Re: H series bearings for 383-400???
[Re: RockChip]
#1792041
03/31/15 12:28 AM
03/31/15 12:28 AM
|
Joined: Jan 2015
Posts: 35
Canada
Criterion
member
|
member
Joined: Jan 2015
Posts: 35
Canada
|
Per the recommendation of another member on here (I believe it was Cab Burge), I am running Federal Mogul/Sealed Power 4094M's. They're a narrow, fully grooved, tri-metal main bearing. The only downside I can think of is if you want a bearing with the larger thrust flange for the later blocks, which the 4094M bearings lack.
I also wouldn't hesitate to use a set of King bearings. I don't think you can get the XP series for low-deck mains, but you should be able to get an HP series bearing.
Last edited by Criterion; 03/31/15 12:29 AM.
|
|
|
Re: H series bearings for 383-400???
[Re: super451b]
#1792044
04/01/15 02:03 AM
04/01/15 02:03 AM
|
Joined: Jan 2015
Posts: 35
Canada
Criterion
member
|
member
Joined: Jan 2015
Posts: 35
Canada
|
Quote:
I use the 4094m bearings on my 440 source crank and while they are a little bit narrower than the clevites , I still had to chamfer them for clearance.
I am running the 4094M's on a Molnar crank with no issues. I am also using the King XP series of BBC rod bearings and have zero clearance issues there as well. I guess Molnar cranks don't need the extra bearing-width clearance on the journals that the 440 Source cranks do. Interesting.
|
|
|
Re: H series bearings for 383-400???
[Re: Criterion]
#1792046
04/01/15 11:33 AM
04/01/15 11:33 AM
|
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 75,005
U.S.S.A.
JohnRR
I Win
|
I Win
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 75,005
U.S.S.A.
|
Quote:
Quote:
I use the 4094m bearings on my 440 source crank and while they are a little bit narrower than the clevites , I still had to chamfer them for clearance.
I am running the 4094M's on a Molnar crank with no issues. I am also using the King XP series of BBC rod bearings and have zero clearance issues there as well. I guess Molnar cranks don't need the extra bearing-width clearance on the journals that the 440 Source cranks do. Interesting.
Why is that interesting?? It's a known fact that the radius on the 'source cranks are bigger than they should be and the accepted by the mASSES fix has always been to scrape for clearance.
I used the Clevite bearings on a low deck Eagle crank and they didn't need to be scraped for clearance ???
|
|
|
Re: H series bearings for 383-400???
[Re: JohnRR]
#1792047
04/01/15 04:23 PM
04/01/15 04:23 PM
|
Joined: Jun 2004
Posts: 741
Carson City, NV
440sourcedotcom
super stock
|
super stock
Joined: Jun 2004
Posts: 741
Carson City, NV
|
Quote:
It's a known fact that the radius on the 'source cranks are bigger than they should be and the accepted by the mASSES fix has always been to scrape for clearance.
I used the Clevite bearings on a low deck Eagle crank and they didn't need to be scraped for clearance ???
It's a known fact that those who acquire their engine building experience via a keyboard instead of a wrench are often mistaken.
The issue of main bearings contacting the radius is almost always due to where the engine block locating tangs position the bearings rather than the crankshaft radius.
When the blocks were machined at the factory, very little attention was given to positioning the locating tangs at the exactly correct position. The factory cranks had no radius, so there was a ton of room in there, and it didn't matter.
So, if you get a block where the tangs are shifted to one side (which is very common), and you are using a crank with a large radius (which is necessary for the strength of the crankshaft) there can be some interference with the radius.
While the uneducated or inexperienced instantly blames the crankshaft, in reality the crankshaft has nothing to do with the problem.
We've attached a picture, so anyone can easily see what we are explaining. In this particular case, the bearing was heavily shifted toward the right side of the picture, by nearly a quarter inch. With a factory crank, it did not cause a problem. With a radiused crank, now you have a problem. Name brand of the crank has nothing to do with it.
Our cranks have an eighth inch (.125") radius, no larger, no smaller.
|
|
|
Re: H series bearings for 383-400???
[Re: 440sourcedotcom]
#1792048
04/01/15 04:55 PM
04/01/15 04:55 PM
|
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 52,972
Romeo MI
MR_P_BODY
Master
|
Master
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 52,972
Romeo MI
|
Quote:
Quote:
It's a known fact that the radius on the 'source cranks are bigger than they should be and the accepted by the mASSES fix has always been to scrape for clearance.
I used the Clevite bearings on a low deck Eagle crank and they didn't need to be scraped for clearance ???
It's a known fact that those who acquire their engine building experience via a keyboard instead of a wrench are often mistaken.
The issue of main bearings contacting the radius is almost always due to where the engine block locating tangs position the bearings rather than the crankshaft radius.
When the blocks were machined at the factory, very little attention was given to positioning the locating tangs at the exactly correct position. The factory cranks had no radius, so there was a ton of room in there, and it didn't matter.
So, if you get a block where the tangs are shifted to one side (which is very common), and you are using a crank with a large radius (which is necessary for the strength of the crankshaft) there can be some interference with the radius.
While the uneducated or inexperienced instantly blames the crankshaft, in reality the crankshaft has nothing to do with the problem.
We've attached a picture, so anyone can easily see what we are explaining. In this particular case, the bearing was heavily shifted toward the right side of the picture, by nearly a quarter inch. With a factory crank, it did not cause a problem. With a radiused crank, now you have a problem. Name brand of the crank has nothing to do with it.
Our cranks have an eighth inch (.125") radius, no larger, no smaller.
If this were the case.. how would you get the crank
into the block.. the thrust bearing #3 has what..
.015 end play
|
|
|
Re: H series bearings for 383-400???
[Re: MR_P_BODY]
#1792049
04/01/15 05:11 PM
04/01/15 05:11 PM
|
Joined: Jun 2004
Posts: 741
Carson City, NV
440sourcedotcom
super stock
|
super stock
Joined: Jun 2004
Posts: 741
Carson City, NV
|
Quote:
If this were the case.. how would you get the crank
into the block.. the thrust bearing #3 has what..
.015 end play
Because when the tang location is inaccurate, that doesn't mean all 5 saddles are consistently inaccurate, it just means one or more can be off relative to the others.
The thrust bearing usually locates itself based on the slight press fit with the machined recess in the cap/block, not with the tang anyhow, and the position of the thrust is the main factor in how the crank is located in the block. Then the other four bearings use the tangs to "match up" to the position which the thrust has established.
If the tangs are machined correctly, this works great in theory. If they are machined incorrectly, you have a situation such as what is shown in the picture.
|
|
|
Re: H series bearings for 383-400???
[Re: 440sourcedotcom]
#1792050
04/01/15 05:18 PM
04/01/15 05:18 PM
|
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 52,972
Romeo MI
MR_P_BODY
Master
|
Master
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 52,972
Romeo MI
|
Quote:
Quote:
If this were the case.. how would you get the crank
into the block.. the thrust bearing #3 has what..
.015 end play
Because when the tang location is inaccurate, that doesn't mean all 5 saddles are consistently inaccurate, it just means one or more can be off relative to the others.
The thrust bearing usually locates itself based on the slight press fit with the machined recess in the cap/block, not with the tang anyhow, and the position of the thrust is the main factor in how the crank is located in the block. Then the other four bearings use the tangs to "match up" to the position which the thrust has established.
If the tangs are machined correctly, this works great in theory. If they are machined incorrectly, you have a situation such as what is shown in the picture.
Ok.. so your saying that the crank didnt move its
just 1 or more bearings might have
|
|
|
Re: H series bearings for 383-400???
[Re: 440sourcedotcom]
#1792053
04/01/15 10:15 PM
04/01/15 10:15 PM
|
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 854
Bloomingdale , OH
super451b
super stock
|
super stock
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 854
Bloomingdale , OH
|
Quote:
Quote:
It's a known fact that the radius on the 'source cranks are bigger than they should be and the accepted by the mASSES fix has always been to scrape for clearance.
I used the Clevite bearings on a low deck Eagle crank and they didn't need to be scraped for clearance ???
It's a known fact that those who acquire their engine building experience via a keyboard instead of a wrench are often mistaken.
The issue of main bearings contacting the radius is almost always due to where the engine block locating tangs position the bearings rather than the crankshaft radius.
When the blocks were machined at the factory, very little attention was given to positioning the locating tangs at the exactly correct position. The factory cranks had no radius, so there was a ton of room in there, and it didn't matter.
So, if you get a block where the tangs are shifted to one side (which is very common), and you are using a crank with a large radius (which is necessary for the strength of the crankshaft) there can be some interference with the radius.
While the uneducated or inexperienced instantly blames the crankshaft, in reality the crankshaft has nothing to do with the problem.
We've attached a picture, so anyone can easily see what we are explaining. In this particular case, the bearing was heavily shifted toward the right side of the picture, by nearly a quarter inch. With a factory crank, it did not cause a problem. With a radiused crank, now you have a problem. Name brand of the crank has nothing to do with it.
Our cranks have an eighth inch (.125") radius, no larger, no smaller.
If it came across that I was blaming the crank as the problem , that was not my intention. I was just trying to point out that the use of the 4094m bearings cannot be taken as a blanket statement that will work on all setups and that clearances should ALWAYS be checked. Although the crank that I got did have a couple minor issues, journal machining , was not one of them.
Last edited by super451b; 04/01/15 10:18 PM.
|
|
|
|
|
