When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.
Greg, with all due respect, clearly, the new rods that you put into Mark's and Joes car are different. (not the ones that are in my engine). the way you can tell is the slope of the bottom end and the box design all the way to the wrist pin end. the rods that came out of mark's car before you change them, were the same (*or looked the same) as mine. the new ones have a narrow small end.
Picture below of the rod type that broke and came out of Anderson/fan blown engine in the final blow ups Do they look "exactly the same " to you??
can you help me understand the rod offset difference? are you talking about the offset on the crank so that the rods are closer together on the journal pair? isnt that related to the bore separation?
again, as far as "sounds " and rpm based on tone, it is VERY accurate to determine relative RPM with tone. once i have a note.. say the note: F or F/G and then the shift point goes to A.... I then know of the percentage change that the RPM went through. a 4 cycle engine, regardless of the exhaust, has a 4 x event sound. so, when i found my redline shifts and saw the note associated , i could then pull the note for the post shift RPM and see if it matched the gear spacing (72% of redline) and it did, almost exactly. when you hear someone sing off key, its only a few % off, well beyond human perception.
my engine was redlining at 6600 rpm as we detected at the dyno... it matched the RPM guage reasonably well. (.looks more like 6500rpm actually) however, the tone shown at 6600rpm matches what Mark was shifting at. I with any mishift, i can tell what the RPM level was based on tone and it will be exactly what the gear spacing says it should be. 6000rpm with the 928 S4 box, provides 8,500rpm if you cant release the clutch fast enough. fully audible and verifiable.
you kind of remind me of the guys that doubted times captured on video ........ the clock accuracy of video tape is amazingly accurate, no difference than the timing systems used today. however, it is hand captured which can be a 10th of a second difference at worst. plenty accurate for how we judge a lap time.
if you have a guitar, or a piano, but better yet a frequency generator, you can match audibly the sound of any engine and get the RPM with amazing accuracy.
dont mock what you dont understand.
here is the frequency chart
t
Originally Posted by GregBBRD
The Carrillo connecting rods that are in Kibort's engine, that our helpful, independentmoderator 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.
As long as all of you armchair engineers are so involved trying to blame me for a connecting rod failure.....here's another data point.
Mark Anderson's engine had over 11 to 1 static compression ratio. (More than he had ever had, before.). Joseph's engine, in an effort to make more power than his friend's engine, had a static compression ratio over 11.5 to 1.
While I'm not sure how many times Joseph ran this engine (since I put it together 5 year ago), but he says "several times"....he always ran a 50% ratio of race fuel to 50% street "monkey ****" (to save a few dollars on fuel costs?) I've not seen this engine or vehicle since it was built. I've not looked at the spark plugs....Hell, the oil and filter has ever been changed!
Now, Mark Anderson had an engine failure with his engine. The analysis from Carrillo stated that the engine had 1.) Been over-reved. 2.) Had been subjected to a high rpm downshift without proper throttle input . 3.) Had suffered detonation at high rpms. And he was completely aware of their findings....yet, he still blamed me.
Mark ran this engine, at Fontana, using 25% race fuel and 75% street fuel....the same mixture he was using when his engine broke a rod. And from someone standing there when this was done...."25% is being generous."
Certainly, you armchair engineers know, for a fact, that a lack of octane never leads to detonation, right?
Heh, Catorce....Call Carl and see what he reacts to you running this fuel mixture in your new race engine!
I'll even "donate" the remaining fuel out of Joseph's car, just for you!
As long as all of you armchair engineers are so involved trying to blame me for a connecting rod failure.....here's another data point.
Mark Anderson's engine had over 11 to 1 static compression ratio. (More than he had ever had, before.). Joseph's engine, in an effort to make more power than his friend's engine, had a static compression ratio over 11.5 to 1.
While I'm not sure how many times Joseph ran this engine (since I put it together 5 year ago), but he says "several times"....he always ran a 50% ratio of race fuel to 50% street "monkey ****" (to save a few dollars on fuel costs?) I've not seen this engine or vehicle since it was built. I've not looked at the spark plugs....Hell, the oil and filter has ever been changed!
Now, Mark Anderson had an engine failure with his engine. The analysis from Carrillo stated that the engine had 1.) Been over-reved. 2.) Had been subjected to a high rpm downshift without proper throttle input . 3.) Had suffered detonation at high rpms. And he was completely aware of their findings....yet, he still blamed me.
Mark ran this engine, at Fontana, using 25% race fuel and 75% street fuel....the same mixture he was using when his engine broke a rod. And from someone standing there when this was done...."25% is being generous."
Certainly, you armchair engineers know, for a fact, that a lack of octane never leads to detonation, right?
Heh, Catorce....Call Carl and see what he reacts to you running this fuel mixture in your new race engine!
I'll even "donate" the remaining fuel out of Joseph's car, just for you!
I get it.. the analysis says over rev or detonation or non blip downshift, but this was on the rods you replaced in that engine.
