Performance Boats Forum banner

1 - 20 of 83 Posts

·
I'm No Expert
Joined
·
3,139 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
Got the block back from Pfaff and come to find out they didnt line hone the block like i asked.. so today i mic'd the journals and installed the bearings to get a idea were i'm at. The bearings are MS-829H-1.

Journals measured
#1 2.7480
#2 2.7482
#3 2.7481
#4 2.7481
#5 2.7483

Torqued down the caps to 110 lbs and this is what i got. F means the bearing half facing the front and R facing the back (using the groove as a divider)

#1 F .0026 R .0024
#2 F .0025 R .0026
#3 F .0020 R .0026
#4 F .0016 R .0016
#5 F .0030 R .0025

I checked the bearings they all have the same .001 number on them, caps are in the correct numbered places and facing arrow forward.

I'm curious why the numbers are so sparatic, is this because i need to have this thing line honed? This block with my last 468 build the mains were on the tighter side too... Ended up running kings race bearings to try to get extra clearance (old crank was mains were .010)
 

·
Bostick Racing Engines
Joined
·
1,063 Posts
Got the block back from Pfaff and come to find out they didnt line hone the block like i asked.. so today i mic'd the journals and installed the bearings to get a idea were i'm at. The bearings are MS-829H-1.

Journals measured
#1 2.7480
#2 2.7482
#3 2.7481
#4 2.7481
#5 2.7483

Torqued down the caps to 110 lbs and this is what i got. F means the bearing half facing the front and R facing the back (using the groove as a divider)

#1 F .0026 R .0024
#2 F .0025 R .0026
#3 F .0020 R .0026
#4 F .0016 R .0016
#5 F .0030 R .0025

I checked the bearings they all have the same .001 number on them, caps are in the correct numbered places and facing arrow forward.

I'm curious why the numbers are so sparatic, is this because i need to have this thing line honed? This block with my last 468 build the mains were on the tighter side too... Ended up running kings race bearings to try to get extra clearance (old crank was mains were .010)

Damn... that #4 is a bit on the tight side... still within "specs"... but specs allow for .0005 to still be "cool" for what that's worth. My two cents... line hone the puppy. You could play the "mix 'n match" bearing routine... but never been a fan when you can just machine the part correctly and get it spot on wihtout buying 2-3 sets of bearings. Just curious though... before going through the trouble... did you check the housing bore dia and roundness? You'd be surprised at what the factory allows out the door.
 

·
I'm No Expert
Joined
·
3,139 Posts
Discussion Starter #3
No i didnt check the housing bore and i dont doubt that some previous work was not correct. Before i got this block it had been rebuilt by some budget shop, and was .040 over with .010 under mains and stock rods. I had a hell of a time the first go around with the mains and getting my clearances right. I always figured it was the crank.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
1,681 Posts
Shaun,
Four needs to be fixed. You need to have the block line honed. You would have to buy 2 more sets of mains, std, and X's to get the clearances you need, if if was 1 set then okay but with 4 the way it is you would be better off to get the block line hone.

Also 3 and 5 have some taper in them so thats telling me the cap is just a tad cocked on the registers. For what your building I would get that fixed.
 

·
Lurker
Joined
·
1,417 Posts
Shaun,
Four needs to be fixed. You need to have the block line honed. You would have to buy 2 more sets of mains, std, and X's to get the clearances you need, if if was 1 set then okay but with 4 the way it is you would be better off to get the block line hone.

Also 3 and 5 have some taper in them so thats telling me the cap is just a tad cocked on the registers. For what your building I would get that fixed.
X2!

Also, if you do end up having to run mixed matched bearings (using std. with a .001 under ect.) try to keep the bearings in the caps all the same. I would start by putting std/std in, then adjust the upper bearing as needed.

PM answered
 

·
Gone
Joined
·
1,824 Posts
"This block with my last 468 build the mains were on the tighter side too"

Meaning #4 was not like that before.

Somethings up. Wrong cap wrong place...something. Follow instructions in pm.
 

·
steelcomp was here
Joined
·
26,512 Posts
I'll be odd man out here and say I find it hard to believe the #4 main is .001 off from the others, but not unheard of I guess. My guess is Pfaff didn't hone it because it wasn't needed. First thing I would do is measure bearing shells. Part numbers could be wrong. On no. 3, look for a burr or piece of dirt or something that may be keeping that cap from going on straight. If you need to, gently use a fine cut file on the edges of the cap and block to make sure things are clean and straight. Assemble the mains without the bearings and check the bores before you haul it to the machine shop. Try and confirm the clearances you're getting. Make sure your torque procedures are correct and uniform. Like Warp said, keep the same bearings in the caps and use the block side to adjust if you have too.
JMO.
ETA: X2 with Fiat on possibly having caps crossed up.
 

