when are 3/4 grooved main bearings needed for bbc ?

[Warp Speed]

I think what ClassAct is basically trying to say when comparing oiling systems is that the SBC picks its feed up from the main and oils the rod jrl at around the TDC visinity before the load is the greatest on compression, that spreads the wedge and also gets the rod feed hole out of the way, im not familiar with Chrysler systems but this "timing" as everyone eludes to is 60* on a SBC
Tom

60* on #1 cyl?
What about #2?
You see, what Classass fails to realize, is that we (or many besides him anyway) have learned thing a thing or two about oiling systems, and busted many myths since the "good old days"! Lol
We use some oil timing strategies ( for various reasons) that according to his vast knowledge, wouldn't make it past 6k, but is successful at 9k+, with oil temps in the 280*+ in range, depression levels well over 20in (anyone with real experience know what depression does to hot oil) making well over his 2hp/ci level, all day long. Hell, our holes weren't "lined up at 70* atdc, turning 10,400, all day long!
Why is that, if this is all just simply a timing thing?!?
MT brought up a case with a mod motor. Not sure what the timing problem was in the crank that caused his failure, and he stated that they were drilled wrong? But in a 90* v8, with a single, straight shot drill (as the stock crank is) there is only so far you could adjust the oil timing. And the only aftermarket crank that is available for them is from Manley, and they employ a stock, oem drilling, and thus timing. One bank oils at one point, and the other oils basicslly 90 or so after, just like a sbc, ls, sbf ect.
We have the ability to use complex drillings in our design, so basically can adjust this timing all over the place, and have, for various reasons along the way. That's how I know what I speak. LOTS of scientific testing at extreme rpm and temps, with little biudries other than extreme architectural.
Again, not beating my chest what so ever..................just stating Facts!
Is the placement and angle of the block main feed in a 351c optimum? Hell no, but neither is the 351w (almost identical to the 351c) and they don't exhibit this problem.........why?!?
This Is NOT just a simple hydraulic system, but a very complex and inefficient one, no matter what some may imply

I see...you don't agree so you call me names. That makes you a pussy because you wouldn't say that to my face.

I understand that you don't know this so I must be wrong, and this is your way to get Mike to lock a thread which you can't dominate.

You are classLESS.

Hahaha, your to much!
You can dish it out, but then can't take being wrong, so you want to act tough!
Your in way over your head here, but you know that huh?!?

[tuffxf]

G,day,
Kawasaki zx14 crank, 4 cyls, 1.495" journals, 2 rods get fed off both no. 2 and no. 4 main journal.
Note fully grooved main bearings, cross drilled main and rod journals, something different!

20191207_141348_resized.jpg

[cjperformance]

60* on #1 cyl?
What about #2?
You see, what Classass fails to realize, is that we (or many besides him anyway) have learned thing a thing or two about oiling systems, and busted many myths since the "good old days"! Lol
We use some oil timing strategies ( for various reasons) that according to his vast knowledge, wouldn't make it past 6k, but is successful at 9k+, with oil temps in the 280*+ in range, depression levels well over 20in (anyone with real experience know what depression does to hot oil) making well over his 2hp/ci level, all day long. Hell, our holes weren't "lined up at 70* atdc, turning 10,400, all day long!
Why is that, if this is all just simply a timing thing?!?
MT brought up a case with a mod motor. Not sure what the timing problem was in the crank that caused his failure, and he stated that they were drilled wrong? But in a 90* v8, with a single, straight shot drill (as the stock crank is) there is only so far you could adjust the oil timing. And the only aftermarket crank that is available for them is from Manley, and they employ a stock, oem drilling, and thus timing. One bank oils at one point, and the other oils basicslly 90 or so after, just like a sbc, ls, sbf ect.
We have the ability to use complex drillings in our design, so basically can adjust this timing all over the place, and have, for various reasons along the way. That's how I know what I speak. LOTS of scientific testing at extreme rpm and temps, with little biudries other than extreme architectural.
Again, not beating my chest what so ever..................just stating Facts!
Is the placement and angle of the block main feed in a 351c optimum? Hell no, but neither is the 351w (almost identical to the 351c) and they don't exhibit this problem.........why?!?
This Is NOT just a simple hydraulic system, but a very complex and inefficient one, no matter what some may imply

I see...you don't agree so you call me names. That makes you a pussy because you wouldn't say that to my face.

I understand that you don't know this so I must be wrong, and this is your way to get Mike to lock a thread which you can't dominate.

You are classLESS.

Hahaha, your to much!
You can dish it out, but then can't take being wrong, so you want to act tough!
Your in way over your head here, but you know that huh?!?

Warp, and Class, id hate to see this get locked , you both obviously know your stuff. Its all too easy to get into the ranting, but, what would Mr. Terrill think. Lets chill out.
I must ask in this case of a 90* crank 90* V8, in specific for myself im talking SBF both windsor and cleveland. Biggest single difference in block oiling is the main feed gallery.
Priority main we'll call it for the W, but drop a lifter from either and the mains/rods/oil pressure/delivery suffer "unless" the windsor has oil restrictors to the lifter galleries.
The Clevo is also passing oil by the lifters, which move, bleed oil and as the lifter rises and falls on each side of the lobe is forced to rock in its bore which pumps oil out, possibly air in but also creates localised pressure drop areas to allow air dispersion(into the main oil feed) from the oil as well as oil vaporization. Probably a heap of other dynamic problems I dont know about too.
Yet, when a clevo has lifter bore sleeves, the rod bearing problem still exists, also when the HTC or similar mods are performed the problem still exists. Yet, when you run a stroker crank in a clevo which has different main to rod bearing oil drilling angularity to the factory crank, be it single feed or crossdrilled and dont have the fancy block mods the rod bearing problem stops.
I have a heap of Ford, Chev, Holden cranks and blocks, including BBC, so I'll re visit the differences in main to rod oiling, angles, positions, diameters etc etc in the cranks and also go back over the oiling differences in the blocks. I dont have any chrysler stuff at all at the moment unfortunately as I do very little with chrysler stuff.
Sometimes a band aid trick is fine, if the problem stops within the working range of something then hey, its good, but its always good to know what the real fix may be and why.
Persoanlly I think that the real answer to all of this falls within a combination of what we all are thinking. I dont think there's nothing in the crank "oil timing" but i also dont think that its all in the block/oil gallery's either.
So both Warp and Class, and anyone else with an idea or opinion, if we pick on a Cleveland , or engine of your choice with a known problem for an example, without just saying "its NOT this or that" , what are the main things that "you would do" or "you do see" with this engine that are a big oiling problem at high rpm/load, and how would you fix it.

[BobbyB]

I see...you don't agree so you call me names. That makes you a pussy because you wouldn't say that to my face.

I understand that you don't know this so I must be wrong, and this is your way to get Mike to lock a thread which you can't dominate.

You are classLESS.

Hahaha, your to much!
You can dish it out, but then can't take being wrong, so you want to act tough!
Your in way over your head here, but you know that huh?!?

Warp, and Class, id hate to see this get locked , you both obviously know your stuff. Its all too easy to get into the ranting, but, what would Mr. Terrill think. Lets chill out.
I must ask in this case of a 90* crank 90* V8, in specific for myself im talking SBF both windsor and cleveland. Biggest single difference in block oiling is the main feed gallery.
Priority main we'll call it for the W, but drop a lifter from either and the mains/rods/oil pressure/delivery suffer "unless" the windsor has oil restrictors to the lifter galleries.
The Clevo is also passing oil by the lifters, which move, bleed oil and as the lifter rises and falls on each side of the lobe is forced to rock in its bore which pumps oil out, possibly air in but also creates localised pressure drop areas to allow air dispersion(into the main oil feed) from the oil as well as oil vaporization. Probably a heap of other dynamic problems I dont know about too.
Yet, when a clevo has lifter bore sleeves, the rod bearing problem still exists, also when the HTC or similar mods are performed the problem still exists. Yet, when you run a stroker crank in a clevo which has different main to rod bearing oil drilling angularity to the factory crank, be it single feed or crossdrilled and dont have the fancy block mods the rod bearing problem stops.
I have a heap of Ford, Chev, Holden cranks and blocks, including BBC, so I'll re visit the differences in main to rod oiling, angles, positions, diameters etc etc in the cranks and also go back over the oiling differences in the blocks. I dont have any chrysler stuff at all at the moment unfortunately as I do very little with chrysler stuff.
Sometimes a band aid trick is fine, if the problem stops within the working range of something then hey, its good, but its always good to know what the real fix may be and why.
Persoanlly I think that the real answer to all of this falls within a combination of what we all are thinking. I dont think there's nothing in the crank "oil timing" but i also dont think that its all in the block/oil gallery's either.
So both Warp and Class, and anyone else with an idea or opinion, if we pick on a Cleveland , or engine of your choice with a known problem for an example, without just saying "its NOT this or that" , what are the main things that "you would do" or "you do see" with this engine that are a big oiling problem at high rpm/load, and how would you fix it.

CJ, Thanks so much for your sensible post on a fantastic topic. You made some points much better than I have been able to.

I am super interested in what you have experienced with Clevelands using aftermarket cranks working well. What is your recommendation for oiling mods and crankshaft for a Cleveland stroker turning 6500 rpm in a street/strip set up wet sump??? What do you think is required, oiling system wise, to increase the engine speed to 7500 rpms?

