FE Power Forums
FE Power Forums => Non-FE Discussion Forum => Topic started by: FirstEliminator on May 22, 2016, 01:44:06 PM
-
Hey guys,
A mild 351w that I had put together in 2010 always had a shake to it at idle. I've tried moving around the initial timing. Tried different carbs---both Autolite 2100 going rich and lean with the mixture screws. Did a compression test to find cylinders were all very close. Then I had loosened all the rockers and put air pressure into the intake. There was a little bit of air coming out of the oil breather. So I resealed the intake. It was ever so slightly smoother. Or, just my brain playing tricks on me grasping for some improvement. A couple weeks ago I pulled the engine, disassembled it to find a rough spot in the middle of cylinder 7. Like as if it were rusted. I had not pressure tested the block, but suspect there is either a very small crack or porosity pin hole. The piston has some scuffing in the ring land area, but the skirt looks untouched. The barrel finish of the top ring is worn flat from top to bottom where it rode over the rough spot. So, I need a set of rings. Pistons I think can be reused. Got another block and are having it bored to reuse my pistons.
Here are the ring questions:
1. Difference/benefit of moly versus plasma moly ring facings?
2. I'd like to use a "low tension" oil ring for improved efficiency. Is low tension a bad idea for a street cruiser? I've read the low tension oil ring has no problems when used with a Napier 2nd. How about when used with a reverse twist taper ring or any non-Napier 2nd?
3. Does anyone make a Napier style 2nd ring in 5/64?
4. If there is no such thing as a 5/64" Napier, would it be a better choice to get another set of pistons that use thinner rings? Like 1.5mm, 1.5mm, 4.0mm are the stock style piston for the latest 351w in the Lightning truck. If I were to go this route of lower ring tensions, could I expect an improvement in gas mileage?
The biggest problem I am having is I'm planning to take this car to Carlisle All Ford in 2 weeks.
thanks,
Mark
-
in my world I would rather have the block honed with deck plates, with about .005 to hone. and use sunnen an500 stones for finish. then brush 6 to 12 strokes . with 100 ft lbs of torque on the head bolts with a thin wall block, it is common to have .0015/003 bore distortion when the deck plates are installed. if you must have trick rings call TotalSeal.
-
Hey guys,
.
Here are the ring questions:
1. Difference/benefit of moly versus plasma moly ring facings?
-In a street car you will never know any difference.
2. I'd like to use a "low tension" oil ring for improved efficiency. Is low tension a bad idea for a street cruiser? I've read the low tension oil ring has no problems when used with a Napier 2nd. How about when used with a reverse twist taper ring or any non-Napier 2nd?
-waste of time, money and effort unless this s a 1.25 hp/per CID engine (or pure race).
3. Does anyone make a Napier style 2nd ring in 5/64?
-yes, but.....see above.
4. If there is no such thing as a 5/64" Napier, would it be a better choice to get another set of pistons that use thinner rings? Like 1.5mm, 1.5mm, 4.0mm are the stock style piston for the latest 351w in the Lightning truck. If I were to go this route of lower ring tensions, could I expect an improvement in gas mileage?
-yes getting a new set with thin rings would be better yet I do think you'd need to order up a set of custom pistons. Once again, paying say $500 to $700 to merely get low compression (i.e. non-race) pistons iwht modern thin rings little sense to me. You'd never see enough mileage improvement in my book to pay off the increased cost.
I agree that getting the block deck plate honed with your current pistons if they are in great shape is a far better investment with plasma or straight moly rings that fit the ring lands.
JMO!
-
1 - plasma moly is an application technique, usually provides a stronger attachment to the base ring. So - whatever. Any decent moly faced ring should work.
2. - Typically, yes - it's a bad idea. You might get away with something at least 12 lbs tension or better with good PCV draw. I used 11 lbs on the last 351C and not problems with oil control - but it was not a street cruizer. 95% open exhaust with header evac, not your street setup.
3. Have no idea. I've run standard configuration rings in all my engines for 30 years and never had issues
4. If you'd like to drop $600 on a nice set of light Probes and re-balance the motor, sure. Gas mileage? I'd not think you'd be able to detect any improvements by using thin rings. There are a zillion other thing that impact MPG. The Probe set I have uses 1/16, 3mm oil. Low tension rings makes for little friction - but they are going in a dragster, so not applicable.
IMHO - if you are running a 2100, then you need a set of Summit moly rings (Hastings is the OEM as I recall), get a decent cylinder wall finish for the rings - tell your block shop, deck the new block square, put it together and go.
-
Thanks for the replies guys.
Earlier today, I bought the Summit/Hastings ring set with the regular Moly top ring. A new set of Clevite main bearings and a few engine tools. Which included a one-size-fits-one 4.030 solid ring compressor.
The block is at the machinist and i dropped off my pistons today for him to mic.
The 545 stroker 460 that I am putting together for a '79 F-350 crew cab has 1/16, 1/16 and 3/16 rings. I will try the Napier 2nd and low tension oil ring set up in hopes of retaining the term mileage instead of yardage. The E4OD will also help. Along with dropping from 4.10 to 3.73 gear set.
Thanks for the help and now back to the regularly scheduled FE programming.
Mark
-
Mileage? F350 7.5L Gas? Right, best of luck with that. I pull the 24' box with a 1993 F350 extend cab 7.5L gas. Trailer weighs about 7500lbs loaded. I was pleased that we got 7 MPG average going to the bracket finals last year. Total pull over 900 miles @ 65 MPH.
-
A while back I had a decently built 460 with C-6 and 2.75 gear in my 78 F-150. I was checking mileage while pulling an empty open trailer across Ohio and Indiana on flat ground. Topping off then going 100 miles and topping off again the truck was getting 16.2 mpg. This was going by the mile markers on the side of the road, not by an optimistic odometer. It had an Edelbrock 750 that was leaned out until surging then richened up a step. The block had been decked for .040 quench. It had a 200/205 @ .050 cam with a 112 sep. D3 heads with roller rockers. Stock intake and exhaust manifolds. The engine ran really good until one day turning onto a main road from a side street I heard a rattle and the engine stalled. What happened was the #8 piston shattered. Many miles before this failure a friend was driving the truck while helping me move from Florida to Massachusetts and the radiator let go. The engine got overheated really bad. I guess that started the ball rolling on a failure.
When I say mileage, I don't expect 20 plus. 12 would be o-k when cruising at 65. The 545 will have the MSD Atomic EFI, mild cam picked by Scott at Reincarnation which has a 113 lobe separation. Performer RPM intake, FPA headers to 2 1/2 exhaust, Diamond pistons with a 38cc dish, ported D3VE heads. Trans is E4OD with a 3.73 gear set. I'm hoping for decent mileage from such a combination, but we'll find out what it really is once I get it together.
-
Hyper-E pistons I take it. Forged would not do that.
-
Hyper-E pistons I take it. Forged would not do that.
I don't remember if they were Hyper-E or plain cast. That is definitely why I went with forged in the 545. That 460 was a throw together of extra parts. Inconvenience and frustration for a little while, but not a big loss. In every attempt to build it right, the 545 is hopefully going to last the life of the truck. Which should last the rest of my life. It won't be driven daily and never in the winter.
But, then again, this 351w was supposed to be built that way------done and move onto the next thing. Oh well, perhaps this is the last time.
-
Our F350 DRW is a 4.10 gear unit, 7.5L injected AOD-E with overdrive . Best it'll do totally empty one driver is around 10 MPG running 65-70 at steady throttle. That's about 2000~2200 RPM on the highway. The cat has been replaced with a high flow unit, but the rest is bone stock 103K miles. It's fer pullin' not for cruzin' :) Even the 2015 DRW 350s with a high zoot new tech 6.8L only get 12~14.
-
Well, 10 is double digits. Perhaps single rear wheels and a 3.73 cruising at 60-65 might get me closer to 12. With my F-150 getting good mileage with a decently built 460 gives me hope on this F-350 getting near that.
