dartfreak75
Restore it, Dont part it!
That is the one that has to be burnished correct? Do you happen to know the press and go part #?
Almost time for the machinist!
- Thread starter dartfreak75
- Start date
-
dartfreak75
Restore it, Dont part it!
Is this the right one ? Mine don't have the grove down the guide part ?
dartfreak75
Restore it, Dont part it!
Or this one?
If you're planning to do the oiling system modifications you need to do them before you take it to the Machine Shop.
dartfreak75
Restore it, Dont part it!
Yes I agree.
Make sure.......IF you don't have the burnishing tool, that you get the bushing that does not require sizing after installation........OR I can send you my resizing tool to use. It's very simple.
dartfreak75
Restore it, Dont part it!
Do you know the part number for the one that doesn't require sizing? Is it better to use the mopar one and size it?
Dura-bond part # is AD-780 and Pioneer part # is PC-780 Both are finished to size, but testing finished result will be still necessary.
dartfreak75
Restore it, Dont part it!
I appreciate that thanks!
dartfreak75
Restore it, Dont part it!
Well I got all my big ticket items ordered tonight. Damn it hurts spending that much money at one time. I got my crankshaft all my bearings, new valves, new comp valve seals, lunati voodoo camshaft, new lca bushings since the last ones where crap, my engine paint, gaskets etc I think i spent about 600 bucks or more. But hopefully other than the machinist bill and a harmonic balancer I should have everything.
What he said. lol
67 gt
A Wog boy who loves his Mopars !
On the balance side of things I would get it done my scat kit I ordered and payed for balancing was 16 grams out my machinist had it within 2 grams. Engine runs so much smoother.
nm9stheham
Well-Known Member
The MP PN I provided is the PN that does not require burnishing. We bought that MP part from Mancini and used as-is. I like the O'Reilly description: "Tower Shift Bushing" LOL
Bookmarked for future reference@ thanks
nm9stheham
Well-Known Member
Did your machinist happen to say what was at that larger tolerance? Was it the balance between the piston/rod assemblies, or the crank balance versus the bobweight? More curious than anything.
IIRC..... SCAT says they balance to a +/-5 gram tolerance but it has never been clear to me which factor that is... or if it is both.
dartfreak75
Restore it, Dont part it!
Thanks I will get that one then I'd rather have a mopar part anyway.
dartfreak75
Restore it, Dont part it!
Oh i forgot about the biggest of them all Haha. I still have to order my pistons and rings. That's another 300+ depending on the machinist bill I think the engine will be under 2k. Depending what I decided to do on my carb situation.
67 gt
A Wog boy who loves his Mopars !
I think it was crank balance to bob weight ! he also mentioned that it was very common in these as he has had some pushing over 35+ grms. This is the set I purchased from summit and I paid extra for the balance job SCA-1-48035BI
nm9stheham
Well-Known Member
OK, thanks. One thing about determining bobweights.... the fixtures to separate the big and small end rod weights, and the skill of the user, is a potential source of error. Separating the weights properly can be tricky to do, and is critical to getting the right bobweight.
I'd also be curious to know of your machinist (or SCAT) uses a different reciprocating factor for a stroker than the common 50%. Again, just curious... that would change the computed bobweight to which the crank would be balanced.
dartfreak75
Restore it, Dont part it!
Ok guys got another question for yall on this topic. This is gonna be a long Aj one but I will try to keep it as short as possible. Lol sorry AJ! Hehe.
Ok so as we all know this engine is gonna be a driver reliability and dependability is my number one goal. Of course with as much power within reason without going overboard. I want to be able to get in and drive it 8 hours to the beach or drive it to the mopar nats etc. Without overheating or anything like that. I want to run on regular old pump gas without worrying about additives or race fuel or detonation etc So here is what I'm getting to. I have decided on a scr of 9.5 with my cam that will give me a dcr of 7.7 and at my elevation 7.4. (Approximately) so here is the question I have a couple different options to get there which one do yall think is the best?
Option 1) mill the head .025 and use a felpro 8553 blue head gasket.
Option 2) leave the heads uncut and use a .028 mr gasket head gasket
I was leaning more towards option 1 because of two reasons one I can make sure the head is good and flat by cutting it and 2 I have read alot about the thick (.050) blue 8553 head gasket being alot more reliable and dont leak or need replaced ever.
I have read quite a few times that the mr gasket (I can't recall the number right now I believe its 1551) leak and are troublesome and have to be replaced more frequently than a OEM style gasket. And 2 because with the cut head If i ever want to increase the scr i can always go with a thinner gasket. If I start with the thin gasket that's about it. I know option 2 will be somewhat cheaper tho about 150 bucks cheaper. That Is the big pro with option 2!
Sorry for rambling what are you guys opinions.
Ok so as we all know this engine is gonna be a driver reliability and dependability is my number one goal. Of course with as much power within reason without going overboard. I want to be able to get in and drive it 8 hours to the beach or drive it to the mopar nats etc. Without overheating or anything like that. I want to run on regular old pump gas without worrying about additives or race fuel or detonation etc So here is what I'm getting to. I have decided on a scr of 9.5 with my cam that will give me a dcr of 7.7 and at my elevation 7.4. (Approximately) so here is the question I have a couple different options to get there which one do yall think is the best?
Option 1) mill the head .025 and use a felpro 8553 blue head gasket.
Option 2) leave the heads uncut and use a .028 mr gasket head gasket
I was leaning more towards option 1 because of two reasons one I can make sure the head is good and flat by cutting it and 2 I have read alot about the thick (.050) blue 8553 head gasket being alot more reliable and dont leak or need replaced ever.
I have read quite a few times that the mr gasket (I can't recall the number right now I believe its 1551) leak and are troublesome and have to be replaced more frequently than a OEM style gasket. And 2 because with the cut head If i ever want to increase the scr i can always go with a thinner gasket. If I start with the thin gasket that's about it. I know option 2 will be somewhat cheaper tho about 150 bucks cheaper. That Is the big pro with option 2!
Sorry for rambling what are you guys opinions.
Sounds logical. I went about it backwards from your thoughts. I milled the head and used the thin head gasket knowing that I could use the the thicker one if I needed to because of detonation. Nope, didn't need it. 9.6 static and dynamic at 8.07. The closed chambered 273 heads are pretty efficient and the polished chambers have to help.
nm9stheham
Well-Known Member
I forget... which piston and heads are you using? Just trying to see if you can get a quench gap with a thinner head gasket. That helps in staying away from detonation-land, which you need if you really want to try to get by with regular fuel
#596's post 22. Open chambered 360 heads I imagine. My book only goes to 74.
nm9stheham
Well-Known Member
OK, no quench gap; tnx TMM. I'm gonna say: Mill the heads and use the Felpro 1008 at .039" thick and then back up to the thicker 8553PT if the CR need to drop a couple of tenths. And milling the heads a bit for flatness is an excellent idea with older heads; if reliability is the goal, that is important. Glad the OP is looking at that matter. (I'd put money into that long before the money into any balance work as this engine stands.)
-
