Notices
Evo Engine / Turbo / Drivetrain Everything from engine management to the best clutch and flywheel.

Attention All Aluminum Rod Engine Owners....

 
Old Jun 23, 2010, 04:08 PM
  #16  
Evolved Member
iTrader: (2)
 
BLKCarbonEVO's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: VaBeach, VA
Posts: 3,463
Likes: 0
Received 3 Likes on 3 Posts
Agreed. 100mm w/ 156mm rod is not going to work to well with R&R from what I have heard. I don't build motors so I go by what others have told me...

Mikey
BLKCarbonEVO is offline  
Old Jun 23, 2010, 04:43 PM
  #17  
Evolved Member
iTrader: (125)
 
94AWDcoupe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Tampa
Posts: 4,837
Likes: 0
Received 21 Likes on 19 Posts
Originally Posted by JohnBradley View Post
11:1 compression 2.0L
22k miles
no oil cooler
Dyno guinea pig/Street driven/Drag race (alot)
R&R aluminum rods
ACL bearings
E98
Boost anywhere from 31-41 depending on traction
675-770whp
50 mile break in
good post. hope there are more like this
94AWDcoupe is offline  
Old Jun 23, 2010, 05:33 PM
  #18  
Evolving Member
Thread Starter
iTrader: (14)
 
MagicManRed's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: New York
Posts: 389
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by JohnBradley View Post
We have had trouble trying to make them fit. It barely fit when I did 162s with the 94mm and the 156s and 94mm were also pretty close. Just getting the I beams to fit requires clearancing. However if the GRP is smaller in the beam than the R&R they might fit pretty tight as a 150 but still make it.
Its not that we didnt want to, we just couldnt see a way to make it work how we wanted.
Yeah it was a little bit of a pain to get that setup in my 4g64.

Originally Posted by BLKCarbonEVO View Post
Agreed. 100mm w/ 156mm rod is not going to work to well with R&R from what I have heard. I don't build motors so I go by what others have told me...
Mikey
Opinions vary and hit every end of a spectrum. Those opinions obviously affect different people in different ways (I'm sure everyone on EvoM has seen this ). I tend to not get scared off from opinions that have no actual factual data, and just a hunch in something not working properly/efefctively. I guess its all in what you're willing to try and trust. In the end, I could be an idiot for choosing the combo I went with, or in the end I could be the reason people follow those steps. Either way... it's all fine by me, money well spent in the pursuit of a dream. Time will tell if it works out for my application.
This is kinda why I started this thread... I think it'll be very useful in the future. It'll definitely close some mouths and open some eyes if you know what I mean.
MagicManRed is offline  
Old Jun 23, 2010, 06:34 PM
  #19  
Evolved Member
iTrader: (8)
 
03whitegsr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Utah
Posts: 4,001
Received 11 Likes on 10 Posts
Originally Posted by JohnBradley View Post
2 reasons.

Proving a point about aluminum rods and oil temps on the streets and weight reduction.

Actually I think Luke took it off to sell to a customer that had a spun rod bearing and needed an oil cooler and didnt want to pay dealer price.

aaron
Stock size radiator or half width?
03whitegsr is offline  
Old Jun 23, 2010, 07:53 PM
  #20  
Evolved Member
iTrader: (30)
 
JohnBradley's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Northwest
Posts: 11,393
Received 52 Likes on 37 Posts
Stock radiator from the factory

On the 2.2 we had to bore the oil galley, sleeve the oil galley, then grind through parts of the oil galley to make the 162mm and 94mm crank work. The 156 doesnt have as much dwell time so the big end (which is ALOT larger than stock) is not up against the edge of the block and it seems to work alot better.

I would presume a 150mm aluminum and a good non coreshifted block might work like the 156 and the 156 like the 162. I didnt like the 900 additional I spent on machine work to make the 2.2 work though looking back. I want to make a smaller beam aluminum rod that might only be good to 1100whp instead of the 1400whp that the standard R&R is.

Looking at Spyros thread on the solidworks it looks like you could do it and not sacrifice much and not have to go to a Ti MMC style rod. I am assuming those are probably per rod what I pay for 2 sets of R&Rs.
JohnBradley is offline  
Old Jun 23, 2010, 11:51 PM
  #21  
Evolved Member
iTrader: (30)
 
project_skyline's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Colorado
Posts: 2,532
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Originally Posted by DynoDude55 View Post

What Turbo are you planning to use? I would be nervous to rev that long rod engine past 8000RPMs unless you lightend up the rotating mass with a Winberg Crankshaft
Please... You can rev a 2.4 higher then a 2.3. 8000rpms? No 3k crank is needed to rev higher then 8000rpms.
project_skyline is offline  
Old Jun 24, 2010, 07:53 AM
  #22  
Former Sponsor
iTrader: (20)
 
DynoDude55's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Denver, CO
Posts: 161
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by project_skyline View Post
Please... You can rev a 2.4 higher then a 2.3. 8000rpms? No 3k crank is needed to rev higher then 8000rpms.
Okay, sure whatever

Manley crank weighs 38lbs
Winberg crank weighs 26lbs

Bust out your crayons and do some math and get back to us after you re-read your mis-leading post (which is about 99.8% of your posts are).

