"Uber Performance" 928 Crankshafts Are Here!
#16
Rennlist Member
![Default](https://rennlist.com/forums/images/icons/icon1.gif)
Having lived through an alusil block that had been nikasiled, I cannot recommend Nikasil unless you are expecting to rebuild in under 20K miles.
Oh sure, come out with the uber crank as my engine is already going back together.
Oh sure, come out with the uber crank as my engine is already going back together.
Last edited by RKD in OKC; 04-19-2012 at 04:17 AM.
#19
Drifting
![Default](https://rennlist.com/forums/images/icons/icon1.gif)
I finally have the first batch of my "Uber Performance" 928 crankshafts in hand.
Here's pictures of the 85.9mm (stock GTS stroke) crankshaft, along with some specifications that will interest all you technical guys.
* Great starting point for a "mini stroker" 2 valve 928 engine.
I'll post pictures and specifications for the other new crankshafts I have available, as soon as I have time.
Here's pictures of the 85.9mm (stock GTS stroke) crankshaft, along with some specifications that will interest all you technical guys.
* Great starting point for a "mini stroker" 2 valve 928 engine.
I'll post pictures and specifications for the other new crankshafts I have available, as soon as I have time.
So this is a drop in plug and play application for a Euro 4.7 block?
#20
Three Wheelin'
![Default](https://rennlist.com/forums/images/icons/icon1.gif)
Maybe you had media blasting debris that wasn't cleaned? Ring compatability could be another problem area but who knows, there are many ways for problems to arise when doing low volume custom work.
#22
Rennlist Member
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Oklahoma City, Oklahoma
Posts: 1,158
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
#23
Nordschleife Master
![Default](https://rennlist.com/forums/images/icons/icon1.gif)
I can't think of a good reason to use a 4.7 instead of a 5.0 block, my way would be 5.0 bored to 104mm to get all the cheap cubes I can. (relatively speaking) At least leave none of them on the table without a good reason.
#24
Archive Gatekeeper
Rennlist Member
Rennlist Member
![Default](https://rennlist.com/forums/images/icons/icon1.gif)
Yeah, if the cylinder bores need to be kissed regardless of whether they end up at 100, 102, or 104 mm post-Nikasil, then you might as well go big.
#25
Race Director
![Default](https://rennlist.com/forums/images/icons/icon1.gif)
drool....................................wow......
Hmm...a 5.4 to 5.8L engine between 100mm & 104 bore.....lets say 350ftlbs at 8k....nice 533HP!!!! 400ftlbs would be 609HP!!!!!
Imagine what a 928 engine would SOUND LIKE at 8k.....................mine is mind blowing at 6500 when the fuel cuts off......
I wonder what the limits of a 16V head-cams are.....you can run much more lift in the 2V heads and Bob Devores all were 2V heads......I dunno.....
Where did I leave that spare $20K+ Hmm maybe a secret high limit credit card just for Doc......Hmmm divorce doesn't sound good either
Hmm...a 5.4 to 5.8L engine between 100mm & 104 bore.....lets say 350ftlbs at 8k....nice 533HP!!!! 400ftlbs would be 609HP!!!!!
Imagine what a 928 engine would SOUND LIKE at 8k.....................mine is mind blowing at 6500 when the fuel cuts off......
I wonder what the limits of a 16V head-cams are.....you can run much more lift in the 2V heads and Bob Devores all were 2V heads......I dunno.....
Where did I leave that spare $20K+ Hmm maybe a secret high limit credit card just for Doc......Hmmm divorce doesn't sound good either
#28
Former Sponsor
Thread Starter
![Default](https://rennlist.com/forums/images/icons/icon1.gif)
You can always find someone that thinks they can improve on things. Certainly, a "better, lighter, stiffer crankshaft can be built that these cranks....but it will cost you 15K to 20K to build them....a tough sale in the 928 market.
I have never had a problem or a complaint about the Moldex cranks we have made. Good quality, good workmanship, good price. I considered that I might continue to stock those cranks (I still have one in stock) as they are slightly cheaper to buy, but if you factor in that their crank isn't balanced and these are....it's getting close enough to a "push" to not worry about it.
When I started to think about spinning engines "another 1000 rpms", it was obvious, to me, that I needed something different for a crankshaft. Something lighter, sitffer, and possibly with the two additional counterweights (although even 8,000 rpms isn't quite to the point where 8 counterweights are required.) I also wanted to be "involved" in the process and have a certain amount of control. Moldex isn't close to me. However, there are several very well respected crankshaft builders in Southern California and it was a "natural" evolution for me to go and talk to these people and pick one to build these cranks.
Due to the initial costs of engineering and programming to build these cranks....I will have to sell quite a few of them to get back these "initial" costs....and that would happen some quicker if I was to charge $4995...but I've never really done this stuff for the money....I do this stuff because I love it and I love these cars.
#29
Former Sponsor
Thread Starter
![Default](https://rennlist.com/forums/images/icons/icon1.gif)
Not quite. You'd need to make sure that the eariler thrust bearing (smaller flanges on the 4.7 blocks) were relieved enough to accept a crank made with the larger thrust surfaces. It should clear, but you'd need to confirm that.
Plug and play in a 5.0 block.
Plug and play in a 5.0 block.