Eagle rotating assembly, rod side clearance question

Posted By: crscuda

Eagle rotating assembly, rod side clearance question - 09/22/10 12:49 AM

I have a Eagle 472 rotating assembly that while mocking it up found that the rod side clearanc is at .032". The eagle rod width = 1.007" +-.001".

Is this to much clearance? If so how would you fix it?

Thanks

Posted By: Thumperdart

Re: Eagle rotating assembly, rod side clearance question - 09/22/10 01:02 AM

Nope....run it, mine are .035+ for 11 years now.

Posted By: Dads426

Re: Eagle rotating assembly, rod side clearance question - 09/22/10 01:04 AM

You can't do anything about it. It won't hurt anything. It will sling more oil on the cylinder walls, (EDIT: OK, I stand corrected. The bearing clearance, not the side clearance determines how much oil will be be slung on cylinder walls. That makes sense) but many engines have been assembled with that much clearance with no problems.

Posted By: crscuda

Re: Eagle rotating assembly, rod side clearance question - 09/22/10 01:20 AM

Just got a call, I might be able to exchange the eagles for a set of RPM rods. They measure in at 1.015". The Eagles were 1.007". That would bring the rod clearance around .017"

Is RPM brand any good? I never heard of them.

Posted By: '72CudaRacer

Re: Eagle rotating assembly, rod side clearance question - 09/22/10 01:33 AM

Get the rods that you are comfortable with and don't be concerned about the excess side clearace. It was a concern to me until I really started looking and that stock side clearance spec is almost unobtainable. My engine has a stock crank and Ohio Crankshaft H-beam rods and the clearance is well over .030", making just under 600 HP. Like the above poster stated, you can't do anything about it, just like if you measure the actual length, center of crank to center of pin, it will most likely be less than 6.760, which is already shorter than stock.

Brian Dunnigan

Posted By: moparmxz

Re: Eagle rotating assembly, rod side clearance question - 09/22/10 01:36 AM

Run them it will be fine.

Posted By: Crizila

Re: Eagle rotating assembly, rod side clearance question - 09/22/10 03:55 AM

This aint a new topic ( means less than a year old). I called Eagle on this and their recommendation was .016" I believe. I also thought that more clearance ment more oil slung on the cylinder walls. I was shown ( mathematically ) by a poster that I was wrong. Also heard from some members that they ran as much as .070" with no problems. It appears there are more issues with tight than with loose. Keep this in mind; the rods do jump from side to side as they travel up and down ( IMHO ).

Posted By: dOOc

Re: Eagle rotating assembly, rod side clearance question - 09/22/10 01:46 PM

Quote:

This aint a new topic ( means less than a year old). I called Eagle on this and their recommendation was .016" I believe. I also thought that more clearance ment more oil slung on the cylinder walls. I was shown ( mathematically ) by a poster that I was wrong. Also heard from some members that they ran as much as .070" with no problems. It appears there are more issues with tight than with loose. Keep this in mind; the rods do jump from side to side as they travel up and down ( IMHO ).

BUT ... Eagle IS right and you were correct !

... and the people who say it makes NO diff ...are uNcorrect !!

Is running fat clearance going to "hurt" your motor? ... Of course not .. but it will cost you power ... both in running your pump to an excess AND running the crank, rods and pistons THROUGH all that excess oil AND pulling that Xtra oil off the cylinder walls.

Posted By: JohnRR

Re: Eagle rotating assembly, rod side clearance question - 09/22/10 01:52 PM

Quote:

Quote:

This aint a new topic ( means less than a year old). I called Eagle on this and their recommendation was .016" I believe. I also thought that more clearance ment more oil slung on the cylinder walls. I was shown ( mathematically ) by a poster that I was wrong. Also heard from some members that they ran as much as .070" with no problems. It appears there are more issues with tight than with loose. Keep this in mind; the rods do jump from side to side as they travel up and down ( IMHO ).

BUT ... Eagle IS right and you were correct ! ... and the people who say it makes NO diff ...are uNcorrect !!

Is running fat clearance going to "hurt" your motor? ... Of course not .. but it will cost you power ... both in running your pump to an excess AND running the crank, rods and pistons THROUGH all that excess oil AND pulling that Xtra oil off the cylinder walls.

Doctor D you should stick to things you actually know about ...

