Anyone used an MP 3.246” Stroke Crank?

[Mario]

I recently picked one up and was interested in building an engine with it. I'm wondering what would be an optimal set-up.

[86Shelby]

16V high revving, let that sucker breathe!

I've thought a lot about picking one up as well. Toss a TIII head and a GLHT into the mix and it should make for some good times...

[Mario]

What would be the optimum rod length to use?

Also I remember reading a while back that either someone used a pre 89 crank in an 89 and up block or vise versa. If that's true what do I have to modify in order to do that? The seals and their housings?

[8valves]

I think it's the front snout of the crank that is different between common blocks and not. How to use one in the other, you've got me.

You'd definately want either a bad --- 8V head with some serious work done to it, or a 16V optimally with a short throw setup. I think it would be awesome, and if you use the right rod length you'd be sitting pretty for a better rpm range. Now, the actual rod length, let me get back to you, I'll see what I can come up with.

Aaron Miller

[Mario]

Thanks, I appreciate it.

[rbryant]

Wouldn't it be just as easy to drop in a 2.0 from a Neon block and all?

Unless you are putting it into an lbody the motor mounts should be cheaper to fab up than the crank would be.

I guess electronics would be the issue.

-Rich

[BadFastGTC]

I'm putting a 2.0 crank in the common block and we're making a sleeve to press over the 2.0 snout. The common block seal retainer will be changed to accept the '87 seal. There are a ton of rods to chose from out there. A rod for a SBC with a thicker bearing may work without too much trouble. I would rather just buy a set of cutom pistons instead of having to but a set of custom rods and pistons.

As far as the head goes, I'm working on a copy of a raised port 8V that a buddy of mine did a few years ago. The goal with all of this is to nail 500WHP.

I think it's the front snout of the crank that is different between common blocks and not. How to use one in the other, you've got me.

You'd definately want either a bad --- 8V head with some serious work done to it, or a 16V optimally with a short throw setup. I think it would be awesome, and if you use the right rod length you'd be sitting pretty for a better rpm range. Now, the actual rod length, let me get back to you, I'll see what I can come up with.

Aaron Miller

[turbovanman²]

Wow, sounds awesome Steve,

[TrrboJeep]

The goal with all of this is to nail 500WHP.

500hp! Holy scattershield batman!

[altered7151]

I'm putting a 2.0 crank in the common block and we're making a sleeve to press over the 2.0 snout. The common block seal retainer will be changed to accept the '87 seal. There are a ton of rods to chose from out there. A rod for a SBC with a thicker bearing may work without too much trouble. I would rather just buy a set of cutom pistons instead of having to but a set of custom rods and pistons.

As far as the head goes, I'm working on a copy of a raised port 8V that a buddy of mine did a few years ago. The goal with all of this is to nail 500WHP.

Definitally keep us updated on how things are going. I'd be super interested in how that works out, would like to use something like that for a bonneville motor.

[altered7151]

I'm putting a 2.0 crank in the common block and we're making a sleeve to press over the 2.0 snout. The common block seal retainer will be changed to accept the '87 seal. There are a ton of rods to chose from out there. A rod for a SBC with a thicker bearing may work without too much trouble. I would rather just buy a set of cutom pistons instead of having to but a set of custom rods and pistons.

As far as the head goes, I'm working on a copy of a raised port 8V that a buddy of mine did a few years ago. The goal with all of this is to nail 500WHP.

I was wondering what you're doing for the main bearings? It looks like the 2.0 main journals are like over .300" smaller then the 2.2 crank. Are you having the journals welded up and turned?

[BadFastGTC]

The main and rod journals are the same as stock 2.2 stuff.

I was wondering what you're doing for the main bearings? It looks like the 2.0 main journals are like over .300" smaller then the 2.2 crank. Are you having the journals welded up and turned?

[BadFastGTC]

I worry about that area a good deal! Hopefully my billet flywheel will be stout enough for what I hope to accomplish.

500hp! Holy scattershield batman!

[altered7151]

The main and rod journals are the same as stock 2.2 stuff.

Hmm, I must have been looking at the wrong specs then. How do the front snout o.d's compare, how large of a sleeve are you having to put on?

[BadFastGTC]

The '87 crank uses a larger seal. The seal retainer for the '89 is going to get a small disc/washer of aluminum welded to it and then we will machine that out to the '87 size.

The remainder of the adapter will involve a bit more. The whole snout will be larger and will utilize a 1/2" ARP stud to hold the timing gear pulley. The sleeve will have to be larger than the '89 snout as leaving it the stock diameter will not allow us to cut another keyway. The difference in diameter between the two is roughly .100" So by going larger, we'll have enough meat to cut the keyway and be indexed properly. The inside of the '89 timing gear will also be machined out larger. The crank pulley will still bolt on fine with the ARP stud also. Gear removal won't be an issue either. The '89 snout is also longer and we'll make the sleeve long enough to compensate. Keep your fingers crossed!

Hmm, I must have been looking at the wrong specs then. How do the front snout o.d's compare, how large of a sleeve are you having to put on?

[altered7151]

The '87 crank uses a larger seal. The seal retainer for the '89 is going to get a small disc/washer of aluminum welded to it and then we will machine that out to the '87 size.

The remainder of the adapter will involve a bit more. The whole snout will be larger and will utilize a 1/2" ARP stud to hold the timing gear pulley. The sleeve will have to be larger than the '89 snout as leaving it the stock diameter will not allow us to cut another keyway. The difference in diameter between the two is roughly .100" So by going larger, we'll have enough meat to cut the keyway and be indexed properly. The inside of the '89 timing gear will also be machined out larger. The crank pulley will still bolt on fine with the ARP stud also. Gear removal won't be an issue either. The '89 snout is also longer and we'll make the sleeve long enough to compensate. Keep your fingers crossed!

Would it be possible to just have the snout surface welded up, then machined and have the new key-way recut? Seems like that route might be a little easier if you could use the stock CB front seal and retainer and crank timing pulley. I'm definitally keeping my fingers crossed for you though, this sounds like an awesome set-up!

[turbovanman²]

The '87 crank uses a larger seal. The seal retainer for the '89 is going to get a small disc/washer of aluminum welded to it and then we will machine that out to the '87 size.

The remainder of the adapter will involve a bit more. The whole snout will be larger and will utilize a 1/2" ARP stud to hold the timing gear pulley. The sleeve will have to be larger than the '89 snout as leaving it the stock diameter will not allow us to cut another keyway. The difference in diameter between the two is roughly .100" So by going larger, we'll have enough meat to cut the keyway and be indexed properly. The inside of the '89 timing gear will also be machined out larger. The crank pulley will still bolt on fine with the ARP stud also. Gear removal won't be an issue either. The '89 snout is also longer and we'll make the sleeve long enough to compensate. Keep your fingers crossed!

Would love to see pics of that,

[Directconnection]

I'm putting a 2.0 crank in the common block and we're making a sleeve to press over the 2.0 snout. The common block seal retainer will be changed to accept the '87 seal. There are a ton of rods to chose from out there. A rod for a SBC with a thicker bearing may work without too much trouble. I would rather just buy a set of cutom pistons instead of having to but a set of custom rods and pistons.

As far as the head goes, I'm working on a copy of a raised port 8V that a buddy of mine did a few years ago. The goal with all of this is to nail 500WHP.

This is something I have been wanting to do...but time/money/and enough knowledge is needed I have said in the past that 500whp is acheivable in my opinion on the 2.2 8V. Add in the 2.0 crank (I had thought of offset grinding a forged 2.2 crank instead) and the JS style head and Steve's goals will be met no problemo.

[BadFastGTC]

Steve,

Cost is a major factor for me also. Thank goodness my machinist is going to be me for the most part! The guy who does my machine work was very cool about this project as he said,"You can pay me a ton of money to do this, or you can come up here on your spare time and do it after I show you how." Needless to say, I jumped on the opportunity. The first thing I had to do was machine the "semi-finished" head without a blueprint. I used an old 445 casting for a reference. A lot of tedious work to get it under construction. I also am putting in a shouldered Hemi valve guide vs. the standard 2.2 guide. Again, more machining, but I wanted to go this route as I will gain a little retainer to guide/seal clearance. Most of the rough port work is done. I'm going to finish machining the guides, cut spring seats, and machine/install seats next week. Copper-beryllium seats are going in the exhaust side. I can then do the combustion chambers before rough cutting the seats. Looking at ports raised 1/2", I can see why JS had such success with his head.

The crankshaft worf will be the same thing. I'll get a brief overview as to what to do and then he'll let me fire on high!

This is something I have been wanting to do...but time/money/and enough knowledge is needed I have said in the past that 500whp is acheivable in my opinion on the 2.2 8V. Add in the 2.0 crank (I had thought of offset grinding a forged 2.2 crank instead) and the JS style head and Steve's goals will be met no problemo.

[BadFastGTC]

Would love to see pics of that,

Buy me a camera!