You stated here, that the rods were the same as mine and his prior rods, but clearly they are not. what do you think the differences were on those two rods types?
And again, seeing the video of him in Joes car before it broke doesnt show any indication that he was doing anything wrong.
as far as pump gas vs race gas... ive been running 91 octane since day one also with 11:1 compression, and only running a few times, half 100/91 for the world challenge races to prove that i bought "their gas". however, i know the basic difference between mark's, Joe's and my engine is that mine has 30% less HP, so what could detonate with them, might not with me............However, I've seen mark mix the gas and usually its 108 and 91 mixed to make something near 100octane which should be fine, but maybe not. dont the knock sensors pull out enough timing to help with any knocks? will the ECU store any knock occurrence data?
staying techincal.... how did you get 50hp out of changing from the JE pistons in nicasil block (middle items) vs the right items ? (balancer, pistons and rods)???? the rotating mass change, and more importantly the rate at which the rotating mass rpm changed in a dyno test could not be responsible for 50hp change in power for those items alone. since i have the same components as the middle group, thats like saying i could change to the Right group and gain 50hp and that doesnt seem at all likely .
I have 3 words for ya. rod ratio & compression. both can increase HP. Using the wrong pistons and rods the 1st time around really capped the HP. Keep in mind this was with variable cam timing on the 928.
I have 3 words for ya. rod ratio & compression. both can increase HP. Using the wrong pistons and rods the 1st time around really capped the HP. Keep in mind this was with variable cam timing on the 928.
I guess if the basline HP was 600, i see it possible, but i think even Greg has mentioned the gains for compression ratio. so , yes, if you went from 8:1 to 12 :1 compression, yes, on a 400 engine, that would be 50 hp. Rod ratio didnt look to change all that much with the 2nd two rod and pistons. and variable cam usually is a mid range helper, unless you have it tweaked for even better high RPM gains (hp)
It must be really difficult to know so much and be an armchair Einstein. Before this thread you were irritating. Now I just feel sorry for you. You can calculate HP and rpm by sound and blurry internet pictures. the sad thing is that you actually believe it.
Heh, Catorce....Call Carl and see what he reacts to you running this fuel mixture in your new race engine!
I'll even "donate" the remaining fuel out of Joseph's car, just for you!
Carl made it very clear right from the get go that the motor takes RACE FUEL only. Why would I ever run anything but race gas in the car? Is this even a question?
I'm curious why a baller like Joe is running anything less than race gas in that car. Lunacy.
I guess if the basline HP was 600, i see it possible, but i think even Greg has mentioned the gains for compression ratio. so , yes, if you went from 8:1 to 12 :1 compression, yes, on a 400 engine, that would be 50 hp. Rod ratio didnt look to change all that much with the 2nd two rod and pistons. and variable cam usually is a mid range helper, unless you have it tweaked for even better high RPM gains (hp)
You're kidding, right? That pin is moved a country mile, in "engine speak"
Mark: You're not here trying to figure anything out or contribute anything, you're just here trying to raising some ****.
Carl made it very clear right from the get go that the motor takes RACE FUEL only. Why would I ever run anything but race gas in the car? Is this even a question?
I'm curious why a baller like Joe is running anything less than race gas in that car. Lunacy.
Now cut that down to 25% 100 octane race fuel and 75% 91 octane monkey ****....on an engine with milder cams than you have and over 11.5 to 1 static! (I'm betting Tuomo could calculate the effective compression ratio, for us....way beyond my pay grade.)
I've got news for everyone....whatever money was "saved" on race fuel flew out the bottom of this engine by a factor of about 50!
Add two motors up, and the money "saved" starts to look really silly....trust me, these engines are not even remotely cheap.
But, let's all sit around the campfire and ponder how a Carrillo rod could possibly break.
I'm going to gracefully bow out of this "conversation". Way too much has been said and way too many fingers are pointing everywhere. I' would suggest that all those with even a tiny bit of class, do the same.
I've been way too defensive, trying to deflect comments made by certain individuals, who are trying to just to "stir the pot",
I think that our friend Roger is the one that always says: "If we were all sitting around talking in a bar...we would all be great friends with something big in common!"
My sincere apologies to almost everyone that I've offended (or thrown under the bus.).I was being an ***, with my feelings hurt, and was being defensive. For those that were just stirring the pot...shame on you!
I will post pictures and more information as the engine comes apart...on a completely new thread....and we will see what we can learn, as a group of supportive 928 people, trying to solve a problem.
I've got my own set pf questions that need to be answered....trust me.
One of the things that Carrillo could never explain, to me, was why was the entire top of the rod (called the "strap") was missing (in Mark"s engine) from the piston pin...which was still in the piston..in one piece. To me, that meant the "strap" failed.....how else would it get off of the intact pin?
The problem with that train of thought is that the fact that the other 7 rods were absolutely perfect....they didn't even re-size them or install new bushings....perfect rods.
