Opinions on sleeving for a 470

[Challenger340]

You are missing about 2/3 of your sonic test measurements but the ones you do have, if correct, are very good. Something else is wrong. The block shouldn't split with those thicknesses.

I agree..... You've got something else contributing here, those numbers if correct are very good ?
Bump !

 

[33 IMP]

Hydrauliced? Frozen? Over heated? Are the rings loose on the piston in that hole? Ring gap? (Just throwing wildzass guesses out there.....)

 

[66Satellite47]

You are missing about 2/3 of your sonic test measurements but the ones you do have, if correct, are very good. Something else is wrong. The block shouldn't split with those thicknesses.

IQ, I agree, that was the comment I started make, but didn't. We did sonic checking at about top of ring travel, mid travel and bottom, major thrust, minor and each side. Looking at the chart in post#1, no idea where those were taken. Still it's a very odd crack, maybe hydraulicing would do that?

 

[7t500]

I would love to see a sonic test done all around your crack. That would tell you a lot more info about a possible why.

I'd love to see that too. I'm talking to the guy that did the work and seeing what he wants to do about it.

 

[7t500]

Hydrauliced? Frozen? Over heated? Are the rings loose on the piston in that hole? Ring gap? (Just throwing wildzass guesses out there.....)

Not Hydrauliced since I've had it and had the work done. It got warm once in the middle of summer but it wasn't to the point of overheated. I can say about rings as I had someone else assemble the shortblock this time hoping to ensure it was done 100% correctly.

 

[69Bee]

Checked before boring and was bored to .035 over. Soundsike we have very similar concerns about the other cylinders.

Can you clarify this for us? I am going to assume that your pistons are 0.030" OS, which would dictate that the cylinders are bored 0.025" over, and then honed to size (0.030") for the pistons. If you are not using any power adders, the resultant bore should be 0.030" because the pistons are smaller by the clearance required for a NA application. If you have power adders, you usually increase by a thou or two, and gap the rings to suit your usage also.

If, in fact, the bore were bored & honed to 0.035", and the pistons had lets say 0.0035" clearance built in, you would actually have 0.0085" clearance roughly. If any was added for any power adders, the clearance would be even larger, and might explain why the cylinder cracked; it was getting the **** beat out of it with the larger clearance.

 

[7t500]

Can you clarify this for us? I am going to assume that your pistons are 0.030" OS, which would dictate that the cylinders are bored 0.025" over, and then honed to size (0.030") for the pistons. If you are not using any power adders, the resultant bore should be 0.030" because the pistons are smaller by the clearance required for a NA application. If you have power adders, you usually increase by a thou or two, and gap the rings to suit your usage also.

If, in fact, the bore were bored & honed to 0.035", and the pistons had lets say 0.0035" clearance built in, you would actually have 0.0085" clearance roughly. If any was added for any power adders, the clearance would be even larger, and might explain why the cylinder cracked; it was getting the **** beat out of it with the larger clearance.

The kit I ordered from 440Source was the 400.470.5070. Which, after reviewing shows that the pistons are 4.375. I discussed my application with the builder and made sure he knew that it was an NA motor and what my end goals were. Now, I never actually put a bore gauge and mic on the cylinders to verify that it was done as this was part of the reason I outsourced that portion.

I can double check measurements later today and probably should as I am calling the builder back later today to discuss where we go from here.

 

[7t500]

I put my ID bore gauge on all the cylinders ans came back with measurements ranging from 4.371 to 4.375. There were some slight deviations with some slight out-of-round cylinders, including the ones that cracked but I'm not certain if that would be a symptom or a side-effect.

 

[69Bee]

Just measure the thrust (in/ex) direction, top middle bottom. Don't worry about fr/rr T/M/B for OOR yet. The cylinders should not range -0.004" to 0.000". With only 1000mi on the motor, and the bore at 4.375" (yes, I checked your kit), the bores should start out at 4.375". If they are down to 4.371", that is too tight and sounds like the issue potentially causing the cylinders to crack. When you take it apart, you might find damaged piston too.

 

[66Satellite47]

Can you clarify this for us? I am going to assume that your pistons are 0.030" OS, which would dictate that the cylinders are bored 0.025" over, and then honed to size (0.030") for the pistons. If you are not using any power adders, the resultant bore should be 0.030" because the pistons are smaller by the clearance required for a NA application. If you have power adders, you usually increase by a thou or two, and gap the rings to suit your usage also.

If, in fact, the bore were bored & honed to 0.035", and the pistons had lets say 0.0035" clearance built in, you would actually have 0.0085" clearance roughly. If any was added for any power adders, the clearance would be even larger, and might explain why the cylinder cracked; it was getting the **** beat out of it with the larger clearance.

