6.7 Twin Turbo Setup
- Thread starter Dan
- Start date
Dan
New member
Waiting on parts, should be going to go together ASAP... I'm sure Wayne will post pictures as it goes. Hoping for a quick assembly time.
What about this stuff?
Morgan@Midwest Diesel & Auto
New member
Dan
New member
Coming along
Dan
New member
Getting new torque to yield main bolts this time
4EverBoosted1
Active member
- Joined
- Jan 29, 2012
- Messages
- 1,724
- Reaction score
- 0
Getting new torque to yield main bolts this time
This time? Are you saying they were not new when elite built the motor?
drunk on diesel
New member
- Joined
- Sep 7, 2011
- Messages
- 4,179
- Reaction score
- 0
I believe the mains were studded
Dan
New member
Nope, I'm saying it's getting new torque to yeald bolts this time!
And no, has always had factory main bolts, I'm under the impression that there is nothing available for main studs
Wayne
Active member
I have no idea what processes anyone else uses to ensure the bottom end stays together. The cap bolts are torque to yield, but I couldn't find anywhere in the instructions that the bolts must be replaced. I just don't feel comfortable re-using bolts that have already been stretched.
In the assembly process, it calls for a bearing clearance check involving a full running torque assembly, disassembly, bearing clearance inspection, and final reassembly. The bolts originally supplied with the new ford short block were used for all sequences except for final installation for peace of mind despite no call for replacement in the manual.
Considering the rod and main bearings are press fit, and do not have any tangs to keep them from spinning, we believe the design could have contributed to the bearings spinning. With as bad as the failure was on the "old" engine, we can't be totally certain of the cause of failure, so we're doing what we can with available components to avoid a repeat engine failure. Cases are rare, but I've seen mostly stock trucks that have spun mains. We're short blocking one at the dealership right now under factory warranty with that exact failure.
bricewise
New member
- Joined
- Mar 9, 2013
- Messages
- 937
- Reaction score
- 0
So because your unsure of the Dan's engine failure, your throwing random new parts at it, whether the ford spec calls for it or not? I can't wait to see what else you sold him.
Crack85
Active member
opcorn:
CATDiezel
New member
- Joined
- Dec 27, 2011
- Messages
- 2,221
- Reaction score
- 0
This....^^^
Most people get extremely confused with the first number... The viscosity index improver.
This also needs to be even more revised if the said 6.7L is deleted. The additives of the CJ-4 specifications are for heavy soot loads which are non existent in a deleted truck.
One would be completely fine running 5w-30 gasoline engine oil. If the truck is stock with all emissions in tack I would stay with DEO.
sootie
Well-known member
- Joined
- Oct 3, 2012
- Messages
- 11,843
- Reaction score
- 35
since when does replacing tty hardware classify as "throwing parts at it"??
6.4strokin
New member
- Joined
- Jul 3, 2013
- Messages
- 330
- Reaction score
- 0
Way to take a shot at Wayne. How experienced are you at engine building?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
CATDiezel
New member
- Joined
- Dec 27, 2011
- Messages
- 2,221
- Reaction score
- 0
And some complain because the conversation switched to "oil"
Lol.... at least it was a good conversation rather than a passing match of ____________ !
Keep on keepIN ON Wayne....
Lol.... at least it was a good conversation rather than a passing match of ____________ !
Keep on keepIN ON Wayne....
Wayne
Active member
Oh, yeah! you should check out the muffler bearings he paid for :toast: I'll send you your cut for the idea.
Just give me your paypal account info, and I'll send it right over LOL We actually had the rotating assembly rebalanced after it came "balanced", or so we presume, since no weight removal marks were on the pistons, wrist pins, or rods, and there was no indication of how each of them should be paired to match to get them as close as possible, but the crank was ground on. After weighing 2 of the carrillo rods, and finding an 8 gram discrepancy on the first 2 we measured, we decided it was a good idea. I can tell you there was a very noticable increase in effort to final torque the new bolts compared to the ones I used to inspect bearing clearance. You call new TTY bolts "random". I call it cheap insurance, and common sense. If main studs were available then of course we wouldn't bother, but then we'd run into block distortion issues, which are extra sensitive in "crush" main bearing without tangs. In a perfect world we'd install the unavailable girdle with main studs after a fully torqued line hone, and using tanged bearings, but I don't see all of that stuff available at the moment. Perhaps it makes sense to you to re-use bolts that are stretched, re-stretching them even more incrementally for each cycle. This is especially a worth while expense IMO because this would have been the 2nd complete install cycle counting the factory original assembly of the short block. ...but that's where we apparently differ in opinion.
Last edited:
Six_Sloww
New member
I bet you sold him new gaskets too... Waste of money.
4EverBoosted1
Active member
- Joined
- Jan 29, 2012
- Messages
- 1,724
- Reaction score
- 0
The award for most references of pissing matches and dik measuring contests goes to!
NathannialD
New member
wayne the tangs do nothing to prevent the bearings from spinning, they are only to aid during the assembly process. just fyi. thats all
Wayne
Active member
okay :thumbup: You do make a very good, educated point. Here's an article that explains why you say that:
http://underthehood.mahleclevite.com/?p=706
Here's an excerpt from the article for those of you who don't want to "click"
"If I polled 100 customers, at least 90 would say it’s this lug that prevents the bearing from rotating in the housing bore. Nothing, I repeat nothing, could be farther from the truth!"
Now take an engine that has been stressed to the point where a girdle might come in handy, and complications arise. The engine might fail anyway, but that tang might be the difference in keeping it from rotating, and not. I won't debate the likelihood of that happening, and Dan's thread is not the place for that, but IMO, yeah, IMO, the tang just might make enough difference in survival and failure.
http://underthehood.mahleclevite.com/?p=706
Here's an excerpt from the article for those of you who don't want to "click"
"If I polled 100 customers, at least 90 would say it’s this lug that prevents the bearing from rotating in the housing bore. Nothing, I repeat nothing, could be farther from the truth!"
Now take an engine that has been stressed to the point where a girdle might come in handy, and complications arise. The engine might fail anyway, but that tang might be the difference in keeping it from rotating, and not. I won't debate the likelihood of that happening, and Dan's thread is not the place for that, but IMO, yeah, IMO, the tang just might make enough difference in survival and failure.
Last edited:
