King versus clevite

[1980RS]

Used King bearings for the 1st time last year in my BBC. After the first race started to see silvery flakes in the heads where the drain back is. The clearances were good and in all 3 times I have replaced bearings in that big block, never have I seen this, will have to go through it again. Won't use them anymore. Back to Clevites for me.

Interesting. I am using a set in my build and they were all at .0023-0025" We will see how they hold at 9000 rpm.

I confirmed my suspicions when I took the timing cover off and saw little flakes coming off the front of the first main bearing. At least I caught it before it took anything out.

[ProPower engines]

I have seen the trends come and go with the HP bearing manufactures and to me it seems they all have issues in consistent sizing from time to time. The top 3 bearing manufactures FM Clevite and King all offer a basic AL series bearing for passenger car engines like the OE's use as well as a Bi and Tri metal and a race equivalent bearing.
Clevite has the ""P"" series and King has the SI series FM CP series for run of the mill performance builds. They all have there place but king does offer some options that Clevite an FW do not as far as bearing shell width's which seems to be the industry standard when purchasing a complete rotating assembly for the last 10 years regardless of who is selling the kits.

Now if a customer wants to upgrade to a different bearing selection then there is a major up charge but as we know it depends on the vendor and application specific details.

FM also has a comparable HP bearing line which goes unused most times because of low inventory of lack of coverage but they make them for OEM's.

The Clevite H series and the King XP series both tri-metal bearings seem to be used mostly these days and while there is good and bad there seems to be more coverage and availability with King in most cases compared to Clevite .

I have not seen Clevite offer a fully coated bearing Like King does other then getting them coated by Calico coatings and needing to use an X bearing to get the extra room to coat them to the correct size or half size as the case may be..

They also seem to have less optional sizes compared to King as well.

They have more HP bearings in under sizes then Clevite does for popular engines as well all the way to minus .030 in some cases they offer a .029 .030 .031 I have seen listed.

But in many extreme load engines like BB marine Sprint car and others and I have used FM Clevite ACL and King with equal success and reliability for the past 15 years.

Every bearing manufacture all have a special place that separates them from the other manufactures but they all have issues at some point I guess it just comes down to what is needed and what is listed as available for your engine combo.

[enigma57]

In an application such as marine use or heavy towing (not a race engine but subject to long periods under load)...... Which brands and types of bearings and clearances would be the way to go with either 10W40 or 20W50 oil? Engine will be iron block and iron head.

Thanks,

Harry

[englertracing]

Was getting larger clearances with them then i should have been with the housing minus the shell thickness vs dial bore guage, was thinking excessive crush.

[ProPower engines]

In an application such as marine use or heavy towing (not a race engine but subject to long periods under load)...... Which brands and types of bearings and clearances would be the way to go with either 10W40 or 20W50 oil? Engine will be iron block and iron head.

Thanks,

Harry

Depends on the engine Gas or diesel and what the typical heavy load is. How is the cooling system and is it using an oil cooler on said engine.
A marine engine is like towing a trailer flat out all day in 2nd gear. A truck towing a trailer is not like that as it gets a rest on the flat but up hill will see more throttle/load.
20/50 oil is heavier then I would use in a truck unless you really need the shear strength of such a heavy oil or running at a real higher then normal oil temp.

But in a BBC engine I would go .0027" on the mains .003" on the thrust bearing and .0022" on the rods if using a good aftermarket rod.
Stock rods with new bolts .0024".
As long as the bearing clearances are exactly the same rod to rod and main to main the need for anything other then a good quality pump like a 10778C and put the lighter spring in it or the bypass is open all the time. The side clearance about .018"-.020"will be lots.
I like that pump as it has an anti-cavitation feature and a screw in plug for the bypass spring location making the swap easier then the oiled pinned spring type. They are a bit more money but worth the extra cost.

As long as the lifter bores are not worn bad to cause 16 bigger leaks as well you should be about 45 lbs idling and about 65-70 around 5000 under load

[ProPower engines]

Was getting larger clearances with them then i should have been with the housing minus the shell thickness vs dial bore guage, was thinking excessive crush.

More crush will most likely close up the clearance. the length of the over hang at the parting lines I have seen differ a good amount between a regular P bearing and an H bearing in stock rods. Also find they tend to distort the big end more with an H bearing from the extra crush. Which direction are you getting more clearance. 6-12 or 4-11 or 8-2 o-clock positions?

What rods are you working with?

[englertracing]

Was getting larger clearances with them then i should have been with the housing minus the shell thickness vs dial bore guage, was thinking excessive crush.

More crush will most likely close up the clearance. the length of the over hang at the parting lines I have seen differ a good amount between a regular P bearing and an H bearing in stock rods. Also find they tend to distort the big end more with an H bearing from the extra crush. Which direction are you getting more clearance. 6-12 or 4-11 or 8-2 o-clock positions?

What rods are you working with?

Main for a ford 2.3 small journal.
Measuring the housing -shell thicknes x2 - journal it should have been just under 0.003
Measuring with a dial bore guage was 0.004
This is all at 12 and 6

[af2]

I have to wonder if the King bearings where that bad why are they in business?

[ProPower engines]

I have to wonder if the King bearings where that bad why are they in business?

Well said
I would have to ask the same thing.They are not an old bearing company by any means but since they came on the HP engine scene they have shown that their products can run with the others and surpass them in some ways as well.

They have good coverage and size selection for alot of engines the others do not. I have been using them in 99% of HP builds for the last 10 years or so and had no issues with the construction of the products.

Some guys have had bearing issues but I find it hard to believe its a manufacturing process issue on all of them.

I have a customer that dropped off a 360 Dodge engine on the weekend for a cam bearing replacement for an upgrade to a bigger roller set up and found the Durabond HP coated bearing cavitated surface of the bearing at the oil entry area on the side of the bearing and its not the bearing that oils the top end as well.

Will I stop using them...I doubt it because they are the best cam bearing offered for the application but they did fail over time. Now I must figure out why as well as talk with their tech to see if there is a solution.

[ProPower engines]

Was getting larger clearances with them then i should have been with the housing minus the shell thickness vs dial bore guage, was thinking excessive crush.

More crush will most likely close up the clearance. the length of the over hang at the parting lines I have seen differ a good amount between a regular P bearing and an H bearing in stock rods. Also find they tend to distort the big end more with an H bearing from the extra crush. Which direction are you getting more clearance. 6-12 or 4-11 or 8-2 o-clock positions?

What rods are you working with?

Main for a ford 2.3 small journal.
Measuring the housing -shell thicknes x2 - journal it should have been just under 0.003
Measuring with a dial bore guage was 0.004
This is all at 12 and 6

What is the bearing bore diameter? Is it the push rod engine or the OHC engine?
If its on the big side them maybe thats the reason for the difference.

If the OHC main bore is 2.5902 and the crank is 2.3982 then you would be about .003 for clearance.
But if the block is on the large side of spec 2.5910 then you may be looser at .004.

Push rod engine is2.4012 for min spec on the main bore and 2.2482 for min crank size.
High spec of 2.4020 and a min. spec crank again may be larger again.

The main bore size and crank journal size have a direct affect on clearance. They both need to be the correct size to be in the tighter clearance zone with a std. bearing unless you mix/match bearings with a std and a +.001 to get closer.
Or tighten up the main line to reduce clearance.

Same deal applied to the rods as well.

[modok]

The only way the size of the bearing ID would be EXACTLY same as calculating the housing minus thickness, is if there was NO crush.
The force of the bearing press fit will enlarge the housing some, maybe a few tenths, maybe more.

Although .001 larger IMO, would probably be on the high end, maybe too much.

[enigma57]

In an application such as marine use or heavy towing (not a race engine but subject to long periods under load)...... Which brands and types of bearings and clearances would be the way to go with either 10W40 or 20W50 oil? Engine will be iron block and iron head.

Thanks,

Harry

Depends on the engine Gas or diesel and what the typical heavy load is. How is the cooling system and is it using an oil cooler on said engine.
A marine engine is like towing a trailer flat out all day in 2nd gear. A truck towing a trailer is not like that as it gets a rest on the flat but up hill will see more throttle/load.
20/50 oil is heavier then I would use in a truck unless you really need the shear strength of such a heavy oil or running at a real higher then normal oil temp.

But in a BBC engine I would go .0027" on the mains .003" on the thrust bearing and .0022" on the rods if using a good aftermarket rod.
Stock rods with new bolts .0024".

As long as the bearing clearances are exactly the same rod to rod and main to main the need for anything other then a good quality pump like a 10778C and put the lighter spring in it or the bypass is open all the time. The side clearance about .018"-.020"will be lots.

I like that pump as it has an anti-cavitation feature and a screw in plug for the bypass spring location making the swap easier then the oiled pinned spring type. They are a bit more money but worth the extra cost.

As long as the lifter bores are not worn bad to cause 16 bigger leaks as well you should be about 45 lbs idling and about 65-70 around 5000 under load

Thanks for the info, ProPower engines! Much appreciated. Of the 2, I like 10W40 best but have run 20W50 without issue before.

Yes, I will be adding an oil cooler and will run the lighter spring. Radiator and cooling system are good. No issues there. Oil pan holds 6 qts. Oil filter is the long type, holds nearly 2 quarts.

Lifters have a small flat machined to help oil cam lobes (flat tappet engine). Haven't mic'd lifters and lifter bores yet, but will do so. If lifter clearance exceeds 0.0015", how much is max allowable before bushing lifter bores?

Pistons will be forged 2618. Redline will not exceed 6,000 RPMs. Any recommendations regarding piston clearance? Piston coating (skirts)?

Thanks,

Harry

[ProPower engines]

Harry
[/quote]
Thanks for the info, ProPower engines! Much appreciated. Of the 2, I like 10W40 best but have run 20W50 without issue before.

Yes, I will be adding an oil cooler and will run the lighter spring. Radiator and cooling system are good. No issues there. Oil pan holds 6 qts. Oil filter is the long type, holds nearly 2 quarts.

***There is no real reason to run that long filter with better quality short filters available. All it does is hold an extra quart of oil not any real benefit since changing the oil and filter more often as running conditions apply.

Lifters have a small flat machined to help oil cam lobes (flat tappet engine). Haven't mic'd lifters and lifter bores yet, but will do so. If lifter clearance exceeds 0.0015", how much is max allowable before bushing lifter bores?
*** You are there now!! Any bigger is not going to be good for oil pressure as any loss's at the lifter can affect the over all pressure else where..
***If you are running a flat tappet cam you can get a tool to grove the lifter bores instead of using the lifters with the flat. It rotates and does not allow all the oil to be directed to the lobe as it approaches the lifter when rotating. Other wise its just a loss of oil pressure better suited to be at the crank bearings not windage wrapped around the crank when running.

Pistons will be forged 2618. Redline will not exceed 6,000 RPMs. Any recommendations regarding piston clearance? Piston coating (skirts)?

***What is the intended purpose of this engine?? Will it be boosted or N/A with EFI???
How hot does it get during operation?? I say that because we don't know what your doing with it.

[enigma57]

Thanks, ProPower engines. About the engine......

The engine will be used for towing mainly. The terrain is rolling hills and fairly steep. Mostly 20% to 30% grades, pulling uphill half of the time and gearing down and using the engine to help brake the remainder of the time. There are a few short stretches of relatively flat roadway, but not much. Speed limit ranges from 65 MPH to 75 MPH (posted, most drive faster).

New engine is a 292 inline 6. Naturally aspirated, running carburettors. I may experiment with nitrous or with a belt driven supercharger and modest boost (perhaps 1/2 atmosphere) at some point, so want to build this engine to stay together if I do that.

Backed up by a BW T-85N 3-speed transmission with overdrive and I have wired OD solenoid to toggle switch on shifter so I can split all 3 forward gears like a 2-speed rearend if need be. Unloaded in high gear at 75 MPH with OD engaged on flat ground, she cruises at 2,250 RPMs. Pulling uphill at same speed with a load and OD locked out, she will be turning 3,210 RPMs. Or I can shift down to 2nd gear with OD engaged and pull uphill at 3,930 RPMs if need be.

I cammed the engine to make as broad and flat a powerband as possible from off idle to peak. For what I am doing, felt it would be better to keep redline under 5,500 RPMs due to these engines' reputation for bad harmonics at greater engine speeds. And to sacrifice higher TQ and HP peaks for greater average numbers over the designed operating range whilst generating a broad, flat powerband.

Computer dyno program projects torque peak at 3,500 RPMs and nearly flat between 3,000 - 4,000 RPMs with peak HP to be nearly flat between 4,500 and 5,000 RPMs. Properly designed headers even with full length muffled exhaust would boost power some, but I don't need exhaust leaks on a driver at my age, so these are predicted power levels in street trim with 9.25:1 static compression running through split exhaust manifolds and mufflers. ......

RPMs - ft/lb - HP

2,000 - 338 - 141
2,500 - 345 - 175
3,000 - 351 - 210
3,500 - 354 - 244
4,000 - 350 - 275
4,500 - 336 - 292
5,000 - 304 - 292
5,500 - 266 - 278
6,000 - 212 - 241

Had not considered that grooving lifter bore would oil cam lobe more efficiently than grooving or machining small flat down lifter body. I'll think through that and see if I can get it straight in my mind. This engine is an inline 6 and the lifter bores are vertical and positioned directly above cam lobes rather than in angled banks as with a V-type engine.

Yes, I was thinking 0.0015" clearance or less would be best for lifter bores. If its more than that and I must bush lifter bores, would somewhere between 0.0005"and 0.0010" be the preferred clearance?

Cooling system should be more than adequate. I have a 4-row desert cooler crossflow radiator with 36" wide X 18" high core not counting side tanks. Will run that along with a good fan and shroud. Previously ran this cooling setup with a built 400 Pontiac engine. Even in 115 degree heat running through the desert from California to Texas in summer with a load, I was able to run 90 MPH for hours without engine cooling issues. Previous engine had 180 degree thermostat and never ran hotter than thermostat setting even under those conditions. New engine is 25% smaller displacement and same state of tune, so should generate less power (and thereby less heat) than the big Poncho mill.

I will change oil at 3,000 mile intervals. Was reasoning that the long filter in a WIX or other good brand would have more filter surface area and that would help oil flow (volume/pressure) and the extra oil capacity would help lower oil temps. Am I thinking about this the wrong way?

Thanks,

Harry

[jimmyhemi]

Hello we at our shop have been slowly using them more. I buy from epw and they are pushing them. The price is cheaper. No issues