Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

I don't see why a crank collar properly fitted would not be good enough for 500hp.  It costs half as much or less 'but I might as well throw $500 in the river since I'm rebuilding the engine anyway'.  Note sarcasm - not rudely meant, just easier to use.

Also those pistons will not likely be lighter will they?  More likely the opposite.  Dunno about the rods.

:P No offence taken. I don't really want to throw $500 away on anything either. It just seems to me that to go to all this trouble while the motor is out and so on, and then pop the 12yr old crank back in - which has had to be modified (possibly weakened at this point?) - in the scheme of things $500 was good insurance... but hey, that's exactly why I am asking the question - to see what others have done/think on this.

Pistons I thought were lighter going to the forged items over the stock cast ones -aren't they?

The crower rods are about 200g lighter than the stock rods. (recently another was done, and my engine builder weighed them both).. so all this means less stress on the crank I would think.

once you fit the collar etc its still gonna need to be machined before goin back into the motor.

thats where the new crank works out near enough to the same costings, without the wait of workshops :P

The weak point on that crank is the oil pump drive which the collar deals with.

How is the crank getting weaker with age? A new crank is never perfect anyway, it still needs some machining.

Also please note I tied your 500hp power figure to my statement.

Forged pistons are generally heavier than cast but you are making up for it with those rods - whether you need them or not is another story.

But I am not going as full on as someone building an outright race car either.

if this is so....you dont really need the motec and cdi....i have a brand new power fc pro which may suit your application better....could do a swap perhaps. pm me for a chat if your keen to work something out with me.

Edited by DiRTgarage
How is the crank getting weaker with age?  A new crank is never perfect anyway, it still needs some machining.

If cranks are anything like engine blocks, my understanding is that there are distinct advantages refreshing a used item from a metalurgy point of view, that is, the used item has already hardened and done any warping/etc.

Anyone more knowledgable then me (ha! that's not hard :)) care to comment?

The weak point on that crank is the oil pump drive which the collar deals with.

How is the crank getting weaker with age?  A new crank is never perfect anyway, it still needs some machining.

Also please note I tied your 500hp power figure to my statement.

Forged pistons are generally heavier than cast but you are making up for it with those rods - whether you need them or not is another story.

Fair enough. I suppose it was just my thought that perhaps the crank may have suffered some fatigue over that time. If not, and in keeping with what Lucien says about the metallurgy point of view - perhaps it is better to simply keep that one?

I'm all for saving the money if it really is no advantage.

if this is so....you dont really need the motec and cdi....i have a brand new power fc pro which may suit your application better....could do a swap perhaps. pm me for a chat if your keen to work something out with me.

:( Cheers for that, but I guess I meant I am not a "no limit to budget, out and out race car". I still intend to be 'racing' as much as I can.

Part of the reason I have Motec and CDI is because that what my tuner is most familiar with, and secondly - he sponsored me. :( He probably wouldn't like me to give it away like that. But thanks for the offer anyhow. Now if you want to swap a veilside front bar for that nice stock one you have - that's something I'd be interested in! :D

Forged pistons are generally heavier than cast but you are making up for it with those rods - whether you need them or not is another story.

I just weighed the stock pistons in at 440grams - and the JE replacements are 335grams according to the specs.

25% less, or 100grams per pot saving - using this particular piston. Got to be good.

Take another 200grams off per rod and the crank surely is having a better time of things at 8000rpm - not to mention the faster spin up time?

I just weighed the stock pistons in at 440grams - and the JE replacements are 335grams according to the specs.

25% less, or 100grams per pot saving - using this particular piston. Got to be good.

Take another 200grams off per rod and the crank surely is having a better time of things at 8000rpm - not to mention the faster spin up time?

I notice your using JE pistons what made you choose these?

I ask because I have a dilema of using JE's which I got at a good price or sourcing Weisco's which have teflon coating from the factory, which apparently are a closer fit and less noisy from cold start.

All advice appreciated.

Edited by Sinista32
I just weighed the stock pistons in at 440grams - and the JE replacements are 335grams according to the specs.

25% less, or 100grams per pot saving - using this particular piston. Got to be good.