How different are the aftermarket stroker cranks oil timed from a factory Cleveland crank? What bearings do you think work best for what I am asking about? I really appreciate your insight.

[John Wallace]

Tuffxf, is there another passage from the main to the rod journals? (must be, just not seen?)
Does it intersect the cross-drilled passages?

[Kevin Johnson]

Tuffxf, is there another passage from the main to the rod journals? (must be, just not seen?)
Does it intersect the cross-drilled passages?

http://motorhead.jactup.com/ZX-14/tech/ ... 202006.pdf

Pages 304-5

[John Wallace]

Thanks, Kevin!

[tuffxf]

Thanks Kevin!
Yes drilled from the shoulder of the big end journal through the actual centre of the journal and into the actual centre of the main journal.
It is sealed with a plug on the big end side.
Cheers

[el camino man]

the cross drilled crank pretty much eliminated the need for grooving more than 180 degrees of the main bearings. If you are having lubrication problems with your big block, then you need to find the problem not use a bandage.

[ClassAct]

Classact, you don't believe the hydrodynamic wedge has to be reformed every time the crankshaft makes a revolution do you Mark H.

I have to say, you made me go back through my notes. Didn't help.

The only answer I have is yes, you have to reform the hydrodynamic wedge every time. That's why rods get oil half the time with half groove mains. Or all the time with full groove mains. The oil in the wedge between the bearing and the crank will eventually (talking 5th or 6th digit time numbers here) leak out past the rods and has to be replaced.

If you really stop and consider that even with a half groove main, the rods only get full pressure, full flow oil when the feed hole in the block lines up with the feed hole in the mains. The rest of the time it's getting less flow and probably less pressure out to the Rod bearings because any time you make a fluid turn you lose flow.

So trying to stuff enough oil out to the rods when the hole in the cranks is say...at 9 o'clock and the main feed hole in the block is at noon (looking from the front) is not the same as two holes lined up.

I have a fixture I use to put all my main bearings in and I made a tool to make the oil groove in the bearing a bit wider (.015 IIRC) and about the same in depth than what they are out of the box. I also just buy 1/2 groove mains and do the groove myself anymore.

Makes getting bearings much more simple.

[cjperformance]

CJ, Thanks so much for your sensible post on a fantastic topic. You made some points much better than I have been able to.

I am super interested in what you have experienced with Clevelands using aftermarket cranks working well. What is your recommendation for oiling mods and crankshaft for a Cleveland stroker turning 6500 rpm in a street/strip set up wet sump??? What do you think is required, oiling system wise, to increase the engine speed to 7500 rpms?

How different are the aftermarket stroker cranks oil timed from a factory Cleveland crank? What bearings do you think work best for what I am asking about? I really appreciate your insight.

Hi, Cleveland with any aftermarket crank i have used is fine, wether its cross drilled or not there is no issue any more and in this im talking when using 1/2 groove bearings.
Wet sump N/a clevo stroker street/strip is no major ask. The minimum I do in this typical instance (not because its a must, just because it makes me feel good) is match the hole in the block for oil feed(where the pump bolts on) to the pump, then that hole quickly goes near 90* out to the filter feed, i get right into this hole from both sides and smooth out the 90* intersection and port/lay down the 'short side' of this intersection and get it as smooth flowing as i can, then at the filter boss chamfer this hole out, i just dont want any hard sharp edges/turns.
Then same with the feed from filter to block, take out the filter adaptor, chamfer the block side of it out as much as possible while not weakening it, get into the block under this adaptor and smooth out that shitty intersection. I almost always use a grooved back cam bearing with oiling set at 2 to 3 o clock, this does restrict oil to the cam bearings (which saves any excess for main/rods) but improves the delivery point and the bearings look great all the time. That's it for the basics that i do and its quick to do as well.
If im spending a bit more time i then match up/elongate the main bearing galleries at the main bore to the bearing and match the bearing back to the hole as well.
So im not reinventing the wheel here, all im really trying to do is smooth up the oil flow path wherever i can, improve delivery quality.
If youre then going to turn the same stroker combo to 7500 assuming the hardware is able, oiling wise a rear oil feed line is in my opinion helpfull as feeding the gallery from both ends simply slows down the supply oil speed where it has to turn thru 90* into the rh lifter gallery before it can feed #'s 2,3,4,5 main bearings, you dont change the oil demand/quantity but by having 2 feed points you slow down the oil speed where it has to turn at every point until the oil in into the galleries that meet the bearing.
I do like to chamfer the crank main to rod oil feed holes at the journals with a heavy leading chamfer on the main journal and trailing chamfer on the rod journal, BUT i often wonder about the effect of the leading chamfer on the lower main as it runs over the non grooved surface, as in am I creating more of a pressure drop here and causing localised vaporization? I havmt seen any ill evidence on the bearings so maybe not, someone else may have more thoughts on this? Id be happy to hear them.