I presume it had .035 over pistons. That's how we built the 400 motors to use the common available ring sizes. Custom pistons.
Edit: Didn't see post #28 with bore of 4.371. Not sure what this build is!

 

[69Bee]

I presume it had .035 over pistons. That's how we built the 400 motors to use the common available ring sizes. Custom pistons.
Edit: Didn't see post #28 with bore of 4.371. Not sure what this build is!

I looked it up, and they say that is does have 0.035" pistons. I thought that they might have been referring to the "file fit" rings, but the description does say 4.375" Bore (0.035" OS). Yes, I do agree that there should not be that much taper in the cylinder, let alone, smaller than the proper bore to start.

 

[33 IMP]

Can you clarify this for us? I am going to assume that your pistons are 0.030" OS, which would dictate that the cylinders are bored 0.025" over, and then honed to size (0.030") for the pistons. If you are not using any power adders, the resultant bore should be 0.030" because the pistons are smaller by the clearance required for a NA application. If you have power adders, you usually increase by a thou or two, and gap the rings to suit your usage also.

If, in fact, the bore were bored & honed to 0.035", and the pistons had lets say 0.0035" clearance built in, you would actually have 0.0085" clearance roughly. If any was added for any power adders, the clearance would be even larger, and might explain why the cylinder cracked; it was getting the **** beat out of it with the larger clearance.

.035 is a very common overbore for 400 Mopar. It gets to 4.375 for a huge ring selection. Many more choices than 4.370....

 

[7t500]

Just measure the thrust (in/ex) direction, top middle bottom. Don't worry about fr/rr T/M/B for OOR yet. The cylinders should not range -0.004" to 0.000". With only 1000mi on the motor, and the bore at 4.375" (yes, I checked your kit), the bores should start out at 4.375". If they are down to 4.371", that is too tight and sounds like the issue potentially causing the cylinders to crack. When you take it apart, you might find damaged piston too.

I can focus on thrust dimensions at lunch.

.035 is a very common overbore for 400 Mopar. It gets to 4.375 for a huge ring selection. Many more choices than 4.370....

I corrected my typo on my previous post. Pistons are 4.375 ( http://store.440source.com/Platinum-Series-Pistons-4375-17-Dished/productinfo/5070/ )

 

[7t500]

I verified thrust dimensions and I'm getting 4.371 with both calipers I have. Granted, I'm using a bore gauge/calipers and not an ID bore micrometer.

Also attaching pictures of the wear on minor/major trust walls for a couple cylinders to see what thoughts are on those. Pictures didn't come out as nice as in person but there's definitely some wear/scoring.

 

[33 IMP]

I think there is a very good chance those forged pistons were installed too tight. You know the old saying.... if you build it too loose, you'll know, if you build it too tight, everybody will know....
I like AT LEAST .005 piston to wall, for a forged piston.. He'll, I ran a motor that was.011. Didn't bust any cylinder walls....

 

[steve340]

I have seen pistons to tight or to loose a few times but I have never seen that symptom alone be responsible for cracking the bore wall.
I don't believe your problem can be explained to piston clearance alone.
My guess is as in earlier post - before you got it it was either hydrauliced or frozen and you have inherited the problem caused by that.

 

[7t500]

I have seen pistons to tight or to loose a few times but I have never seen that symptom alone be responsible for cracking the bore wall.
I don't believe your problem can be explained to piston clearance alone.
My guess is as in earlier post - before you got it it was either hydrauliced or frozen and you have inherited the problem caused by that.

That is a possibility and I'm not dismissing it at all. I'm not trying to blame the builder but do want to find the cause so I can learn from it and if it was someone's error that it gets corrected amicably. Even if I just learn that sometimes you just lose, life sucks, and I bought a **** block.

 

[steve340]

Good attitude - I agree.
I do believe you got a dud block but at least all your other parts can be swapped.
It could be worse - the engine could be spread all over the asphalt.

 

[7t500]

Good attitude - I agree.
I do believe you got a dud block but at least all your other parts can be swapped.
It could be worse - the engine could be spread all over the asphalt.

I try to be realistic and realistically I may have **** luck... but it definitely could be worse as you said. I should hopefully have caught everything early enough that it can be re-used and breath new life. Just gotta put in the due diligence to figure out the best course forward. That means I gotta consult people smarter than I... which thanks for all the knowledge, advice, insight, suggestions from everyone thus far!

 

[7t500]

As an update - I took the shortblock to the guy that built it. We could not find any good reason that it failed. No evidence of anything out of spec when using tools much more expensive than what I have in my arsenal. In short, looks like I have bad luck and the block was a dud...

However, I have found a 71 400 block that is currently at the machine shop getting checked out... hoping it gets a clean bill of health.