently 2.71875 ( about .0032 over from std)
Block Bores are as follows: (Should be 2.937-2.938)
1 = 2.9375
2 = 2.9375
3 = 2.9375
4 = 2.9360 <-- the cap they replaced
5 = 2.9365
we put all 4 sets of bearings in the #1 main and torqued them down and they all came out to 2.7205 (0.00175 clearance), except one set was 2.7210.
I'm gunna take the block back to the guy tomorrow and tell him to fix #4 and #5
then I'll get a set of .030x's (if i can find them). that will give me about .00275 clearance if they get #4 and #5 to match 1-3.
-
Good news. Even though you're in the "acceptable" range on 4 & 5, good call on getting that shit taken care of. Big River?
-
Lucky,
What do you mean by "acceptable range" on 4 and 5?
-
Picking nits here, but you've got to work the numbers right to understand what's really happening.
If your crank measures 2.71875, the it is exactly .0302" UNDERsized....which is close to perfect.
The block disturbs me. I'm not sure how they did what whey did and ended up with different diameters without dicking up several more aspects like alignment (between all the journals as well as main bores going straight Down the block. Did you measure to the cam bores at each end of the block?
-
skip. if i get 0.031 bearings, that will give me .00275 clearance on 1-3 which is a little on the tight side, but close enough......if i dont fix 4 and 5, that will give me .00175 on #5 and .00170 on #4. WAY too tight.
thus not in an acceptable range. ;)
-
Pat: no, we didnt measure anything with the cam. ......and thanks for the undersized correction. I'm still getting the hang of all this....and im a little dyslexic to boot. :screwy:
-
Before letting anyone fix anything, you've got to measure the crank to cam centerline distance at both ends of the block. Line boring a block twice will most likely result in excessive timing chain slop.....you can get .005 and .010" undersized chains, but depending how far they moved up the crank centerline....even those
Will be to long
-
Do you think that maybe they line bored it BEFORE changing out the cap(s) (discovering it was bad) and didn't do so after that? Be willing to bet both #4 and #5 were replaced.......I'm with Pat, can't figure how they physically did that...... :screwy:
Good job catching it though! :thumbup:
Ray
-
Lucky,
What do you mean by "acceptable range" on 4 and 5?
My bad, I had a moment of dyslexia there. :banghead:
-
skip. if i get 0.031 bearings, that will give me .00275 clearance on 1-3 which is a little on the tight side, but close enough......if i dont fix 4 and 5, that will give me .00175 on #5 and .00170 on #4. WAY too tight.
thus not in an acceptable range. ;)
Yeah, I did bad math, it's been a looooooooooong 5 days filled with lots and lots of yellow bellies, I think my brain is starting to work again...
-
Before you ask him to fix it, ask him how he plans on fixing it...and more importantly, how did it end up like this in the first place. Ask him what to do about the timing chain lenght issue? Ask him how out of round those bores will be? I'd stand there and watch him, because I'm willing to bet he's gonna go at with a flap wheel on a die grinder if you leave it with him, and while the thing might measure out OK, it won't be anywhere near round. Also, before you bring it back to him, bolt the rear cap down again and see if the thrust surfaces come close to lining up with those on the block. There is a lot involved in swapping caps and line bore/honing a block....you have to look at all of the things that can possibly go wrong, and have the "machinist" explain what steps he will take to prevent these things from occuring. If you're not happy with his answers, take your shit elsewhere. If he makes you feel stupid while you're asking him questions...take your shit elsewhere.
I'm not posting all this because I've had "experiences" with automotive machine shops, I'm posting this because I don't want to see you waste more time, and possibly money, and end up with something that's the same or worse.
I'd almost be inclined not to return the shop that let something like this out the door. The money you paid him...well, chalk it up to the price of education.
