LT1 Based Engine Tech 1993-1997 LT1/LT4 Engine Related

wanted to post dyno #'s, but instead I messed up my LT1

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old Feb 10, 2006 | 12:15 AM
  #31  
stroked383z28's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Aug 1999
Posts: 422
From: Fort Worth, TX
Re: wanted to post dyno #'s, but instead I messed up my LT1

Originally Posted by MachinistOne
ANY AFTERMARKET PART YOU BUY WILL ALWAYS SAY OR BE IMPLIED THAT IT IS THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE INSTALLING MECHANIC TO VERIFY COMPONENTS WILL WORK TOGETHER.
Dug up this quote from another thread. Just because you don't know what you're doing doesn't mean it's not your fault.

Last edited by stroked383z28; Feb 10, 2006 at 12:17 AM.
Old Feb 10, 2006 | 11:21 AM
  #32  
SStrokerAce's Avatar
Banned
 
Joined: Oct 2002
Posts: 6,518
Re: wanted to post dyno #'s, but instead I messed up my LT1

Originally Posted by CMSDave
Actually we have ran it, on more than enough cars in this city.
Let alone the parts that have gone out of here.

A couple of key things I noticed, the assumption of what is being said on our end.
Several, and I mean several, people call to order parts with part numbers.
God forbid we start talking them out of the parts they've already got in mind then we're not right according to the internet.

I guess the other problem would be my assumption that he had an NSA RR based on the lift he was talking about @ .568, but that info wasn't given.
Not once was Crane Golds brought up(let alone used with damage), if they were then I would've voiced my opinion on those based on what I've seen happen to those in the past.

Either way, somebody installing those should check them before going in for exactly what you said, a possibility of the numbers being off. But the attack on us before knowing all the facts would probably be useful before making your own assumption Mr. Bauer.

I respect your knowledge on motor issues, I've even searched for archived posts, the least you could do is possibly hear more details before a public thrashing.
Dave,

This is why you ask questions....

Some of us can turn customers away and not sell them parts if they want to do it the wrong way. Some of us care what they are doing is not going to break parts.

I understand you guys fill orders for parts, thats your deal. It still didn't help this guy that nobody looked at his setup and said "hey this **** is not going to work together, you are going to euchre your motor"

I can look at the parts and realize that nobody stepped in and helped this guy in his buying process. The Crane golds don't even work with those retainers.

If you guys take this bad, oh well. I'm just calling it how I see it.

Bret
Old Feb 10, 2006 | 11:23 AM
  #33  
SStrokerAce's Avatar
Banned
 
Joined: Oct 2002
Posts: 6,518
Re: wanted to post dyno #'s, but instead I messed up my LT1

Originally Posted by Josh'95Z28conv
Whats wrong with NSA Crane Golds? They did have a little cosmetic wear on 2 of them, but I put them on cylinder # 1, and this problem happened on #7. I asked lots of questions when ordering these springs, so I wouldnt have a problem. I would think if NSA RR's were a problem, you would have asked the question to me.

Anyway, the springs had an install height of 1.675". With .568 lift, that puts the spring at 1.107". These springs coil bind at 1.085". Thats .022" difference. Is that a little too close for comfort?

Id really like to know if this really was coil bind, or if a spring was defective. Either way I appreciate you working with me in trying to pinpoint the problem, and hopefully you will work with me in building the engine I will replace this one with.
Nope....

these springs can easily have 1.140" coil bind so

1.675"-.568"-1.140"= -.033"

that means the springs go BANG!

Bret
Old Feb 10, 2006 | 01:03 PM
  #34  
rskrause's Avatar
Moderator
 
Joined: Dec 1969
Posts: 10,745
From: Buffalo, New York
Re: wanted to post dyno #'s, but instead I messed up my LT1

Originally Posted by IllusionalTA
Both yes and no... I understand that you should always double check everything.. I do it.. But the majority of those purchasing these "cookie cutter" cam kit's are going to take the word of the shop they buy from.. Assuming that they sent the right stuff. If the part no. matches then they're fine from there... It's the job of the shop to sell the right stuff the first time and if they're going to sell a kit to do a specific job w/ the specific cam it should all be matched component's... So regardless if he didn't check coil bind and installed height. .It still fall's on the store not giving him the right stuff.. They are however not liable to replace his engine due to this.. As far as i know...
The proper way to set up a pair of heads involves multiple checks and measurements no matter who you bought the parts from. Aftermarket performance parts should not be assumed to be "plug and play". They almost never are. I hope this doesn't come off as too harsh, but my take is that this is probably the end users fault. Without knowing the details of what was discussed, unless the vendor said something like "these parts will fit, just install them, you don't need to check anything" the assumption is that the relevant steps to set the heads up properly WILL be taken.

Rich

Last edited by rskrause; Feb 10, 2006 at 01:10 PM.
Old Feb 10, 2006 | 05:05 PM
  #35  
Josh'95Z28conv's Avatar
Thread Starter
Registered User
 
Joined: Feb 2003
Posts: 1,553
From: San Antonio, Texas
Re: wanted to post dyno #'s, but instead I messed up my LT1

Originally Posted by rskrause
my take is that this is probably the end users fault. Without knowing the details of what was discussed, unless the vendor said something like "these parts will fit, just install them, you don't need to check anything" the assumption is that the relevant steps to set the heads up properly WILL be taken.

Rich
I realize that I should have checked things. I know its my fault I dindnt. But according to comps coil bind spec, I was still in the clear.

This is just so fustrating. If they are going off of comps specs as well, then they thought this spring setup would work. They also said they have run the same setup on larger lift cams. So this may be nobody's fault, just a faulty spring. But according to Bret who's opinion I trust, these springs coil bind far before the givin spec. If this is true I just hope this and all other vendors be carefull recommending these springs when asked for their opinion. According to comps spec I had .022" before coil bind. According to Brets experience, I had -.033, and was doomed before I started the engine. Now Im left with an engine that cant even be returned for a core
Old Feb 10, 2006 | 10:06 PM
  #36  
cehan's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Jun 2005
Posts: 387
From: Brandon, Fla.
Re: wanted to post dyno #'s, but instead I messed up my LT1

Regardless of all the math, wouldn't the safest way to check for coil bind be by using a solid lifter (or a hyd lifter with spring removed and spacer/washers installed), turn the engine through and check the gap between the coils with a feeler gage? As I remember, the rule of thumb is 0.060 minimum. That way you can see the rocker to retainer clearance too.

Chris
Old Feb 11, 2006 | 12:17 PM
  #37  
SStrokerAce's Avatar
Banned
 
Joined: Oct 2002
Posts: 6,518
Re: wanted to post dyno #'s, but instead I messed up my LT1

Some of those springs might have been good to 1.085, but the one that broke wasn't.... that's where the hard part of all of this is.

Bret
Related Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
Steve69SS396
Track Kill Stories
15
Aug 10, 2015 02:45 PM
jayblev95
Track Kill Stories
3
Jan 15, 2015 07:48 AM
Injuneer
LT1 Based Engine Tech
5
Dec 15, 2014 09:36 AM




All times are GMT -5. The time now is 07:54 PM.