By the way, I replaced the decent 460 with the broken piston with a 460 that was pulled from a 76 Lincoln Towncar. The gas mileage immediately went from 16 with the trailer to 12 totally empty. Recently I took the F-150 on probably it's last long trip to pick up a Comp Green 70 Cougar Eliminator 351c 4 speed. The trip was from the northwest corner of Massachusetts to the Wisconsin/Minnesota boarder. It used $600 in gas. I didn't want to calculate the mileage---but it was terrible. Plus, the engine used 9 gallons of oil on the round trip. Definitely time for something fresh. Not too different, just fresh. The F-150 is a 1978 with tu-tone brown and tan. The 79 F-350 crew cab is also brown and tan. I like that color combo as I also have a 78 F-250 4x4 that is brown and tan. Wow, gotta get this F-350 done. With two young kids, 2 more doors on the truck will be helpful. Since it's a summer truck, working A/C will be nice. Plus it has the capacity to tow my 28' enclosed trailer which my 150 certainly did not......well, pull yes----drive strait and stop, not so well.
thanks,
Mark
p.s. your trans is an E4OD, not AODE.
-
Oops, yes E not A. We also pull with a 2004 F150 Super Crew 5.4L. It's pretty good, averaged 11 with 5500 total (car+open trailer) last time we ran to Dallas and back. Normally 18 ~20, not bad at all. I imagine the 460 could be tweaked easily, maybe a bit torkier cam and/or diaiing in the stocker with a new chain. But it runs well now, no time to mess with it. I did bump the timing +2 and that seemed to help it a bit. If I was going to fix anything, it'd be replacing the fuel pump assemblies because the front doesn't read and the truck has the "failed one way check valve" issue that requires care in how much you put in both tanks.
-
Well, it doesn't look too go in getting my 351w back together for Carlisle. I attempted to put the bottom end together this evening and I could turn the crank, it wouldn't budge. Took all the main caps off and tried just one. It created a significant amount of resistance. All in all, the main caps are off-set from the block. The guy I bought the block from couldn't find the main caps at his house. We had to go across town to find the missing box of main caps in his friend's trailer. Apparently, these mains are not from this block. Where and when the mix-up happened, I have no idea. Highly unlikely that anyone will be able to align this caps to the block with enough time to get everything back together.
It's a bummer. But oh well, life goes on. Guess I'll be taking a different car.
Mark
-
Really sorry to hear that. It's so simple to keep all those parts on the block, not sure why people like to scatter them around.
-
I use a low tension oil ring on my FE street car with no problems. The ring set is just common standard 1/16, 1/16, 3/16.
If you want to use thinner rings on your pistons, you can get ring spacers from Total Seal to run whatever type ring you want.
-
Things are looking up. I called the machinist that bored the block first thing this morning and he had referred me to a guy that can align hone the mains. It was an hour drive to get there. He made no promises, but got the work done. After 4 hours of driving I am back on track for Carlisle.....As long as I can get the engine together, get it in the car, tuned and ready.
I talked to the guy I bought the block from. He had sold another 351w block a few years ago and possibly gave the wrong mains with that one. Yeah, why not keep things like that together.
If I had more time, I'd look into the ring spacers.
thanks,
Mark
-
Tonight I am assembling the engine. Got the short block done and are looking at the heads. I mentioned I bought a few tools from Summit the other day when I got the piston rings. One of the tools was a valve spring tester. What I found when testing the stock spring is that the closed height is 1.8. The pressure at 1.8 is 54 pounds. Man, maybe that is one of the reasons my engine never ran up to par? The Isky cam I had in there calls for a spring that has 135 on the seat. Is 54 pounds normal for a stock spring? These are GT 40 heads from a 96 Ford Explorer which would have a roller cam. The new Lunati Voo-Doo cam calls for 115 @ 1.75. That was the only spring dimension given on the cam card. Looking around I found the spring they recommend has an open pressure of 246 @ 1.25.