Understand that:
when they do work on the mains, they have to first machine a small amount off of the bottoms of the caps to make the holes smaller, but they also go out of round. After all the caps are torqued back on, the mains are bored, but you can't move a hole, keep it the same size, and keep it round, so the machining procedure involves an interupted cut, which encourages tool deflection, which makes the hole even more not round and screws up the finish. Additionally, with a boring bar as long as it needs to be to do the job, it too will flex. It is not a "set it and forget it" operation. It requires a real machinist who can monitor and make changes during the process to keep things going smoothly, not just a guy who knows how to machine stuff. This is why a lot of shops don't deal with main bore work...cuz it's a pain in the ass. The shops that DO still deal with it either have no clue how/are too lazy to properly do it, or are very expensive because all that attention to detail and time costs $$. And regardless of who does it, the crank centerline moves a little closer to the cam centerline every time you do it...so generally after having been done (especially poorly) once, it'll make a good boat anchor, since the timing chain will have enough slop to hook your shackle too.
-
All that being said, and true, would that not also screw up the bore centerline being perpendicular to the crank centerline?
What can be done about it? ???
Ray
-
All that being said, and true, would that not also screw up the bore centerline being perpendicular to the crank centerline?
What can be done about it? ???
Ray
Measure it up and see if it's fixable, if not, stop wasting time and money and find a new block that doesn't need main bore work. They're out there...I had one. The mains were untouched and perfect. took me 4 blocks to find it.
-
This is a sincere question coupled with my opinion. I can't imagine the machine shop removing more than .005 from the caps to begin the process. (could be wrong) after honing back round this should only raise the crank .0025. I don't know what they use to register the new crank centerline. I just can't believe that .0025 would matter. I wonder how much the block moves and mishapes during operation. Agreed, if you start in the wrong place it probably won't get better. BUT, I would rather have round holes .0025 higher than an out of round hole in the wrong spot. As for lining up the bores with the "NEW" crank centerline .0025 (new crank location) at 45 degrees (new crank location in regard to the existing cylinder centerline) at 7" (rod plus pin height) is about .020 degrees.
My opinion;
I have a tough time swallowing .020 degrees having ANY impact on anything.
My question;
Does this amount really matter?
On the other hand, I do see the impact of having a loose timing chain. Although, if we run the calcs on a 3" timing gear moving the crank .0025 only results in less than 1/2 a crank degree. When degreeing a cam I am always satisfied if I am within 1/2 a degree. If you subscribe to the theory that the cam will use the play in the chain (rotate forward and backward based either on the the chain springing or valve springs pushing the cam forward) the most impact that could have is 1 degree total.
Ok, I'm done.
-
If it went like that, it would be fine. That's the way the job should be done......it rarely goes like that tho. The fact is, you'll never know unless you measure it.
-
This is a sincere question coupled with my opinion. I can't imagine the machine shop removing more than .005 from the caps to begin the process. (could be wrong) after honing back round this should only raise the crank .0025. I don't know what they use to register the new crank centerline. I just can't believe that .0025 would matter. I wonder how much the block moves and mishapes during operation. Agreed, if you start in the wrong place it probably won't get better. BUT, I would rather have round holes .0025 higher than an out of round hole in the wrong spot. As for lining up the bores with the "NEW" crank centerline .0025 (new crank location) at 45 degrees (new crank location in regard to the existing cylinder centerline) at 7" (rod plus pin height) is about .020 degrees.
My opinion;
I have a tough time swallowing .020 degrees having ANY impact on anything.
My question;
Does this amount really matter?
On the other hand, I do see the impact of having a loose timing chain. Although, if we run the calcs on a 3" timing gear moving the crank .0025 only results in less than 1/2 a crank degree. When degreeing a cam I am always satisfied if I am within 1/2 a degree. If you subscribe to the theory that the cam will use the play in the chain (rotate forward and backward based either on the the chain springing or valve springs pushing the cam forward) the most impact that could have is 1 degree total.
Ok, I'm done.
Ron's got a point. Most don't even degree a cam in properly, so yeah, splitting hairs on this. (Homeblown, you're dead ballls on with the way I think and do it, BUT remember two things. First, the timing chain, and not depending on engine, will never go slack on the "pull"side at speed. Yes ramp ups and downs can cause issue at low RPM, but at the speeds we work with, doesn't really exist.) Stretch is more of a worry, and honestly, how many people who have an opinion on this actually "re-time" or "re-degree" a cam after some good hours on it? I do, and hadda buy offset keys............
