Page 6 of 6 FirstFirst ... 23456
Results 101 to 113 of 113

Thread: The Big Rod Discussion!

  1. #101
    turbo addict
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Hazelwood, MO
    Posts
    6,566

    Re: The Big Rod Discussion!

    I agree that 99% of rod failures have to do with high rpm, and a lot of the time it's right as the throttle is lifted (the engine is compression braking or freewheeling). That is not to say that rods don't bend or break under power. Rods (aka pillars or columns) are typically better in compression than in tension. However, when you induce angles to the loads, then you start introducing some bending moments as well. Those bending moments can be on more than 1 axis, hence why H-beam rods are popular as they resist those types of loads much better than say a round cross section.

    I find it interesting that people have problems bending wrist pins. I can understand what may be causing this, but even in hydrolocked engines where the rod is bent/broken due to a compression load much greater than it was ever designed for I've found it not that common for the pin to be bent. Given that the piston is aluminum I'd expect the pin bore to elongate due to work hardening the aluminum before the pin bending. Of course the material and thickness of the pin will have a large impact on what actually happens, plus it has to be considered that the pin is in single shear while the piston is in double shear.

    From the descriptions of what people are doing when they have these issues it almost sounds more like a tuning problem given that the reason stated for this phenomena is peak cylinder pressure. There is a larger chance of things not being happy when that happens close to TDC. It almost sounds like a little compromise on torque by retarding the timing a bit would help this. Of course I'll admit that I have a lot of theory background, but my real-world is lacking...a LOT.

    I just did a basic search for bend wrist pins (for all kinds of applications), and it really doesn't seem that common. Thickness of the wall seems to be the main culprit, then material, then pin length. There are a LOT of applications that run the .866 (22mm) pin size. From the limited search I did it seems about 600whp is around where people start to see problems with the stock .866/.150 thick pins in DSM's. The one upgrade I found was an increase in pin wall thickness to .225. It looks like an upgrade to 9310 steel is also very common, though not cheap (probably the alternate upgrade being offered by out vendors), the one site I finally found a price for pins alone were just over $100 for a set.

    It also sounds like beyond the reduced fatigue due to the constant deformation of the pin that lubrication plays a large factor in pin failure. Once the pin is scored, it is doomed. That stress riser will kill the pin.

    One more factor I found, and honestly didn't take into account due to I was thinking about the bore deforming, was that when a pin bends, it is also putting stress on the piston and can lead to a broken piston as well. That would be pretty nasty.

    Anyway, the pin diameter doesn't seem to be the issue. It's the wall thickness and material.

  2. #102

    Re: The Big Rod Discussion!

    has anyone used Pauter rods ?

  3. #103
    turbo addict Pat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Rockville, MD
    Posts
    3,801

    Re: The Big Rod Discussion!

    I believe Bruce Bender ran Pauter rods in his car for years. Not sure if he's on here much these days though.

  4. #104
    Supporting Member Turbo Mopar Contributor 2.216VTurbo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    SoCal the OC
    Posts
    6,675

    Re: The Big Rod Discussion!

    [QUOTE=EXTRME PSI;1046906]has anyone used Pauter rods ?[/QUOTE



    Lots of the air cooled Volkswagon ProMod guys use the Pauter's. Several of those cars are above 800HP level.

    AJ (no More Alan) 84 Rampage RT TIII/568 Quaife 87 GLHS dealer optioned Red 16V Masi/568/Quaife
    90 Masi 16V White/Ginger/Black
    89 TC Masi 16V Red/Ginger/Black
    86 GLHS #110 RoadRace Built 89 CSX-VNT Recaro Car
    89 Turbo Mini 'Woody' 85 GLHT 'RedBox'
    2014 Explorer DD'r 3.5Twin Turbo Ecoboost AWD and 500HP
    My profile page has over 20,000 views, I'm somebody LOL

  5. #105
    turbo addict
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Seattle
    Posts
    7,065

    Re: The Big Rod Discussion!

