|
Re: 440 Source kit update part 1
[Re: dakotahotrodder]
#569578
01/04/10 05:26 PM
01/04/10 05:26 PM
|
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 6,295
U.S.
moparniac
master
|
master
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 6,295
U.S.
|
Just call muscle motors or best machine. hopefully they will chime in here..... I guess there king krate 600" uses that as well  I updated the post and put hughes kit in there BTW.... just show options is all...... now back to our regularly scheduled program....
Mopar Performance
|
|
|
Re: 440 Source kit update part 1
[Re: turbobitt]
#569579
01/04/10 05:42 PM
01/04/10 05:42 PM
|
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 9,910
Eighty Four, PA
B G Racing
OP
master
|
OP
master
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 9,910
Eighty Four, PA
|
When you say "Correct" the crank, are your intentions to re-grind ? If so, will you re-nitride to bring it back to the hardness level that it was intended to be ? AG.
Source's nitride extends to .014.Remember we are trying to keep it a budget build not see how bad we can make it or how much money we can spend unnessarrly.That would not be fair to anyone.
why would you believe that they can hold .014 depth on the nitiding when they have obvious issues with the other machined critical features of the crank. I'm not an engine machinest but definetly an end user that has bought budget stuff in the past. I would be very unconfortable with the fact that someone is shaving the bearings with a knife or grinding the crank to bring it within tolerance or pressing it back into shape because of run-out. Again, not a bashing fest but a comment from an end user looking at "budget" parts. It seems like these extra labor cost get lost/ignored in the final price of the build or when someone claims it was done on a budget. If you would report on the cost TO THE CUSTOMER and not your cost to fix, then that would interesting.
This is not a malicious stab so please don't take offense.
Allan
Not taking any offence Allen,but don't understand your point that your trying to make.If you pay for a budget assembly why try and make a Source crank into a Bryant.Many engine builders choose to cut a bearing to correct a radius interference.The cost of regrinding a crank opposed to an hour or so of shop labor negates any savings.You may not like cutting the bearing but it is and has been an acceptable practice,not VooDoo.As far nitride,it can be done in a few different methods and the depth can vary from manufacture to manufacture and process to process.The most common is a salt bath nitride process which Chrysler used for years and usually only penetrated aprox .003,the gas ion process allows for further penatration,and a induction furnace/gas ion process can penatrate to greater depths .025 to .035 or greater.The only limit is the density of the material,less dense material will allow a white blushing of the finished product.The runout on number one was minimal and acceptable but to the high side of what I perferr.I talked to the crank grinder today and he said live with it,no one in this part of the country can get it any closer,it was at .0014+- a tenthousandth(problem solve).As far as believing anyone,who can answer that,I guess if it was Bryant's claim it would have to be the gospel.Somewhere some engineers figure with a particular process for a particular amont of time will penetrate a particular density of material at a particular rate and depth.I'am in no position to question them.What happens to the Nitride when you micropolish a crank?Nothing,polishing only cleans the surface of pertruding materials and oxidations and does not remove material.If your removing material your machining and cutting,anyway this is far from the original intent of the original post and I still don't understand your position or intent,sorry,don't mean to offend you,you may have better knowledge on the subject. 
|
|
|
Re: 440 Source kit update part 1
[Re: @#$%&*!]
#569580
01/04/10 05:49 PM
01/04/10 05:49 PM
|
Joined: Oct 2005
Posts: 8,882
Ontario, Canada
Stanton
Don't question me!
|
Don't question me!
Joined: Oct 2005
Posts: 8,882
Ontario, Canada
|
Quote:
Has anyone considered that the "unfinished" rod journal lightening hole might be done that way to set the max. designed bobweight? If they'd punched that hole all the way through then they'd have to go back and take material off the counterweights to compensate. Am I wrong here? Let me know.
Cory
This is exactly my thoughts.
My guess is they leave some weight in them because its easier to take weight out than to add weight on in the balancing process.
The holes aren't all that big either - maybe 1/2" or 5/8" - unlike a stock crank that has huge holes.
|
|
|
Re: 440 Source kit update part 1
[Re: pittsburghracer]
#569581
01/04/10 08:29 PM
01/04/10 08:29 PM
|
Joined: Nov 2004
Posts: 6,890
North Alabama
Monte_Smith
master
|
master
Joined: Nov 2004
Posts: 6,890
North Alabama
|
Quote:
Quote:
Some are missing the point. We are NOT bashing 440 Source, only pointing out what was found and what it will take to fix it. You buy a low cost kit, you expect it not to be perfect. The question is, does the low cost kit, save you enough, to pay to repair the issues and still save money over the better kit. As far as whether these issues have been corrected in newer kits, is an impossible question to answer. You would just have to check it and see. My opinion, not likely. Lets face facts guys, these are cheap kits, yes prices were raised recently, but do you think that was done because they are spending more time with machining to make tolerances better, or because the raw forging price went up. I am betting on the steel went up myself. Regardless, the fact remains, given the history, you MUST check these parts. You may get one that needs little work, you may get one that needs a lot. But as stated, they are NOT "ready to run kits". Personally, I "check" every part I get, be it a cheaper part, or a billet crank from Bryant. The difference is, the better parts are always "right". I like to save money as much as anybody, but if a couple hundred extra upfront, saves me time and money in the long run, that is a no brainer........Another option, is to buy the low cost kit from BG, Muscle Motors, or some such other place. Yes, it will cost you more than direct from Source, but the issues will be corrected. But again, you will have to weigh this cost vs the better kit up front. Lets just see what the final costs are going to be when BG gets done. I feel sure he will give a fair account of the results.
Monte
Monte I respect you and most of your posts but when you say the better parts are always right you are wrong. My 2200.00 dollar 4.500 stroke callias crank was already cut .010 right out of the box. If it wasn't such a bother I would have reboxed it and told them to shove it up their azz.
I am not here to argue, all I can say, is I have NEVER gotten a "good" crank, be it a Callies, Bryant, Windberg, or even the K-1 Callies, that needed work and I have built a couple motors over the years. Am I saying every crank they ever made was perfect, of course not, am I saying 95% are good, yeah, I would take that bet. Will you say the same for the "cheap" cranks, not likely. As far as yours being cut .010, sure won't argue, you got it, but I have a hard time believing they just sent you a .010 under crank without your knowledge and then you just kept it Ok. But we are getting totally off topic and I don't want to wreck BGs thread. All I am saying, is the cheap kit does not seem to be the big bargain, once everything is looked at. The prices are posted on the thread. If the K-1 kit with Compstar rods is a few hundred more, I will go that way every time, because from MY experience, I would much rather have a crank and rods, final machined here in the states by Callies, because I know that it is likely going to be dead on the money.
Monte
|
|
|
Post deleted by Defbob
[Re: B G Racing]
#569583
01/04/10 10:11 PM
01/04/10 10:11 PM
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
|
|
|
Post deleted by moparts
[Re: moparniac]
#569584
01/04/10 10:36 PM
01/04/10 10:36 PM
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
|
|
|
Re: 440 Source kit update part 1
#569586
01/04/10 10:54 PM
01/04/10 10:54 PM
|
Joined: Jan 2005
Posts: 193
Australia
Teamx
member
|
member
Joined: Jan 2005
Posts: 193
Australia
|
For those looking at the overall cost of a stroker kit, keep in mind the potential extra block clearancing requiered with the old school 4.15s x 6.76 rod combinations. The last two 4.25s x 7.100 BBC storker kits went in the block with no clearancing at all!
Last edited by Teamx; 01/04/10 10:56 PM.
|
|
|
Re: 440 Source kit update part 1
[Re: Stanton]
#569587
01/04/10 11:04 PM
01/04/10 11:04 PM
|
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 1,131
Thigh-Gap Junction
@#$%&*!
New user name, Same old jerk!
|
New user name, Same old jerk!
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 1,131
Thigh-Gap Junction
|
Quote:
Quote:
Has anyone considered that the "unfinished" rod journal lightening hole might be done that way to set the max. designed bobweight? If they'd punched that hole all the way through then they'd have to go back and take material off the counterweights to compensate. Am I wrong here? Let me know.
Cory
This is exactly my thoughts.
My guess is they leave some weight in them because its easier to take weight out than to add weight on in the balancing process.
The holes aren't all that big either - maybe 1/2" or 5/8" - unlike a stock crank that has huge holes.
Thanks for backing me up. Though I didn't say it explicitly, what I was thinking was that, during the mfg. process they have all these cranks that are the same. Then, they want to set the up for different target max. bobweights. Say you want a max. 2300 gm BW, you drill the holes to one depth. The you want some for a 2500 gm bobweight so you drill them a little deeper. Then maybe you want some for a 2100 gm BW so you drill them a little shallower. I guess what I'm trying to say is that the amount of material drilled out could be used to tune the crank for a particular intended max BW. I wanna say that the fact that the holes aren't drilled all the way through is a non-issue. The finish on the holes is another thing. I wouldn't want any burrs falling off.
Nobody has said I'm hallucinating, yet. Well, not today anyway....
|
|
|
Re: 440 Source kit update part 1
[Re: @#$%&*!]
#569588
01/04/10 11:58 PM
01/04/10 11:58 PM
|
Joined: Dec 2007
Posts: 266
iowa
rook440
enthusiast
|
enthusiast
Joined: Dec 2007
Posts: 266
iowa
|
Thanks Bob for this artical ,,,frankly 2 years ago a bought a 440 source kit 4.25 stroke ,Jim VanZee built the engine for me had a local high performance machine shop check everything out and they were happy with everything ..he then assembled the engine with a hughes girdle and factory ported heads stage VI heads and it made 650 hp and 650 ft lbs of torque ,we pulled the filter after the breakin and the 5 dyno pulls and there were no abnormal filings ,this was indeed a cheap build ,but one I could have never done with out the inexpensive kit,yes you should check everything ,and maybe your taking a chance but if you are at this point you have a lot of company ,you see these kits everywhere ..thanks again for taking the time to write such an informative artical ,I will be looking foreward to reading the next posts on the rods and the ballancing .... Rook
|
|
|
Re: 440 Source kit update part 1
[Re: rook440]
#569589
01/05/10 12:24 AM
01/05/10 12:24 AM
|
Joined: Oct 2005
Posts: 8,882
Ontario, Canada
Stanton
Don't question me!
|
Don't question me!
Joined: Oct 2005
Posts: 8,882
Ontario, Canada
|
It's all fine and dandy to do price comparisons here but you have to compare apples to apples and you're going to have a tough time of that for one simple reason ... nobody offers the selection of stroker kits that 440Source does. Sure, you can look at Hughes, Muscle Motors, Mancini, etc. but they only offer a few choices - all around 500 cubes. If I'd wanted a 500 cube stroker with 12.5:1 CR I likely would have given one of those guys a little more consideration, but for the 528 with 10.5:1 the choice was pretty simple. Furthermore,
|
|
|
Re: 440 Source kit update part 1
#569590
01/05/10 12:38 AM
01/05/10 12:38 AM
|
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 871
WA 98043
thecarfarmer
super stock
|
super stock
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 871
WA 98043
|
Quote:
Well said! Mainly im curious as well as to what the "actual" cost will be! However Im sure that would vary also  ! but atleats that way people dont get "sticker shock" when they go pick up the discount stroker kit from their machinist.
I'd have to go look in my records, but there was significant labor in getting my parts all squared away.
Not huge, mind you, but it was a significant amount compared to the $15XX.00 kit that I had believed to be 'ready-to-run'.
That's why I think threads like this are great - the next guy will have a better idea what he's getting into.
Quote:
Quote:
......................My 4.25" "B" crank from 440 Source had .0015" taper on all 5 mains; the crank snout was off .001", the rod journals were straight, but the radii were so large I had to make some pretty heavy cuts on Clevite HN (narrow) bearings.
(snip)
-Bill
I used one of those cranks too, and the indexing was off .035", so I sent it back (since it couldn't be offset ground and fixed) and got another.......Did you have your indexing checked?
(snip)
Yeah, the crank was checked in a crank grinder; the only real issues were the mains being tapered and the large fillets on the rods.
I elected to not grind the rods, and just cut the bearings... $$$... I'd already bought the bearings, and couldn't see a significant advantage to the quality of the engine to buy more bearings and grind the rod journals too.
Although my laziness might have won out if I hadn't already bought the bearings.
Curious to see what BG finds with the rods. I picked a bunch of chips out of the area where the hollow dowel goes into the rod on some rods, and filed some substantial burrs off the rods at the parting line caused by the honing. My machinist also opened up the wristpin bushings a little bit (a couple tenth-thousandths IIRC).
-Bill
Seduce the attractive, and charm the rest.
******
489 C.I.D., roller cam, aftermarket heads, tunnel ram, stock '54 Dodge rear axle assembly: which of these doesn't belong?
|
|
|
Re: 440 Source kit update part 1
[Re: rook440]
#569591
01/05/10 01:41 AM
01/05/10 01:41 AM
|
Joined: Jul 2004
Posts: 4,384
Worst Weather USA
493_DART
master
|
master
Joined: Jul 2004
Posts: 4,384
Worst Weather USA
|
Quote:
Thanks Bob for this artical ,,,frankly 2 years ago a bought a 440 source kit 4.25 stroke ,Jim VanZee built the engine for me had a local high performance machine shop check everything out and they were happy with everything ..he then assembled the engine with a hughes girdle and factory ported heads stage VI heads and it made 650 hp and 650 ft lbs of torque ,we pulled the filter after the breakin and the 5 dyno pulls and there were no abnormal filings ,this was indeed a cheap build ,but one I could have never done with out the inexpensive kit,yes you should check everything ,and maybe your taking a chance but if you are at this point you have a lot of company ,you see these kits everywhere ..thanks again for taking the time to write such an informative artical ,I will be looking foreward to reading the next posts on the rods and the ballancing .... Rook
i know Jim V!
where are ya from and do you race Eddyville?
|
|
|
Re: 440 Source kit update part 1
[Re: dakotahotrodder]
#569592
01/05/10 08:28 AM
01/05/10 08:28 AM
|
Joined: Feb 2005
Posts: 232
Lansing, MI
MuscleMike
enthusiast
|
enthusiast
Joined: Feb 2005
Posts: 232
Lansing, MI
|
Thank you for the correction. Our site says clearly what cranks are available, how we prepare our kits, pricing, etc. K1's are an upgrade.
I am staying out of this thread as it is not for promotion but explaining the intricacies of kits and I thank BG racing for explaining the in's and outs of mail order parts.
Mike @MM
Last edited by MuscleMike; 01/06/10 07:12 AM.
|
|
|
Re: 440 Source kit update part 1
[Re: @#$%&*!]
#569593
01/05/10 11:04 AM
01/05/10 11:04 AM
|
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 9,910
Eighty Four, PA
B G Racing
OP
master
|
OP
master
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 9,910
Eighty Four, PA
|
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Has anyone considered that the "unfinished" rod journal lightening hole might be done that way to set the max. designed bobweight? If they'd punched that hole all the way through then they'd have to go back and take material off the counterweights to compensate. Am I wrong here? Let me know.
Cory
This is exactly my thoughts.
My guess is they leave some weight in them because its easier to take weight out than to add weight on in the balancing process.
The holes aren't all that big either - maybe 1/2" or 5/8" - unlike a stock crank that has huge holes.
Thanks for backing me up. Though I didn't say it explicitly, what I was thinking was that, during the mfg. process they have all these cranks that are the same. Then, they want to set the up for different target max. bobweights. Say you want a max. 2300 gm BW, you drill the holes to one depth. The you want some for a 2500 gm bobweight so you drill them a little deeper. Then maybe you want some for a 2100 gm BW so you drill them a little shallower. I guess what I'm trying to say is that the amount of material drilled out could be used to tune the crank for a particular intended max BW. I wanna say that the fact that the holes aren't drilled all the way through is a non-issue. The finish on the holes is another thing. I wouldn't want any burrs falling off.
Nobody has said I'm hallucinating, yet. Well, not today anyway....
Sorry guys,call it hallucinating,wishful thinking or plain assumptions on your part.To clarify "to assume" You make an azz of you and me.That one rod journal throw was not drilled all the way for balancing purposes,it was a result of an unfinished process.In over forty years of engine building on my part and exposure to many of the greats in the industry along the way in most every type of racing that involves internal combustion engines I would characterize that as a minor fkup.Not a big issue but since the assembly was balance a costly fkup.The crank was factory balanced at 2300 grams,the actual bobweight was 2169 grams.To further define my point I will spin the crank as is,record the over or under or "perfect"balance,then I will address the rod journal and flange and spin it again.Just the fact that the bobweight dictates the crank needed lightened shoots your assumption out of the water.I sunk your battleship!!!No offence,just BGR humor  
|
|
|
Re: 440 Source kit update part 1
[Re: B G Racing]
#569594
01/05/10 03:38 PM
01/05/10 03:38 PM
|
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 6,295
U.S.
moparniac
master
|
master
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 6,295
U.S.
|
thx for clearing that up musclemike.... also i talked to someone today who sells K1 kits and they are about $2400... so for the record here on the "discount kits" Mancini Racing Stroker Kit (Common Eagle Kit) $1,750 Balanced 440 Source $1897 Balanced Muscle Motors Kit $1999 Balanced Hughes Engines $1896 Balanced K1 Kits $2400 Balanced My Carillo "RBRE" Stroker Kit(for comparison) COMPLETE Price Balanced $3185 Im sure depending on your salesman and time of year prices may vary a few bucks... As well Im sure on the "discount" made kits "final" machined pricing on the kit will vary as well.... Im not sure what the total machining cost will be one the build here but the K1 stuff seems like a real good quality in the middle kit! and others on here have stated its a quality kit
Mopar Performance
|
|
|
Re: 440 Source kit update part 1
[Re: moparniac]
#569595
01/05/10 04:03 PM
01/05/10 04:03 PM
|
Joined: Oct 2008
Posts: 35
Johnstown,PA
curt jr
member
|
member
Joined: Oct 2008
Posts: 35
Johnstown,PA
|
Hi guys,Curt Jr.here  While tinkering in the shop I think I have solved the great crank drill hole debate.All the holes were drilled parallel to the centerline of the crank with the exception of the one not completely drilled.Had been drilled completely through it would have come out in the center main thrust journal.The hole was not parallel to the centerline of the crank as all the others.See attached photos.
1971 dodge challenger 500ci 9.70s
1969 superbee 383 4speed numbers matching original redline tires
1970 challenger round tube chassis project
|
|
|
Re: 440 Source kit update part 1
[Re: curt jr]
#569597
01/05/10 04:07 PM
01/05/10 04:07 PM
|
Joined: Jun 2009
Posts: 705
Michigan
Hemiroid
super stock
|
super stock
Joined: Jun 2009
Posts: 705
Michigan
|
Quote:
Hi guys,Curt Jr.here While tinkering in the shop I think I have solved the great crank drill hole debate.All the holes were drilled parallel to the centerline of the crank with the exception of the one not completely drilled.Had been drilled completely through it would have come out in the center main thrust journal.The hole was not parallel to the centerline of the crank as all the others.See attached photos.
  
|
|
|
|
|
