Forged Cranks who makes decent price Forged Cranks?

can you guys tell me who mnakjes some nice forged cranks. do any of them have a website any help would be awesome . neew forged bottom end for juiced carbed lt1
greg

This will probably be moved to the LT1 forum.

If you don't mind parts forged in China, then look into Scat, Eagle, and CAT (Cal Auto Transpeed). If that bugs you (it sure bugs me), the next step up is probably something from Ohio Crankshaft or Howards Racing Components. Then you get into Crower, Callies, and Cola, and the top of the heap would probably be Hank the Crank and Moldex. Of course, the non-Chinese stuff will cost more and the premium parts are downright pricey.

Scat makes some very nice inexpensive cranks... I've always liked how they measure out and the machine work is done here, but the forging is done overseas. Funny thing is most of the raw materials for cranks these days comes from someplace other than the US.

Bret

I am partial to Callies - excellent product, fair price, made in USA.

Rich

I like cola cranks.

I like the Callies Dragonslayer for a good forged crankshaft that can take some abuse. They are reasonably priced compared to a lot of their competitors as well.


We offer several different options for Callies Crankshafts in our web store. (http://www.victoryracingengines.com/products.php?SECTION=13)

for low $ the 5140 gm forged isnt bad for the price, ive beat on them further than i thought prudent with no problems, and how many trillion zz motors have run one without problems.Crower does a number on the same crank-stock plus i think- for a little more $. for a 4340 piece, you will spend more $ but get a stronger piece, just depends on what your motor needs

i've broken the snout off my Eagle 4340 with a blower belt, idling in the driveway.Heard more storys like mine about the DragonSlayer by Callies
I've got a Scat Crank now, its a much nicer piece.
Cola is no longer made, i tried to get one when my eagle broke.

Another vote for Callies Dragonslayer. :thumb:

Heard lots of problems with Eagle.

i've broken the snout off my Eagle 4340 with a blower belt, idling in the driveway.Heard more storys like mine about the DragonSlayer by Callies
I've got a Scat Crank now, its a much nicer piece.
Cola is no longer made, i tried to get one when my eagle broke.


Cola is still in business.

http://web.camaross.com/forums/showpost.php?p=2342905&postcount=12

Yep, Cola is still up and going, I just talked to them not to long ago about my crank. A matter fact, I think the owner posts some on here.

i don't know if you already have some parts to build your short block but i have an brand new lt1 383 forged short block for sale. If you are interested, pm me

Never have had a problem with a callies crank, they are by far the highest quality forging in both fit(mic'd specs) and finish quality than the others in that price range. They also weigh a bit less than the competition. We have a dragonslayer in a dyno-proven 980hp blown BBC that has been running for 6 years and two teardowns for refreshning and its still perfect. My only complaint with callies is they are becoming so popular it takes a while to get the crank in the mail.

Eagle is junk pure and simple, never seen one out of the box that mic'd out to spec. Only time I ever use them is on a customer supplied deal, and even so I usually convince them to send it back.

Scat is a decent crank, they mic out well, but are not as nice a forging as the callies. They are a little weak in the transition area from main journal to rod throw on the 383 stuff.

Machinist...

From what I have miced lately the Eagles variey the most maybe .0003 from journal to journal so I expect to run two different sets of main bearings to get clearance.

The last Dragonslayer I had gave me the same measurement from journal to journal, only problem is that #5 should have been about .0005" smaller so I didn't have to put another set of X bearings in there to get the clearance I was looking for. When the block is the same journal diameter the whole way down and so is the crank, you gotta run different sets of bearings to get the right size...

Haven't had that same thing with the forged Scats I've run.

The Callies is a really nice piece either way, but I wouldn't be averse to running a Scat without a problem.

Bret

I continue to believe that the Callies Dragonslayer is the best overall value in a performance crankshaft on the market today. I have seen them sell from about the mid-700's to the mid-800's.

I also believe that the new Howards PM rods, at $599, 585 grams (sbc, 3.48 x 6") and an 800hp+ rating is the best overall value in a set of rods today.

While I'm on a roll, the Mahle coated-piston/pin/ring packages are a good value too.

Scat makes a good forged crank and a very nice billet. Prices are hard to beat.

HTC is very reasonable and the quality is top notch. If you ever get one up next to a "decent" crank then the differences become obvious. Better finishes on thrust and bearing journals, straightness is dead nuts and the tolerances are just as good. Not to mention HTC uses the central balancing method (putting the mallory in the center counterweights). Price is reasonable considering the work.

I'd like to think I know when something is 100% USA made. That'd be real nice to know, but then I have to stop and ask myself..... Where were the dies machined? Where were they designed? Where did the materials come from? Where, where, where....

I know enough about manufacturing now, having consulted with many engineers & designers over the years, to be a little less naive about it.

-Mindgame

Thanks guys you have helped alot i beleive im going to check into the scat cranks. thanks for the info
greg

I continue to believe that the Callies Dragonslayer is the best overall value in a performance crankshaft on the market today. I have seen them sell from about the mid-700's to the mid-800's.

I also believe that the new Howards PM rods, at $599, 585 grams (sbc, 3.48 x 6") and an 800hp+ rating is the best overall value in a set of rods today.

While I'm on a roll, the Mahle coated-piston/pin/ring packages are a good value too.
i havent run a dragonslayer but have only heard positive things; are you guys praising them assembling them or just gettin them to have installed by your builder [big difference]?
im loyal to crower for old reasons but their prices aren't too competetive.
as far as Mahle--i know they run F1 all day but that doesnt mean they can make a N2O SBC piston---im not knocking them at all as AMG and most F1 teams dont go wrong---im just curious how they adapt to our sport; I.E. how do they mic out and who has put over 200 on the hose to a set?
not a flame at all, just looking for the varied opinions that make this board great...


as far as the howards PMs-search it and youll find it in a few recent threads;me and some of the real builders are still looking for prelim results....thanks.

i havent run a dragonslayer but have only heard positive things; are you guys praising them assembling them or just gettin them to install[big difference]?
im loyal to crower for old reasons but their prices aren't too competetive.
as far as Mahle--i know they run F1 all day but that doesnt mean they can make a N2O SBC piston---im not knocking them at all as AMG and most F1 teams dont go wrong---im just curious how they adapt to our sport; I.E. how do they mic out and who has put over 200 on the hose to a set?
not a flame at all, just looking for the varied opinions that make this board great...


as far as the howards PMs-search it and youll find it in a few recent threads;me and some of the real builders are still looking for prelim results....thanks.

Very good post as it points out something I have seen here (and everywhere else on the 'net). A lot of "knowledge" gets recycled. And it's well known how with enough repetition of an opinion, people will believe it and it will become "fact". The Howard's PM rods are a case in point. Bret, who has true credentials and presents his view point in a coherent manner was the first one to mention them here. He may be the only person here who has actually used them! But this positive opinoin of the rods started to circulate and now there are a bunch of "experts", most of whom have likely never even seen one of the Howard's rods, let alone used them in an engine build, who sing their praises.

There are numerous other examples. Much of the info you see people post about DCR, cam specs, engine components, etc. are all recycled opinions that started with just a few people. After enough time passes, a whole variety of "experts" pop up who really don't know anything about the subject but post with great authroty and gravitas. Often, the initial valuable kernel of fact has by then been either distorted or missapplied to the point where it has become mis-information. I don't have a huge knowledge of a lot of this stuff, but I have been around a while and have occassionally posted some "pearl" that I have gleaned. It's kind of amusing to see it come back in a thread a year or two later in a post by a 20yo "expert" who is working on his first car. Often in a context that makes no sense.

I wonder if there are any Internet scholars who have looked at individual message boards and traced out the path information follows? Do a search on "Howard's rods" and it's fascinating to see how Bret's valuable opinion (and it probably is absolutely valid) has become dogma "here". It's so persuasive that I am thinking of trying a set!

Rich

Two words.........AMEN BROTHER!!



Very good post as it points out something I have seen here (and everywhere else on the 'net). A lot of "knowledge" gets recycled. And it's well known how with enough repetition of an opinion, people will believe it and it will become "fact". The Howard's PM rods are a case in point. Bret, who has true credentials and presents his view point in a coherent manner was the first one to mention them here. He may be the only person here who has actually used them! But this positive opinoin of the rods started to circulate and now there are a bunch of "experts", most of whom have likely never even seen one of the Howard's rods, let alone used them in an engine build, who sing their praises.

There are numerous other examples. Much of the info you see people post about DCR, cam specs, engine components, etc. are all recycled opinions that started with just a few people. After enough time passes, a whole variety of "experts" pop up who really don't know anything about the subject but post with great authroty and gravitas. Often, the initial valuable kernel of fact has by then been either distorted or missapplied to the point where it has become mis-information. I don't have a huge knowledge of a lot of this stuff, but I have been around a while and have occassionally posted some "pearl" that I have gleaned. It's kind of amusing to see it come back in a thread a year or two later in a post by a 20yo "expert" who is working on his first car. Often in a context that makes no sense.

I wonder if there are any Internet scholars who have looked at individual message boards and traced out the path information follows? Do a search on "Howard's rods" and it's fascinating to see how Bret's valuable opinion (and it probably is absolutely valid) has become dogma "here". It's so persuasive that I am thinking of trying a set!

Rich

Callies Dragonslayer here in my fully forged 383. My engine builder kept remarking about how nice of a piece that was and how it mic'd out real well. Just adding to the discussion. :D

Very good post as it points out something I have seen here (and everywhere else on the 'net). A lot of "knowledge" gets recycled. And it's well known how with enough repetition of an opinion, people will believe it and it will become "fact". The Howard's PM rods are a case in point. Bret, who has true credentials and presents his view point in a coherent manner was the first one to mention them here. He may be the only person here who has actually used them! But this positive opinoin of the rods started to circulate and now there are a bunch of "experts", most of whom have likely never even seen one of the Howard's rods, let alone used them in an engine build, who sing their praises.

There are numerous other examples. Much of the info you see people post about DCR, cam specs, engine components, etc. are all recycled opinions that started with just a few people. After enough time passes, a whole variety of "experts" pop up who really don't know anything about the subject but post with great authroty and gravitas. Often, the initial valuable kernel of fact has by then been either distorted or missapplied to the point where it has become mis-information. I don't have a huge knowledge of a lot of this stuff, but I have been around a while and have occassionally posted some "pearl" that I have gleaned. It's kind of amusing to see it come back in a thread a year or two later in a post by a 20yo "expert" who is working on his first car. Often in a context that makes no sense.

I wonder if there are any Internet scholars who have looked at individual message boards and traced out the path information follows? Do a search on "Howard's rods" and it's fascinating to see how Bret's valuable opinion (and it probably is absolutely valid) has become dogma "here". It's so persuasive that I am thinking of trying a set!

Rich


Yep, tis funny how info circulates the web.

WRT, Howards... http://web.camaross.com/forums/showthread.php?t=105714&highlight=howards+rod

Still one of the best rods on the market... powder metal or forged. Yep, I'm still singing it too, that's why the new motor has eight of their forgings in it. ;)

-Mindgame

You know...

I'm one of those people who is guilty of recycling information.

For instance; when I say that I beleive that the new Howard's PM rods are a good value it is in large part due to information I got here. (Plus of course the price, which is part of the "value" equation".)

I also "recycle" information that I got from Smokey's writings all the time. I always assumed that my 'passing it along' didn't make it any less valid.

I daresay that most of the information we deal with on a daily basis is "recycled".

We pretty much all know that acceleration due to gravity, here on earth, is 9.8m/s^2, but how many of us have actually verified that in a labratory?
OK, true... I have and probably a lot of people here on this board have too, but the point is still valid.


Stealth brought up some good points and so did Rich.


I made the statement that there were three products I consider to be good values, which is almost entirely based on the experiences of OTHER people combined with the relative costs.

Have I put those parts into an engine yet?
No.

Have I put my money where my mouth is by BUYING those parts?
Yes.

Is the information that I passed along accurate?
To the best of my knowledge; yes.


But maybe I shouldn't be talking at all.

I try to limit the things I say to things that I believe to be accurate, but I can't claim that all the information I have comes directly from MY personal experience. A lot does, but not all of it.


You know, I can't speak for the others on this forum that aren't on the same level as Rich and them, but I'd be happy to shut my mouth and let folks like Rich and a few others answer EVERY question that comes along. There's no doubt that they know more than I do and more of it comes from direct experience.

I mean hey...
Why get mostly second hand information from me when you can get first hand info from those guys?

haha Considering I'm only 19 (oops there went my credibility), I have seen lots of crank snouts break off Eagle 4340 cranks locally. They had a recall a while back that supposedly fixed it but I don't think it ever truely solved the problem.

I am also "guilty" of stating as fact information that I don't really have personal knowledge of. As "LameRandomName" suggested, this is often inevitable. For example, I have posted in threads regarding rod length. And I sure haven't done any back-to-back dyno runs with different rod lengths. However, I have had engines with various length rods and seen/worked on a number more. Usually though, this kind of thing is obvious from the context. When it's not, I guess it would be better to state where the information comes from. Often, this is done and you will see statements to that effect when it's not obvious from the context.

I will try to do this more in the future, when needed.

Rich

Aye... don't get too bent on the regurgitation thing. You'll end up beating yourself to death over it.

When you truly sit back and think about information...... isn't everything pretty much "recycled"?

I learned that 2+2=4 after hearing my teacher say it a few times.... then I accepted it and started saying it too. Still do. ;)

I don't believe anyone here is onto anything "revolutionary". If they were then they wouldn't be talking about it.

As far as stating facts without personal experience is concerned.... well you have to read between the lines. When in doubt... consider the source.

-Mindgame

I agree on the regurgitation... I learn about some of these things myself talking to other engine builders whos knowledge I respect. The best thing to do is talk to some good people, get the parts in hand, measure them, look them over and run them. Some things like a Bryant crank or a Carrillo rod are just known to be bad ass though and that's why the guys with all the coin run them. Really part of all of this is having the knowledge to know what is good and WHY, helps when you have a mechanical engineer as a teacher.

A good example lately....

Morel Hyd Roller lifters. I've had a customer talk about them like they were a playmate he was dating, basically WAY TOO MUCH. So I did some homework, read some stuff from Chris Straub of Stef's who is a close friend of Mr Morel. Anyways after I had a set of Comp R's in the shop that were not up to snuff for OldSStroker and I, they got sent back and the Morels came in. I have to say that it's night and day in the machine work quality. Add on that they test the lifters to a 10million cycle test and they are perfect, and guy typically see 400-800rpm gains with them, i'll try them. Hopefully I will test a set of them to 8,000rpm and see what they really can do since I've had the old Comp R's to 7,500rpm and they work great.

Note: New Product, Do Homework, Find a Good Source on them and get a set in and try them out and then beat on them.

So far I'm impressed with them and if I get them to go to the RPM that I want then I will be sold forever.

Bret

Yep, like me and powder rods other folks need to do more testing with them.Still don't trust um.
The Schubeck lifters were on the blind side until they arrived and the workmanship is there and the material research,so I am sold,if they only stand the test of time and can take a licking and keep on ticking.

powder rods...Still don't trust um.


Question: Why not?

Is it the technology itself or the manufacturer?


I would have thought that the factory LT1 is about as good a demonstration of the sound basis of the technology as you could have.

In terms of the manufacturer...
Well, a good rep doesn't automatically equal a good product... true. But I find myself wondering if you know about some failures in the field that I have not heard about.

Lame,

Larry has a few decades on you, that's most of it. I've talked with him about them on here, he has seen the numbers just wants to see them walk the walk is my guess.

BTW I think that the LS7 Ti rods are powder Ti.

Bret

Lame,

Larry has a few decades on you, that's most of it. I've talked with him about them on here, he has seen the numbers just wants to see them walk the walk is my guess.

BTW I think that the LS7 Ti rods are powder Ti.

Bret


I have seen 2 LS-1 H/C cars with the rods hung out the side of the block. They were turning more RPM's than stock and the rods elongated at the rod end causing a spun brg then a rod failure then lot's of money.
They were stock bottom ends but they had powder rods but not Howard so there has to be a lot more proof for me to put them in a customer's 10-15,000 dollar engine.
This isn't hearsay,I put my good eye on them.

WRT the Howard's rod or any other "new" part, I am just plain conservative as I don't have to many spare motors laying around the shop! If I were a pro and looking for an "edge" I would be more inclined to experiment. But everyone involved, including a customer, would certainly know that we were experimenting. If I know something works, I tend to stick with it. Here are the brands for major RA assembly parts that I "know" work form experience vs. "recycled" knowledge.

Steel Rods: Carillo, Oliver, Crower, Lunati, GM, SCAT
Cranks: Callies, Lunati, HTC, Moldex, GM, SCAT
Pistons: Ross, SRP/JE, Diamond, Wiseco, GM

I am sure there are many others as good or better, but I stick with what I know until someone I respect A LOT provides new info.

Rich

Lame,

Larry has a few decades on you, that's most of it. I've talked with him about them on here, he has seen the numbers just wants to see them walk the walk is my guess.

Bret


Bret -

He'd have to be pretty damn old to have a few decades on me.



Besides... it's a legitimate question and it was asked in a sincere manner.


The LT1 used PM rods from the factory, and they SEEM to be holding up pretty damn well, even after a LOT of abuse. The empirical evidence suggests that even with well over 100,000 miles, and in applications in excess of 400fwhp, they continue to hold up. There are also a lot of people spraying 100-150 hp on stock LT1 engines, some as much as 200; and the pistons seem to give out first.


So as far as I'M concerned, with the information that I have AT THIS TIME, the basic technology of PM rods is sound.


So if someone knows something that contradicts that, I'd very much like to know.

Not because I'm trying to start a p*ssing contest...


It's because if I have incomplete information I'd like to find out BEFORE I build an engine with PM rods.

As it stands right now, the VERY NEXT engine I'm building is getting a set of 3.48" x 6.00" Howard's PM rods and I'll be expecting them to hold up under a 750+ fwhp load.

UNLESS of course, someone has some info for me that indicates that I shouldn't do that.

Bret -

He'd have to be pretty damn old to have a few decades on me.



Besides... it's a legitimate question and it was asked in a sincere manner.


The LT1 used PM rods from the factory, and they SEEM to be holding up pretty damn well, even after a LOT of abuse. The empirical evidence suggests that even with well over 100,000 miles, and in applications in excess of 400fwhp, they continue to hold up. There are also a lot of people spraying 100-150 hp on stock LT1 engines, some as much as 200; and the pistons seem to give out first.


So as far as I'M concerned, with the information that I have AT THIS TIME, the basic technology of PM rods is sound.


So if someone knows something that contradicts that, I'd very much like to know.

Not because I'm trying to start a p*ssing contest...


It's because if I have incomplete information I'd like to find out BEFORE I build an engine with PM rods.

As it stands right now, the VERY NEXT engine I'm building is getting a set of 3.48" x 6.00" Howard's PM rods and I'll be expecting them to hold up under a 750+ fwhp load.

UNLESS of course, someone has some info for me that indicates that I shouldn't do that.


Yep,I'm pretty old.
Read my post above and I have found my evidence in what I see.
The tech may be sound,but what about the rod's.
Ya can use what ya like,if they work, fine,if they don't break out your checkbook.
Call and ask one of the main engine builder's like John Kaase,Joe Sherman,Ron Shaver,Rehr-Morrison,people like that and see how many they are using.

Larry -

Can you tell me anything more about the two failures you saw?



BTW, I shouldn't have to say this, but this board has gotten a little weird lately.

That question shouldn't be taken as being a "challenge". It should be taken strictly at face value for what it is; a request for more information.

Larry -

Can you tell me anything more about the two failures you saw?



BTW, I shouldn't have to say this, but this board has gotten a little weird lately.

That question shouldn't be taken as being a "challenge". It should be taken strictly at face value for what it is; a request for more information.

It appeared that the big end of the rod elongated,letting it spin the brg,then came apart. The rod didn't break the bolts broke when it momentarily locked up. The cap and rod on the big end looked like a "U" and had stress fractures all around the big end. So the rod stretched out of shape before it let go during the pass at about 6500.
I have seen 2 like that and they both let go during a run and no problems before hand. Just too many RPM's for the material IMO.Both cars had H/C less than a year and both were in the 60,000 mile range.The rest of the engine was fine.No evidence of an oiling problem.
Didn't take anything as a challenge just trying to prevent a possible mistake and the loss of a good motor.

Sounds more like a rod bolt problem and maybe a design issue over a manufacturing process issue. Anytime the big end elongates is because of the rod bolts, or the design doesn't have enough meat in the rods to do that. The Powder Metal process is a lot like the process of forging. I know that Lingenfelter does stock cube LS1 builds that can go to 7500rpm with ARP rod bolts in the stock LS1 PM rods. Their stuff is always bullet proof.

It's not to much RPM for the PM rods, but too much RPM for the stock rod bolts. Throw a ARP Pro Series replacement bolt in those same PM rods and they are not going to break at those RPM levels or 1,000rpm higher.

With all that being said.... just because something is PM doesn't mean it's bad. The Howards rods are a better grade steel than the GM PM rods and they are a different design. Hell they are making race car engine parts out of PM now that you wouldn't believe.... I bet most of us see these guys race every weekend as well. It's not rods either because the volume that you need to make PM parts in has to be huge for their to be a cost benefit. Low volume stuff like a NASCAR shop wouldn't have the need for that much volume.

Bret

The cap and rod on the big end looked like a "U" and had stress fractures all around the big end.


Now that's interesting.

Any insight on which may have come first? The stress fractures or the distortion I mean.


BTW, whose PM rods were they? IIRC, you said they weren't Howards, but I got the impression that they weren't GM either.

Sounds more like a rod bolt problem and maybe a design issue over a manufacturing process issue. Anytime the big end elongates is because of the rod bolts, or the design doesn't have enough meat in the rods to do that. The Powder Metal process is a lot like the process of forging. I know that Lingenfelter does stock cube LS1 builds that can go to 7500rpm with ARP rod bolts in the stock LS1 PM rods. Their stuff is always bullet proof.

It's not to much RPM for the PM rods, but too much RPM for the stock rod bolts. Throw a ARP Pro Series replacement bolt in those same PM rods and they are not going to break at those RPM levels or 1,000rpm higher.

With all that being said.... just because something is PM doesn't mean it's bad. The Howards rods are a better grade steel than the GM PM rods and they are a different design. Hell they are making race car engine parts out of PM now that you wouldn't believe.... I bet most of us see these guys race every weekend as well. It's not rods either because the volume that you need to make PM parts in has to be huge for their to be a cost benefit. Low volume stuff like a NASCAR shop wouldn't have the need for that much volume.

Bret


Bret,
The bolts hung on long enough to "u" shape the hole,so I don't know.
I didn't think ya could resize the factory PM rods,and have always done so when replacing the bolts.
Didn't say they were good or bad,just I will take a lot more convincing than I've seen so far.
Next they will build crank's out of carbon fiber or some other space age material.

Now that's interesting.

Any insight on which may have come first? The stress fractures or the distortion I mean.


BTW, whose PM rods were they? IIRC, you said they weren't Howards, but I got the impression that they weren't GM either.

The General's. They were stock short blocks.

In my experiance, the PM rods are great technology from the automakers perspective, they are cheap to manufacture and provide great strength and durability at the power level they are designed to work at. In design, a PM rod is "stronger" than a comparable forged rod (although PM is a forging process too) The uniform grain structure, and ability to "mold" the shape of the rod allows rods to be very strong for their size and weight.

They do not like to be subjected to cylinder pressure spikes, tuning of the vehicle is very important to the life of the rod because they tend to shatter or break, they do not have the flexability that a typical forging has, they are more prone to RPM related failure than HP related.

For example I have been involved in sled pulling for while now and in 2001 the ford diesels started being equiped with PM rods from the factory. Go above 400rwhp and they toss rods out the block, I have even seen many stock trucks that had an 80hp chip that was not programmed with CP equipment throw rods because of the pressure spikes. Now our pull truck is at 650rwhp with stock forged rods that have been polished and we have had no rod failures.

As for the Howards, I have not tried them, the technology is sound and they should be a good piece, I am just a bit scared of them because of all the failures I have seen, I will wait a while and see what happens...plus I can buy manley tour-lite rods for cheap and they weigh much less.

The General's. They were stock short blocks.


Oh, OK. Thanks.




Machinst -
When you talk about pressure spikes, are you mainly referring to detonation issues?

Well,that is 2 people that have seen them fail ,in a performance application.

I

A good example lately....

Morel Hyd Roller lifters. I've had a customer talk about them like they were a playmate he was dating, basically WAY TOO MUCH. So I did some homework, read some stuff from Chris Straub of Stef's who is a close friend of Mr Morel. Anyways after I had a set of Comp R's in the shop that were not up to snuff for OldSStroker and I, they got sent back and the Morels came in. I have to say that it's night and day in the machine work quality. Add on that they test the lifters to a 10million cycle test and they are perfect, and guy typically see 400-800rpm gains with them, i'll try them. Hopefully I will test a set of them to 8,000rpm and see what they really can do since I've had the old Comp R's to 7,500rpm and they work great.

Note: New Product, Do Homework, Find a Good Source on them and get a set in and try them out and then beat on them.

So far I'm impressed with them and if I get them to go to the RPM that I want then I will be sold forever.

Bret

In the FWIW club........... We were having problems getting past the 450 rwhp mark with my new 398ci combination and were at a bit of a loss. After replacing the TB with a monoblade and trying three sets of injectors, we finally got the bright idea of rechecking the Comp R's lash setting.

The car made 465.77 rwhp today being a red alert polution day and the only change was zero lashing the comp lifters and a bit of tuning. The car still looks like it having mild lifter issues from 6000-7000 and hits the wall around 7300-7400 rpm.

Based upon the feedback from this list..... our own trial and error...... I'm ordering a cam with a tad more duration and the Morel lifters Monday.

Thanks for the information guys. Also.... I have the Howards rods and so far so good. Wonder where I heard about them??

In the FWIW club........... We were having problems getting past the 450 rwhp mark with my new 398ci combination and were at a bit of a loss. After replacing the TB with a monoblade and trying three sets of injectors, we finally got the bright idea of rechecking the Comp R's lash setting.

The car made 465.77 rwhp today being a red alert polution day and the only change was zero lashing the comp lifters and a bit of tuning. The car still looks like it having mild lifter issues from 6000-7000 and hits the wall around 7300-7400 rpm.

Based upon the feedback from this list..... our own trial and error...... I'm ordering a cam with a tad more duration and the Morel lifters Monday.

Thanks for the information guys. Also.... I have the Howards rods and so far so good. Wonder where I heard about them??


Denny could ya post up after a period of time and let me know if they are still making HP.I would appreciate it.
How much mallory did they use to balance it?

Not against them,just don't trust them.

In the FWIW club........... We were having problems getting past the 450 rwhp mark with my new 398ci combination and were at a bit of a loss. After replacing the TB with a monoblade and trying three sets of injectors, we finally got the bright idea of rechecking the Comp R's lash setting.

The car made 465.77 rwhp today being a red alert polution day and the only change was zero lashing the comp lifters and a bit of tuning. The car still looks like it having mild lifter issues from 6000-7000 and hits the wall around 7300-7400 rpm.

Yeah those things don't need hardly any preload on them, where you will find .030 to work about the best on the Morels.

Based upon the feedback from this list..... our own trial and error...... I'm ordering a cam with a tad more duration and the Morel lifters Monday.

I would stop throwing duration at it and just start adding overlap.... you have almost 400 cubes under that thing and more than enough lobe area already, but hardly enough overlap. BTW overlap doesn't make a car undriveable... the combination of too much duration and overlap makes cars horrible to drive.

Thanks for the information guys. Also.... I have the Howards rods and so far so good. Wonder where I heard about them??

Good to see you are running them... they should hold up for a long time.

Bret

Oh, OK. Thanks.




Machinst -
When you talk about pressure spikes, are you mainly referring to detonation issues?

It can be caused by detonation, timing, poor fuel atomization, inefficient flame propagation, etc.

Well you are saying quite a few real engine shops are using junk then including ours and we have never had a single failure! I never trust people that say crap like this again until they say something that proves they know something pure and simple. Guys like this make our entire industry look bad.

You can get a Sonny Bryant or a Windberg too and have a great crank or you can get the Eagle or SCAT and get some heads, intakes and valvetrain and make some real power. I like american stuff too if you're going to do an expensive high rpm endurance engine etc. but it's basically wasted money when you are trading getting real power producing items for a crankshaft that is tremendous overkill since NONE of these will break on what we are talking about.

It's funny how we have used "junk" Eagle cranks that make over 1200 RHWP and run 8.0s in 3300 pound cars. We also have some hydraulic roller pump gas engines that make almost 600 RWHP and also put serious street miles on their cars and yet they don't have any issues either with Eagle cranks? Tell me, what are we doing wrong?

Eagle is junk pure and simple, never seen one out of the box that mic'd out to spec. Only time I ever use them is on a customer supplied deal, and even so I usually convince them to send it back.

Compared to similarly priced cranks out there, yes they are junk...I have measured taper across the journals, out of spec journals, and some that were bent from the factory...hence I do not use them.

I have not had these problems with callies or scat cranks.

I'm not saying YOU are doing anything wrong...just that they do not meet MY standards and so I use higher quality parts...

In the FWIW club........... We were having problems getting past the 450 rwhp mark with my new 398ci combination and were at a bit of a loss. After replacing the TB with a monoblade and trying three sets of injectors, we finally got the bright idea of rechecking the Comp R's lash setting.

The car made 465.77 rwhp today being a red alert polution day and the only change was zero lashing the comp lifters and a bit of tuning. The car still looks like it having mild lifter issues from 6000-7000 and hits the wall around 7300-7400 rpm.

Based upon the feedback from this list..... our own trial and error...... I'm ordering a cam with a tad more duration and the Morel lifters Monday.

Thanks for the information guys. Also.... I have the Howards rods and so far so good. Wonder where I heard about them??

I use and sell the Morels as well but have not seen any large rpm gains with them so far. They are of much higher quality than any other hydraulic lifter however and have a larger wheel and axle. They are sure pricier as well.

I'm not saying that they will break at say 500-600hp...Although I have seen a couple snout failures... I just put a scat in a 489 BBC that makes 600hp in a daily driver. And I like the GM cranks too, we use them in our pump gas 750hp 502's.

Compared to similarly priced cranks out there, yes they are junk...I have measured taper across the journals, out of spec journals, and some that were bent from the factory...hence I do not use them.

I have not had these problems with callies or scat cranks.

I'm not saying YOU are doing anything wrong...just that they do not meet MY standards and so I use higher quality parts...

Well we sure as hell build a lot of engines to not have any problems so far! I can't speak for the Eagles of the past but in the last few years I guess quality has come a long way. I use a lot of Callies too but I cannot say that they are tremendously better and not because there is anything wrong with them but there's never anything wrong with the Eagles either.

We did have some Eagle LS1s with slightly large pilot bearing bores but they had a pilot bearing at Eagle to fix this and they were still inside of GM spec. Of course some of the Lunati and Callies first LS1 deals had reluctors falling off and they cost three times as much but they are nicer pieces and lighter. We have sure seen some problems with the Lunati Pro Billet rods and NONE with the Eagles again even though they are less than half the price! I would say it just depends on the particular part. Lunati is supposed to be redesigning that rod now though?

Ford and others have done testing on rods for the Cobra engine that involved extreme cycling and very large loads since they knew the SC engines would be abused and the rod test results between many different brands including Eagle were truly shocking to many in the industry. I'm not saying that 10,000 rpm wouldn't have sorted stuff out more but lets just say the Eagle had some pretty pricey neighbors at the end!

I'm not saying that they will break at say 500-600hp...Although I have seen a couple snout failures... I just put a scat in a 489 BBC that makes 600hp in a daily driver. And I like the GM cranks too, we use them in our pump gas 750hp 502's.

I've seen snout failures on ALL SBC cranks. that why every serious SBC including even NA endurance engines use a BBC snout. SC apps are just looking to fail with an SBC snout and any really high loads. The problem is that the guys using Eagle and SCAT parts are also the ones doing all this crazy crap at least in my own experience!

I do get all my cranks etc. as freight on pallets so at least they don't get beat up in a weak box. I DO have a problem with Eagle there and I wish they boxed their cranks with the bigger heavier boxes and insta-pak foam like Callies does. I am considering reboxing them from now on like that whenever I send them out as a single part.

Denny could ya post up after a period of time and let me know if they are still making HP.I would appreciate it.
How much mallory did they use to balance it?

Not against them,just don't trust them.

I'll e-mail ya the balance sheet.

Back to the powder metal rods....

I'm still on the fence... but might be coming down.
I think it's important to remember that factory LT1/LS1 PM rods were not designed with 600hp in mind, so I don't feel that it's fair to compare them to the Howards rod. I do know that a local dirt track race engine builder is using them (Howards) in a "no forged rod" class (don't know the official class name) and they were #2 in that class with no rod failures last time I checked. Dirt engines turn alot of rpm and are notoriously hard on parts. Will be interesting to see how well they perform in these types of racing classes. I don't doubt that the number of users will increase as time goes on.

The failure LR mentioned is interesting, but it wasn't due to the connecting rod material. The fact that the rod deformed on the big end counters the low ductility I imagined of a PM rod.
Many of the other PM "rod failures" I've read about don't seem to be material related either, yet the rod always seems to get the blame. Then again, there is a lot of this that goes on in the hi-po world. Yes, I've seen pictures of some legitimate failures, but they were always in engines that were big on power/abuse and should have been using a high quality forging in the first place.

As I read more about powder metal processing and the testing many aerospace companies are investing in I come to realize that PM is still evolving as a high-strength manufacturing technique. In one article I remember reading comparing forged titanium components to powder metal, a Lockheed engineer was quoted saying that the new powder metal components were, "As strong if not stronger than the original forgings". The technology is fascinating and it's still very much on the advance. I think we will be seeing more high-strength powder metal components engineered to perform specific duties that forgings use to do at a reduced cost.

-Mindgame

Back to the powder metal rods....

I do know that a local dirt track race engine builder is using them (Howards) in a "no forged rod" class (don't know the official class name) and they were #2 in that class with no rod failures last time I checked. Dirt engines turn alot of rpm and are notoriously hard on parts. Will be interesting to see how well they perform in these types of racing classes. I don't doubt that the number of users will increase as time goes on.


-Mindgame

Back to powder metal rods and cranks......

My information for most things comes second hand and I seek out the old hard core racers to get their input. I went with a Eagle crank and the Howards rods because the local dirt track crowd was very high on both. As mentioned, these guys turn 8000 rpm plus for extended periods of time and if that crowd is big on um...... they must work. Cause if anyone can tear one up, they can.

Course then they seem to be able to fix um with bubble gum, silicone and rubber bands for the next round.

In my profession (medicine) I never want to be either the first or the last to embrace a new therapy. Ditto with my hobby.

Rich

I agree with that

Back to the powder metal rods....

I'm still on the fence... but might be coming down.
I think it's important to remember that factory LT1/LS1 PM rods were not designed with 600hp in mind, so I don't feel that it's fair to compare them to the Howards rod. I do know that a local dirt track race engine builder is using them (Howards) in a "no forged rod" class (don't know the official class name) and they were #2 in that class with no rod failures last time I checked. Dirt engines turn alot of rpm and are notoriously hard on parts. Will be interesting to see how well they perform in these types of racing classes. I don't doubt that the number of users will increase as time goes on.

The failure LR mentioned is interesting, but it wasn't due to the connecting rod material. The fact that the rod deformed on the big end counters the low ductility I imagined of a PM rod.
Many of the other PM "rod failures" I've read about don't seem to be material related either, yet the rod always seems to get the blame. Then again, there is a lot of this that goes on in the hi-po world. Yes, I've seen pictures of some legitimate failures, but they were always in engines that were big on power/abuse and should have been using a high quality forging in the first place.

As I read more about powder metal processing and the testing many aerospace companies are investing in I come to realize that PM is still evolving as a high-strength manufacturing technique. In one article I remember reading comparing forged titanium components to powder metal, a Lockheed engineer was quoted saying that the new powder metal components were, "As strong if not stronger than the original forgings". The technology is fascinating and it's still very much on the advance. I think we will be seeing more high-strength powder metal components engineered to perform specific duties that forgings use to do at a reduced cost.

-Mindgame


MG, What ya mean when ya say a rod hanging out the side of a block isn't rod related. It wasn't the crank that was hanging out the side.

When they get the selection of the right powder's, the amount's of the each powder,the perfect mixing technique,and the right methods and pressures, down to a science(which probably won't be in my lifetime) I may try some.

In my profession (medicine) I never want to be either the first or the last to embrace a new therapy. Ditto with my hobby.

Rich


What area of medicine?

The snout failures that I have seen were in mild 383 builds that made 275rwhp in TBI 4x4 trucks, so nothing too extreame there.

I've only tried Lunati rods a couple times because they were customer supplied, I stick to manley because they are proven and I have great WD pricing with them. Manley is who ford decided to use in their cobra's since '03.

Another PM issue...the 4.6/5.4L fords were having trouble in high HP applications of shattering the oil pump gear which is PM, so we use a billet gear instead.

What area of medicine?

I am the director of an emergency mdicine residency program and besides the MD degree have a PhD in Pharmacology. My clinical practice is now entirely in the ED. I used to cover the ICU as well when I was in a smaller hospital.

The exception to not wanting the be the first to use a new therapy is when treating a serious disease for which there is currently no good treatment. In that case, there isn't much to lose. But if there is already a good way to do something, I am pretty reluctant to change that. Ditto for a new technology when it comes to engines or other systems in the car. It's good to be open to new ideas, but you need to look at risks vs. benefits and take into account your own degree of risk tolerance vs. risk aversion.

I am pretty "conservative" by nature and am more averse to risk than some. When it comes to patients (or with motors, the analogy would be customers) you need to involve them in this kind of decision making. Kind of like this: "This is the usual way of approaching your probelm (= reaching your goals in building this motor). Here is the expected benefit and risks (= what it will cost, how close it will come to meeting your expectations/goals). We can try this other way (use this other part) if you want. Here's what I know about it and what the downside is (same discussion). What do you think?" And go from there with a dialogue until you reach an agreement. This "buy in" is ethical and may lead to a more staisifed, or least a less surprised/angry patient (customer).

Rich

I am pretty "conservative" by nature and am more averse to risk than some. When it comes to patients (or with motors, the analogy would be customers) you need to involve them in this kind of decision making. Kind of like this: "This is the usual way of approaching your probelm (= reaching your goals in building this motor). Here is the expected benefit and risks (= what it will cost, how close it will come to meeting your expectations/goals). We can try this other way (use this other part) if you want. Here's what I know about it and what the downside is (same discussion). What do you think?" And go from there with a dialogue until you reach an agreement. This "buy in" is ethical and may lead to a more staisifed, or least a less surprised/angry patient (customer).


Dam good way to go about it.

Not making a case one way or the other. I just learned a long time ago that you should always try to look at things from different angles to gain the best perspective. I can argue both sides of anything equally well. Try finding many people who can do that. :)

And I am in agreement with those saying to use what you know works. That's what I do and I wouldn't recommend anything to anyone that I wouldn't/haven't done myself.

However this is a technical forum and in the spirit of that I think we should at least talk about things in that context rather than throwing out parts lists. Makes Jack a dull boy.

MG, What ya mean when ya say a rod hanging out the side of a block isn't rod related. It wasn't the crank that was hanging out the side.

When they get the selection of the right powder's, the amount's of the each powder,the perfect mixing technique,and the right methods and pressures, down to a science(which probably won't be in my lifetime) I may try some.

Larry,

This will probably be a waste of my time but I will go ahead and apologize right up front... I'm not going to just take it on your word and you'll just have to not take it personal.
You're not the only guy on this board who's been around the block a few times LR. Matter of fact, I remember seeing windowed blocks way before PM rods were even a twinkle in someone's eye. I'm also intelligent enough to know that, as a bystander to any failure, I hardly know enough about the situation to blame any one component. Seen crankshaft snouts broken where the blame immediately went to the crankshaft only to find that the dampener was no good and/or the press tolerance was not adhered to. Seen numerous rod bolt failures where the rod took the blame. Seen numerous ring and pinion failures blamed on the "brand" without even considering the fact that they may not have been setup properly. Hey, everyone's an armchair failure analysis expert these days. Just not me.

MachinistOne,
Do you not find it uncanny that you are seeing all these "snout" problems yet Erik is not? Any comments you want to make about that?

-Mindgame

Very good post as it points out something I have seen here (and everywhere else on the 'net). A lot of "knowledge" gets recycled. And it's well known how with enough repetition of an opinion, people will believe it and it will become "fact". The Howard's PM rods are a case in point. Bret, who has true credentials and presents his view point in a coherent manner was the first one to mention them here. He may be the only person here who has actually used them! But this positive opinoin of the rods started to circulate and now there are a bunch of "experts", most of whom have likely never even seen one of the Howard's rods, let alone used them in an engine build, who sing their praises.

There are numerous other examples. Much of the info you see people post about DCR, cam specs, engine components, etc. are all recycled opinions that started with just a few people. After enough time passes, a whole variety of "experts" pop up who really don't know anything about the subject but post with great authroty and gravitas. Often, the initial valuable kernel of fact has by then been either distorted or missapplied to the point where it has become mis-information. I don't have a huge knowledge of a lot of this stuff, but I have been around a while and have occassionally posted some "pearl" that I have gleaned. It's kind of amusing to see it come back in a thread a year or two later in a post by a 20yo "expert" who is working on his first car. Often in a context that makes no sense.

I wonder if there are any Internet scholars who have looked at individual message boards and traced out the path information follows? Do a search on "Howard's rods" and it's fascinating to see how Bret's valuable opinion (and it probably is absolutely valid) has become dogma "here". It's so persuasive that I am thinking of trying a set!

Rich
ive been away for a while and didnt see where this thread went.Rich is much more eloquent than i am and expanded on the points i was trying to make.thanks!

i would also like to clarify i was NOT knocking Mahle's stuff at all, ive never used it--they are new to our crowd and I was just wondering if their stuff for our motors was as good as another vendors that have been doing pistons for our apps. for years and have a larger R&D base to work with.thats all.

Bret,
The bolts hung on long enough to "u" shape the hole,so I don't know.
I didn't think ya could resize the factory PM rods,and have always done so when replacing the bolts.
Didn't say they were good or bad,just I will take a lot more convincing than I've seen so far.
Next they will build crank's out of carbon fiber or some other space age material.
i actually have an unobtanium crank for sale right now for SBC 3.500 stroke[i upgraded to carbon fiber]
price:if ya have to ask....... :D

Mahle designed it's Pro Pack line to compete with SRP head to head.... and I think it's a better deal by far.

I've talked to a few guys about them before I ran them and they all saw power gains with them over what they were running.

That and they measure out awesome.

Bret

Not making a case one way or the other. I just learned a long time ago that you should always try to look at things from different angles to gain the best perspective. I can argue both sides of anything equally well. Try finding many people who can do that. :)

And I am in agreement with those saying to use what you know works. That's what I do and I wouldn't recommend anything to anyone that I wouldn't/haven't done myself.

However this is a technical forum and in the spirit of that I think we should at least talk about things in that context rather than throwing out parts lists. Makes Jack a dull boy.



Larry,

This will probably be a waste of my time but I will go ahead and apologize right up front... I'm not going to just take it on your word and you'll just have to not take it personal.
You're not the only guy on this board who's been around the block a few times LR. Matter of fact, I remember seeing windowed blocks way before PM rods were even a twinkle in someone's eye. I'm also intelligent enough to know that, as a bystander to any failure, I hardly know enough about the situation to blame any one component. Seen crankshaft snouts broken where the blame immediately went to the crankshaft only to find that the dampener was no good and/or the press tolerance was not adhered to. Seen numerous rod bolt failures where the rod took the blame. Seen numerous ring and pinion failures blamed on the "brand" without even considering the fact that they may not have been setup properly. Hey, everyone's an armchair failure analysis expert these days. Just not me.

MachinistOne,
Do you not find it uncanny that you are seeing all these "snout" problems yet Erik is not? Any comments you want to make about that?

-Mindgame

MG,
When they get the selection of the right powder's, the amount's of the each powder,the perfect mixing technique,and the right methods and pressures, down to a science(which probably won't be in my lifetime) I may try some.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
That's all I am saying.
I've seen some block with holes in them too.
Some were from experimenting with stuff the owner wasn't sure worked.I don't want to be in that class.Can't afford it.

i actually have an unobtanium crank for sale right now for SBC 3.500 stroke[i upgraded to carbon fiber]
price:if ya have to ask....... :D

Does it look like the driveshafts, like Shreadded Wheat after a few passes.

Mahle designed it's Pro Pack line to compete with SRP head to head.... and I think it's a better deal by far.

I've talked to a few guys about them before I ran them and they all saw power gains with them over what they were running.

That and they measure out awesome.

Bret

this is EXACTLY what i was looking for.people who have run them's opinion on how they mic'd/ ran.thanks man.

--as this applies to the brand warfare going on here:
am i going to yank my SRP's for some,no.
will i preach to everyone how good they are even though ive never touched a set,no.
will i get mad at bret for not running brand X instead, no.
will i consider and research them for the next motor in that range due to favorable opinions from those who have, yes.
if asked would i show someone the above opinion and let them make their own judgements, yes.

ask for everyone's input then sort out what you want from it,and let everyone else take what they want from it [this is not adressed to anyone in particular BTW]thats why there are good conversations on this forum.

Does it look like the driveshafts, like Shreadded Wheat after a few passes.
id tell you but you have to fill out the security clearance waiver i pm'ed you and blood sample first. i will hint that i picked up more than 2000% power.
seriously though, i couldnt imagine a material as brittle as CF ever being able to flex like a crank.
read somewhere once top fuel billets are twisting something over 45 degrees torsionally on a pass :eek:

MachinistOne,
Do you not find it uncanny that you are seeing all these "snout" problems yet Erik is not? Any comments you want to make about that?

-Mindgame

I didn't say that they were in engines that I built ;) just that the snout failure I have seen were 3 eagle cranks and 1 SCAT crank. The scat crank was in an engine we built, and the guy plays in the sand every weekend with NOS, looking at the snout, there was a small inclusion which probly started the stress crank and failure...these were all cast cranks by the way, that's something important I left out....

ask for everyone's input then sort out what you want from it People (not on this forum) get offended when I do that.
"Why didn't you take my advice?!" I didn't take anyone's advice because everyone said something different. Therefore I made my own decision.

People (not on this forum) get offended when I do that.
"Why didn't you take my advice?!" I didn't take anyone's advice because everyone said something different. Therefore I made my own decision.


The trick is sorting out the good advice from the not-so-good, but that's true in almost everything in life. At some point many of us realize that we don't know everything (that usuually occurs somewhere after 50 years of age :) ), and heed someone else's advice. Hopefully that person has the training/experience/smarts to be giving good advice. Sometimes it helps if we are paying for the advice/service. "Free advice is worth what you paid for it."

I heard Lunati Cranks have a better balance then Callies Dragonslayer's..

Why would balance be that important? I have all my stuff balanced to the specific parts being used

People (not on this forum) get offended when I do that.



It happens on this forum too.

Not naming names, but not long ago I asked a question in a different section, got answers that didn't actually fit the question I asked, and when I asked for clarification, someone got bent out of shape that I was doubting his experience.

Hello...? It's not your EXPERIENCE that's the issue, it's your ANSWER.


It's amazing how many times people seem to be answering questions that aren't the ones you asked.

Hell, I'm sure I'm guilty of it too, although I do try not to get bent about my own goof-up. :D

I am the director of an emergency mdicine residency program and besides the MD degree have a PhD in Pharmacology. My clinical practice is now entirely in the ED. I used to cover the ICU as well when I was in a smaller hospital.

The exception to not wanting the be the first to use a new therapy is when treating a serious disease for which there is currently no good treatment. In that case, there isn't much to lose. But if there is already a good way to do something, I am pretty reluctant to change that. Ditto for a new technology when it comes to engines or other systems in the car. It's good to be open to new ideas, but you need to look at risks vs. benefits and take into account your own degree of risk tolerance vs. risk aversion.

I am pretty "conservative" by nature and am more averse to risk than some. When it comes to patients (or with motors, the analogy would be customers) you need to involve them in this kind of decision making. Kind of like this: "This is the usual way of approaching your probelm (= reaching your goals in building this motor). Here is the expected benefit and risks (= what it will cost, how close it will come to meeting your expectations/goals). We can try this other way (use this other part) if you want. Here's what I know about it and what the downside is (same discussion). What do you think?" And go from there with a dialogue until you reach an agreement. This "buy in" is ethical and may lead to a more staisifed, or least a less surprised/angry patient (customer).

Rich
Rich

I’m also in the medical profession also only I’m on the other side doing business development and product development. Basically one of those damn reps whom scrubs in only on a little higher level.

Even served as an adviser to the American Society of Cataract and Refractive Surgeons overseeing industry standards and setting up a universal standard to measure energy as it’s used in the eye during cataract surgery.

There certainly is a pucker factor when bringing new items into surgery and the initial stress level for sure gets your attention. I’ve told myself many times over… why are you getting up so early putting myself through all this stress. As you know, it’s a very bad day when things don’t go right in surgery.

Being it’s a car and not a person and that new is how I make my living, I don’t have any problems at all trying new things. The “above all…… do no harm” only applies to your pocket book if it doesn’t work on your hobby car.

Rich

I’m also in the medical profession also only I’m on the other side doing business development and product development. Basically one of those damn reps whom scrubs in only on a little higher level.

Even served as an adviser to the American Society of Cataract and Refractive Surgeons overseeing industry standards and setting up a universal standard to measure energy as it’s used in the eye during cataract surgery.

There certainly is a pucker factor when bringing new items into surgery and the initial stress level for sure gets your attention. I’ve told myself many times over… why are you getting up so early putting myself through all this stress. As you know, it’s a very bad day when things don’t go right in surgery.

Being it’s a car and not a person and that new is how I make my living, I don’t have any problems at all trying new things. The “above all…… do no harm” only applies to your pocket book if it doesn’t work on your hobby car.


Denny,
Try driving with oil all over your tires at 130+ "IF" a rod comes loose,It gets real stressful and could hurt somebody meaning yourself.
Of cource it can happen with steel rods too but not as likely if it's built right.

Just a thought.

Denny,
Try driving with oil all over your tires at 130+ "IF" a rod comes loose,It gets real stressful and could hurt somebody meaning yourself.
Of cource it can happen with steel rods too but not as likely if it's built right.

Just a thought.


The only thing worse than driving over someone else's oil is driving over your own. Of course, stepping on, errr..I mean driving over, your own crank also hurts ;)

Rich

The only thing worse than driving over someone else's oil is driving over your own. Of course, stepping on, errr..I mean driving over, your own crank also hurts ;)

Rich


Looks like we have a lot of things in common.

Anyone with experiences with Ohio Cranks? www.ohiocrank.com

Anyone with experiences with Ohio Cranks? www.ohiocrank.com

No one...?

-Dustin-

They are your basic Chinese import. We used one to rebuild the 454 in my buddys motorhome. It has been ok for that purpose. You don't get something for nothing, so don't expect a superior quality piece. One of their cranks will likely be functional in a mild application. If you want to use it in a hi-po setup, check it carefully. Even a high-priced domestic piece should be checked, but be extra careful with import stuff.

Rich

A friend of mine thinks Chinese cranks are made of better steel than US-made cranks because of steel trading. Even if lots of good US steel is going to China and we're getting lots of Chinese steel here, it still seems to me that reputable US crank manufacturers would be sure to use real, high quality US steel in their cranks, and the Chinese crankers would probably be inclined to use the cheapest steel possible, which I doubt is the US steel they import.
Does anyone here have the straight dope on the steel situation?

How about the Lunati Sledgehammer, comments?

I'm just looking for a good reason to spend the extra buck on a Callies, Compstar, Lunati vs a Scat crank.

-Dustin-

From what I read many of the top name cranks are now made in Japan.

Ok... so what are the top 3-4 cranks do the pro's on this forum would use. We know, you know.:D

From what I read many of the top name cranks are now made in Japan.

Yep - I consider that a good thing.

Yep - I consider that a good thing.

:shrug:

-Dustin-

:shrug:
-Dustin-

Made in the USA doesn't assure quality...

Made somewhere else doesn't mean junk.

The Japanese are known for quality forgings.

1. Chinese cranks are not made of American steel.
2. All of the remaining American brands of aftermarket cranks ARE of high quality.
3. I have also heard that some of the "American" manufacturers are using Japanese raw forgings. While it may be true, I doubt it because it would not save money and would be a PR disaster if the truth got out. Quality Japanese forgings would be just as expensive as quality American pieces.
4. Chinese parts are not "automatically" inferior. But in reality, the available parts ARE inferior. This was once true of Japanese parts.
5. Politics aside, do not think that a Chinese "4340 forged crankshaft" is at all equivalent to a Callies, Moldex, HTC, Lunati, etc. "4340 forged crankshaft" just because it has the same generic description. It is not.
6. Politics included, it astounds me how willing people are to fork $$$ over to the Chinese. They (the Chinese government) has bought off the Dems with campaign contributions and the Repubs bought themselves off with the huge profits they make selling Chinese junk to Americans. China is more of threat to the US than Al Queda ever was.

Rich

Lunati 4340 crank and Pro Mod rods here. As far as the Chinese stuff goes, you can feed your pets the poisoned food, drive on their faulty tires, give your children the lead laced toys and we're still discussing whether or not their steel/cranks are high quality? Just wait till they start selling CARS here.

I'm using a Callies Magnum crank with Lunati Pro Billet rods for my current engine build. I'm sure that's gonna be a rock solid combo of parts.

These are reasons I have a slight problem buying oversea's cranks. My parents jobs are hanging by a thread due to the outsourcing crap, two of the hardest working people I have ever known may lose their jobs @ 50 because everyone buys cheap junk. They have always bought US made cars, GM or Ford mostly, as have I, and the rest of my family. I'd hate to add to the problem building a foreign part motor and it would be better in all ways except monitary to go with higher quality parts anyways. ABA383 has good parts in his and its lasted over a decade of racing.

Who makes US cranks, rods, and pistons?
Callies/Lunati?
Oliver/Manley/Lunati?
SRP/Wiseco/JE/Mahle/Diamond?

Thanks.

-Dustin-

Mahle is not an American company. I am not sure if they manufacture anything in the US or not.

Some of the cranks made in US: Callies, Crower, Lunati, Moldex, HTC Hank the Crank), Bryant, etc. all make cranks in the US.

rich

I'm glad there are other "regular guys" who still want to buy American even if it costs a little more. I was beginning to think I was the only one left!

Who makes US cranks, rods, and pistons?
Callies/Lunati?
Oliver/Manley/Lunati?
SRP/Wiseco/JE/Mahle/Diamond? I'm not an expert, but I'll give you a few things to think about anyway.
Last I checked, Callies (http://www.callies.com/) cranks are not non-twist forgings. A twisted crank isn't bad, it's just not quite as strong as a non-twist crank (the issue is grain flow). The toolings required to forge a crank with all 4 throws in the same plane and then twist two of the throws into the other plane is cheaper than the tooling needed to forge a crank in two planes right off the bat, so you pay a little more for a non-twist crank. If I had the money, I'd get a Hank the Crank or Moldex crank, but I'd also check out Cola and maybe Crower. If I was building something with a monster stroke, I'd also look into a Sonny Bryant crank. If your pockets aren't bulging, you might research Howard's (http://www.howardscams.com/track_smart_4340_american_crankshafts.htm)cranks. They claim to be all-American: forged at Louisville Forge and then machined by Callies. If you do look into it, please let me know what you find out.
As far as rods go, Carrillo (http://www.carrilloind.com/) used to be the best, at least according to the authors of How to Hotrod Big Block Chevys (and probably many of their contemporaries). If you like Manley (http://www.manleyperformance.com/), be sure to check where the exact rods you want are made: some of their stuff is offshore now. I've also read on ClassRacer.com that their stainless stuff (valves) is not as good as it used to be. Or was it titanium stuff?... Anyhow, Oliver (http://www.oliver-rods.com/) rods are generally quite well respected, although the length of ONE set was a touch less consistent than ONE set of Eagles (Chinese, I believe) as measured by highly respected local engine builder Bob Snyder. But that's just anecdotal evidence.
My friends who build alot of Ford motors have had very good luck with SRP (http://www.jepistons.com/cat/srp/) pistons, which is the same company as JE (http://www.jepistons.com/). Other pistons I'd look into are Wiseco (http://www.wiseco.com/) (several Pro Stock cars have their decals, FWIW), Ross (http://www.rosspistons.com/), and CP (http://www.cppistons.com/).

You should read the Blue Thunder 355 (http://www.chevyhiperformance.com/techarticles/148_0506_gm_bow_tie_vortec_small_block_engine/index.html) article, and look at all the pics of the sweet high-$$$ stuff they put in that motor. :drool:

Howard's has whole rotating assemblies made in America, prices seem pretty attractive too. Sad thing is while they are only 30 minutes from me I have not YET been down there.

Anyone have experience in Callies Stealth line? pricing?

I don't believe that is a product line. Some of their dranks have "stealth" stamped on one of the counterweights though. Which cranks get this stamp is something I have wondered about. But their website does not reference a "Stealth" crank. The lines are Magnum, Magnum SL, Dragonslayer and Compstar. All of their stuff is excellent quality and fairly priced. Unless it is truly a max effort motor, the Dragonslayer will be more than adequate. The Compstar is an imported forging that is inspected and finished in the US. A good value, I'd trust it more than Eagle, for example. Eagle is also a Chinese forging finished in the US.

Rich

The compstar stuff is top notch IMO (for the price) and way better than eagle stuff. Callies sent over their engineers to setup the foundry, and all machining is done in the USA - I have used a few of them and was very impressed with the tolerances and finish.

I'm about to put the Scat through some serious abuse, i will report what happens as far as US vs China stuff i really dont car i just want a crank that wont snap on me like the Eagle did and Not cost an arm and a leg, meaning anything over 1k for an lt1 crank is an arm and a leg IMO.
So far 650rwhp with loads of tension on a 12 rib belt about 20 passes and 2k miles Scat has proven to be by far better product then Eagle. Lets see how it hold up with a Maxed out YSI and cog belt. There have been plenty of people snaping the Callies dragon slayer so i wouldnt call it superior.

If you are snapping the nose off of a Callies crank, your belt is too tight.

Rich