KenRudd

Looks like one of the hubs is shot, very loose in bearing.

KenRudd

This is the "bad" hub. It is beaten up, but the weird part is that it almost looks like it has a thin sheath.

KenRudd

Back on the rebuild project. Intake progress

KenRudd

Staging all the hoses, etc

Mrmerlin

Ken make sure the area under the bolt heads for the water bridge and the sensor surfaces are cleaned of the coating,
otherwise the temp sensors will give false readings

KenRudd

Sensor locations and base of bridge were masked off, so no PC there. I did apply anti-sieze to sensors, not sure if it is really needed for the brass to aluminum contact. I may need to touch up bolt holes to ensure continuity. Thanks for the hint as easier now than later.

Mrmerlin

the bolts will be the ground path even though the base of the WB is clean,
the gasket will prevent grounding.
I have seen this issue occur on a few cars with powder coated water bridges,
the engine will not get accurate temperature readings and then the computer will adjust the injection system to the wrong parameters,
this can also effect the temperature gauge readings to be erratic.

clean the bolt mating surfaces and use deoxit 100 on the bolt heads and washers and the temp sensor washers

KenRudd

Duly noted and will do. Thanks!

Bigalrut

Ken,
I'm in the process of doing an intake/fuel refresh and was curious as to what you used to replace the 'horseshoe' hose and what type clamps you used. Great post…it has been very helpful!

KenRudd

Timely question.

As background, I am running PorKen chips, so I am using an early '87 FPR, which _may_ make a difference.

In any case, I bought new hose and 14 mm clamps from Roger.

I had to cut off the connectors from the end of the old hose, and then I cut the new hose to exactly the same length as the old. This was a mistake. The hose kinked.



I spoke to Roger and he recommended making the hose longer:
"You must make the hose a lot longer and put it behind the engine and below the fuel cooler. The longer the hose the larger the bend radius and no kink."

The next piece was a little over an inch longer, no kink. It may make sense to go even longer.

Bigalrut

Thanks much. Did you do the same for the other hoses?

Mrmerlin

Ken do you have new sealing washers for the temp sensors on the WB?
it appears that they are not installed this could lead to a leak

PorKen

Looks like you have a '85 type return bracket. (The '86 return hose connection is on the right side, with a shorter hose*.)

If you delete the fuel cooler better to go directly to the return line on the firewall. (I trimmed the line and had a hose supplier rebraze the end for me.)

If you retain the fuel cooler and '85 bracket, there was originally a small bracket fitted on the rear TB housing stud for a (blue) clip to hold the return line.




*Some very early '85 have the FPR on the left side as shown in the WSM. It has been observed that the engine runs oddly with the FPR on the left side. Perhaps because of fuel pressure harmonics.

KenRudd

Good eye Porken! I also noticed the different return bracket from my existing '86 vs. this earlier '85 motor. I was going to leave it as is, but I will consider re-routing, simplifying this return hose connection to the fuel cooler, as others have said similar in other threads.

The other difference I noted so far is that the bracket for the diagnostic port at the motor front is different, putting that port in a slightly different location.

KenRudd

I do have them, using crush washers, and was staging and did not want to "crush" them just yet.

So why the anti-seize at this point? I was just on a roll with the Anti-seize brush and got ahead of myself.