Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

I'm sure this has been covered somewhere but I can't find info.

What's the general consensus when it comes to checking bearings, can I simply re-tighten the nuts on the rods or do I need to throw em and start again. Are they a TTY bolt, it's on an RB30 if that's different to the other RBs.

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/482795-re-using-rod-bolts/
Share on other sites

On 9/5/2021 at 8:39 AM, killa-watt said:

So your saying once you undo em they are bin jobs

Yes, but not because they are TTY bolts (which they are not). It is because they are 30 years old, have done a million billion cycles and an engine builder is BUILDING an engine, usually with the intent to push it hard.

I agree to replacing original factory rod bolts but would happily re-use upgraded bolts next time.  Presumably you’re chasing more power than the original bolts were ever designed to handle plus the age factor so replace them now and they will be fine for the next build as well.

I'm in a similar situation. I've already assembled the bottom end of my 25Neo and next is installing the head. My engine shop said I'm good to reuse the factory rods and bolts (RB26 rods and matching bolts as it is a NEO bottom end, with forged pistons) for this power goal and application (street). I've also been told that there's not much point getting ARP rod bolts if I'm reusing stock rods.

On 9/5/2021 at 10:26 AM, GTSBoy said:

Yes, but not because they are TTY bolts (which they are not). It is because they are 30 years old, have done a million billion cycles and an engine builder is BUILDING an engine, usually with the intent to push it hard.

This has reinspired the fear of god in me. GTSBoy would it be totally moronic to not pull it apart and bring the rods to a shop to get reworked for ARP bolts? I ask this suspecting you will say yes, but I still want to hear it 😁

Edited by CowsWithGuns

6 of one or a half dozen of the other. The expense is not huge and the effort is not huge, so you could say that it is silly to not take the opportunity. It's just sump off, rod caps and pistons off and then put it back together afterwards. It's just annoying given the effort that you've put in goes to waste.

On the other side of the coin - the stock rod bolts have been demonstrated to happily run at streetable ~300rwkW power levels without failing on many engines for many years. So as long as you don't plan to beat on the engine real hard, it will probably be fine.

At this point you choose your poison and you drink it.

Thanks. I've had some time to research and clarify my thoughts. 300+ rwkw is already incredible relative to what I had, so I'm going to put it together and and just stay modest with the power. If I really want to go beyond say 350 or get heinous redlines, I'll pull it out when the time comes and upgrade. This is only my first build too, I think I shouldn't overthink part selection lest I make some rookie mistake that causes failure anyway...

If my bolts eat shit, I'll be sure to report back to the community ;) 

Edited by CowsWithGuns

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

    • 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.
    • When I said "wiring diagram", I meant the car's wiring diagram. You need to understand how and when 12V appears on certain wires/terminals, when 0V is allowed to appear on certain wires/terminals (which is the difference between supply side switching, and earth side switching), for the way that the car is supposed to work without the immobiliser. Then you start looking for those voltages in the appropriate places at the appropriate times (ie, relay terminals, ECU terminals, fuel pump terminals, at different ignition switch positions, and at times such as "immediately after switching to ON" and "say, 5-10s after switching to ON". You will find that you are not getting what you need when and where you need it, and because you understand what you need and when, from working through the wiring diagram, you can then likely work out why you're not getting it. And that will lead you to the mess that has been made of the associated wires around the immobiliser. But seriously, there is no way that we will be able to find or lead you to the fault from here. You will have to do it at the car, because it will be something f**ked up, and there are a near infinite number of ways for it to be f**ked up. The wiring diagram will give you wire colours and pin numbers and so you can do continuity testing and voltage/time probing and start to work out what is right and what is wrong. I can only close my eyes and imagine a rat's nest of wiring under the dash. You can actually see and touch it.
    • So I found this: https://www.efihardware.com/temperature-sensor-voltage-calculator I didn't know what the pullup resistor is. So I thought if I used my table of known values I could estimate it by putting a value into the pullup resistor, and this should line up with the voltages I had measured. Eventually I got this table out of it by using 210ohms as the pullup resistor. 180C 0.232V - Predicted 175C 0.254V - Predicted 170C 0.278V - Predicted 165C 0.305V - Predicted 160C 0.336V - Predicted 155C 0.369V - Predicted 150C 0.407V - Predicted 145C 0.448V - Predicted 140C 0.494V - Predicted 135C 0.545V - Predicted 130C 0.603V - Predicted 125C 0.668V - Predicted 120C 0.740V - Predicted 115C 0.817V - Predicted 110C 0.914V - Predicted 105C 1.023V - Predicted 100C 1.15V 90C 1.42V - Predicted 85C 1.59V 80C 1.74V 75C 1.94V 70C 2.10V 65C 2.33V 60C 2.56V 58C 2.68V 57C 2.70V 56C 2.74V 55C 2.78V 54C 2.80V 50C 2.98V 49C 3.06V 47C 3.18V 45C 3.23V 43C 3.36V 40C 3.51V 37C 3.67V 35C 3.75V 30C 4.00V As before, the formula in HPTuners is here: https://www.hptuners.com/documentation/files/VCM-Scanner/Content/vcm_scanner/defining_a_transform.htm?Highlight=defining a transform Specifically: In my case I used 50C and 150C, given the sensor is supposedly for that. Input 1 = 2.98V Output 1 = 50C Input 2 = 0.407V Output 2 = 150C (0.407-2.98) / (150-50) -2.573/100 = -0.02573 2.98/-0.02573 + 47.045 = 50 So the corresponding formula should be: (Input / -0.02573) + 47.045 = Output.   If someone can confirm my math it'd be great. Supposedly you can pick any two pairs of the data to make this formula.
×
×
  • Create New...