Take another 200grams off per rod and the crank surely is having a better time of things at 8000rpm - not to mention the faster spin up time?

Well that's interesting. Has anyone got a pic of the JE piston lying around?

Do they have short skirts?

I went for the wiseco's recently for the abovementioned reasons basically. Teflon coated skirts from factory, clearances are smaller than some, fairly quiet compared to some, nice long skirts for keeping square in the bore, not expensive.

This weight saving says to me you have even less reason to get a new crank.

Just my opinion.

Well that's interesting.  Has anyone got a pic of the JE piston lying around?

Do they have short skirts?

I went for the wiseco's recently for the abovementioned reasons basically.  Teflon coated skirts from factory, clearances are smaller than some, fairly quiet compared to some, nice long skirts for keeping square in the bore, not expensive.

This weight saving says to me you have even less reason to get a new crank.

Just my opinion.

Yeah I hear what you're saying. Perhaps the JE are thinner and/or have shorter skirts. (I've always preferred shorts skirts.. not just in pistons either...)

I'll have to see if I can get hold of one and post some pics. I don't think the JE have any coatings like the Wiseco's either... I was thinking of having them ceramic coated - but thats just the top, not the skirts.. How much are the Wiseco's?

I notice your using JE pistons what made you choose these?

Frankly, it was just what my engine builder suggested. He's always had a like for the JE stuff. I once used them in a V8 too. But to be honest - I'm sure the Wiseco are probably just as good. And I like the sound of the teflon... I'll ask him about it and see what he thinks, but I know he did say that most 'good forged pistons' these days are all very good.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


  • Similar Content

  • Latest Posts

    • For once a good news  It needed to be adjusted by that one nut and it is ok  At least something was easy But thank you very much for help. But a small issue is now(gearbox) that when the car is stationary you can hear "clinking" from gearbox so some of the bearing is 100% not that happy... It goes away once you push clutch so it is 100% gearbox. Just if you know...what that bearing could be? It sounding like "spun bearing" but it is louder.
    • Yeah, that's fine**. But the numbers you came up with are just wrong. Try it for yourself. Put in any voltage from the possible range and see what result you get. You get nonsense. ** When I say "fine", I mean, it's still shit. The very simple linear formula (slope & intercept) is shit for a sensor with a non-linear response. This is the curve, from your data above. Look at the CURVE! It's only really linear between about 30 and 90 °C. And if you used only that range to define a curve, it would be great. But you would go more and more wrong as you went to higher temps. And that is why the slope & intercept found when you use 50 and 150 as the end points is so bad halfway between those points. The real curve is a long way below the linear curve which just zips straight between the end points, like this one. You could probably use the same slope and a lower intercept, to move that straight line down, and spread the error out. But you would 5-10°C off in a lot of places. You'd need to say what temperature range you really wanted to be most right - say, 100 to 130, and plop the line closest to teh real curve in that region, which would make it quite wrong down at the lower temperatures. Let me just say that HPTuners are not being realistic in only allowing for a simple linear curve. 
    • I feel I should re-iterate. The above picture is the only option available in the software and the blurb from HP Tuners I quoted earlier is the only way to add data to it and that's the description they offer as to how to figure it out. The only fields available is the blank box after (Input/ ) and the box right before = Output. Those are the only numbers that can be entered.
    • No, your formula is arse backwards. Mine is totally different to yours, and is the one I said was bang on at 50 and 150. I'll put your data into Excel (actually it already is, chart it and fit a linear fit to it, aiming to make it evenly wrong across the whole span. But not now. Other things to do first.
    • God damnit. The only option I actually have in the software is the one that is screenshotted. I am glad that I at least got it right... for those two points. Would it actually change anything if I chose/used 80C and 120C as the two points instead? My brain wants to imagine the formula put into HPtuners would be the same equation, otherwise none of this makes sense to me, unless: 1) The formula you put into VCM Scanner/HPTuners is always linear 2) The two points/input pairs are only arbitrary to choose (as the documentation implies) IF the actual scaling of the sensor is linear. then 3) If the scaling is not linear, the two points you choose matter a great deal, because the formula will draw a line between those two points only.
×
×
  • Create New...