Will not Cross Drill my crank

[Bryan]

1 hour ago, Adam H P15 D30 said:

Since you are in it this far (and you asked) I would have a set of modern 3 ring pistons made and while you're at it find a set of longer 218 rods.  Then recalculate your total height to 0 deck.  Though you have no plans to rev it higher than 4000 rpm, the long stroke makes the piston speeds very high in our old engines, coupling that with 4 rings on our OE pistons....  Also you get the advantage of a longer rod and moving the wrist pin higher inside the piston.  Is all this necessary, probably not. Will our old engines run a very long time without modifications, you betcha. But since you are there anyway spending thousands on a proper rebuild, what's an extra few hundred bucks to improve the design a little?  If I had to go through my 230, I would spend the money on pistons and longer rods first.

Adam

Longer rods would decrease the angle, would it help that much?  Would rather try something someone else has proven to work over a long period of time.  Modern rings on the same piston as original seems safe.   Toying with wrist pin & compression heights...have no experience with that.

[55 Fargo]

4 minutes ago, Bryan said:

Longer rods would decrease the angle, would it help that much?  Would rather try something someone else has proven to work over a long period of time.  Modern rings on the same piston as original seems safe.   Toying with wrist pin & compression heights...have no experience with that.

Just go with what Tim Kingsbury suggests.

It will fine for all your needs He would not steer you wrong.

Now not suggesting Adam's idea is wrong or anythingbut for your needs Tim has layed it all out...

[oldasdirt]

1 hour ago, Adam H P15 D30 said:

Since you are in it this far (and you asked) I would have a set of modern 3 ring pistons made and while you're at it find a set of longer 218 rods.  Then recalculate your total height to 0 deck.  Though you have no plans to rev it higher than 4000 rpm, the long stroke makes the piston speeds very high in our old engines, coupling that with 4 rings on our OE pistons....  Also you get the advantage of a longer rod and moving the wrist pin higher inside the piston.  Is all this necessary, probably not. Will our old engines run a very long time without modifications, you betcha. But since you are there anyway spending thousands on a proper rebuild, what's an extra few hundred bucks to improve the design a little?  If I had to go through my 230, I would spend the money on pistons and longer rods first.

Adam

At the risk of insulting you, for an engine that the person is not planning on using much and definately not looking to build some performance engine, this makes zero sense.   When I looking into custom forged pistons, rings and pins relocated I was looking at almost 50% of what the rebuild was costing.   Your comment makes total sense if your trying to build so cutting edge performance engine, but for what isnt even a daily drive, sorry and no offense intended, but it makes no sense.   

As I side note to using longer rods, keep in mind the small blocks do have offset rods.  Its the `weak link`` when your comparing engines to the Canadian big block.  Likely a topic for another thread however I believe the AoK boys have already went down the road of using the longer rods in both the small and big block engines. I am suggesting that after looking at the pictures Tim posted earlier. The picture with the short piston beside the taller stock one looks like its sent up to run 238 rods.  I am just guessing here mind you.

[John-T-53]

On 11/8/2017 at 4:23 PM, 55 Fargo Spitfire said:

I scratch my head often on some of the conjecture that is spread out on this forum and wonder why this still persists....

Me too.... 

I hope that someday you will find peace in your life.

Edited November 10, 2017 by John-T-53

[55 Fargo]

35 minutes ago, John-T-53 said:

Me too.... 

I hope that someday you will find peace in your life.

I trust you found the additional posts from Tim Kingsbury and Oldasdirt informative.

 

[Adam H P15 D30]

3 hours ago, 55 Fargo Spitfire said:

Just go with what Tim Kingsbury suggests.

It will fine for all your needs He would not steer you wrong.

Now not suggesting Adam's idea is wrong or anythingbut for your needs Tim has layed it all out...

Ok, I will never claim to be as knowledgeable as Tim Kingsbury or George Asche but I have built a few engines in my short time on this planet....  Rest assured, going with Tim's suggestions is always a good idea.

2 hours ago, oldasdirt said:

At the risk of insulting you

I take no offense to anyone telling me these mods aren't necessary, and also I don't want to get into some of the personal entanglements I see more and more here and other places, so no problems here.

To be clear, a factory, stock, out of the book, no changes or deviations rebuild is just fine and will net you many, many trouble free miles.  But where's the fun in that?

3 hours ago, Bryan said:

Longer rods would decrease the angle, would it help that much?