I can say I am a little scared of running the heavier spring. I don't want to flatten a lobe. If I pull the damper out, it has about 15 pounds less. The stock springs don't have a damper. It would be a little less pressure for an engine that is 2 barrel with single exhaust in a car that just drives around. I need some help to determine whether to go with or without the damper?
Also, should I break in the cam with the stock springs? Not sure if those valves are bouncing off the seats at 2000 rpms.
thanks,
Mark
-
I doubt they would be bouncing off the seats at 2500 RPM, but even if they are, you are still getting the cam broken in. I would leave them in until the break-in is done, and then get rid of those things; no way they started out that weak!
-
Thanks for the reply Jay. Any thoughts on removing or leaving the damper in place? I'm kinda thinking in the very mild application a little less tension might be o-k.
thanks,
Mark
-
I think I would leave the damper in there. Valve springs are designed as a package, and I'm not sure what you might be getting into by leaving it out. Those springs are not so heavy that they should cause any problems, especially if the cam is broken in with the stock springs.
-
Thanks for the reply Jay. Any thoughts on removing or leaving the damper in place? I'm kinda thinking in the very mild application a little less tension might be o-k.
thanks,
Mark
If you really have 54 lbs seat, then you don't need to change anything - except throw those away after a good break in. 135~140 seat minimum like Isky says, over the nose - follow their recommendations. Buy a quality spring/matching retainer/keepers, don't look for anything no-name/cheap. 10 degree locks preferred.
-
Well, I took out the 54lb stock springs right before I read the posts to leave them in there. The next day, I borrowed a pneumatic valve spring compressor to put them all back. The engine is now in the car and there are just a few more things to assemble. I did remove the damper from the new springs because it doesn't fit the head properly. The column that comes up to center the spring is just a tad too big in diameter. The spring with damper gets stuck on it. I'm afraid it will create metallic or possibly break a spring. There was no time to machine the column to accept the spring and damper. I believe the spring by itself is o-k. It has about 5 lbs less on the seat than called for with the Lunati cam. With the damper, it would have had about 10 over.
Perhaps later I can change it to a spring that fits properly. For now it'll work. Chances are "for now" might just be forever.
thanks,
Mark
-
Agree. If you're not wailing on it. it should run just fine for cruising. Sounds like the proper setup will require the heads to come off for machining. Unless this is a resto, might be worth just hunting around for a deal on a better set of heads. Good luck and hope it all works AOK.
-
Thought I had a fight so far. Well, upon breaking in the cam I had a cam lobe and lifter fail. The lifter looks like Gumby's head. Oil is has enough silver metallic to paint a bass boat. Engine is back out of the car and parts have been overnighted. There's enough time for one last attempt. I have until 9am Thursday morning to get things together. Or, I'll be taking the Colony Park to Carlisle.
With fresh paint at least it looked nice. Sucks.
Mark
-
Man, that sucks. What kind of cam and lifters were they? Did you use a break-in lube from one of the cam manufacturers? What kind of oil? With 50 pounds on the seat there is no way you overdid it on the springs...
-
Best of luck, hope this one works! Sorry to hear about the failed break in.
-
Lunati Voodoo cam. Mild 207/213 @.050 with a 112 sep. I used Isky rev lube on the cam, non-detergent 30wt and a bottle of Comp Cam break in additive. Car started pretty quickly and came up to 2200.
My thought is either the lifter was no good. Or, more likely it was having trouble rotating in it's bore. There was one lifter with a dot on it out of the box. Actually, one single pit. I was a little nervous with that one and was cursing myself for using it. That lifter was in the cylinder next to the failed lifter. The dot lifter had no trouble.
To save time I'm just going to use the 105 lb valve spring for break in. Lunati said 105 is very mild and there should be no problem at all.
35 hours to departure. Parts should be here in 14, leaving 21 hours to assemble, install, break-in, tune, clean and pack.....seams feasible. The only thing that would make it more fun is if it were an FE.
thanks,
Mark
-
It's all over now. The jackass salesman I talked to at Summit shipped my order regular ground. I emphasized next day air. Even asked if they offer next day air by 10am. He said no, so I said o-k, regular next day air. I could probably source the bearing and gaskets locally that I need. But, not the camshaft.
For some reason, I am not meant to take this 69 Cougar to Carlisle.
thanks,
Mark
-
May be a good thing, the slow freight, that is. I'd always take extra time with a cam failure to really determine why it occurred. A non-rotating lifter is often a cause as old varnish on the bore(s) can stop it from rotating. That or a few other factors like a bad heat treat, etc. Given the next try, I'd ensure all rotated freely before giving it another shot. JMO! 8)
-
Hard to believe from Summit - both them and Jegs and do overnight, done it. They are usually much better than that.
Cams fail because - I used the well run in Crane F238 solid and matching EDM lifters in the wife's build - ran for two years in my car, no problem. Lasted 5 rounds in the wife's car, #8 exhaust went away, lost .25 of it's lift in 5 1/8 mile passes. Same racing oil used, etc. Go figure.
Which is why I'm now roller or nothing.
-
The 351w is back together and in the car. Getting ready to break-in the cam today. I've heard multiple people say that they paint a white stripe on the push rods to make sure all the lifters are turning. When do you view the turning of the push rods? Do you leave the valve covers off during break-in? I don't see any other time to view the push rods turning before it's too late. But, it seems like it'd be quite messy. Or, would you see if they turn while the engine is at cranking speed? Seems the excessive cranking which would wipe off the lube.
I've been pondering why this previous cam had a lobe failure. There are a couple things that I think contributed. The cam is a Lunati Voodoo with specs of 250/256 advertised with a 207/213 @.050. That seems like a really fast ramp for a flat tappet. I think this fast ramp is a bit more prone to having a failure or overall less longevity than a cam that had similar specs @.050 but with another 20 degrees advertised. But, those slow ramps look antiquated and less efficient. I like cake and like to eat it which is why I can't resist buying a fast ramp.
The other thought is the springs that I had used to break-in the first cam with had about half the pressure that the cam card called for. After removing all those springs I noticed there were a couple that were shorter and probably weaker. I did not measure the pressure of those two and can only guess the pressure may have been around 40ish. Also, I do not know if one of those shorties were on the failed lobe/lifter. All 16 springs quickly went in the scrap barrel. Is the idea correct that for the cam to spin the lifter there has to be a minimal amount of friction present? Does the possibility exist that the spring was too weak to maintain firm enough contact between the lifter and lobe as to where it would not promote lifter spin?
The springs are now just about what the cam recommends. Lunati calls for 115 @ 1.75. The intakes set up at 110 lbs and the exhaust at 105 lbs. The tech at Lunati mentioned 90-100 would be sufficient for this cruising application. The cam and lifters are covered with a lot of Isky Rev Lube. The engine oil is 30wt non-detergent with a bottle of Lucas Break-in additive.
Perhaps 3rd time is the charm? I had the original build back in 2010. Then the build where I replaced the block and the new cam lost a lobe. Now is the 3rd build and hopefully the last.
thanks,
Mark
-
Tonight, I broke-in the new cam. Everything went pretty well. Here and there I'd hear a little ticking, but nothing like before when the lobe and lifter failed. Perhaps the ticking could have been fluctuations in the load of rpm, oil pressure and temperature affect on the lifters? About 10 minutes into the break-in I shut down the engine. Removed the oil filter and cut it open. There was some metallic in the filter element. I am not sure how much is what would be considered "normal" on break-in with a flat tappet. I replaced the filter and topped off the oil for the remainder of the break-in. After the break-in, adjusting the idle mix and initial timing I had shut the engine off again. We put the hood on and made sure everything else was in check for a road test. Before going on the road test I had again changed the filter. I have yet to cut open the 2nd filter. The oil is sparkling clean and still has the break-in additive. I will put a few miles on the engine before doing an oil change and putting on another filter. So far, so good. Still curious about some of the questions I'd asked in the previous post if anyone has some comments. Having this cam failure on break-in is bothersome and I'd love to know where I went wrong.
This 112 lobe separation came seems to have a louder exhaust than the 108. Why would that be? A later exhaust closing point?
The car drives good and the shake at idle is gone. The shake is why I pulled the engine out in the first place.
thanks,
Mark
-
The 351w is back together and in the car. Getting ready to break-in the cam today. I've heard multiple people say that they paint a white stripe on the push rods to make sure all the lifters are turning. When do you view the turning of the push rods? Do you leave the valve covers off during break-in? I don't see any other time to view the push rods turning before it's too late. But, it seems like it'd be quite messy. Or, would you see if they turn while the engine is at cranking speed? Seems the excessive cranking which would wipe off the lube.
-The covers need to be on due to the large amount of oil thrown off at 2,000 and more rpms. So yes, it's too late if later one cuts up an old steel cover horizontally (i.e. top is cut off) to see the spinning p-rods or if all 16 moved at all.
I've been pondering why this previous cam had a lobe failure. There are a couple things that I think contributed. The cam is a Lunati Voodoo with specs of 250/256 advertised with a 207/213 @.050. That seems like a really fast ramp for a flat tappet. I think this fast ramp is a bit more prone to having a failure or overall less longevity than a cam that had similar specs @.050 but with another 20 degrees advertised. But, those slow ramps look antiquated and less efficient. I like cake and like to eat it which is why I can't resist buying a fast ramp.
-There may be some disagreement from others but.....I don't believe for one second a slow ramp is any better at break-in time versus a fast ramp. It's all to do with ensuring the lifters rotate, the springs are sufficiently weak, cam is well lubed, the engine starts immediately, etc. etc. Even then, if the lifters aren't correctly heat-treated (the still recent issues of American made Johnson-type lifters being supplanted by cheap Asian parts) it's all for naught!
The other thought is the springs that I had used to break-in the first cam with had about half the pressure that the cam card called for. After removing all those springs I noticed there were a couple that were shorter and probably weaker. I did not measure the pressure of those two and can only guess the pressure may have been around 40ish. Also, I do not know if one of those shorties were on the failed lobe/lifter. All 16 springs quickly went in the scrap barrel. Is the idea correct that for the cam to spin the lifter there has to be a minimal amount of friction present? Does the possibility exist that the spring was too weak to maintain firm enough contact between the lifter and lobe as to where it would not promote lifter spin?
-40 is pretty low but if you didn't drive it and the rpms were under say 3,000, a too low spring pressure should not have impacted the break in. A bouncing lifter you would have heard unless the headers were unplugged! Keep in mind at installation it's key to hand 'work' each lifter in each hole to ensure they easily spin in their respective bores. Older, well-used engines often have gunk in the bores that limit lifter rotation with disastrous results.
The springs are now just about what the cam recommends. Lunati calls for 115 @ 1.75. The intakes set up at 110 lbs and the exhaust at 105 lbs. The tech at Lunati mentioned 90-100 would be sufficient for this cruising application. The cam and lifters are covered with a lot of Isky Rev Lube. The engine oil is 30wt non-detergent with a bottle of Lucas Break-in additive.
Perhaps 3rd time is the charm? I had the original build back in 2010. Then the build where I replaced the block and the new cam lost a lobe. Now is the 3rd build and hopefully the last.
-sounds like this is the same block (3rd time)? I'd be quite careful right afterwards and maybe even consider setting up a dial indicator and magnetic base (beg, borrow, steal?) to check lift at the p-rod end for all 16. Your recent issues are why many have given up on flat tappet cams and switched to a pricey yet reliable hydro roller cam set-up with no lifter spin issues.
thanks,
Mark
-
Thanks Bob. The 1st time (2010) was a different block. The engine was pulled to change the cam as it had a 108 lobe separation and I thought it may have been compromising a smooth idle. The block was replaced because of a rough spot in the middle of a cylinder. I didn't due any further checking, but my assumption is a tiny crack or pin hole causing coolant to wash oil off the wall. The rings were worn in that area too. That may have been the cause of the shake at idle I was chasing for a few years.
Mark