|
 Moparts Web Board
 Moparts Question and Answer
 Jim's 451 Build Up Notes
|
 UBBFriend: Email This Page to Someone! |
next newest topic | next oldest topic |
| Author | Topic: Jim's 451 Build Up Notes |
|
451 Jim Moparts Member Posts: 57 |
posted 01-09-2001 11:40 PM
  
I disassembled, measured, and checked out my new oil pump for the motor. It is a Mopar Performance high volume pump, P4286590. It appears to be a Melling high volume part since cast into the body is "63 HV". Here are the details: Cover flatness: Checked with precision parallel bar, none (spec <0.0015) Everything checked out, so I painted, cleaned and reassembled it. I added some pics of the disassembled pump for those who are interested: http://albums.photopoint.com/j/AlbumIndex?u=1263067&a=9874969 ------------------ IP: 207.192.131.159 |
|
451 Jim Moparts Member Posts: 57 |
posted 01-08-2001 09:30 PM
John, Sticking out 0.001 doesn't scare me, that was my worst case. I was going to allow up to 0.003. Anymore than that and I would shave the tops of the pistons. I was disapointed, but it is fine. The Manley length variation is posted near the beginning of this topic. I had two 6.859" and one 6.862", the rest were in between. IP: 207.192.131.54 |
|
JohnRR Moparts Member Posts: 2253 |
posted 01-08-2001 11:53 AM
TTT 451jim , the length varied on the manley's? thats scary seeing your piston pop above the deck ... IP: 129.55.200.20 |
|
451boy Moparts Member Posts: 1264 |
posted 01-05-2001 07:34 PM
If you want to scare yourself, take a rod and dip it in oil then weigh it. I bet it picks up 5 or 6 grams just with the oil coating! Having said that, there is nothing wrong with spending a few minutes to dress up a rod or two if that is what it takes to get them perfect. [This message has been edited by 451boy (edited 01-05-2001).] IP: 192.65.17.24 |
|
451 Jim Moparts Member Posts: 57 |
posted 01-05-2001 06:35 PM
quote: When I said, "disappointed", I meant that I had hoped for closer to perfection. The length varied more than I had hoped too, but they are fine, nothing to worry about or I would have had them corrected. Manley makes a good product. IP: 207.192.131.152 |
|
451 Jim Moparts Member Posts: 57 |
posted 01-05-2001 06:28 PM
quote: Yea, the fever is lower today [This message has been edited by 451 Jim (edited 01-05-2001).] IP: 207.192.131.152 |
|
451 Jim Moparts Member Posts: 57 |
posted 01-05-2001 06:16 PM
JohnRR, I bought my Ross pistons from Straightline Performance (517) 381-8801. Scott Brown posts sometimes (here or MoparChat?). Muscle Motors had the same price, $499, but they were closed for SEMA the week I wanted to buy. As far as calculating piston to deck, etc. look at my early posts in this topic. The list of numbers is for subtracting, and the bottom number is the result. IP: 207.192.131.152 |
|
Fast One Moparts Member Posts: 452 |
posted 01-05-2001 04:51 PM
Thanks 451, it gave me a fright. IP: 198.142.200.242 |
|
JohnRR Moparts Member Posts: 2253 |
posted 01-05-2001 01:21 PM
they were within manleys spec if i recall correctly with is +/- 1.5 grams ... i thought this was alot also . lots of good info , i'm still tossing the 451 vs 496 thing around . i already paid for the 4.15 MP crank , but new info i have is pushing me away from that crank , plus the change back to my 383 69 bee is pushing me towards a more stealth lo deck motor . the compression height thing has me a bit confused , since i'm getting ready to buy some rods and would like to build it with off the shelf parts and do it as ecomonicly as possible ,this is one i haven't figured out as of yet , math was always my weak subject . 451 jim where did you get your pistons ? [This message has been edited by JohnRR (edited 01-05-2001).] IP: 129.55.200.20 |
|
451boy Moparts Member Posts: 1264 |
posted 01-05-2001 12:12 PM
If I remember correctly, Jim was disappointed by the variance of a gram or two of weight on the Manley rods. I think Jim has gotten "engine builder fever" on us! A gram here or there is pretty insignificant. IP: 192.65.17.24 |
|
Fast One Moparts Member Posts: 452 |
posted 01-05-2001 12:49 AM
Yooohhooo ! Jim are you still with this topic? What was wrong with the Manley rods? I need to know. IP: 198.142.200.243 |
|
451 Jim Moparts Member Posts: 57 |
posted 01-04-2001 07:52 PM