And as far as detonation is concerned (in all fairness to Mark Anderson)....In my history of racing turbo charged air cooled 911 engines....I've seen an entire coffee table full of melted pistons......none of which has ever broken a connecting rod. Frankly, a connecting rod thst "sticks" onto the crankshaft and breaks is simple to understand.....something in the oiling system failed. A connecting rod that just fails in the beam (or strap), with the big end still in perfect condition better have a damn good reason to have failed!
(I'm going to stick to my feeling that using race fuel "watered down" with street monkey **** is a "false ecconomic move" on a high compression race engine...but if this is the reason a rod would fail...it sure as hell should not be!)
All that being said:
There's a race, in a couple of weeks, at Indy. People spend literally millions of dollars buying the very best pieces, assembled by some of the very best and brightest on the planet. At least 1/3 of those cars, will suffer a mechancel failure, of some sort, during that race. Hell, almost every year, there's a car or two that never even complete a lap! Unlimited budgets....millions and millions of dollars spent on every car#
**** happens, in racing. Everyone involved tries to keep this **** at bay, but it always happens!
(If any of you have not read the book "Beast", you, as car people, are missing one of the greatest books ever written about the effort required to compete, at this race. A fantastic book that will forever change how you watch this race!
Sorry for the Grammer and any spelling errors...it's very late.
Now cut that down to 25% 100 octane race fuel and 75% 91 octane monkey ****....on an engine with milder cams than you have and over 11.5 to 1 static!
Milder cams will not raise the static compression ratio since that's a measrement of the the volume of the cylinder at BDC, and the remaining volume with the piston at TDC. It will not change over the life of the engine all else being equal.
However, the dynamic compression ratio is calculated at the moment the intake valve finally closes on the compression stroke. By this time, the piston is well past BDC and has risen in the bore decreasing available cylinder volume thus lowering the engine's effective compression ratio.
Therefore, a big race cam whose aim is high-RPM horsepower, will hang the intake valve open as long as possible to get fuel into the cylinders in the short amount of time available.
Because of that, the race engine's effective compression ratio is much lower than its static compression ratio.
I say all this because MK's engine is running stock street cams with a static compression ratio of 11:1. This implies his engine's effectice compression ratio is much higher than MA's and Joseph's engines due to the intake valve closing much earlier for good, torque-ier street-driving manners.
Yet, by his own admission, MK states he's been running 91 octane for 10+ years and he has had ZERO problems, a simply remarkable feat.
One can reasonably conclude then, since MK did not blow his engine while running 91 octane street gas on his 11:1 static cr engine, which also has a HIGHER effective compression ratio due to his street cams, that MA with his race engine with its lower effective compression ratio and race gas mixture, MA's engine did NOT blow due to fuel type used.
All else being equal, MA's engine was safer compression-wise as well as fuel-type used versus. MK.
Originally Posted by 928sg
It must be really difficult to know so much and be an armchair Einstein. Before this thread you were irritating. Now I just feel sorry for you. You can calculate HP and rpm by sound and blurry internet pictures. the sad thing is that you actually believe it.
Sterling, please tell us where MK is wrong about the operation of vario cams and their effect on power production throughout the power band.
It is my opinion that he's 100% correct in his assessment.
There's a race, in a couple of weeks, at Indy. People spend literally millions of dollars buying the very best pieces, assembled by some of the very best and brightest on the planet. At least 1/3 of those cars, will suffer a mechancel failure, of some sort, during that race. Hell, almost every year, there's a car or two that never even complete a lap! Unlimited budgets....millions and millions of dollars spent on every car#
**** happens, in racing. Everyone involved tries to keep this **** at bay, but it always happens!
Absolutely.
When word of this got out, Todd and I were chatting since he likes to absorb any and all such data, at the end of a very long 5+ hours phone conversation he said basically the same thing you just did. He's built countless race engines over the years and once and a while, sh*t just happens. You hope to learn from it to prevent the same thing from happening again.
I cannot count how many friends have spend mega bucks on LS race engines from the biggest names in the Chevy performance world, only to have them blow up in very short time (one didn't survive one DE day).
Speaking of Indy, anyone bored look back at the all mighty Buick V6 turbo. People like John Menard spent a kings ransom over several years trying to make this engine work. The formula was incredibly fast, yet most never finished the race and not one took the checkered flag.
They did win the pole a few times & set at least one lap record.
What gets me Greg, is somehow you taking offense to the idea the rod was defective. That's hardly your fault, it's not like you used some random Chinese company. It's Carrillo and even they can f*ck up once and a while.
Both rods? They very well could have come from the same casting batch at the foundry. This type of metal work is one of Todd's professional specialties and that was his first reaction when I told him of the failure, high probability the issues goes all the way back to the foundry.
05-10-2018, 05:29 PM
Rod ratio didnt look to change all that much with the 2nd two rod and pistons. and variable cam usually is a mid range helper, unless you have it tweaked for even better high RPM gains (hp)