    Chris, I don't exactly know where you are going with your post. The person private messaging, whether its your or anyone else, needs to research boosted engines and ignore information about other engines.

    99% of rod failures among all engines regardless of application has nothing to do with rod failures in the type of high boost engine that we are looking at (and I would bet most failed rods are caused by oil starvation and owners who continue to drive the damaged engine). I know your background is not in turbocharged engines and the stuff you are interested in is actually not turbocharged (no matter how many turbochargers you want to put on your own car.) You have to admit this. I know what you follow. The ONLY thing I follow are boosted engines and people who build/break them.

    Research. I have seen the evidence, I am not conjecturing which you are admitting to above. My stock engine build program is planned around the idea of limiting torque output and increasing rpms to achieve higher HP without losing a stock rod.

    In highly boosted compressions The compression loads on the rods are extreme and no matter how well designed they are, when you run 300-500% more horsepower through and engine then designed, its no wonder pins and rods have problems.

    I mentioned the pins as a very useful bit of advice because its a fact that many people here have no exposure to extreme turbocharged engines since basically nobody on this site has one. If they do, they probably know all the ins and outs thanks to unmentioned failures or their engine builder does.
    I have custom wrist pins in my built block and they are done with a tapered inner bore (venolia). I don't know what my custom ones are capable of since they are lighter than stock and are an unknown material but .220 tool steel pins for me cost over 200 dollars.

    Decreasing peak combustion pressure will just hurt HP. When you are at that level you can't make the mistakes you did when you were slow. Detonation introduces huge combustion pressures but when I am talking about bending rods I am referring to knock free motors and the rods bending from knock free combustion pressure. The number of cycles they will live becomes very short when exposed to so much more power then they were designed for.

    If people want to go build motors for an RPM they will never see or obsess about weight loss on parts that ONLY matters in restricted racing classes where every advantage is needed...........go ahead. Waste your money and your time. I don't understand why people try to mimic things they see on professional racing engines (that are not even turbocharged) that are regulated into NOT doing what is best for the budget for nearly the same results. Most upgraded rods are lighter then stock for motors that have strong factory rods. No worries about adding weight there.

    2.2/2.5L Chryslers are already blessed with a large piston pin so even the guys making big power might never have noticed a problem. If you go with .866 pins I don't see your goals working out, especially a compound turbo setup (rod killer).
    Last edited by Ondonti; 07-07-2014 at 02:08 PM.
    Brent GREAT DEPRESSION RACING 1992 Duster 3.0T The Junkyard - MS II, OEM 10:1 -[I] Old - 11.5@125 22psi $90 [U]Stock[/U] 3.0 Junk Motor - 1 bar MAP [/I] 1994 Spirit 3.0T - 11.5@120 20 psi - Daily :eyebrows: Holset He351 -FT600 - 393whp 457ft/lb @18psi 1994 Spirit 3.0T a670 - He341, stock fuel, BEGI. Wife's into kid's project. 1990 Lebaron Coupe 2.2 TI/II non IC, a413 1990 Spirit 3.0 E.S. 41TE -- 1993 Spirit 3.0 E.S. 41TE -- 1994 Duster 3.0 A543 1981 Starlet KP61 Potential driver -- 1981 Starlet KP61 Parts -- 1983 Starlet KP61 Drag 2005 Durango Hemi Limited -- 1998 Dodge 12v 47re. AFC mods, No plate, Mack plug, Boost elbow -- 2011 Dodge 6.7 G56

  6. #106
    Garrett booster
    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    Location
    Minnesota
    Posts
    73

    Re: The Big Rod Discussion!

    Quote Originally Posted by Ondonti View Post
    Sounds like somebody quoting some books I have read that focus on naturally aspirated engines or lightly turbocharged engines in a chapter that is trying to scare people away from high rpm setups. That almost sounds like the introduction to Corky Bell's Maximum Boost. The whole point of that intro is teach people that turbocharging does not necessarily mean the death of your engine, therefore, lets go have fun with it (aka, "you are not wasting your time reading my book").

    His "best knowledge" is inadequate and wrong when it comes to extreme turbo setups. Extreme turbo setups bend rods and it usually doesn't happen at high rpms (which totaly blows the quoted stuff above out of the water as far as part weight goes).

    I have never seen a properly assembled rod come apart on a 6g72 (which rods are smaller/weaker then 2.2/2.5 big rods except the fasteners are probably superior) BUT stock rods bend all the time when pushed to over 100hp/cylinder. In reality, HP is not exactly what is killing the rods, but it is peak combustion pressure which is happening at peak torque. So to simply think of it, torque per cylinder bends rods but most mild rpm turbo setups make similar HP as torque and many dynos with bad rpm pickups don't give out torque numbers.

    The next thing that fails is the pins bend or the main bearing caps start separating from the block etc etc etc.

    So if we want to go into full douche mode,
    ================================================== ===============================

    Peak combustion pressure bends rods, E85 actually decreases peak combustion pressures so equal torque #'s the E85 shortblock will survive more abuse. E85 extends the high compression levels throughout the combustion stroke so it still makes the same power but the decreased peak combustion pressure means less shock load on the rod, less bending.

    Simple proof would be looking into new Nissan GTR's that bend rods on gasoline with stock turbos but similar power E85 setups usually don't. I think the combustion pressure difference was something like comparing 1300psi on gasoline vs 1000 on E85. I don't want to look it up for someone sending condescending PM's.

    ================================================== ================================================== ==

    If you are planning on very high rpms then you are going to have to look at the weight of your parts, your rod ratio, and balance that with your peak combustion pressure needs. Most good rods just need improved fasteners to handle ridiculous rpms. Tool steel connecting rod fasteners are the next step up (ARP 625+ for example). IMO, aluminum rods are more important for how they absorb shock loads that would hurt crankshafts/bearings etc than any weight savings people worry about. Lots of guys run them when they have bearing problems. Other people run them because it seemed like a good idea at the time. I don't like their short cycle life but if I had bottom end problems they make sense. If you are running 800whp (200hp/cylinder) its possible you will have bearing problems and its a good chance that aluminum rods would solve that. I would skip them and only try if you can't keep a bearing in your motor. 800whp is when 4g63's start having rod bearing problems.
    They recommend that during a 6G72 rebuild with intentions of greater than 400whp to replace wrist pins with stronger wrist pins due to the torque that is exerted on the connecting rods. They also recommend running thicker H-Beam rods if you plan on going over 500whp, however the rods can bend easily in a 6G72 engine.

  7. #107

    Re: The Big Rod Discussion!

    ok we are NOT building a 6g72 engine i am building a t3 2.2 16 valve engine the block has been upgraded to 4 bolt mains and im going to run venolia pistons ,the head has been race ported and i have custom designed cams, i have not decided on fuel or turbo yet

  8. #108
    turbo addict
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Hazelwood, MO
    Posts
    6,566

    Re: The Big Rod Discussion!

    Quote Originally Posted by Ondonti View Post
    Chris, I don't exactly know where you are going with your post. The person private messaging, whether its your or anyone else, needs to research boosted engines and ignore information about other engines.

    99% of rod failures among all engines regardless of application has nothing to do with rod failures in the type of high boost engine that we are looking at (and I would bet most failed rods are caused by oil starvation and owners who continue to drive the damaged engine). I know your background is not in turbocharged engines and the stuff you are interested in is actually not turbocharged (no matter how many turbochargers you want to put on your own car.) You have to admit this. I know what you follow. The ONLY thing I follow are boosted engines and people who build/break them.

    Research. I have seen the evidence, I am not conjecturing which you are admitting to above. My stock engine build program is planned around the idea of limiting torque output and increasing rpms to achieve higher HP without losing a stock rod.
    Brent, you are absolutely correct that it appears I need to do more research about modern ultra high-boost builds. (BTW, it is not me that is PM'ing in case others were wondering). I was going after the fact that bending rods and wrist pins isn't that common in our community (2.2/2.5) and things to consider when these issues are discussed.

    For those that don't know me well:
    I have personally never built a non-boosted engine for my own vehicles. My background, more accurately what I'm interested in, is not only about making good power, but also getting to it and being able to use it. Transient response, or how quickly the engine can transition between rpm's is a big interest of mine as well as making that power as efficiently as possible (reducing parasitic losses). So in that regard, yes, I do worry about weights of parts that most people wouldn't even bat an eye at. My own build isn't even on the level I would like it to be, but I've got to start somewhere! LOL A lot of the thinking and train of thought that goes with transient response does come from the N/A world. The discussion of bending wrist pins, or even rods for that matter isn't something that comes up too often on the non-boosted side of things. So, this is an area that is not directly translatable.

    Quote Originally Posted by Ondonti View Post
    If people want to go build motors for an RPM they will never see or obsess about weight loss on parts that ONLY matters in restricted racing classes where every advantage is needed...........go ahead. Waste your money and your time. I don't understand why people try to mimic things they see on professional racing engines (that are not even turbocharged) that are regulated into NOT doing what is best for the budget for nearly the same results. Most upgraded rods are lighter then stock for motors that have strong factory rods. No worries about adding weight there.
    So, decreasing peak combustion pressure will decrease torque at a given rpm. Rev it a bit harder and you just gained that horsepower back (horsepower is a function of torque). While I typically will strive to stay at a low rpm for many reasons, there are times, and this may be one, where it makes sense to take a small hit down low to keep things alive. Besides, in these extreme builds, especially with our cars, we are talking torque numbers that are usually close to the power number, which is something that isn't typical. There are guys that have tried to kill low end torque (though I'm thinking even more could be done). The fact is that while it's cool to brag about huge torque numbers for a 4-banger, the exact issues we are talking about, and the driveability factor all indicate that taking a hit on the torque number down low and winding the engine out a bit might be a better way to go...especially for the 16V guys since the valve trains in those heads were designed with higher rpm in mind to begin with.

    In any kind of racing or competition, any legal advantage that can be taken should be. Why would you want to leave something on the table? In our world there are no restrictions, so beyond simply building a brick sh*thouse for an engine that can withstand a nuclear holocaust I still think that finding those areas that can make gains in performance, whether it's making 10hp more, or getting the engine to recover from a rpm drop .100 seconds faster are all worthy of investigation. There is a point where the sacrifice between that performance gain and engine longevity will have to be weighed (no pun intended).

    Quote Originally Posted by Ondonti View Post
    2.2/2.5L Chryslers are already blessed with a large piston pin so even the guys making big power might never have noticed a problem. If you go with .866 pins I don't see your goals working out, especially a compound turbo setup (rod killer).
    I agree that these engines were built very robust and that might be part of the reason this problem hasn't really surfaced before. There's nothing wrong with .866 pins. It's WHICH .866 pins to use that is the key.

    Quote Originally Posted by EXTRME PSI View Post
    ok we are NOT building a 6g72 engine i am building a t3 2.2 16 valve engine the block has been upgraded to 4 bolt mains and im going to run venolia pistons ,the head has been race ported and i have custom designed cams, i have not decided on fuel or turbo yet
    Correct. You aren't building a 6Gxx or a 4gxx or a 426 or a B18.... you are building a mechanical device that you are intending to make a certain power. Regardless of the manufacturer, model designation, displacement, number of cylinders...whatever, a reciprocating engine is required to abide by the same physics. Lessons learned by somebody else can help you either avoid pitfalls, or find an edge that others haven't figured out yet.

  9. #109

    Re: The Big Rod Discussion!

    what rods are the big guys running turboshad, Brian Slowe, etc

  10. #110
    turbo addict
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Hazelwood, MO
    Posts
    6,566

    Re: The Big Rod Discussion!