quote: Here is my opinion. Pay to have ONE of your pistons and ONE of your rods weighed. Then decide if you want to take the chance on balance. That is your call as the builder/buyer. But if you want every rod, piston, ring, and bearing weighed; that is almost as much work as grinding them to match! I hope the Eagle rods are matched as well or better than my Manleys (I was disappointed). If you are planning on 500 HP or more, I suggest spending the money for balancing. P.S. Are you really running the 6.865" H-beam rods (hemi length) and Ross 99496 pistons (for 3.915 stroke)? [This message has been edited by 451 Jim (edited 01-04-2001).] IP: 207.192.131.32 |
|
451 Jim Moparts Member Posts: 57 |
posted 01-04-2001 07:42 PM
quote: I asked this very specific question to two machine shops (Precision Engine, and Samakow Racing). They both said that they couldn't change their price ($175/$185). They both gave me the same answer, some balance jobs cost them money, some make them money. Now, Terry Samakow tried to talk me into doing all my machine work at once for his block package special. But I told him I wanted to have the main cap alignment checked before alingn hone (if needed), and the block returned to me for test assembly before final hone. He agreed, and didn't charge my any extra for the multiple setups. So he is not unreasonable, just running a business. IP: 207.192.131.32 |
|
451 Jim Moparts Member Posts: 57 |
posted 01-04-2001 07:28 PM
quote: Hey, You know I always trusted you! The only thing that was going to stop me was running out of gas, a terrible flood, earth quake, locus... it wasn't my fault. Oops, that was Blues brothers. ------------------ IP: 207.192.131.32 |
|
Brad H Moparts Member Posts: 886 |
posted 01-04-2001 01:28 PM
Jim -- In case you haven't seen it, there is/was a new UltraDyne 267 @ .050"/.609" cam in the "For Sale - Race Parts" ads. And, no, it's not mine.  [This message has been edited by Brad H (edited 01-04-2001).] IP: 168.191.219.14 |
|
451boy Moparts Member Posts: 1264 |
posted 01-04-2001 11:51 AM
Well in my opinion, it shouldn't cost you $200 to get a balanced assembly balanced. Engine builders usually charge $150 to $200 but that is for the 3 or 4 hours of time it takes to match the rod weights and drill the crank and stuff like that. If all they are doing is verifying the balance then they shouldn't charge that much. Since aftermarket rods and pistons are almost always spot on, the engine builder only has to build the bobweight and spin the crank. Shouldn't take more than an hour to do that or $60 of shop time. Have a polite conversation with your engine builder about the subject, if he is a reasonable guy, he'll agree. IP: 192.65.17.24 |
|
dogdays Moparts Member Posts: 284 |
posted 01-04-2001 11:15 AM
Sounds like you're already balanced! R. IP: 140.215.163.190 |
|
69dart Moparts Member Posts: 176 |
posted 01-04-2001 08:50 AM
Now I'm wondering if its even worth having mine balanced. The crank I bought from 451boy is already balanced at 2400g. I'm using the exact same parts as Jim except for eagle rods. And now that 451boy says leave an extra 25g for more power I'm not sure if it's worth $200 to balance an almost perfect assembly. Whatcha guys think? ------------------ IP: 198.26.122.12 |
|
451boy Moparts Member Posts: 1264 |
posted 01-03-2001 11:19 PM
So that 7.250 equals 2400 gram bobweight is just about spot on isn't it! Guess you'll start to trust me now. BTW - Vizard recommends that the crank be left 25 grams or so heavy to overbalance the assembly. Evidently this helps make horsepower by pulling the piston over the top. I don't know if it works or not but I might try it someday. He says it is worth 5 to 10 hp. [This message has been edited by 451boy (edited 01-03-2001).] IP: 38.28.130.217 |
|
451 Jim Moparts Member Posts: 57 |
posted 01-03-2001 09:07 PM
I hope these notes have been informative and a good addtion to 451boy's Manifesto. My next decisions are cam (Ultradyne 0.620 or 0.609) and heads... I have been planning on Indy SR's, but the price of those Edelbrocks is tempting! ------------------ IP: 207.192.131.39 |
|
451 Jim Moparts Member Posts: 57 |
posted 01-03-2001 09:03 PM