Yes. for several reasons.  First the piston stays at TDC a little longer, there are pros and cons to this but so much has been written about this, the information is out there.  Secondly the side loading on the cylinder wall is decreased so a shorter, lighter piston can be used.  That in conjunction with a modern 3 ring pack will reduce the friction on the cylinder walls freeing up some power and reducing heat and wear.  How much? who the hell knows.  We all read how the 230 crank and rods are the way to go and in "demand" I would think a 218 rod set would be pretty easy to source. 

2 hours ago, oldasdirt said:

When I looking into custom forged pistons, rings and pins relocated I was looking at almost 50% of what the rebuild was costing.   Your comment makes total sense if your trying to build so cutting edge performance engine, but for what isnt even a daily drive, sorry and no offense intended, but it makes no sense.

Let's say a set of cast pistons built to spec is ~$600.00, a set of stockers is ~$200.00 (if available), so for a few hundred more, you can spec it exactly how you want it, maybe even have the piston go to the top of the bore.  If a few hundred bucks breaks the rebuild budget, time to look for a new hobby or do a quickie ring, bearing and hone and roll on.  Besides there is nothing "cutting edge" about using long rods, or our engines in general.  Also, I would not build an engine any different for a vehicle used on weekends or a daily driver.  Occasional use isn't a recipe for cutting corners or compromise.  Build it correctly and how you want it the first time.  Funny there is never enough money or time to do it the way you want but there is always enough to do it over.

I've seen people here spend countless $$$$ for that elusive 10% gain in HP or TQ.  Multiple carbs, split exhaust manifolds, crankshafts and rods, milling heads, blocks, cams but if it's getting a full rebuild why not start with the basics, stroke to rod ratios, max compression height, low friction rings, smaller, lighter, better pistons?  Inexpensive things to do during the machining stage, expensive to do later.

My opinions are worth what you paid for them.

FWIW,

Adam

 

[Bryan]

I'll stick to stock pistons and a pre-oiler, do the cam bearing thing, and have the engine balanced.  Didn't want to stir stuff up. I would think what people want to do with their engines would be based on available time, funds and usage.   I like to overdo stuff but have to step back and really think (after hearing other opinions). 

[dpollo]

Three ring pistons were used in Canada in 57, 8 and 9  Engine number prefixes  K ,L, and M.  These  were 251s, 3 7/16 bore.

I cannot remember the   piston part number but the ring sets were Hastings 663.    The distance between the piston top and the top ring was unusually large.

Possibly this contributed to longer top ring life but they still broke up as the bores wore out.    Most Chrysler Method rebuilds  of these blocks that I have opened up used 4 ring .pistons.

I did obtain several sets of 3 ring replacement pistons  #  P240  but these were .050 short of being level with the deck !   I got rid of one set by having .050 taken off the block.  Worked OK 

but  it has implications for valve seats and spring pressure. 

[Matt Wilson]

On 11/9/2017 at 11:19 AM, timkingsbury said:

That being said,  let me say this about the topic of oiling.  There are lots of things you can do to improve the oiling.  1st thing with any rebuild is to simply turn the two cam bearings from using the big hole, which is how they came from the factory, to using the small hole.  There is way more oil hitting the cam than was ever needed.  Next make sure you have good oil pressure, which really is a way of saying make sure you have a good oil pump.  Yes there were higher volume oil pumps for trucks. Yes we try and use them on higher rpm builds but for 99% of every engine I hear being built its not required.

I could go though a bunch of tips but unless your planning on spinning your engine above, let me peg it at 5000 rpm regularly and your running a long stroke engine,  you dont need it.   Use the small hole in the cam bearing, make sure your have a good oil pump and drive on drive on.

Tim, I spoke with George, some months ago, and he suggested the same cam bearing installation tips, saying that using the large holes tends to deflate the oil cushion around the crank journals.

Another tip George mentioned was to drill out the hole in the nozzle on the front of the engine, which feeds the timing chain and gears, so the hole is bigger than the stock size.  He said the stock size hole tends to starve the chain, causing it to wear a bit prematurely over the long term.  He recommend this, even for my relatively stock engine.  So my question is...do you know what size hole should be drilled in the nozzle?  Reason I ask is because George didn't recall the exact size drill bit he typically uses.  He just said, "it's the first one in the set of bits," which he thought was 1/16", but he wasn't sure.  Of course, different drill bit sets will start with different size bits.  So, I figured I'd ask if you happen to know the correct size.

Thanks,

Matt

[ggdad1951]

I'm putting this thread on hold for a few days...some name calling, personal attacks and plain old childish behaviour on MULTIPLE fronts from both sides.  Cool off time.