·
Lurker
Joined
·
1,417 Posts
Not to be a smart ass but are the caps in the correct location:)bulb
I'm guessing by the rest of the reading the caps are in the correct location. Otherwise they all would be jacked up...not just #4.
I have seen #4 close up pretty good due to detonation. #6 cylinder can pound the hell out of it by it's nature, and #7 typically being lean doesn't help this area either. Couple this with clamp load on the low side and it could shrink up quite a bit. Not saying this is the case, but definitely believable.
The one variable is why Pfaff didn't catch it?
That would point to a miss-marked bearing, but they are -.001's, so unless #4 is the only correct one and the rest are std????

Hmmmm.

As Steel pointed out it could be as simple as a spec of dirt behind the bearing, or.......? :)sphss
 

·
I'm No Expert
Joined
·
3,139 Posts
Discussion Starter #10
I went out, removed the bearings, cleaned everything again and torqued the caps on with no bearings. My proceedure is start at 20lbs torque the insides, then outsides, then increment by 10lbs... all the way to 110.

Draging my nail on #1 and #3 accross (front to back) the cap i can feel a bur at the edge.

Pfaff i havnt been all that impressed with. I asked them to line hone the block. They didnt, and when i asked if it was checked they couldnt give me a answer, where suppose to call me back with the answer and never did. They did line hone my buddys block that which he didnt ask for. Now one could say that pfaff checked his block and it needed it but what i find weird is that on my buddys block they didnt check or surface the deck.. My guess is they got us confused. Then my buddy has a crank shipped to them from summit, they balance it and when i pick it up they show me a 1/4" hole in the side of the counter weight because scat drilled the counter weights off center. Pfaff seams to think it will be fine, scat seams to think it wont be and wouldnt run it. Scat also said a red flag should have poped up when pfaff saw this... so now i'm trying to find out if pfaff is going to rebalance the new crank from scat but again, havnt gotten a call back or an answer only been a day though...

At this point i'm not sure if it's just me or what but i'm thinking i should take back and get it line honed to just have peice of mind and maybe have them check it while it's up there so i can compare there measurements with my own...

I set my mic to 2.9375, put the dial bore guage in it and zero'd it. Here's what i got

#1 F -.0006 R -.0007
#2 F -.0011 R -.0010
#3 F -.0005 R -.0005
#4 F -.0005 R -.0005
#5 Didnt check.
 

Attachments

·
steelcomp was here
Joined
·
26,512 Posts
Right off the bat I see #3 and #4 are identical, and the crank is as well, so the final on those two should have been identical.
Do you have compressed air?
 

·
I'm No Expert
Joined
·
3,139 Posts
Discussion Starter #12
Right off the bat I see #3 and #4 are identical, and the crank is as well, so the final on those two should have been identical.
Do you have compressed air?
yes, and already blew out the main bolt holes if thats what your going to ask me to do next :D
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
25,975 Posts
Pfaff i havnt been all that impressed with. I asked them to line hone the block. They didnt, and when i asked if it was checked they couldnt give me Then my buddy has a crank shipped to them from summit, they balance it and when i pick it up they show me a 1/4" hole in the side of the counter weight because scat drilled the counter weights off center. Pfaff seams to think it will be fine, scat seams to think it wont be and wouldnt run it. Scat also said a red flag should have poped up when pfaff saw this... so now i'm trying to find out if pfaff is going to rebalance the new crank from scat but again, havnt gotten a call back or an answer only been a day though...



I set my mic to 2.9375, put the dial bore guage in it and zero'd it. Here's what i got

#1 F -.0006 R -.0007
#2 F -.0011 R -.0010
#3 F -.0005 R -.0005
#4 F -.0005 R -.0005
#5 Didnt check.
Some thing is up here Shaun. How come the #2 is big, yet when you had the bearings in, it measured the same as #1. I would get some really good measurements on the bearing thicknesses and maybe you can juggle them around to come up with some thing better than you had the first time. Is this ridge on the bearing saddle or on the register flat? Iam totally confused by the crank counter weight thing. Explain it again, doesn't make any sense!



100% free webcam site! | Awesome chicks and it is absolutely free! | Watch free live sex cam - easy as 1-2-3
 

·
I'm No Expert
Joined
·
3,139 Posts
Discussion Starter #14
Some thing is up here Shaun. How come the #2 is big, yet when you had the bearings in, it measured the same as #1. I would get some really good measurements on the bearing thicknesses and maybe you can juggle them around to come up with some thing better than you had the first time. Is this ridge on the bearing saddle or on the register flat
bob, i dont know, at this point i'm starting to doubt this dial bore guage. It's made by tavia from the looks of it but it's the summit brand. I just went out and took some numbers again and now #3 i'm able to get to -.0001 and #4 the same... going from a mic of 2.9375

The burs/ridge i feel is on the bearing saddle.

I'm a bit frustrated right now....
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
25,975 Posts
Couple suggestions, first, only measure dead vertical, don't rotate the gauge at all. Don't care about that for now. Second, remember you are looking for the smallest number the dial shows as you raise or lower the gauge end very slightly. The smallest number is when the gauge is dead 90* in the bore. You should be able to get repeatable numbers every time you remeasure the bore. Remember .0001 is very small. If you can't get repeatable numbers, try to find out if it's you or the gauge.



100% free webcam site! | Awesome chicks and it is absolutely free! | Watch free live sex cam - easy as 1-2-3
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
280 Posts
I'm guessing by the rest of the reading the caps are in the correct location. Otherwise they all would be jacked up...not just #4.
I have seen #4 close up pretty good due to detonation. #6 cylinder can pound the hell out of it by it's nature, and #7 typically being lean doesn't help this area either. Couple this with clamp load on the low side and it could shrink up quite a bit. Not saying this is the case, but definitely believable.
The one variable is why Pfaff didn't catch it?
That would point to a miss-marked bearing, but they are -.001's, so unless #4 is the only correct one and the rest are std????

Hmmmm.

As Steel pointed out it could be as simple as a spec of dirt behind the bearing, or.......? :)sphss
I can guarantee it was an honest mistake by Pfaff I bet if he called Gordy it would be handled with no question.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,034 Posts
I went out, removed the bearings, cleaned everything again and torqued the caps on with no bearings. My proceedure is start at 20lbs torque the insides, then outsides, then increment by 10lbs... all the way to 110.
Start by correcting this. You are not trying to sneak up on the torque reading real quiet like and scare it. Torque the bolts (studs) then go on from there. Steady, even, smooth pull, not 10# at a time.

If you were not happy with Pfaff (I don't know who he is..I am not a west coast guy), why would you take it back. No shop worth a damn would machine a block without checking the mains. It needs to be right. It has the potential to bring necessary work into their shop.
Personally, I would not machine a factory block with factory main work without align honeing the piece. (for performance applications). I willl catch it here, but the factory work 20+ years ago (even today) is decent at best. Add 20 years of heat cycles, running, etc, the mians should be done.
Just my .02
Wags
 

·
I'm No Expert
Joined
·
3,139 Posts
Discussion Starter #18
I can guarantee it was an honest mistake by Pfaff I bet if he called Gordy it would be handled with no question.
Like i said, i think they confused me and my buddy which is a easy thing to do... we sound exactly the same on the phone. The crank deal has me a bit sketch though.. looking at it and them telling me to run it... i dont know, it just doesnt seam right. I'm using pfaff because it was recommended to me by a few as a good shop...
 

·
I'm No Expert
Joined
·
3,139 Posts
Discussion Starter #19
Couple suggestions, first, only measure dead vertical, don't rotate the gauge at all. Don't care about that for now. Second, remember you are looking for the smallest number the dial shows as you raise or lower the gauge end very slightly. The smallest number is when the gauge is dead 90* in the bore. You should be able to get repeatable numbers every time you remeasure the bore. Remember .0001 is very small. If you can't get repeatable numbers, try to find out if it's you or the gauge.
should i pivit on the end that moved in and out or the end thats set? I've been taking my two fingers holding the outside wheels up against the main and then pivioting the set peice if tha makes sense.

I'm going to take some video... only way to show what i'm doing...
 

·
I'm No Expert
Joined
·
3,139 Posts
Discussion Starter #20
Start by correcting this. You are not trying to sneak up on the torque reading real quiet like and scare it. Torque the bolts (studs) then go on from there. Steady, even, smooth pull, not 10# at a time.
This is what my "How to build a big block chevy" book said to do... why i did this... and if i've been going in 10lbs increments for nothing i'm going to hurt sombody :D You know how long it takes me to torque the damn block that way :p
 
1 - 20 of 83 Posts
Top