Festival of Speed at Cal Speedway /Auto Club Speedway April 20 2018 - 928s running?
#91
Rennlist Member
Erik, no, no rod failures at all with the 928's, NA or FI.
Here's Carrillo stating it's typically 'installation mistakes' when a rod fails.
Download and open the link below:
Carrillo Rod Failure pdf
Here's Carrillo stating it's typically 'installation mistakes' when a rod fails.
Download and open the link below:
Carrillo Rod Failure pdf
#92
Archive Gatekeeper
Rennlist Member
Rennlist Member
Statistically I'm sure that Carrillo is correct that the majority of rod failures are installation mistakes. But in these two cases the big end of the rod was still mounted on the crank journal, no damage to the bearing or crank, so it's not a bearing installation issue, nor a rod bolt failure. Not sure what other part of installation could be responsible for a rod failure like this.
If you hop back to post #53, Carrillo did examine the other 7 rods from the Zombie motor. They didn't see anything wrong with the metallurgy, and they said they were ok to re-use. I sold them to another local 928er for a project motor.
If you hop back to post #53, Carrillo did examine the other 7 rods from the Zombie motor. They didn't see anything wrong with the metallurgy, and they said they were ok to re-use. I sold them to another local 928er for a project motor.
#93
Administrator - "Tyson"
Lifetime Rennlist
Member
Lifetime Rennlist
Member
Statistically I'm sure that Carrillo is correct that the majority of rod failures are installation mistakes. But in these two cases the big end of the rod was still mounted on the crank journal, no damage to the bearing or crank, so it's not a bearing installation issue, nor a rod bolt failure. Not sure what other part of installation could be responsible for a rod failure like this.
Honestly this whole situation has my head spinning. We've all read over and over and over again how necessary it is to build these engines with harder Chevy rod bearings since the stock ones are too soft. And here we find out how successful the Zombie was with custom rods made to use stock 928 rod bearings.... maybe I'm the only one just now realizing this.
Yes I know the bearing and the bearing end of the rod isn't what failed here. But all this talk over the years about the correct and incorrect way to have Chevy rods made for a 928 block......why bother?
If one desires for whatever reason to still use a harder rod bearings, build the engine around one that is smaller in diameter & wider (not skinnier and larger like SBC units). It's common in the BBC world to build cranks around SBC bearings since they are wider and smaller than BBC units....while 928 motors are being built going the other direction.
Is this because the SBC parts are so inexpensive? I understand every build has a budget, but this may not be the best place to cut corners considering the possible issue with rod offset fitting SBC bearings into a 928 block.
It's common for NASCAR and other circle track SBC race engines to be built using custom cranks around the smaller Honda rod bearings.
They don't even use the SBC bearing:
https://www.chevydiy.com/build-chevy...ssembly-guide/
A good way to free up some power is by reducing the size of the rod journals. This is done to lower bearing speed, which reduces friction. The more RPMs the engine turns, the greater the power savings. The standard Chevy rod journal size is 2.100 inches, but popular sizes for racing are also 2.00 and 1.889 inches. The 1.889 size is commonly referred to as a “Honda journal” because this is the stock size for Honda four-cylinder engines.
#94
Rennlist Member
Thread Starter
Statistically I'm sure that Carrillo is correct that the majority of rod failures are installation mistakes. But in these two cases the big end of the rod was still mounted on the crank journal, no damage to the bearing or crank, so it's not a bearing installation issue, nor a rod bolt failure. Not sure what other part of installation could be responsible for a rod failure like this.
If you hop back to post #53, Carrillo did examine the other 7 rods from the Zombie motor. They didn't see anything wrong with the metallurgy, and they said they were ok to re-use. I sold them to another local 928er for a project motor.
If you hop back to post #53, Carrillo did examine the other 7 rods from the Zombie motor. They didn't see anything wrong with the metallurgy, and they said they were ok to re-use. I sold them to another local 928er for a project motor.
do rods break under stress of over-rev? And where do they typically break? as Erik showed, its not uncommon to spin these motors up to 8,000 for a fraction of a second. marks rev limiter (and joes) were set at 6800rpm, and this can be verified by the sound of the engine. (with mine being a template, verified via the dyno a few months ago) even a mishift of our motors at 6000rpm would take the RPM to 8500rpm, where bad things could happen. ) but the sound of that would be pretty obvious on the video.
#95
Rennlist Member
Thread Starter
Wrist pin issue?
How were they inspected (referring to Catorce's post above)? Not questioning it, just curious.
Honestly this whole situation has my head spinning. We've all read over and over and over again how necessary it is to build these engines with harder Chevy rod bearings since the stock ones are too soft. And here we find out how successful the Zombie was with custom rods made to use stock 928 rod bearings.... maybe I'm the only one just now realizing this.
Yes I know the bearing and the bearing end of the rod isn't what failed here. But all this talk over the years about the correct and incorrect way to have Chevy rods made for a 928 block......why bother?
If one desires for whatever reason to still use a harder rod bearings, build the engine around one that is smaller in diameter & wider (not skinnier and larger like SBC units). It's common in the BBC world to build cranks around SBC bearings since they are wider and smaller than BBC units....while 928 motors are being built going the other direction.
Is this because the SBC parts are so inexpensive? I understand every build has a budget, but this may not be the best place to cut corners considering the possible issue with rod offset fitting SBC bearings into a 928 block.
It's common for NASCAR and other circle track SBC race engines to be built using custom cranks around the smaller Honda rod bearings.
They don't even use the SBC bearing:
https://www.chevydiy.com/build-chevy...ssembly-guide/
How were they inspected (referring to Catorce's post above)? Not questioning it, just curious.
Honestly this whole situation has my head spinning. We've all read over and over and over again how necessary it is to build these engines with harder Chevy rod bearings since the stock ones are too soft. And here we find out how successful the Zombie was with custom rods made to use stock 928 rod bearings.... maybe I'm the only one just now realizing this.
Yes I know the bearing and the bearing end of the rod isn't what failed here. But all this talk over the years about the correct and incorrect way to have Chevy rods made for a 928 block......why bother?
If one desires for whatever reason to still use a harder rod bearings, build the engine around one that is smaller in diameter & wider (not skinnier and larger like SBC units). It's common in the BBC world to build cranks around SBC bearings since they are wider and smaller than BBC units....while 928 motors are being built going the other direction.
Is this because the SBC parts are so inexpensive? I understand every build has a budget, but this may not be the best place to cut corners considering the possible issue with rod offset fitting SBC bearings into a 928 block.
It's common for NASCAR and other circle track SBC race engines to be built using custom cranks around the smaller Honda rod bearings.
They don't even use the SBC bearing:
https://www.chevydiy.com/build-chevy...ssembly-guide/
what about the bearing width? how do you fit larger bearings on a rod big end.. i would imagine the rod has to be wider at the bottom and the crank has to have a wider journal as well. has that been done, or is this part of the chevy rod end change?
what did Devek strokers use when using the Scat crank, which i believe Joe's might have had that crank to start, and maybe even has it now...did that have smaller, 928 sized bearings?
#96
Administrator - "Tyson"
Lifetime Rennlist
Member
Lifetime Rennlist
Member
That is why Nascar is using a Honda rod bearing which is smaller diameter and wider.
Yes
Two reasons why people would do this:
1. More options of bearings to choose from (harder, stronger etc... is the mentality)
2. Lower cost - many "off the shelf" rods available in this bearing size
The rods in your motor are "off the shelf" SBC 6" Carrillo severe or heavy duty rods with 7/8" Carr rod bolts. Most rods have 3/8" ARP rod bolts.
The wrist pin is also smaller in the "Chevy" rod compared to a stock 928 unit.
In your motor are Clevite 77 rod bearings and the H-11 Tool Steel Wrist Pins. In Todd's opinion the best wrist pins money can buy.
Originally Posted by mark kibort
GB engines have traditionally used the stock sized bearings
The two motors in question which failed are using the same size Chevy small block rod bearings that are in your motor. I cannot comment on which particular bearing was used in these motors, only Greg can speak to that.
Originally Posted by mark kibort
what about the bearing width? how do you fit larger bearings on a rod big end.
Originally Posted by mark kibort
what did Devek strokers use when using the Scat crank
#97
Nothing new here.
Rod maker/machinist blames assembly/builder, Builder blames an unskilled/careless driver (racing history is rich with examples of this in professional racing, sometimes justified sometimes not). Again very common in racing history, in this thread there is accusation of the driver blaming the builder, though for the record he posts that he does not blame the builder.
Regardless, it is just a circular firing squad with each player entrenched and blaming other(s). Isn't the whole point of discussing this to discover the source of the failure and learn something?