What Pat is trying to say, and I whole heartedly agree, Is expect perfection and go from there and do not accept substandard work. In dealing with the cam degreeing issue later? well, those CAN be over come.
Ray
-
There comes a ponit where you just have to do it. It would be nice to have things perfect, aiming for it is good. But sometimes you have to settle. Either settle with a few imperfections or settle with the fact that you will never be satisfied and have your boat apart forever.
-
The more I think about this the more I am surprised this happened.
IMHO, the block should be put in the align hone "backward" and keep the bight off the front mains....This would require a very experienced machinist and not a normal job scope, but should completely cure the problem. I think the crank center line relocation will be non issue and may be overblown unless this block had an ass load of block shift from the beginning (easiest to tell by the amount of material around the front and rear cam hole and the centering of the front and rear mains).
Having an automotive machine shop in the family for a little over 30 years, you hear a lot of horror stories that turn out to be easy fixes, I think this is one of those... ;)
In all honesty, if I have a block that needs to have caps replaced, I just convert it with billets or start over....Hate messing around with used parts to fix used parts...And I am a cheap ass.... :screwy:
GT
-
I agree....for this application, if it's serviceable, put it together....problem is, it's not serviceable now. The first motor in the white boat ate rear main bearings every 2 weekends because the line bore job was botched. I also had 3/4"+ timing chain slop because they went too far with it......this was the second block I tried to get done right and finally gave up and just put it together.
My point was simply, if a shop, in their efforts to "fix"
the mains, decided that 3 different sizes and inadequate oil clearance was the way to go....what else did they screw up? They obviously didn't measure
anything...just winged it. It's amazing how little details can destroy expensive parts. I'd just like to see brad put together a solid motor so he can enjoy the boat instead of having problems every time he takes it out.
-
But sometimes you have to settle. Either settle with a few imperfections or settle with the fact that you will never be satisfied and have your boat apart forever.
the million dollar ????? is, are those imperfections going to cause problems later?? unto wich, the boat will be torn down again???
on another note, any thing is fixable but, is it woth it? or should a new (different) block be procured and the process started over? if the current machine shop is not going to fix this for free, then i would be hard pressed not to get a different block and start over.... jmo
-
i appreciate all the concerns here, but you all arent looking at the big picture here.
this block/crank was in BAD shape when i started. I personally thought it was all junk and when i started this project, i was unemployed and very little money to spend.
Ron (HB57) was by the house and asked me what the story was on this block as it was just sittin the in the corner of the garage upside down on an engine stand. I told him it was a pile of junk that I had seized the bottom end and toasted the crank and cooked all the mains.
he looked at it and said it was possibly salvageable. I didnt know shit about chevys, but he said its still a decent block and good rods (dimple) with a forged crank that could be turned to 30 over if needed. so i took the crank and rods to a machine shop and had them turn the crank and resize the rods. 3 rods were bad, but they replaced them and weight matched them...then turned the crank 20 over. the crank still had some bad areas on the main journals so i took it back to have it turned to 30 over.....so all that (turned crank and resize/replace rods) cost me about $300. Over all, the rods/crank work done here came out perfect in the end.
I then tried to assemble the motor and found out the main caps were all fubar'd from getting cooked. I was 1 1/2 weeks out from the last Avi trip. I found a shop in town (different from who did the rod/crank work) that would do a line bore on the block in 1 day. I was in a pinch and gave it a shot. Unfortunately, the work they did wasnt correct. It cost me $180 to have this work done and they replaced 1 main cap.
So I am now only $480 out of pocket from having a complete running motor. I had NOTHING before. Even if the block turns to junk, I am only out $180. I still got a perfect rotating assembly.
I dropped the block back off at the shop today. They are going to re-line bore it and do it on the 'loose' side. Even if it comes back today 'fucked'.....im not upset. it is what it is. i took a gamble on it. i will just look for another block and throw this shit in it.
it just a motor guys.
-
That is a VERY positive turn on a slightly negative situation Brad.
