DSMTalk Forums: Mitsubishi Eclipse, Plymouth Laser, and Eagle Talon Forum banner
Cancel
Create thread New Garage Forums

Diary of a rebuild (56k beware)

Jump to Latest
81 - 100 of 139 Posts
#81 ·
well sorry to hear about it
i have a quick quesiton.. maybe a way to noobie one.
Image


that line goin to the turbo from the oil filter housing, how thats tha connect to it?
i know that on the bottom theres a oil return line in the stock position right?

thanks
 
#83 ·
sorry.. maybe ill try again :)
on that picture theres a line going from the turbo to the oil filter housing, i know how it attaches to the turbo, but im wondering how it connects to the oil filter housing since theres not an outlet there, or is there?
 
#84 ·
Yes there is a place to connect it... Sometimes you have to take out a plug to connect it. Either that or run the feed line to the head (stock location) instead of the oil filter housing.
 
Discussion starter · #85 ·
A 90* elbow is put in one of the unused ports in the filter housing. One of them gives filtered oil and another unfiltered. I can't remember which is which off the top of my head.
 
#87 ·
Did porting that oil pressure relief hole give you any noticebale gain or loss in oil pressure? I can't believe how small the hole is in it's stock form and as long as my motor is out, I am thinking I'm going to do it as well. Mine is a 7 bolt filter housing, any difference in the port job or should I just ream it out like in your pic that you posted. I imagine that is to not have your oil pressure go through the roof under high boost because it would relieve the pressure more quickly, correct?
 
Discussion starter · #88 ·
Porting the hole compensates for the oil pressure you gain by getting rid of balance shafts, oil squirters, or both. My motor had neither so I ported the hell out of mine as you saw in the pic. I was satisfied with the oil pressure; I didn't jot down any numbers but it seemed just right to me (40-50 psi cruising).

In contrast, I just installed a 2.4 in a customer's car which did not have squirters or b/s and did not have the relief hole ported (I didn't put the short block together). The resulting oil pressure is sky high even at low RPM (~80psi at 3000 RPM, 140* oil temp on 10w40 oil). Not good. The oil filter housing on that motor is coming off today to have the hole ported.

Rod and main bearing clearances can have an effect on the oil pressure you end up with. However, chances are they are within spec on most motors, so my recommendation would be to always port the hole when you eliminate b/s and/or squirters. Another good reason to do it is because you want to run thicker oil in a built motor anyway, which will also raise the oil pressure on an otherwise unmodified system.
 
#90 ·
nukefission said:
Porting the hole compensates for the oil pressure you gain by getting rid of balance shafts, oil squirters, or both. My motor had neither so I ported the hell out of mine as you saw in the pic. I was satisfied with the oil pressure; I didn't jot down any numbers but it seemed just right to me (40-50 psi cruising).

In contrast, I just installed a 2.4 in a customer's car which did not have squirters or b/s and did not have the relief hole ported (I didn't put the short block together). The resulting oil pressure is sky high even at low RPM (~80psi at 3000 RPM, 140* oil temp on 10w40 oil). Not good. The oil filter housing on that motor is coming off today to have the hole ported.

Rod and main bearing clearances can have an effect on the oil pressure you end up with. However, chances are they are within spec on most motors, so my recommendation would be to always port the hole when you eliminate b/s and/or squirters. Another good reason to do it is because you want to run thicker oil in a built motor anyway, which will also raise the oil pressure on an otherwise unmodified system.
Click to expand...
Excellent. Much more clear now. The longblock I have going in is fully built with OE balance shaft removal kit but squriters are still going to be there. Thanks for the clarification. Time to go do some porting. :D
 
Discussion starter · #91 ·
elementone said:
Nukefission: What about when your leaving the b/s and the squirters? Is it a good idea to port it anyways?
Click to expand...
If you aren't increasing the oil pressure by removing either of those components, I see no reason to decrease it by porting the hole. If everything else is stock then leave the hole stock.
 
#92 ·
Ok..I need to ask a few questions and glad found this post and maybe can do things right and not have a simlar disaster.
Not sure where to start.I am also buiding a 2.4 6 bolt. I have crower rods and wiseco pistons.Pretty sure same pistons you had. I have cometic 87 hp gasket.I am running an FP3065 with similar stuff. I am now scared silly.
I think it said .0025 or something in my wiseco box.So that is obviously no good? So I need to go like .0045 or something? And won't to big piston to wall clearance give me oil blowing by the rings?
I thought this would be straighforward but now not so sure.And also so I should port that hole in oil pump like you did.Anywhere to get any clearer instructions on that?i am not using squirters or balance shafts.
Man I thought forged engines were bulletproof but you have shaken my faith in them big time.Forged pistons should take a good amount of knock no problem.And while 8.8 is a bit high ,I have also .20 over wisecos it shouldn't be that bad with a big fmic and stuff Guess depends on your altitude and other factors.
So for now guess like to know what to do with piston to wall clearance and if you think anything else caused your catastrophic 2.4 failure.
 
Save
Reply Quote Like Like
Discussion starter · #93 ·
If you aren't spraying it with anything then .0045" may be ok. If I had it to do over again I would have put the Wisecos in at .006". Beyond the 400whp mark, running a big clearance for safety is worth the small price you pay in performance.

My experience shouldn't scare you away from built motors. Here are a few precautions you can take to help avoid what I went through:
  • After machining, have the block sonic tested and/or magnafluxed to check for cracks and defects in the cylinders, etc.
  • Have the crank magnafluxed and checked for balance, straighness, etc.
  • Weight match all of the pistons/rods; balance every rotating part (flywheel, harmonic damper, etc)
  • Always use a torque plate.
  • Make absolutely sure that your machinist understands that Wiseco calls for the wall clearance on their pistons to be measured from a different place than most other manufacturers. Make sure he follows these directions. Make him measure the wall clearance in front of you when you go to pick up the block.

I think there was a defect in my block, in cylinder 3. It's the only logical explanation I can think of for how the fluid got into the cylinder. Understand that most of the damage occurred because of hydrolock. It's the cause of the hydrolock that I'm not certain of and probably never will be. All I can say is have your block checked out for defects.
 
#94 ·
Well engine is still at shop and didn't get it quite as loose as yours.In fact after talking to wiseco and checking with other guys running pretty big boost on the wisecos the general consensus was .003 to .0035 would be sufficient if 500 mile break in was followed which do the way the wiseco coating is suppose to wear away .0035 would give more like .0043 and supposedly is equivalent to ross at like .005.
And read of other high power engines running that .004 range with zero problems.What about your ring gaps..maybe they were too tight..
I was told to go like .20 and .23 or so for those.
I guess it may be impossible to every exactly figure out what really happened in there.You weren't spraying it and were just running 30psi..?
I agree it would be good idea to do most of what you said to do with the magnaflux and all that other stuff.Unfortunatley not going to do that and have never done it in past on any engines I have built. Most of it is machine shop hype. Yes it may find some flaws with the magnafluxing and yes balancing might be an ok idea but it all just costs a lot more and found most of the time its overkill.
Maybe they did make a big mistake and took the .004 at wrong place..?
I guess will find out if wiseco is wrong recommending the .0035 but Brian Nutter who used to hang on tuners and is wiseco tech that actually knows a lot about the dsm said .0035 even .004 would be lots for my application but most agree too small ring gaps could cause more problems than too small piston to bore. And break in on the street would allow smaller clearances to be used than break in on the track.
I hope he is right and other guys that said they ran smaller piston to wall gaps.
Do you remember your ring gaps..nuke.?
Anyway after seeing that engine it almost makes me want to go back to my small block chevies..we never balanced them ,blueprinted them or magnafluxed them.We simpley screwed them together and ran hell out of them with zero problems.
 
Save
Reply Quote Like Like
Discussion starter · #95 ·
My rings gaps were all around .19. I wrote Brian Nutter a detailed email a while back with lots of pics and an explanation of every step I took during assembly. Never heard back from him about it.
 
#96 ·
Hmm, emailed wiseco and had it forwarded to him and got reply really fast within hours.
Your 19 top was likely fine and think bottom is supposed to be larger than top ring.
They recommend .004 in small block chevies I think and adding .001 to that for lots of nitrous and superchargers and stuff.
I think it said .0025 in my box for the 2.4 .20 over 8.8 or whatever.I think we have same ones.So .0035 would be a .001 diff and they said wiseco due to measuring low is same as ross at like .005 anyway plus gap goes bigger as coating wears off them.
Did you ever measure you piston to bore to see if it was right? Did all the pistons show evidence of siezing in the bores or did the pistons all show same wall damage.Maybe the machinist messed up number three or something big time.It was number three that showed the most damage right? I would think if it was wrong piston to wall they would have all went equally at same time.
I have talked to quite a few guys running .0035 and with bit bigger ring gaps like .019 and .020 and seconds of around that .023 type thing with no problems so far.
So have to think it was something else not the piston to wall.Since you were not spraying and only running 30psi
lots of guys have pushed their big turbos to that and not had to use huge piston to wall clearances from talking to people.
So are you doing up another 2.4 or just going back to a 2.0?
I am sure you are depressed.
I did see on one site where the car went lean and did a serious number on the motor similar to yours.The leaness and heat let the pistons expand too much I think and they did contact the walls but the guy said that was from like 15 to 1 AFR at full throttle!
I think you said you were logging and all that did'nt you?
Also not sure what effect the meth would have on the afr and stuff.You were running straight meth?
I guess I have to be a guinea pig but so far think staying at the .0035 piston to wall and break it in nice for 500 as recommended. Put top gap at .020 and bottom at .023 I think.try that out.I won't be spraying for quite some time maybe not even till next year and think would keep it at 50 to 75 shot not even sure 100 is a good idea. And keep my redline at 7500 mabye 8000 max as a bit worried about the 2.4 cranks.
See how it goes and wish you better luck there nukefission with your next motor..
 
Save
Reply Quote Like Like
Discussion starter · #97 ·
This is one of the conclusions I came to a while ago and already stated here. Either the wall clearance wasn't enough or the machinist didn't set and measure the clearance from the right spot on the piston. It's quite possible he set it to .004" at the bottom of the skirt instead of further up it like Wiseco recommends. This would equate to a smaller clearance at Wiseco's recommended spot. Who knows how much smaller.

Whatever the case, the clearances were not sufficient for the amount of power I was making. All of the pistons showed excessive wear, as well as all of the cylinders. What probably happened is that I built the motor with a certain power level in mind, then exceeded it when I put the meth kit on. Regardless of what meth or other power adders do to the intake temps, more HP means more heat and pressure. The wall clearance must be adjusted accordingly. I'm inclined to believe the Wisecos would have worked fine at the right clearance. Personally I would not dare run .0035" unless it were for very mild street use. Doesn't matter to me what other people say about running low clearance with lots of power, the question is how reliable is it at that clearance? When you consider how much power is lost by running looser, compared with the margin of safety you gain, it's a no-brainer.

Yes, it is depressing to suffer a near-total loss on that motor, but it's also a learning experience. I put the motor together thinking it would be a nice, tight stockish motor that would last a long time but still handle a lot of power. I'm off that kick and am going loosey-goosey from now on. Case in point: a friend of mine regularly puts down a repeatable 600whp on pump gas and meth, and has been doing so for a couple years. The car is street driven, but has a huge wall clearance. It sounds like a diesel truck when cold but it sure has proven its reliability.

My 2.4 crank survived the catastrophe so I'm using in it my old 2.0 block to make a 2.3. I've already gathered most of the parts but am still waiting on pistons. I will also be changing turbos and few other things. I will likely have pics and details of the second motor when it's done in a few months.
 
#98 ·
Nuke could you email me a big pic of those pistons in the sig and did you take any pics of the walls in the other cyinders? Would like to see those too.
Did you ever get the walls measured to see if they were machined wrong?
I am really wished had just got ross now and set them at their .0055 or whatever and called it a day.Now as messed up as still hearing nearly everyone say the .0035 on the wisecos measured properly should be fine even for 30psi and small 50 to 75shot of spray.I can't seem to find many people though that want to talk about their actual piston to wall numbers on the wisecos and what success or bad luck they have had.
You were running pure methanol though ? Not sure what effect pure meth has on hp and cylinder heat and all that.Were you on race gas too or just pump 91 or whatever?
I have not much problem maybe running the wisecos at .004 or a bit more but can't get a straight answer either if will have real bad slap that might not go away when the engine is warm or excessive blowby in daily driving.
 
Save
Reply Quote Like Like
Discussion starter · #99 ·
Here are some more pics. I have others but they are not in a gallery at this time.

AL92 said:
Did you ever get the walls measured to see if they were machined wrong?
Click to expand...
No, I have not measured the old motor yet to see what the wall clearance actually is. At some point I will.

You were running pure methanol though ? Were you on race gas too or just pump 91 or whatever?
Click to expand...
I was injecting straight VP M1 racing methanol. Main fuel was 93 octane pump gas.

It's your motor so do what you like, but I would run a big clearance for the reasons outlined above. You are not gaining much by running it as tight as you can and you're certainly reducing your margin for error and power growth potential. You can't have your cake and eat it too, and expect the cake to last a long time. ;) Some folks I've talked to have run Wiseco's at .006" without a problem.
 
81 - 100 of 139 Posts
About this Discussion
138 Replies
58 Participants
Last post:
nukefission
DSMTalk Forums: Mitsubishi Eclipse, Plymouth Laser, and Eagle Talon Forum
posts
2.3M
members
104K
Since
2000
A forum community dedicated to Mitsubishi Eclipse, Plymouth Laser and Eagle Talon owners and enthusiasts. Come join the discussion about performance, turbos, builds, modifications, troubleshooting, maintenance, and more!
Full Forum Listing
Explore Our Forums
General DSM Tech and Tuning Help! Tech Newbie Questions Forum Body Tech and Appearance Electronics Tech