I know I am not the only crazy one to want to see an objective discussion of the problem(s) contributing to an ultimate improvement for the community. Doubtful since a few have dragged this into cringe worthy territory, but please wake me if this reverts to a constructive discussion.
Such a shame, this thread began to celebrate 928s on the track.
Rod maker/machinist blames assembly/builder, Builder blames an unskilled/careless driver (racing history is rich with examples of this in professional racing, sometimes justified sometimes not). Again very common in racing history, in this thread there is accusation of the driver blaming the builder, though for the record he posts that he does not blame the builder.
Regardless, it is just a circular firing squad with each player entrenched and blaming other(s). Isn't the whole point of discussing this to discover the source of the failure and learn something?
I know I am not the only crazy one to want to see an objective discussion of the problem(s) contributing to an ultimate improvement for the community. Doubtful since a few have dragged this into cringe worthy territory, but please wake me if this reverts to a constructive discussion.
Such a shame, this thread began to celebrate 928s on the track.
Last edited by William A; 05-10-2018 at 02:51 PM.
#98
Administrator - "Tyson"
Lifetime Rennlist
Member
Lifetime Rennlist
Member
I know I am not the only crazy one to want to see an objective discussion of the problem(s) contributing to an ultimate improvement for the community. Doubtful since a few have dragged this into cringe worthy territory, but please wake me if this reverts to a constructive discussion.
#99
this is pretty heated territory and this thread needs a fork in it. So would that mean we are forked? For the record, my stroker has the scat crank which was made for sbc rods. Here is my history of rods:
Stock rods on the left, 1st set of rods in the middle and the Oliver titanium rods on the right. The reason for the rod change was that the rods in the middle were 5.700 and the longer rods on the right are 5.850 The middle rods needed tons of clearance and the rods on the right were pretty much a bolt in. I don't remember what bearings I used. I believe they were clevite 77 dlc coated iirc.
Below are the piston versions:
Stock on the left with stock bores. Middle is JE coated but I don't remember with what on steel pressed in liners. Liners rotated in the bores and the block was toast. Piston on the right is current with the rod on the right in the above pic
Bore is nikasil and the piston have coatings on the skirts but I don't remember what. Engines were same displacement used same crank, cams and heads. Engine on the right made about 50HP more, the only difference being pistons, rods and balancer.
This was my deed to turn this thread back toward something technical. I'm guessing everyone will start taking pot shots at me now.
Stock rods on the left, 1st set of rods in the middle and the Oliver titanium rods on the right. The reason for the rod change was that the rods in the middle were 5.700 and the longer rods on the right are 5.850 The middle rods needed tons of clearance and the rods on the right were pretty much a bolt in. I don't remember what bearings I used. I believe they were clevite 77 dlc coated iirc.
Below are the piston versions:
Stock on the left with stock bores. Middle is JE coated but I don't remember with what on steel pressed in liners. Liners rotated in the bores and the block was toast. Piston on the right is current with the rod on the right in the above pic
Bore is nikasil and the piston have coatings on the skirts but I don't remember what. Engines were same displacement used same crank, cams and heads. Engine on the right made about 50HP more, the only difference being pistons, rods and balancer.
This was my deed to turn this thread back toward something technical. I'm guessing everyone will start taking pot shots at me now.
#100
forgot wrist pins...
Left are stock at 180 grams. Middle are who knows what at 120 grams, On the right are 9310 tool steel taper wall wrist pins at 90 grams each.
Left are stock at 180 grams. Middle are who knows what at 120 grams, On the right are 9310 tool steel taper wall wrist pins at 90 grams each.
#101
Administrator - "Tyson"
Lifetime Rennlist
Member
Lifetime Rennlist
Member
Here is the rod, & piston in Kiborts motor. I don't seem to have a photo of the wrist pin.
#102
Rennlist Member
Thread Starter
this is pretty heated territory and this thread needs a fork in it. So would that mean we are forked? For the record, my stroker has the scat crank which was made for sbc rods. Here is my history of rods:
Stock rods on the left, 1st set of rods in the middle and the Oliver titanium rods on the right. The reason for the rod change was that the rods in the middle were 5.700 and the longer rods on the right are 5.850 The middle rods needed tons of clearance and the rods on the right were pretty much a bolt in. I don't remember what bearings I used. I believe they were clevite 77 dlc coated iirc.
Below are the piston versions:
Stock on the left with stock bores. Middle is JE coated but I don't remember with what on steel pressed in liners. Liners rotated in the bores and the block was toast. Piston on the right is current with the rod on the right in the above pic
Bore is nikasil and the piston have coatings on the skirts but I don't remember what. Engines were same displacement used same crank, cams and heads. Engine on the right made about 50HP more, the only difference being pistons, rods and balancer.
This was my deed to turn this thread back toward something technical. I'm guessing everyone will start taking pot shots at me now.
Stock rods on the left, 1st set of rods in the middle and the Oliver titanium rods on the right. The reason for the rod change was that the rods in the middle were 5.700 and the longer rods on the right are 5.850 The middle rods needed tons of clearance and the rods on the right were pretty much a bolt in. I don't remember what bearings I used. I believe they were clevite 77 dlc coated iirc.
Below are the piston versions:
Stock on the left with stock bores. Middle is JE coated but I don't remember with what on steel pressed in liners. Liners rotated in the bores and the block was toast. Piston on the right is current with the rod on the right in the above pic
Bore is nikasil and the piston have coatings on the skirts but I don't remember what. Engines were same displacement used same crank, cams and heads. Engine on the right made about 50HP more, the only difference being pistons, rods and balancer.
This was my deed to turn this thread back toward something technical. I'm guessing everyone will start taking pot shots at me now.
#104
Former Vendor
While I really do appreciate all of the very positive thoughts, suggestions, and support, I do not believe that anyone that hasn't been anywhere near this car...or engine...is going to figure out the cause of the failure, sitting in their armchair at work or home.
I've made arrangements to remove the engine and take it apart, to determine what failed, if possible. Joseph Fan is a fantastic human (and a great friend) and I feel badly for his loss. That being said, I've offered to buy the car, from Joseph, at the full price Mark Anderson was going to pay for the car, before the engine blew. (They had a gentleman's agreement for Mark to buy the car, before the car went onto the track at Fontana, which Joseph released Mark from.)
The Carrillo connecting rods that are in Kibort's engine, that our helpful, independent moderator has provided pictures of, show that these rods are of the same EXACT design that Carrillo now uses on all 928 connecting rods.....including the ones I have made. This design was done, after Carrillo discovered that people had been foolishly using "Chevy" offset connecting rods in 928 engines, which have a completely different cylinder head offset. These rods have the "square" side beam machining that Carrillo now uses on some of their connecting rods, instead of the older "one pass ball end radius" that they used in the past. This was done to make these rods lighter. Although here is, without doubt, a higher percentage of material removed from the beam, Carrillo uses this design on many connecting rods for many different engines.
I have or will have access to the computers from these two engines, Mr. Kibort, and I will download the rev limiter settings.....although I'm certain that your finely tuned ear is far more accurate than any data about the actual rev limiter setting will somehow be moot.
I've made arrangements to remove the engine and take it apart, to determine what failed, if possible. Joseph Fan is a fantastic human (and a great friend) and I feel badly for his loss. That being said, I've offered to buy the car, from Joseph, at the full price Mark Anderson was going to pay for the car, before the engine blew. (They had a gentleman's agreement for Mark to buy the car, before the car went onto the track at Fontana, which Joseph released Mark from.)
The Carrillo connecting rods that are in Kibort's engine, that our helpful, independent moderator has provided pictures of, show that these rods are of the same EXACT design that Carrillo now uses on all 928 connecting rods.....including the ones I have made. This design was done, after Carrillo discovered that people had been foolishly using "Chevy" offset connecting rods in 928 engines, which have a completely different cylinder head offset. These rods have the "square" side beam machining that Carrillo now uses on some of their connecting rods, instead of the older "one pass ball end radius" that they used in the past. This was done to make these rods lighter. Although here is, without doubt, a higher percentage of material removed from the beam, Carrillo uses this design on many connecting rods for many different engines.
I have or will have access to the computers from these two engines, Mr. Kibort, and I will download the rev limiter settings.....although I'm certain that your finely tuned ear is far more accurate than any data about the actual rev limiter setting will somehow be moot.
#105
The Parts Whisperer
Rennlist
Site Sponsor
Rennlist
Site Sponsor
. Joseph Fan is a fantastic human (and a great friend) and I feel badly for his loss. That being said, I've offered to buy the car, from Joseph, at the full price Mark Anderson was going to pay for the car, before the engine blew. (They had a gentleman's agreement for Mark to buy the car, before the car went onto the track at Fontana, which Joseph released Mark from.)
.
.