-
I just got the block back. they measured it for me and all 5 mains where 2.938
i just loaded the crank and other shit up and im headed over to Ron's to measure it out one more time. :beer:
while im there, we'll check the crank/cam distance as well. O0
-
I just got the block back. they measured it for me and all 5 mains where 2.938
i just loaded the crank and other shit up and im headed over to Ron's to measure it out one more time. :beer:
while im there, we'll check the crank/cam distance as well. O0
:thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup:
-
I just got the block back. they measured it for me and all 5 mains where 2.938
i just loaded the crank and other shit up and im headed over to Ron's to measure it out one more time. :beer:
while im there, we'll check the crank/cam distance as well. O0
All sounds good! I guess the lesson in this is have the same shop do all the work, no? Given your #5 measurement though, I'd bet the farm that it was replaced as well, and both were before the line hone, and not done again after. Just my thought on it.
You gonna make Big River with it? Mike and I kinda got a quiet roost contest a goin on that I think that Southwind might wanna be part of! :thumbup:
Ray
-
Ray, I don't think you heard me the first 5 times....#4 was the ONLY main that was replaced. Give your theory a rest.
As far as roosts....I got a new setup I am bringing to the table.
-
Ray, I don't think you heard me the first 5 times....#4 was the ONLY main that was replaced. Give your theory a rest.
As far as roosts....I got a new setup I am bringing to the table.
Oh jeezuz..........
Ray
-
My 2 for $3 7-11 special bore gauge says its perfect...ron doesnt agree.
[attachimg=1]
-
My 2 for $3 7-11 special bore gauge says its perfect...ron goesnt agree.
Ron is right....That there is a "light beer" with the newly machined block and crank, you need to step it up to the "full carb shiznitt"...
Just my .02c....
Just put it together, all the measuring in the world wont change the fact that it is a Chevy, I have built big block Chevies sitting in the gravel and rusty that ran literally forever... :sly:
Good oil pump, good oil and beat it like it owes you money.... >:D
GT
-
so we're in good shape. all bearings have .003 clearance except #3 thats about .0025-.00275....which is close enough for me.
gunna assemble it tonight....just masked the block off and painted it. :thumbup:
-
crank is in and i got 2 pistons in so far. everything is goin smooth so far. :thumbup:
-
I'll bring a spare alternator for ya should it lose oil pressure
-
I'll bring a spare alternator for ya should it lose oil pressure
LOL! i'm not brining a spare engine this trip.........spare pump may arrive there this time tho! :thumbup:
Can I borrow your bore guages?
Ray
-
I'll bring a spare alternator for ya should it lose oil pressure
i read this 3 times and didnt get it until ray posted.
yeah, i look back now and thats fuckin funny....but in all honesty, the damn thing wouldnt turn over and died on the water like it lost all power.....but would if we jumped it....so we assumed it was a weak battery/dead alternator.....BUT.....turned out to be something way more serious.
-
crank is in and i got 2 pistons in so far. everything is goin smooth so far. :thumbup:
oh yeah, i spoke too soon and jinxed myself.
the damn set of rings i bought is missing one grooved ring out of the box. FML. :banghead:
-
Damn that sucks Brad :mad:
-
Damn that sucks Brad :mad:
amazingly i tracked one down. we're back in the game :thumbup: :beer:
-
Cool
-
amazingly i tracked one down. we're back in the game :thumbup: :beer:
:thumbup: :beer: :thumbup: :beer:
-
shes alive....wet test in about 2 hours...
1978 Southwind jet boat new 454 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C5wzaEBqxCw#)
-
Nice work Brad, sounds good :thumbup: :thumbup:
-
VERY nice! I guess its meaking it next weekend! I could hear a lot of ticking, just double check the valve adjustment bro! :thumbup:
Ray
-
VERY nice! I guess its meaking it next weekend! I could hear a lot of ticking, just double check the valve adjustment bro! :thumbup:
Ray
thanks but its a solid flat cam....the valve train has always been noisy. i did finally change over to a set of crane gold rockers. didnt have one come loose all day yesterday.