Posted By: old_racer

Re: Eagle rotating assembly, rod side clearance question - 09/22/10 01:53 PM

Hi,
what do some of you respected engine builders think? ie, Bob George, Dram, Best Machine, to name a few. I'd like to know also.
thanks
Russ

Posted By: dOOc

Re: Eagle rotating assembly, rod side clearance question - 09/22/10 01:59 PM

Hay ambulance chaser .... so WHY do you chime-in on something you know ZIP about ? ....

SAME THING you do every day !!

...

I will leave this into the hands of people like Eagle and the OEM ... that recommend specs well-uNder .020.

Posted By: crscuda

Re: Eagle rotating assembly, rod side clearance question - 09/22/10 07:19 PM

Talked to an engineer at Eagle, they do cut thier rods to 1.007" about .007" under. The reason he gave me was to let the oil escape the bearing faster reducing heat. Better for the rod bearings.

??? What do you think. If you want the oil to leave the bearing faster, that could be done by increasing the rod bearing clearance to the crank???

Your thoughts...

Thanks for the input

Posted By: 602heavy

Re: Eagle rotating assembly, rod side clearance question - 09/22/10 07:37 PM

Some get confused regards rod side clearance , bearing clearance dictates how much oil is slung off , if we had zero bearing clearance & .060" rod clearance how much oil would get thrown off rod ends?

Posted By: Crizila

Re: Eagle rotating assembly, rod side clearance question - 09/22/10 07:56 PM

Quote:

Some get confused regards rod side clearance , bearing clearance dictates how much oil is slung off , if we had zero bearing clearance & .060" rod clearance how much oil would get thrown off rod ends?

Not enough????????

Posted By: Cab_Burge

Re: Eagle rotating assembly, rod side clearance question - 09/22/10 07:56 PM

Quote:

Some get confused regards rod side clearance , bearing clearance dictates how much oil is slung off , if we had zero bearing clearance & .060" rod clearance how much oil would get thrown off rod ends?

As already mentioned this subject has been beat to death, the rod side clearances do not determine how much oil is slung out of the bearings, the rod bearing to cranksaft clearances do

That has been proven time and time agian on dyno tests and at the track test as far as power and ET is concerned

theory is theory and results are results and results don't always back up theory

Posted By: JohnRR

Re: Eagle rotating assembly, rod side clearance question - 09/22/10 08:25 PM

Quote:

Hay ambulance chaser .... so WHY do you chime-in on something you know ZIP about ? ....

SAME THING you do every day !! ...

I will leave this into the hands of people like Eagle and the OEM ... that recommend specs well-uNder .020.

I know alot more on this subject than you doc fiberASS.

Read the posts above me to see why it's really not as bad as some think. There is more oil coming off the camshaft from the huge oil passages and loose factory lifter bore clearnaces then there is from the added side clearance. Add a crank scraper if you are that concerned with some POSSIBLE extra oil.

Posted By: dOOc

Re: Eagle rotating assembly, rod side clearance question - 09/22/10 08:43 PM

Quote:

I know alot more on this subject than you doc fiberASS.

Read the posts above me to see why it's really not as bad as some think. There is more oil coming off the camshaft from the huge oil passages and loose factory lifter bore clearnaces then there is from the added side clearance. Add a crank scraper if you are that concerned with some POSSIBLE extra oil.

Hay ambulance chaser .... YOU saying what you do .... shows that you do NOT know what you are talking about !

.....

And I say again ... I will leave this into the hands of people like Eagle and the OEM ... that recommend specs well-uNder .020.

O R ...are you claiming that you-know-more than they do ?

IF THIS is your ASSertion ... THERE is a blow-hard topic recently HERE .. that you need to be posting on.

Posted By: dOOc

Re: Eagle rotating assembly, rod side clearance question - 09/22/10 08:46 PM

Quote:

Some get confused regards rod side clearance , bearing clearance dictates how much oil is slung off , if we had zero bearing clearance & .060" rod clearance how much oil would get thrown off rod ends?

I would TOTALLY agree ... bearing clearances have more effect on THIS .. than do RSC ... but all these-clearances are "leaks".

Posted By: crscuda

Re: Eagle rotating assembly, rod side clearance question - 09/22/10 09:28 PM

Quote:

Quote:

This aint a new topic ( means less than a year old). I called Eagle on this and their recommendation was .016" I believe. I also thought that more clearance ment more oil slung on the cylinder walls. I was shown ( mathematically ) by a poster that I was wrong. Also heard from some members that they ran as much as .070" with no problems. It appears there are more issues with tight than with loose. Keep this in mind; the rods do jump from side to side as they travel up and down ( IMHO ).

BUT ... Eagle IS right and you were correct ! ... and the people who say it makes NO diff ...are uNcorrect !!

Is running fat clearance going to "hurt" your motor? ... Of course not .. but it will cost you power ... both in running your pump to an excess AND running the crank, rods and pistons THROUGH all that excess oil AND pulling that Xtra oil off the cylinder walls.

When I asked people at Eagle they said .030"-.035" was ideal not .016". That is why they trimmed the rod width .007". When purching this kit I did not know or even think the rsc would be anything other than oe spec.

Is this why you see mixed assemblies ie. eagle crank with manley rods to correct issues like this? If so will there be other issues with my eagle crank, eagle rods, dimond pistons kit to lookout for or tricks to improve it?

Just want to get this right so I can keep my friends in the rearview mirror. Thanks again...

Posted By: dOOc

Re: Eagle rotating assembly, rod side clearance question - 09/22/10 11:00 PM

Quote:

When I asked people at Eagle they said .030"-.035" was ideal not .016".

So .... one person actually calls Eagle and they-say 16 is-the-plan ...and you call and they say OVER double-that ? .... ?? .... wassssupy ?

The FACTORY service manual says 9-17 .... did you ask why Eagle recommends OVER two-times what the factory says ?

And in keeping-your-friend in your rearview-mirror ? ... EVERY little-bit helps

Posted By: JohnRR

Re: Eagle rotating assembly, rod side clearance question - 09/22/10 11:13 PM

Quote:

Quote:

When I asked people at Eagle they said .030"-.035" was ideal not .016".

*** You are ignoring this user ***

Why don't you try and post some real facts once you learn English you resin huffing

Posted By: dOOc

Re: Eagle rotating assembly, rod side clearance question - 09/22/10 11:20 PM

Quote:

Why don't you try and post some real facts once you learn English you resin huffing

The REAL FACTS are there ..... you BUTThead !

I have been asked ... why do I like butting-heads with RR ? BECAUSE I like showing-him-up ...for the BUTThead he truly is ....

on someone else ..... you BUTThead !

Posted By: dOOc

Re: Eagle rotating assembly, rod side clearance question - 09/22/10 11:37 PM

Quote:

*** You are ignoring this user ***

Let me add ....

If you ARE ignoring-me ... then why are you commenting on what I say ?

So in addition to being a BUTThead and a DUMBbell ... are you are also a JACKazz ?

EVERYTHING points to ... roger-that

Posted By: Thumperdart

Re: Eagle rotating assembly, rod side clearance question - 09/22/10 11:39 PM

Quote:

Quote:

Why don't you try and post some real facts once you learn English you resin huffing

The REAL FACTS are there ..... you BUTThead !

I have been asked ... why do I like butting-heads with RR ? BECAUSE I like showing-him-up ...for the BUTThead he truly is ....

Go on someone else ..... you BUTThead !

How old are you anyhow? 11+ years w/.035+ side clearance and all`s well w/my lowly 9-second street car and my combo`s nothing new and has been around since the 80`s so screw "theory" and go with whats proven time and time again.

Posted By: RyanJ

Re: Eagle rotating assembly, rod side clearance question - 09/22/10 11:42 PM

Quote:

I have a Eagle 472 rotating assembly that while mocking it up found that the rod side clearanc is at .032". The eagle rod width = 1.007" +-.001".

Is this to much clearance? If so how would you fix it?

Thanks

It's fine, run it as is.

Posted By: JohnRR

Re: Eagle rotating assembly, rod side clearance question - 09/23/10 12:36 AM

Quote:

Quote:

Why don't you try and post some real facts once you learn English you resin huffing

The REAL FACTS are there ..... you BUTThead !

I have been asked ... why do I like butting-heads with RR ? BECAUSE I like showing-him-up ...for the BUTThead he truly is ....

Go on someone else ..... you BUTThead !

Excuse me mr. fiberASS has it ever crossed your feeble mind that some things can be re engineered and possibly IMPROVED? One either uses what is available NEW or gets stuck posts want ads on internet forums looking for 40 yr old junk because they have their heads buried in the sand.

You post like the Chrysler engineers are GODs or something , they have done some stupid things.... I, and others, are not saying the original spec is wrong or stupid but it's not the end all spec... just like engineers from the rest of the car makers and engineers in general, I know as I work fixing their messes on a daily basis.

As far as butting heads to make me look bad ... look up the word NARCISSIST ... if you can not do/say anything to make yourself look good then try to make others look bad ... you are a TEXTBOOK case.

Good night

I want to apologize to the OP and the rest of the members for mucking up this thread , I've got the proctoligist on ignore so I won't have to see anymore of his senile drivel....

Posted By: dOOc

Re: Eagle rotating assembly, rod side clearance question - 09/23/10 12:45 AM

Quote:

How old are you anyhow? 11+ years w/.035+ side clearance and all`s well w/my lowly 9-second street car and my combo`s nothing new and has been around since the 80`s so screw "theory" and go with whats proven time and time again.

OLD 'nuff to know that 035 is tooooo FAT of RCS !!

JUST THINK how quick it would be with the proper RSC ? ...

Posted By: dOOc

Re: Eagle rotating assembly, rod side clearance question - 09/23/10 12:59 AM

Quote:

Excuse me mr. fiberASS has it ever crossed your feeble mind that some things can be re engineered and possibly IMPROVED? One either uses what is available NEW or gets stuck posts want ads on internet forums looking for 40 yr old junk because they have their heads buried in the sand.

You post like the Chrysler engineers are GODs or something , they have done some stupid things.... I, and others, are not saying the original spec is wrong or stupid but it's not the end all spec... just like engineers from the rest of the car makers and engineers in general, I know as I work fixing their messes on a daily basis.

As far as butting heads to make me look bad ... look up the word NARCISSIST ... if you can not do/say anything to make yourself look good then try to make others look bad ... you are a TEXTBOOK case.

Good night

I want to apologize to the OP and the rest of the members for mucking up this thread , I've got the proctoligist on ignore so I won't have to see anymore of his senile drivel....

ONLY a JACKazz puts someone on "ignore" ...and then follows them around like a little puppy-dog comments on everything they say

You act like a DOPE

..... and you do THAT so well !! ...

So in your opinion ... fattening up RCS is the "trick" now ? Show me ANY build-article ANYWHERE that recommends that. Fat-RSC is an "improved" and re-engineered spec? What is the RSC on say a 2010 Hemi ? ..I will bet it is closer to 009 than it is to 035 !!

Me going out-of-my-way to make you look bad ? .... it is NOT ME that instigates ANYTHING with you. I try and avoid food-fights with you ...

.....but NO MORE !

LEAVE ME ALONE ...and I will do the same to you.

To add ....you want to apologize for mucking-up a thread ? ..... WHY do that now? ... and does that go for the others that you have F-ed up ?

And WHAT DID you contribute here ....other than MUCK ? ... I quoted a FSM ...

...and what did you do ? .... just your typical BS.

Posted By: polyspheric

Re: Eagle rotating assembly, rod side clearance question - 09/23/10 04:44 AM

The reason is so that they can use the same tooling as on the BBC rods that the blank was originally made for.

Not sure I follow the argument? If the leak is .002" at the journal, how is anything bigger than that more of a leak? Does putting a 2" hose on the end of a 1" hose make more water come out?

Posted By: strokin73cuda

Re: Eagle rotating assembly, rod side clearance question - 09/23/10 05:01 AM

Well put.

Posted By: Crizila

Re: Eagle rotating assembly, rod side clearance question - 09/23/10 05:03 AM

Quote:

The reason is so that they can use the same tooling as on the BBC rods that the blank was originally made for.

Not sure I follow the argument? If the leak is .002" at the journal, how is anything bigger than that more of a leak? Does putting a 2" hose on the end of a 1" hose make more water come out?

You have covered this ground before thanks, - and used the same analogy - and yes, it was simple enough for me to understand the first time

Posted By: maximum entropy

Re: Eagle rotating assembly, rod side clearance question - 09/23/10 05:13 PM

just be sure you have side clearance at the pin end to accommodate side clearance at the bottom end. i've seen some .050 with no problems whatsoever.