    In the BSX update thread pages 8-10 there is a pretty intense connecting rod discussion because Brian fragged a GRP aluminum rod on the dyno. I know he went with a steel rod, but I don't know the manufacturer as it's never really stated ( was only skimming because the thread is 79 pages long! ), but if I had to guess he went with Pauter rods. No telling what pin size.

    The discussion starts here: http://www.turbo-mopar.com/forums/sh...g+rod+rods+BSX

  11. #111
    Moderator Turbo Mopar Staff Force Fed Mopar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Greenville/Spartanburg SC area
    Posts
    7,559

    Re: The Big Rod Discussion!

    NASCAR Cup engines all seem to run a .787" pin now. Just an observation, I know they aren't turbocharged But they do make 800-900 hp and spin 9500 rpm. However, they also spend most of their time at a high rpm, and don't see the low-rev loads of a boosted street car.
    Rob M.
    '89 Turbo GTC

    2.5 TIII stroker, 568 w/ OBX and 3.77 FD

  12. #112
    turbo addict Chris W's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Phoenix, Arizona
    Posts
    2,765

    Re: The Big Rod Discussion!

    Quote Originally Posted by Force Fed Mopar View Post
    NASCAR Cup engines all seem to run a .787" pin now. Just an observation, I know they aren't turbocharged But they do make 800-900 hp and spin 9500 rpm. However, they also spend most of their time at a high rpm, and don't see the low-rev loads of a boosted street car.
    Smaller pin= less surface area and less friction.

    Chris-TU
    Chris Wright www.TurbosUnleashed.com Chris@TurbosUnleashed.com 602-76-BOOST Tech/Sales#: Monday-Saturday 9AM-7PM MST Proudly Serving the Turbo-Mopar Community since 1997 TU is a performance, not marketing company. We provide accurate performance data on all our performance products. Fabricating data to make us appear better is just not our style. Do the research before you buy. ROCK BOTTOM PRICES WITHOUT THE HIDDEN HANDLING FEES.... -----HOME OF THE 9 SECOND FWD T-M CLUTCH-----

  13. #113
    turbo addict
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Hazelwood, MO
    Posts
    6,566

    Re: The Big Rod Discussion!

    I figured people might want to know the specifications of the steels used for wrist pins that are upgrades.


    • H13
    • Hardness (Rockwell C): 28-54
    • Ultimate Strength: 289,000 psi
    • Yield Strength: 239,000
    • Elongation at Break: 9%
    • Poisson's Ratio: 0.30
    • Shear Modulus: 11700
    • Density: 0.282 lb/in^3
    • Alloy Makeup
    • Carbon: 0.32-0.40%
    • Chromium: 3.13-5.25%
    • Iron: >= 90-95%
    • Molybdenum: 1.33-1.4%
    • Silicon: 1%
    • Vanadium: 1%


    • 9310 (these are the typical upgrade pins)
    • Hardness (Rockwell C): 40
    • Ultimate Strength: 179,000 psi
    • Yield Strength: 143,000 psi
    • Elongation @ Break: 15.7%
    • Poisson's Ratio: 0.29
    • Shear Modulus: 116,000 ksi
    • Density: 0.284 lb/in^3
    • Alloy Makeup
    • Carbon: 0.08-0.13%
    • Chromium: 1.2%
    • Iron: 94%
    • Molybdenum: 0.12%
    • Silicon: 0.28%
    • Nickle: 3.25%
    • Phosphorus: 0.025% max
    • Sodium: 0.025% max


    I got confirmation today that my Venoilia pistons (custom ordered) are made of H13 and have .866 OD with a .155 wall thickness. Seeing as H13 is used for matched metal press dies (we have these at work...up to 1500 TONS), I'm thinking I should be OK

    I'm going to look up some other steels that have been sighted as being used for wrist pins and post those as well.
    Last edited by Reaper1; 07-12-2014 at 07:36 PM. Reason: I incorrectly stated the pins came with the rods. In fact they came with the Venolia pistons (custom ordered).

Page 6 of 6 FirstFirst ... 23456

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •