Pushrod rebuild

[QWKSNKE]

A discussion….

Interested to see some other views on this. I am ready to start removing the the motor out of the 93 and start its rebuild. I will be using the OEM block and plan to stay at the power level I am at. I know, I know.. do not start beating me over the head, but I simply can not afford to buy an aftermarket block for this car and the 94 (when the time comes). I am looking to build the motor myself ( actually DSP will).

Since I am keeping the OEM block, should I just use Autozone/Advance Auto parts pistons, rods, rings, and bearings to rebuild the motor OR buy a complete rotating assembly kit from CHP, D.S.S, etc. I was actually looking at a D.S.S. long rod 306 balanced rotating assembly kit.

I expect that I could buy the parts from Advance/Autozone for around $500-$600 (unbalanced of course) vs. the D.S.S. balanced long rod which would be around $1330 including shipping. I am also considering swapping over to a 28 oz balance vs the stock 50 oz.


The only thing I am unsure of, is how much it is going to cost to balance the above mentioned 'cheap' parts. I have a feeling that it will expensive.

[joker]

A discussion….

Interested to see some other views on this. I am ready to start removing the the motor out of the 93 and start its rebuild. I will be using the OEM block and plan to stay at the power level I am at. I know, I know.. do not start beating me over the head, but I simply can not afford to buy an aftermarket block for this car and the 94 (when the time comes). I am looking to build the motor myself ( actually DSP will).

Since I am keeping the OEM block, should I just use Autozone/Advance Auto parts pistons, rods, rings, and bearings to rebuild the motor OR buy a complete rotating assembly kit from CHP, D.S.S, etc. I was actually looking at a D.S.S. long rod 306 balanced rotating assembly kit.

I expect that I could buy the parts from Advance/Autozone for around $500-$600 (unbalanced of course) vs. the D.S.S. balanced long rod which would be around $1330 including shipping. I am also considering swapping over to a 28 oz balance vs the stock 50 oz.


The only thing I am unsure of, is how much it is going to cost to balance the above mentioned 'cheap' parts. I have a feeling that it will expensive.

Personally, I would go with the forged rotating assembly. With it at least you would have the piece of mind that you have good internals, instead of the stock hyper pistons our cars come with.

[96GTS]

I think...you should send me some DSP decals for my ride. :burnout:


I could've dropped the stock 5.4 in, but you're seeing which route I'm taking, so I think you know my answer.

And for my own information, what benefit does going from a 50oz to a 28oz balancer have? Whats the point?

[Craig K.]

If you are thinkin gof buying cheap, look at PAW in California.

I have rebuilt engines using their cheap parts for only a few hundred dollars, though this was in Highschool.

I personnely would think a balanced 306 long rod kit could be had for less than $1300. If you want I can check with my engine builder in Illinois, he has always given us very good deals, and uses good parts.

[svopaul]

I can hook you up with deals on quality parts...I personally would shy away from Advance and contact PAW or Columbus Engine Rebuilders if you want to try to go the cheapest route.

But in reality with a 5.0 HO engine I have rebuilt a few using the same pistons(provided the specs are in line) just pattern hone, new rings and bearings. Balancing should run you about $150...ofcourse depending where you go.

[Craig K.]

Hey Lee,

I just spoke with my friend Ray at R&R Motorsports (618-438-3903) about some prices/options.

These are just ball park, since I was not sure exactly what you wanted. I also got some of his machining prices as well.

316 cid, 5.400" H-beam rods, 4340 crank, JE fordge pistons, file fit rings, clevite 77 race bearings (crank and rods) balanced $1823.

325 cid, I-beam rods (I think) cast steel crank balanced $1573

347 cid, I-Beam rods, fordge pistons, cast steel crank, balanced $1450

Ray charges $200 for balance (I added this to the prices above already), around $45 for cam bearings installed, $180 for bore/hone with torque plate, around $175 for crank journals aligned honed.

If you have any questions, by all means give Ray a call, tell him that I sent you.

[Shorty]

i know summitt has a kit with sealed power forged pistons, rings, freeze plugs, gaskets, bearings, oil pump. pretty much everything for the bottom end. i am not sure how quality all of it, but it is bound to be as good as the stock stuff. compression ratio for the forged is 10.13, so i dont know how that will work with your boost level. anyway the whole kit is $470. dont sound like a bad deal. :shrug:

[qkjuicedpony]

shorty,


i have used that kit several times and have absolutely no complaints on it at all.those c/r numbers are figured with a 58cc head as well.


here is my opinion.

get a good set of pistons and rings
have the stock rods checked and put in some good bolts
have the crank cheaked and either buy a new one or reuse what you have
use good main studs and a girdle
use the afr's
ditch the cobra intake for a systemax

[Wicked]

i know summitt has a kit with sealed power forged pistons, rings, freeze plugs, gaskets, bearings, oil pump. pretty much everything for the bottom end. i am not sure how quality all of it, but it is bound to be as good as the stock stuff. compression ratio for the forged is 10.13, so i dont know how that will work with your boost level. anyway the whole kit is $470. dont sound like a bad deal. :shrug:


I second that. I used a summit kit when I built my motor. It will have everything you need. Reuse your old rods and crank. If you went aftermarket on any part of the rotating assy I would say rods first, although the stockers are damn stout. Stock pistons will do fine. I spent $420 when I bought my Summit kit in 1998, and spent $347 on machine work including rebuilding the heads(bronzevalve guide, seals, valve job, machining) and balancing.

[QWKSNKE]

And for my own information, what benefit does going from a 50oz to a 28oz balancer have? Whats the point?

I am thinking going from 50 oz imbalance to a 28 oz imbalance will cause the motor to be smoother. Am I correct :shrug: If not, please let me know because I am looking at several hundreds of $$$$$ to do this.

Interesting views. the discussion come up today between me and a few people and 2 of the views was to basically use the OEM replacement rotating assembly because the block goes before the rotating assembly. But i am at boost limits of my rods according to Edgar.

96GTS. If you really want some decals we can probably arrange it.

[svopaul]

I am thinking going from 50 oz imbalance to a 28 oz imbalance will cause the motor to be smoother. Am I correct :shrug: If not, please let me know because I am looking at several hundreds of $$$$$ to do this.

Interesting views. the discussion come up today between me and a few people and 2 of the views was to basically use the OEM replacement rotating assembly because the block goes before the rotating assembly. But i am at boost limits of my rods according to Edgar.

96GTS. If you really want some decals we can probably arrange it.

You are not correct Lee....balance is balance. I can tell you that there is no difference between the smoothness of my older 289's vs. the newer 5.0's....Just balance your rotating assembly ;) I have built a number of engines over the years(including a chevy 350-don't tell anyone!) and will NOT even bother to assemble one if it's not balanced. It makes all the difference in the world and is well worth it IMO.

Run a girdle and if nothing else shot peen the rods and use ARP rod bolts...if you want the peace of mind of new rods, let me know.....I can get a deal on a set of H beams right now for around $350...that's overkill but it's a deal so why not?

I think your block might give before the rods but it's going to be a toss up IF there is a failure....magic word there..."IF"...;)

[QWKSNKE]

Whatever I go with will be balanced Paul.


Craig. Thanks for the info above.

[Craig K.]

Lee,
If you are going to keep the stock rods, have them check both on the big and small ends for roundness, then grind down the casting brake off edge (the raised edge on the side of the rods) until it is smooth to the rod, then have them shot penned, and finally use ARP bolts, this is the best you can do to a stock rod.

Also when it comes to balancing, you should have the small/big ends of the rods balanced seperatly, then balance the pistons, finally have the crank balanced using bob wieghts (that wiegh what your rod, piston, rings and bearings total wieght is). Also don't forget to balance with you flywheel and balancer in place. Any good shop should balance everything to with in a gram at the most.

[svopaul]

Whatever I go with will be balanced Paul.



OK....then I see no benefit/need to go with the 28oz balance....

[QWKSNKE]

I would prefer to at least use an I-beam rod.

[svopaul]

I would prefer to at least use an I-beam rod.

I agree there. I can check if you like but I was picking up Lunati 5.4 I beams a year ago for $150/set....I can check to see if there are any deals on the stock style if you like...;)

[QWKSNKE]

BTW. This is the kit i was looking at

http://www.dssracing.com/images/stroker-combo2.gif

•DSS Pro-Lite forged pistons
•5.400" Forged polished I-beam rods with ARP bolts
•Cast steel stroker crankshaft
•Moly rings
•Tri-metal rod and main bearings.

$1095+ $175 balance + shipping

[QWKSNKE]

Are stock rods forged on the 93 model year

[NightHawk756]

Lee, only one place I'm gonna chime in and that's to agree with Craig about the balancing. You say you want to buy a kit that's balanced. But I've always heard and it's what I did on the coupe, that you definately need to balance the entire rotating assembly with the flywheel and balancer that your going to be using. So, I would save the money for having them balance just the rotating assembly and use it to balance the assembly AND your flywheel and balancer by whatever local shop you use. ;)

[joker]

Are stock rods forged on the 93 model year

I am pretty sure they didnt Lee. I didnt think any of the 5.0's came with forged rods., and of coarse the last year of forged pistons was 92

[coupe]

Lee, all the 5.0 rollers used forged rods. The blocks break in high-boost motors before the rotating assembly...(assuming your tune is decent). Bad tune & running lean will kill pistons & bearings. The high power & high RPM's are hard on rods and bearings. Get a decent set of rods; don't be afraid of hypereutectic pistons,; and have it balanced to zero if you can. The 50's good, the 28 better, and zero is best. It's all about harmonics that occur at RPM's that are inherently out-of balance because of the mass of the rotating assembly.

But after all that; remember there are guys running STOCK rotating assemblies well into the 10's with nice tunes and good oil-change intervals.

Take it for what it's worth.

-Matt.

[QWKSNKE]

The blocks break in high-boost motors before the rotating assembly...(assuming your tune is decent).
-Matt.


That is actually the conversation that started this thread.

[svopaul]

Lee, all the 5.0 rollers used forged rods. The blocks break in high-boost motors before the rotating assembly...(assuming your tune is decent). Bad tune & running lean will kill pistons & bearings. The high power & high RPM's are hard on rods and bearings. Get a decent set of rods; don't be afraid of hypereutectic pistons,; and have it balanced to zero if you can. The 50's good, the 28 better, and zero is best. It's all about harmonics that occur at RPM's that are inherently out-of balance because of the mass of the rotating assembly.

But after all that; remember there are guys running STOCK rotating assemblies well into the 10's with nice tunes and good oil-change intervals.

Take it for what it's worth.

-Matt.

Matt, that is not correct. the Rods are NOT forged rods in the 5.0 rollers...if you look at a rod out of one it is the same rod used since 1968 ;).

Also the 50 vs 28 is mute in my book....there is no noticeable difference between the two and if you balance a rotating assembly it makes absolutely no difference. Those numbers dictate which flywheel/balancer to use. As an example, the 5.0 I built that went into my first LSC was a 50oz engine and when we balanced it we actually balanced it to ZERO....but it was still a 50oz engine becuase that's the balancer and flywheel used. It's not necessary to balance an engine to zero and in fact no shop will do it....we did it ourselves and wanted to see if we could....and we did;).

WOrrying about harmonics and which balance stated above is pointless when you are balancing the rotating assembly to specs more than what Ford put them at ;)

[Craig K.]

I agree that there is no real difference between a 28 and 50 oz balance, like paul said it determines what balancer and flywheel to use.

Even when you balance to 0 you still need a balancer of some sort on it.

I do still feel that for any race engine you should balance to 0 (or as close as possible) because this will cut down on internal wear (over the long-term) and will allow the engine to rev faster, also if you hang it at high rpm's for long periods of time (roundy racing or long straights in road racing0 that you will see the benifits.

[coupe]

:nono:

FYI: There's a difference between a dampener and a balancer. :think:

Qwk; listen to whoever you want. I'm not going to argue. :ignorant:

You really ought to look into what balance does to an engine...it does make a difference!

[svopaul]

...and that would be why it is called a "Harmonic Balancer" and not Harmonic Dampener;)

No arguing....just stating facts from having built engines ;) I still stand by the point of it not being worth changing to a 28oz balance ;)

[svopaul]

One more thing Lee....I would recommend a Romac balancer for your engine. If you need a source for one let me know. Definitely want to dump the original style if you haven't already....

[Sendero]

Alright..... I get to dig deep on this one, back to the Classic Mustang days.

First, Ford switched form a 28 in/oz imbalance to a 50 in/oz imbalance because they reduced the weight of the crankshaft counterweights. They were looking to lighten the rotating mass for better fuel efficiency and reduced material costs. To make up for the lighter rotating mass they added extra balance on the dampener and flywheel to compensate for the rotational weight change.

Zero, 28, 50; they are all just numbers signifying the amount of weight you must use to balance your engine's rotational assembly.

If you really want to split hair's; then balance DOES make a difference in a high rpm motor. I bet dollars to donuts that Nascar and FormulaOne builders try to get their engines as close to ZERO balance as possible and for good reason, RPM potential and race life. A 50oz imbalance motor has more potential for failure in a "full race" application than a 0oz imbalance motor does. If you put three men of equal strength on a centerfuge, have a different one hold 50 pound ball, 28 pound ball, and 1 pound ball who is going to let go first?

BUT

...as far as reliability and service life goes, on a street motor your money is well spent on a good flywheel/balancer combo with Romac being the best. Just keep the 50oz imbalance and get it "balanced" by a reputable machine shop. This includes the rods, pistons, rings, rod bolts, and bearings. Every little bit helps. You will probably split the block before the imbalance of your motor becomes an issue.

But its your call because its your money.

[svopaul]

Thankyou Nathan.....Exactly what I was getting at for the most part ;)

[QWKSNKE]

See I was thinking that a 28oz was closest to 0 therefore would be better. Didn't realize that when balancing a motor that you were getting close to 0 based off the initial imbalance.

Thanks guys :nice:

[svopaul]

See I was thinking that a 28oz was closest to 0 therefore would be better. Didn't realize that when balancing a motor that you were getting close to 0 based off the initial imbalance.

Thanks guys :nice:

Exactly :nice:

as stated before, most machine shops balance within an acceptable figure...if you talk to the shop and ask them to balance it as close to zero as they can they may do it for you....even if they charge a little more it would be worth it. It is time consuming though....it took use quite a bit longer when doing mine but not too bad...an experienced balancer would be able to do this without too much more time involved.

[Sendero]

See I was thinking that a 28oz was closest to 0 therefore would be better.

...and it would be, in a full-on competition motor.


Didn't realize that when balancing a motor that you were getting close to 0 based off the initial imbalance.


Technically you are, but you still have that rotational/counter rotational weight to sling. But it won't matter in a street motor like your's. You are probably keeping it under 7k rpms so the stock imbalance will be fine.

[QWKSNKE]

...and it would be, in a full-on competition motor.