[cjperformance]

Sorry , we have completely side tracked this thread
I will have a look at the 454 crank monday or tuesday, im interested as I've never compared oiling on one to anything else before.

[Kevin Johnson]

...
I do like to chamfer the crank main to rod oil feed holes at the journals with a heavy leading chamfer on the main journal and trailing chamfer on the rod journal, BUT i often wonder about the effect of the leading chamfer on the lower main as it runs over the non grooved surface, as in am I creating more of a pressure drop here and causing localised vaporization? I havmt seen any ill evidence on the bearings so maybe not, someone else may have more thoughts on this? Id be happy to hear them.

Ibid, Meernik:

C. H. Wills, Patent No. 1,506,513, "Bearing
Lubrication," United States Patent Office,
August 26, 1924.

https://patents.google.com/patent/US1506513A/en

Aside: be sure to download the pdf and read directly from the image as the Google scan has poor optical character recognition.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Childe_Wills

He was quite an engineer and calligrapher:

[cjperformance]

...
I do like to chamfer the crank main to rod oil feed holes at the journals with a heavy leading chamfer on the main journal and trailing chamfer on the rod journal, BUT i often wonder about the effect of the leading chamfer on the lower main as it runs over the non grooved surface, as in am I creating more of a pressure drop here and causing localised vaporization? I havmt seen any ill evidence on the bearings so maybe not, someone else may have more thoughts on this? Id be happy to hear them.

Ibid, Meernik:

C. H. Wills, Patent No. 1,506,513, "Bearing
Lubrication," United States Patent Office,
August 26, 1924.

https://patents.google.com/patent/US1506513A/en

Aside: be sure to download the pdf and read directly from the image as the Google scan has poor optical character recognition.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Childe_Wills

He was quite an engineer and calligrapher:

Thanks Kevin, i just had a quick skim over the 1st link, very interesting stuff, i will read it fully as i have time over the next couple days.
Cheers,

[BobbyB]

CJ, Thanks so much for your sensible post on a fantastic topic. You made some points much better than I have been able to.

I am super interested in what you have experienced with Clevelands using aftermarket cranks working well. What is your recommendation for oiling mods and crankshaft for a Cleveland stroker turning 6500 rpm in a street/strip set up wet sump??? What do you think is required, oiling system wise, to increase the engine speed to 7500 rpms?

How different are the aftermarket stroker cranks oil timed from a factory Cleveland crank? What bearings do you think work best for what I am asking about? I really appreciate your insight.

Hi, Cleveland with any aftermarket crank i have used is fine, wether its cross drilled or not there is no issue any more and in this im talking when using 1/2 groove bearings.
Wet sump N/a clevo stroker street/strip is no major ask. The minimum I do in this typical instance (not because its a must, just because it makes me feel good) is match the hole in the block for oil feed(where the pump bolts on) to the pump, then that hole quickly goes near 90* out to the filter feed, i get right into this hole from both sides and smooth out the 90* intersection and port/lay down the 'short side' of this intersection and get it as smooth flowing as i can, then at the filter boss chamfer this hole out, i just dont want any hard sharp edges/turns.
Then same with the feed from filter to block, take out the filter adaptor, chamfer the block side of it out as much as possible while not weakening it, get into the block under this adaptor and smooth out that shitty intersection. I almost always use a grooved back cam bearing with oiling set at 2 to 3 o clock, this does restrict oil to the cam bearings (which saves any excess for main/rods) but improves the delivery point and the bearings look great all the time. That's it for the basics that i do and its quick to do as well.
If im spending a bit more time i then match up/elongate the main bearing galleries at the main bore to the bearing and match the bearing back to the hole as well.
So im not reinventing the wheel here, all im really trying to do is smooth up the oil flow path wherever i can, improve delivery quality.
If youre then going to turn the same stroker combo to 7500 assuming the hardware is able, oiling wise a rear oil feed line is in my opinion helpfull as feeding the gallery from both ends simply slows down the supply oil speed where it has to turn thru 90* into the rh lifter gallery before it can feed #'s 2,3,4,5 main bearings, you dont change the oil demand/quantity but by having 2 feed points you slow down the oil speed where it has to turn at every point until the oil in into the galleries that meet the bearing.
I do like to chamfer the crank main to rod oil feed holes at the journals with a heavy leading chamfer on the main journal and trailing chamfer on the rod journal, BUT i often wonder about the effect of the leading chamfer on the lower main as it runs over the non grooved surface, as in am I creating more of a pressure drop here and causing localised vaporization? I havmt seen any ill evidence on the bearings so maybe not, someone else may have more thoughts on this? Id be happy to hear them.

Thanks