DIY Engine build

[TLicense]

Yeah, that's the guy. I spoke to Oselli too actually on the phone. They seemed quite keen to work on it, they said they mainly dealt with older stuff and it was nice to get a modern engine in every now and then!

 

Yeah, my Dad was just saying he went to school with Paul. They were in the same class. Small world huh?

Anyway, when you go to pick it up, give me a shout and we'll meet up if you've got an hour spare.

 

Good luck with it all!

[SimonB]

Simon

how the hell does an ACL/Clevite "standard" bearing set work when i obviously have two bearing sizes on my mains (

 

This is exactly why I don't want Clevite bearings. I've always been planning on using PE ones because they have the correct size range. They are not cheap though. There are actually 7 different sizes IIRC - my crank has 3 different journal sizes, I have 4 different main cap sizes and 3 different bearing sizes. I knocked up a spreadsheet that you put the sizes of everything in and it tells you the bearing to use and what the min and max clearances should be. I'll post it up tomorrow if I remember.

 

I don't know how much standard Toyota bearings are, you're right they would probably be absoltely fine, I just figure I may as well put the best I can in - I've saved a load of dosh by building it myself anyway.

[SimonB]

Yeah, my Dad was just saying he went to school with Paul. They were in the same class. Small world huh?

Anyway, when you go to pick it up, give me a shout and we'll meet up if you've got an hour spare.

 

Good luck with it all!

 

How weird! He had a broken leg, he said he was moving a trolley, turned round and his leg turned with him and his foot didn't as it was stuck under the trolley. Ouch!

[paul mac]

I knocked up a spreadsheet that you put the sizes of everything in and it tells you the bearing to use and what the min and max clearances should be. I'll post it up tomorrow if I remember.

 

 

cheers Simon that would be appreciated

[SimonB]

Ok, so here is my bearing sizing spreadsheet. The way the bearing sizes work on a standard engine is like this. There are a range of different sizes of crank journals and main bearing caps. Toyota measure them and stamp the sizes on the crank and block. From the sizes you can work out which bearing size you need to give the correct clearance.

 

My spreadsheet works like this. You enter the sizes from your crank and block in the yellow areas at the top. You can also enter actual measurements when you have made them - if so they override the size ranges. So for example if you have measured 66.033mm for a bearing bore with an accuracy of +or- 0.001mm you put that in the measurement and accuracy columns and it will work out the min and max sizes of 66.032-66.034, and which standard range that is (which would be 6). Or if you just have the size number 6 from the block you put that in the size column and it will fill in 66.032-66.034. You can then read the standard size bearing needed from the blue bit in the middle. It also tells you the equivalent power enterprise bearing size, and works out the min and max clearance you would get if you used that bearing. If the figure is blue it's within tolerance, red and its outside. You will see that some of the Power Enterprise bearings have a bigger size range than the standard ones, so sometimes you will find the max or min clearances are slightly out of ideal range. Still fine though.

bearingsizer.xls

[paul mac]

awesome mate, this should be stickied somewhere

[paul mac]

still deciding on my re-built engine spec and with reference to the ARP main bearing studs i found this on SF http://supraforums.com/forum/showthread.php?t=466830&highlight=main+bearings

I just presumed (wrongly it would seem) these studs were "plug and play", are the yanks being fussy ? these guys do make a good augument and it makes sense as yes the clamping force will be higher, for my power level i think i will measure up my stock bolts and re-use them. Any progress Simon

[SimonB]

still deciding on my re-built engine spec and with reference to the ARP main bearing studs i found this on SF http://supraforums.com/forum/showthread.php?t=466830&highlight=main+bearings

I just presumed (wrongly it would seem) these studs were "plug and play", are the yanks being fussy ? these guys do make a good augument and it makes sense as yes the clamping force will be higher, for my power level i think i will measure up my stock bolts and re-use them. Any progress Simon

 

If you use the same caps I can't see why there'd be any difference between using studs and bolts. Line honing is only necessary if the main bores are out of round. The straight edge technique I described earlier checks the block end is in line. The machine shop will check each bore for out-of-round (I'd have done this myself if my bore gauge was accurate enough). If they are out then line honing is needed, but I'd be amazed if it was. It's very easy to screw up line honing too apparently.

[paul mac]

If you use the same caps I can't see why there'd be any difference between using studs and bolts. Line honing is only necessary if the main bores are out of round. The straight edge technique I described earlier checks the block end is in line. The machine shop will check each bore for out-of-round (I'd have done this myself if my bore gauge was accurate enough). If they are out then line honing is needed, but I'd be amazed if it was. It's very easy to screw up line honing too apparently.

 

its thrown doubt in my mind now Simon, one of the SF guys had contacted ARP who said they recommend to line hone, i suppose the definative solution is to ask ARP ourselves, i'll rise to the challenge and do it

.

done

Thank You for sending us your question.

 

We will respond as soon as possible.

 

ARP Customer Service and Tech Support

.

[paul mac]

doh, should have read their catalogue properly it does indeed state have the block allign honed http://arp-fasteners.com/Catalog/Catalog.html

page 43 step 4, so ARP main studs are not "plug and play"

[Chris Wilson]

If you use the same caps I can't see why there'd be any difference between using studs and bolts. Line honing is only necessary if the main bores are out of round. The straight edge technique I described earlier checks the block end is in line. The machine shop will check each bore for out-of-round (I'd have done this myself if my bore gauge was accurate enough). If they are out then line honing is needed, but I'd be amazed if it was. It's very easy to screw up line honing too apparently.

 

Simon, I agree with you 100%. Crank main line boring or honing is tricky, expensive and something to be avoided unless necessary. I am convinced certain engine builders atempted to use "billet" main caps and screwed up badly, resulting in serious crank and lubrication issues at best, and scrap engines at worst. IMO the main caps and bolts are best left well alone unless you are building something very extreme. i have never heard of, seen, nor believe main bolt stretch to be an issue on these engines at the power levels people in the UK can honestly claim. As for US power levels and their engine mods, well, my views on those are well known, I hope

 

Any decent rods will come with decent bolts, and the market for better bolts in the stock rods is well covered by ARP. I just use ARP head studs if the customer likes spending money, and ARP big end bolts, and that's it, trick fastener wise. I can't see any sane main cap bolt or stud torque deforming them, but nor do I see a need to fiddle about here, just use the stock bolts at the stock torque figures.

 

Nice build, if you don't mind me saying so, very well executed

[paul mac]

I just use ARP head studs if the customer likes spending money, and ARP big end bolts, and that's it, trick fastener wise. I can't see any sane main cap bolt or stud torque deforming them, but nor do I see a need to fiddle about here, just use the stock bolts at the stock torque figures.

 

well along with the fact ARP recomend to allign hone, thats me convinced, ARP main studs are crossed from my shopping list

 

excellent thread BTW

[SimonB]

well along with the fact ARP recomend to allign hone, thats me convinced, ARP main studs are crossed from my shopping list

 

excellent thread BTW

 

Cheers. They are probably just covering their arses. It's like all the aftermarket stuff that says "not for road use". Anyway, we shall see. Oh, and thanks Chris!

[paul mac]

Simon

heres ARP's answer to the line hone question and credit to them as a company for such a quick response considering i didn't read the info they provided in the first place

 

Hi there Paul it is recommended that you use the new ARP studs

and ARP moly lube when the line hone is being done. Also be sure to use

the torque specs and installation procedure we supply with the kit.

 

Thanks

John

 

i know it doesn't help that much but at least its an answer

[RobSheffield]

Nice work Simon, thats pretty much the spec i was going to go for, but now only aiming for the Jun cams

[SimonB]

Hi there Paul it is recommended that you use the new ARP studs

and ARP moly lube when the line hone is being done. Also be sure to use

the torque specs and installation procedure we supply with the kit.

 

They've done a good job of answering a different question to the one asked there then! They've said you should use the studs if you're line honing, but not if you should line hone if you use the studs! Ah well, we shall see what the measurements of mine are.

[paul mac]

They've done a good job of answering a different question to the one asked there then! They've said you should use the studs if you're line honing, but not if you should line hone if you use the studs! Ah well, we shall see what the measurements of mine are.

 

yeah thats what i thought lol, but at least they answered i suppose, keep up the good work fella (and the pics)

[and1c]

oh c**p, runs out to the garage to stand the fecker up, thanks fella

 

No Problemo mate

[and1c]

They've done a good job of answering a different question to the one asked there then! They've said you should use the studs if you're line honing, but not if you should line hone if you use the studs! Ah well, we shall see what the measurements of mine are.

 

I agree! not a very good answer by ARP..

 

But Im 99.99% sure that the block will need the Mains align honing if ARP studs are to be used....

And the block should of course be align honed with the new ARPs torqued correctly.

Hardened studs have a much higher clamping load than torque to yield bolts do...so to keep the correct crush on the bearings they have to be align honed in situ. I say risking because as Chris said in his earlier post, it is an expensive and (if the shop isnt very competent) 'risky' machining process.

 

For my engine build Im not going to bother with this and just use new Toyota torque to yield fasteners....

 

They handle more power than most of us are going to make anyway so it seems pointless 'risking' an align hone for the sake of ARPs IMHO.

[SimonB]

As I say, we will see if the mains are out of round with the studs - personally I very much doubt they are. The standard bolts are 33ft/lbs and then 90 degrees, whereas the ARPs are 60ft/lbs IIRC, so I doubt there's much difference. Especially given how sturdy the main caps are.

[and1c]

As I say, we will see if the mains are out of round with the studs - personally I very much doubt they are. The standard bolts are 33ft/lbs and then 90 degrees, whereas the ARPs are 60ft/lbs IIRC, so I doubt there's much difference. Especially given how sturdy the main caps are.

 

Its not the torque value thats at issue...its the clamping load for the same amount of torque when using hardened studs....

 

Will be interesting to see if it does have any 'squish' effect...as I may use them myself if not

[paul mac]

 

Will be interesting to see if it does have any 'squish' effect...as I may use them myself if not

 

yeah keep us up to date Simon, i have ARP studs on my current head and they are really nice to use with none of this marking then another 90 degrees malarky

[SimonB]

Right, this thread is long overdue an update! I got the machined block and head back a while ago. The block had been cleaned in a parts washer, then bored and honed. It was skimmed slightly to make it absolutely flat (it was pretty close anyway). The head was cleaned up, old valve guides pressed out and new Ferrea ones pressed in. It too was skimmed to make it absolutely flat. Then the seats were cut for the +1mm Ferrea valves and the head ported and matched to the exhaust and intake gaskets. It's a relatively mild port, but cleaned up inside a fair bit.

 

He also repaired a thread on one of the core plug holes which I had mullered getting the plug out - it was machined, tapped for a size up and a new brass plug screwed in and sealed. Lesson learned - don't bother removing the core plugs from the head! Here's some pics of the head.

[Wez]

Wow, looks like a very nice job been done on that

[SimonB]

Before I gave it to him I worked out the volume of the combustion chamber I wanted for a 8.5:1 compression ratio, and they made them to that volume for me.

 

Ok, so compression ratio 101, pay attention at the back . The compression ratio is the ratio between the swept volume (the displacement of one cylinder) and compressed volume (the volume above the piston at top dead center).

 

The swept volume is easy - the formula is:

 

pi x (bore/2)^2 x stroke.

 

So for me that's 3.14157 x (8.7/2)^2 x 8.6 = 511.24cc

 

The compressed volume is made up of several things:

 

cylinder head combustion chamber + gasket volume + deck clearance + volume between top ring and piston top + piston top. (see attached pic which I've stolen )

 

gasket volume is 3.14157 x (diameter of the gasket bore hole/2)^2 x compressed gasket width. (You need to measure the bore hole in the gasket)

 

For me the HKS gasket I'm using is 1.6mm and the bore holes are 88mm so that's 3.14157 x (8.8/2)^2 x 0.16 = 9.73cc

 

Deck clearance is 0 in my case (this is how far above or below the deck of the block the piston is at TDC). I'm not bothering with the ring volume as it's so small. The piston top bit is positive if there's a dish in the piston top and negative if there's a dome. In my case the JUN pistons have a 12.7cc dish so that's +12.7cc, so compressed volume for me is:

 

combustion chamber vol + 9.73 +12.7.

 

The compression ratio is (swept volume + compressed volume) / compressed volume. I've lost my re-arrangement of the formula to work out the desired combustion chamber volume now, but it worked out at 45.7cc. That's because 45.7+9.73+12.7=68.13, and (511.24+68.13)/68.13 = 8.5.

 

Got that?