No it wouldn't matter. if you are as close to zero balance as you can get on a 50oz imbalance motor and you did the same on a 28oz motor they would actually be balanced the same

[Sendero]

No it wouldn't matter. if you are as close to zero balance as you can get on a 50oz imbalance motor and you did the same on a 28oz motor they would actually be balanced the same

...EDIT: Nevermind

Whatever you do, get it balanced. :bricks:

[Italian LX]

You are probably keeping it under 7k rpms. . .
:rofl:

[QWKSNKE]

:rofl:


I almost did the same thing. :rofl:

[coupe]

Paul; what's an internally balanced motor then? And just so you know now...there IS such a thing as a dampener w/o a balance (or should I say counterbalance) on it.
:D

[joker]

Holy crap, did I type in the wrong forum address?

[QWKSNKE]

Paul; what's an internally balanced motor then? And just so you know now...there IS such a thing as a dampener w/o a balance (or should I say counterbalance) on it.
:D

not on a typical 302 :D

[Sendero]

:rofl:
I almost did the same thing. :rofl:

I don't get it. :shrug:

[NightHawk756]

Paul; what's an internally balanced motor then? And just so you know now...there IS such a thing as a dampener w/o a balance (or should I say counterbalance) on it.
:DMatt, I don't recall anyone talking about a dampener. All the talk has been about 50oz and 28oz balancers. And which would be better. No talk about dampeners.

Just might be a misunderstanding. :shrug:

[coupe]

..not on a typical 302

no; but in a racing engine you can do it. Better be a billet crank though...& nice lightweight rods. :nice:

[96GTS]

no; but in a racing engine you can do it. Better be a billet crank though...& nice lightweight rods. :nice:
Billet crank w/ stock rods/pistons :metal: :jester:

[coupe]

...Just might be a misunderstanding.
Thanks for the heads up :nice:

[svopaul]

Matt, I don't recall anyone talking about a dampener. All the talk has been about 50oz and 28oz balancers. And which would be better. No talk about dampeners.

Just might be a misunderstanding. :shrug:

:werd:

I never typed or uttered the "Dampener" word :shrug:....

and yes, I am quite aware of the difference considering we dealt with one last month ;)....but not on a 302...a 3.8.

I think you misunderstood things Matt....no foul though :chug:

[coupe]

Lee, all the 5.0 rollers used forged rods. The blocks break in high-boost motors before the rotating assembly...(assuming your tune is decent). Bad tune & running lean will kill pistons & bearings. The high power & high RPM's are hard on rods and bearings. Get a decent set of rods; don't be afraid of hypereutectic pistons,; and have it balanced to zero if you can. The 50's good, the 28 better, and zero is best. It's all about harmonics that occur at RPM's that are inherently out-of balance because of the mass of the rotating assembly.

But after all that; remember there are guys running STOCK rotating assemblies well into the 10's with nice tunes and good oil-change intervals.

Take it for what it's worth.


No, no misunderstanding. I still stand by my original post. Lee wants info on going to 28 oz-in externally balanced job, which puts less stress on the crank, expecially at RPM. It will be more durable than a 50 oz-in external motor. And the internal-balance motors have zero (0) balance weight on the front/back of the motor...they do however have a dampener for lower-RPM oscillations that might otherwise be felt w/o a dampener. It's really straight forward. :nice:

[svopaul]

No, no misunderstanding. I still stand by my original post. Lee wants info on going to 28 oz-in externally balanced job, which puts less stress on the crank, expecially at RPM. It will be more durable than a 50 oz-in external motor. And the internal-balance motors have zero (0) balance weight on the front/back of the motor...they do however have a dampener for lower-RPM oscillations that might otherwise be felt w/o a dampener. It's really straight forward. :nice:

So you still say they have Forged rods? :poke: :jester:


You are looking at it more from an engineering point of view and not real life and what works just fine....trying to fix something that aint broke so to speak....

But that's why we don't often agree :chug:

[coupe]

Automotive engineering...it is real life. :yup:

[svopaul]

If it ain't broke, don't try to fix it...it was already engineered once :yup:

Lee was under a misunderstanding about balance which has been cleared up...everything else is clear :nice: