my point is that the piston in itself was most likely not the problem in this engine. judging by the heads/cam, its not turning 7500 rpms or anything like that. discussing what happens during failure to each kind of piston is a moot point. pistons dont just fall apart by themselves.
it may have been cracked during assembly, who knows.

 

I beg to differ.

Isolating the cause is a process of elimination. You can't eliminate a variable from an equation until you have concrete evidence that that variable remains constant regardless of whether other variables in the equation are changed. So in this instance, one variable that needs to be addressed is piston composition. We cannot eliminate the variable of the piston being composed of hypereutectic alloy until we establish that it could not fail in the manner that it did had it been composed of any other form of alloy. If we were to substitute the piston in this equation with a forged piston, knowing that a forged piston cannot crack or shatter in the manner that this piston did, we therefore cannot eliminate the fact of the piston being hypereutectic as being a variable.

Now that we know that the piston being hypereutectic must be considered, this will allow us to eliminate all or some of the possible causes that could have been determined had the piston been forged, thus further simplifying the equation.

Clear as mud?

 

why are we even talking about a forged piston? the guy said in post #1 that these are hyperutectic pistons.
the thing broke all to hell. something hit it, or it hit something causing it to shatter.

he also said there was a bent pushrod. hmm....

 

Reread my last post. If we can't eliminate piston composition as a variable, then we are forced to consider what variables would contribute to the failure of whatever that piston was composed of, which has to be factored into the final answer.

 

I was going to ask you how you know that, but then I decided to take a shortcut and get to the point.

I can't decide if your statement is a Fallacy of the Consequent or a case of Begging the Question.

What your statement certainly IS, is something that's not provable.

I said in an earlier post that three things happened in that engine but that you could not tell what ORDER they occurred in.

I invite you to look for it.

Regardless of the particular order particular in which those things occurred, there is one thing that you can say with a certainty.

ONE of the three things that occurred in that engine is that the piston shattered. Cast shatters, forged deforms.

If that event was the third thing that happened, then the selection of a cast piston had no negative effect on the engine that was relevant to the failure. If it was in third place, then the other two events would have occurred either with or without the shattering.

However, if the shattering occured in the first or second place in the order, then the damage would have been less than it was. How much less depends on, of course; the order.

THAT of course begs the question: "Well so [ EDIT ] what Lame? Who cares what order they occurred in?"

Well, it's because in two of the three possible orders it would have been better to not to have CHOSEN a cast piston and that is the one causitive factor that the owner would have had the opportunity to affect.

 

This appears to have outlived its usefulness.