The actual balance results: 528.0 Pistons, Ross 99496 (spec 520) 151.5 Pin, 0.990 005.0 Spirolocks (4 each piston) 065.5 Rings, 1/16 wide, includes oil ring support rail 294.0 Con rod small end, Manley H-beam hemi length 6.865 599.0 Con rod big end 599.0 Con rod big end 061.5 Bearing, con rod, 0.010 061.5 Bearing, con rod, 0.010 004.0 Oil in crank throw 2369 Total crank bob weight The pistons were heavier than expected but were match weighted well from Ross. My original estimate did not include the weight of the double spirolocks (4 per piston). The rings were heavier because these pistons use an oil ring support rail in the oil ring groove because the pin hole slightly enters the oil ring groove. The Manley rods had two rods that were 2 grams heavier than the rest, one was 1 gram heavy. Hard bloc was added to fill the water jacket to 2.6" from the deck. This is about 3/4" above the freeze plugs (3-3/8" to deck). It must be below the bosses for the head bolts which are about 1.6" I had mentioned that I didn't want it any higher than 3", but I guess I should have wrote it down. Terry Samakow mentioned ahead of time that this height was his recommendation. They confirmed that their crank grinder is Art(ie) at Engines and Components, (301) 277-3066 Bladensburg, MD. I was very happy with the work ($225 with magnaflux). ------------------ IP: 207.192.131.39 |
|
Fast One Moparts Member Posts: 452 |
posted 12-30-2000 01:17 AM
Hi Jim, yeah the .100 valve to piston clearance sounds pretty good, about the iron heads, do you think the 270 cfm area is gonna be enough for what you want?, that's about 556 HP flow, I'm starting to wonder if those Edelbrock heads are ever gonna make it onto the market myself, all the hype & talk about them has me feeling like a kid waiting the night before Christmas. But I'm watching your project closely, it will be interesting to see what combo you end up with. IP: 198.142.200.249 |
|
451 Jim Moparts Member Posts: 57 |
posted 12-29-2000 11:12 PM
Fast One, The Ross pistons have some decent valve reliefs, so I hope I have 0.100 valve to piston clearance with a 0.620" UD cam. My plan is Indy SR heads. However, I am still open to either fully ported iron (270+ cfm) or the new Edelbrock aluminum if they ever make it into production, and I hear good independent reviews, and they are a few hundred cheaper than the SR's. IP: 207.192.131.160 |
|
Fast One Moparts Member Posts: 452 |
posted 12-27-2000 09:57 PM
You want to keep this topic going? Ok then, umm, what do you think your valve to piston clearance will be with that compression height? Have you decided which heads you will be using yet? I am interested in this because I will be going through all this next year, which isn't that far away. IP: 198.142.200.249 |
|
451 Jim Moparts Member Posts: 57 |
posted 12-27-2000 09:18 PM
I didn't want this topic to expire (10 days), so here is a quick post. I should have the reciprocating assembly back from the balance shop by this time next week. It will be interesting to see two things: 1) How much metal needs to be removed since the counterweights have already been turned down to 7.250 2) How close my bob weight estimate is. 2348 grams IP: 207.192.131.131 |
|
451 Jim Moparts Member Posts: 57 |
posted 12-18-2000 09:14 AM
I think that 0.001 out of the hole will be fine with a 0.039-0.040 gasket. I did check this during trial assembly (no rings) and measured what I predicted from the individual part measurements. I didn't post those numbers, since I will measure piston to deck during final assembly with the rings on. ------------------ IP: 192.58.199.172 |
|
Fast One Moparts Member Posts: 452 |
posted 12-18-2000 07:16 AM
Thanks for the info Jim, you went to a lot of trouble, going to take a while to read through all that, how do you feel about the compression height? Not much room is there, suppose there's not much one can do about that. IP: 198.142.200.245 |
|
451 Jim Moparts Member Posts: 57 |
posted 12-17-2000 11:53 PM
I checked the clearance between the rod bolt and the bottom of the cylinders. Since it was only a 3.75 stroke, I didn't expect any problems. The largest cylinder clearance was 0.134" and the smallest was 0.095"; so all was fine and no grinding was required. It should be noted that I did grind flush any casting flash at the bottom of all cylinders before I sent the block for cleaning. As it turned out, this was not the closest location to the rod bolt, but it was pretty close to it. Well, that is where I currently stand. I will post progress maybe weekly or so. ------------------ IP: 207.192.131.151 |
|
451 Jim Moparts Member Posts: 57 |
posted 12-17-2000 11:51 PM
I will put some pictures on photopoint, too. There are a couple of the crank to help see what I am talking about: http://albums.photopoint.com/j/AlbumIndex?u=1263067&a=9874969 Checking the factory clearancing on the block, the diameter measures ------------------ IP: 207.192.131.151 |
|
451 Jim Moparts Member Posts: 57 |
posted 12-17-2000 11:43 PM
I put the crank into the block to check things out. Like 451boy and others have said, after turning the counter weights down to 7.250 dia, it clears everything in the block without grinding. I put a 1/8" wide chamfer (bevel) on the edge of the thin counterweights (next to #2 and #4 main bearings) on the side facing those main bearings. This may not be necessary, but I think it helps give more clearance from the block. This looks like the closest point. I put 0.060 worth of feeler gauges between the crank throws and block everywhere, so it has at least that much clearance. It doesn't appear that reducing the wide counter weights (forward most and rear most) is needed; but it should help make the balancing come out closer. So, you could leave that to the balance shop if you want. But reducing the wide counter weights for balancing looks better than drilling a lot of holes in them! ------------------ IP: 207.192.131.151 |
|
451 Jim Moparts Member Posts: 57 |
posted 12-17-2000 11:39 PM
Now the first fly in the ointment was which main bearings to use. I wanted Clevite 77, full groove mains. I called Clevite bearing (734) 975-4777 for specifications on bearings. They said the only difference in the two sets is the #3 thrust bearing. '73-earlier MS876P thrust surface dia 3.370-3.410, overall dia 3.430-3.500 They call the thrust surface dia. the chamfer dia. and they attempt to hit Now the kicker, I am using a 1971 crank from a 440. The 440's went to a large thrust bearing in 1974 too, but most of those are cast cranks. I was told by a Moparts member, that the spec for early 400 blocks is 3.78" dia and the later ones 3.93" dia. Due to the chamfers it is hard to measure with my tools, but my 440 crank and 400 block came out to: _____Crank_Cap__Block Now, the smaller MS876P would be the safest way to go, since the crank surface is larger than that bearing. But I wanted the largest thrust face, so I decided to use the MS1348P, the actual running surfaces are very close in dia. ------------------ IP: 207.192.131.151 |
|
451 Jim Moparts Member Posts: 57 |
posted 12-17-2000 11:18 PM
451boy's 451 Manifesto was my major source of info. http://www.phoenix.net/~atc347/451/ It states that most combos will have a balance bob weight less than 2400 grams. My parts estimate are: 520 Pistons, Ross 99496 For comparison, my 440 actual was 2500 grams using fairly light Arias pistons and stock LY rods. IP: 207.192.131.151 |
|
451 Jim Moparts Member Posts: 57 |
posted 12-17-2000 11:08 PM
The published numbers that lead me to think this would be straight forward are: 9.980" Mopar 400 spec deck height The block before machining had a deck height of 9.984", the machinist had to go to 9.977" to square everything up. Now I don't claim my measurements are perfect, but here is what I came up with: ------------------ [This message has been edited by 451 Jim (edited 01-05-2001).] IP: 207.192.131.151 |
|
451 Jim Moparts Member Posts: 57 |
posted 12-17-2000 11:00 PM
I would like to use this thread for engine build up discussion and request that performance goals, issues, theories be separately posted under new topics. This should help concentrate the "how to" without the "why for"! Thanks, enjoy and let me know your thoughts. ------------------ IP: 207.192.131.151 |
|
451 Jim Moparts Member Posts: 57 |
posted 12-17-2000 10:55 PM
I decided to post some of my 451 CID build up notes both to share info, and to recieve any pointers along the way. I will be using this new User Name for topics/replies to 451 issues, but I will use 440 Jim for other topics. For starters it is a 1975 400 block, with a 1971 440 forged steel crank with the mains ground to fit the 400 block. I got a $400 deal on new Manley H-beam rods that happened to be hemi length (6.865") or 440 +0.100" I am using Ross flat top pistons, #99496. These are off the shelf for a 3.915 stroke in the 400 block with 440 rods (6.768") and have a compression height of 1.238" ------------------ [This message has been edited by 451 Jim (edited 12-18-2000).] IP: 207.192.131.151 |
All times are ET (US) | next newest topic | next oldest topic |
  |
|
Ultimate Bulletin Board 5.46
The rod that was 2 grams heavy only needed a tiny amount removed. Some balancer's match things to +- 1.0 gram, but I ask them to try for 0.5! Sometimes I get the look... Terry Samakow and I talked for more than a minute deciding on the piston to bore clearance, 0.0040, 0.0045, 0.0050. Ross says 0.004 street, 0.004 to 0.005 drag racing naturally aspirated. Like you pointed out, the bob weight can be calculated with other than 50% and that will change things more than a couple grams.