Last edited by DynoDude55; Jun 24, 2010 at 07:57 AM.
DynoDude55 is offline  
Old Jun 24, 2010, 11:08 AM
  #23  
Evolving Member
Thread Starter
iTrader: (14)
 
MagicManRed's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: New York
Posts: 389
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by DynoDude55 View Post
Okay, sure whatever

Manley crank weighs 38lbs
Winberg crank weighs 26lbs

Bust out your crayons and do some math and get back to us after you re-read your mis-leading post (which is about 99.8% of your posts are).
FYI:
The Manley crank you're talking about: (33lbs not 38lbs)
http://www.extremepsi.com/store/cust...0VIII%20&%20IX

The 100mm Manley crank I'm using in my 4G64 2.4 Aluminum 156mm Long Rod 10.5:1cr build
http://i47.photobucket.com/albums/f1...ods/photo1.jpg
http://i47.photobucket.com/albums/f1...Mods/photo.jpg

Last edited by MagicManRed; Jun 13, 2011 at 06:05 PM. Reason: typo
MagicManRed is offline  
Old Jun 24, 2010, 12:48 PM
  #24  
Former Sponsor
iTrader: (20)
 
DynoDude55's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Denver, CO
Posts: 161
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I was talking about your crankshaft. It weighs 38lbs according to Manley's catalog.

Name:  Manley_cranks.jpg
Views: 0
Size:  91.4 KB
DynoDude55 is offline  
Old Jun 24, 2010, 01:02 PM
  #25  
Evolving Member
Thread Starter
iTrader: (14)
 
MagicManRed's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: New York
Posts: 389
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by DynoDude55 View Post
I was talking about your crankshaft. It weighs 38lbs according to Manley's catalog.
If you say so. However it doesn't look anything like the one I sent you pictures of.
MagicManRed is offline  
Old Jun 24, 2010, 07:34 PM
  #26  
Evolved Member
iTrader: (8)
 
Acree's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Dallas
Posts: 787
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Originally Posted by DynoDude55 View Post
Okay, sure whatever

Manley crank weighs 38lbs
Winberg crank weighs 26lbs

Bust out your crayons and do some math and get back to us after you re-read your mis-leading post (which is about 99.8% of your posts are).
There are plenty of guys running the 2.4L block and stock 100mm crankshaft that are revving up to 8500 rpm.

-Acree
Acree is offline  
Old Jun 24, 2010, 09:21 PM
  #27  
Evolving Member
iTrader: (18)
 
bostonhatcher's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Mid-Missouri
Posts: 272
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
It all depends on your setup. I did a study on this using MATLAB programming. (negative tensile force is compression)



Even if two cars are making the exact same torque at the same rpm with the same fuel it really depends on the setup. For example a 4g63 making 500 ft-lbs on nitrous alone would have to be timed MUCH closer to TDC (360 degrees on graph) while a low compression 4g63 with boost could be closer to 25 or so.

In order for both motors to make 500 ft-lbs, the total area inside the compressional force plot would have to match. The difference is the nitrous motor would have a smaller window but would spike higher, and the boosted motor would have a bigger window but wouldn't spike near as high. They make the same torque but the max compression force on the boosted motor isn't as high.

Using this principle, pretty much any setup that is tuned for 25 or more degrees of timing (without knock) is going to last quite some time. Not only is the max compression force lower but the shock isn't as bad either; it's progressive.
bostonhatcher is offline  
Old Jun 25, 2010, 11:17 AM
  #28  
Evolved Member
iTrader: (30)
 
JohnBradley's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Northwest
Posts: 11,393
Received 52 Likes on 37 Posts
Originally Posted by bostonhatcher View Post
It all depends on your setup.

Using this principle, pretty much any setup that is tuned for 25 or more degrees of timing (without knock) is going to last quite some time. Not only is the max compression force lower but the shock isn't as bad either; it's progressive.
This intrigues me.

25* is past MBT in my experience and therefore has exponentially increased cylinder pressure (6-7* past) according to my understanding, but you are saying has reduced crankshaft forces?

I dont understand the finer points of the engineering to fully grasp it, but is it because forces are equalised better between cylinders?

thanks

aaron
JohnBradley is offline  
Old Jun 25, 2010, 04:29 PM
  #29  
Evolving Member
Thread Starter
iTrader: (14)
 
MagicManRed's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: New York
Posts: 389
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by DynoDude55 View Post
I was talking about your crankshaft. It weighs 38lbs according to Manley's catalog.

http://i55.photobucket.com/albums/g1...ley_cranks.jpg
Just to correct your error... THIS is my crank. (Just over 33lbs)
https://secure.buschurracing.com/cat...f097749a828af7

Only 5lbs heavier than the Winberg, and Manley piece of mind. It's the revised version of what you thought was mine
MagicManRed is offline  
Old Jun 25, 2010, 04:39 PM
  #30  
Evolving Member
iTrader: (18)
 
bostonhatcher's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Mid-Missouri
Posts: 272
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Originally Posted by JohnBradley View Post
This intrigues me.

25* is past MBT in my experience and therefore has exponentially increased cylinder pressure (6-7* past) according to my understanding, but you are saying has reduced crankshaft forces?

I dont understand the finer points of the engineering to fully grasp it, but is it because forces are equalised better between cylinders?

thanks

aaron
Your understanding is correct. You're not tuned for longevity though. If you brought your boost down until your MBT was around 25* then your motor would last much longer. You won't be making as much power but like I said before, when you have two setups making the same power and one is mbt at 25* and the other is mbt at 10* then the one at 25* will last longer.
bostonhatcher is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread
Quick Reply: Attention All Aluminum Rod Engine Owners....


Contact Us - About Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service

© 2019 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands

We are a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for us to earn fees by linking to Amazon.com and affiliated sites.