Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

Gday,

Im just after a bit of advice from people with experience in this area.

My rebuilt RB26 blew a headgasket on a dyno, and on inspection of the bearings, it was apparent that detonation had occurred in most of the cylinders. (The crank had picked up bearing material, and several engine builders have remarked that only detonation could be the cause of this). Number 6 piston had discoloured slightly, and the headgasket let go around number 6 as well, so it had gotten pretty hot in there.

I was hoping i could use the same Venolia pistons as they were only 4 hours old, but the engine builder has said that three of these pistons have "collapsed around the skirts" and that the piston to bore clearence is now too big.

My questions are:

- What does 'collapsed skirts mean'? I assume its contraction or warping of the skirts due to heat???

- What would cause the skirts to collapse?

After the head gasket failure, there was also damage to the bore on number 6. I thought it was due to water corroding the freshly bored block, but i understand that this is rare. Im now wondering if something catastrophic happened on the dyno because this was the only occasion that the engine hit boost in its short life.

Anyway, thanks for any input. At least there wont be a question mark over the used pistons in the rebuild.

Shaun.

Whatever you do, do not use Venolia again.

They are the worst piston I have ever seen, and the skirts from memory are ridiculously thin - Sadly you are not the first person to have their new Venolia Piston-equipped engine let go.

Agreed stay away from the venolia pistons and your tuner :rofl: to blow a head gasket and pistons means it was detonating hardcore... hardcore enough to show up on even the most rudimentary knock detection devices.

agreed with all the comments above, really bad for that to happen on a run in tune. and yeh not really a good idea to re-use pistons in my opinon, easpically if this kind of thing has happened to them the clearances would be stuffed

all the above is sound info. and I'm sorry your engine didn't last :ph34r: I remeber when you were collecting parts for this build and it sounded awesome. I hope you can get it back together better than every ;)

all the above is sound info. and I'm sorry your engine didn't last :ph34r: I remeber when you were collecting parts for this build and it sounded awesome. I hope you can get it back together better than every ;)

Thanks for all the advice above. I was never really happy with the Venolia choice; finances controlled that choice unfortunately. Ive got CP pistons now and I believe they are better.

Ive had nothing but bad luck with this build; businesses have failed half way through, my new engine failed on a highly respected tuners' dyno etc etc.

I cant understand how this tuner missed detonation because it must have been huge; and they have turned out some awesome cars.

Anyway, hopefully this will be the last time; its been a long time coming.

Shaun.

please PM me and let me know who your tuner was...Any experienced tuner worth his salt should have picked that sort of detonation long before it eventuated into that.And on a run in tune ??? what the hell was he thinking ? Run in tune is supposed to be very ,VERY delicate basically setting the fuel so its not really rich but more importantly keeping ignition advance relatively low so you are able to load the engine ( ie 4 heavy guys in top gear going up a hill ) this is the best way to bed the rings in...Sorry to hear about this as your hard earned cash has been totally blown to smithereens by someone who should know better...

Thanks mate. I agree with what you are saying, but before i start giving out names (even privately), id like to chat with them about it. Ill give them the opportunity to explain what happened, as i dont want to make any enemies.

Im also reluctant because i know this guy is an extremely good tuner and had turned some great cars.

Shaun.

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

    • 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.
    • Nah, that is hella wrong. If I do a simple linear between 150°C (0.407v) and 50°C (2.98v) I get the formula Temperature = -38.8651*voltage + 165.8181 It is perfectly correct at 50 and 150, but it is as much as 20° out in the region of 110°C, because the actual data is significantly non-linear there. It is no more than 4° out down at the lowest temperatures, but is is seriously shit almost everywhere. I cannot believe that the instruction is to do a 2 point linear fit. I would say the method I used previously would have to be better.
×
×
  • Create New...