[Skip Fix]

Chris let me state this again, slowly for you-a Pontiac cast block #557 can do fine at 400 hp(got one on the engine stand) or a different one crack though the mains(pictures documented here on PY).Same iron, same casting same HP range. A different Pontiac 400 block casting with thicker main webs can push 600 HP+ and not fail.Was it the extra main webbing or the steel 4 bolt mains they added that made it stronger or both,why was one of the "weak" blocks able to handle 400 hp and the other not? Same cast iron -different block design!! Which block design(Pontiac or just any block) do you want Brinell specs for and at what HP do you want it to fail? Does a 6 bolt/cross bolted main block have more design strength and handle more HP with weaker iron than a 2 bolt main one-you'd have to do tests of each one, but I'd bet there would be a difference-that's part of where the design variability comes in. Does a softer aluminum block that has extra strengths add in the picture? What are you getting at.

If you are in a round about way asking was the MR1s that had stouter main webbing,solid lifter valley steel main caps and studs with soft cast iron going to be more prone to fail-who knows! Several were recalled and replaced by KRE/K&M, so KRE might have even thought there was a "potential" issue. So even with a beefier design but cast iron softer than factory blocks they were recalled,so maybe K&M, KRE can answer that. Seems like you have an idea enlighten us. Would the recall have happened if the one involvd here had not been part of a suit -who knows, but later ones were

I also believe there was one that failed in the mains that had pictures posted here,not sure the HP it was built to.Spidel's. OMTs that was replaced in the recall had a picture of what looked liek a crack starting. So what else do you need Chris.

"Same goes with an engine block. You can have an excellent design for the intended HP level that's 3 times (or greater) than what the OEM block was ever designed for, but if you use an inferior material to cast it with, it's all for naught." Brian understood the analogy.

This thread was initially about jurisdiction for the "defamation" portion-we've all seen plenty of trials jockey for jurisdictions in the media,the lawyers wil have to sort that out. The only thing I read was ruled on was that. The rest still needs to be decided.

Johnta1 still seems you are skirting the main question-did final honing change all those other dimensions?? If there wasn't an issue with the cast iron why was there a recall(and the recall was noted by other PY members) and why did KRE not tell them to go jump as they did this first block's owner?

"I think the whole point of 'this post' is that (And correct me if I'm wrong)

#1: The case is going to be tried in Ohio not Virginia. Which is what was contested and tried to be thrown out?
#2: That the block received was delivered to a customer below standards advertised at that time claimed by the consumer?
#3: That work done after receiving the block never affected the integrity of the block as claimed by the other party?
#4: That at the time all consumer wanted was the block replaced or refunded because block did not meet standards posted by the seller?
#5: Seller claims in court documents that work done affected the initial integrity of the block and all claims are null and void?

Any of this wrong?"

I think that is it in a summary, most of which John.Chris and Maurice have not addressed,and won't.

[fastgto]

I think that is it in a summary, most of which John.Chris and Maurice have not addressed,and won't.[/QUOTE]


Hmmmm.

[Chris Roach]

Skip,
First off, understand me, I am in no way defending anyone or anything in any of my posts.

I only asked a simple question of how the standards are set to deem a given brinell # acceptable or not! That's it, period!

All responses seem to revolve around OEM standard and anything less than that is assumed to be junk. That's fine. I'm just trying to narrow it down to a more technical discussion on how that is derived.

I'm no idiot, and agree with most everything you and others have said. But most is just theories or assumptions.

I'm done, cause I may be a bit guilting of taking the orignal post off topic.

[Brian Baker]

Originally Posted by Chris Roach

Skip,
First off, understand me, I am in no way defending anyone or anything in any of my posts.

I only asked a simple question of how the standards are set to deem a given brinell # acceptable or not! That's it, period!

All responses seem to revolve around OEM standard and anything less than that is assumed to be junk. That's fine. I'm just trying to narrow it down to a more technical discussion on how that is derived.

I'm no idiot, and agree with most everything you and others have said. But most is just theories or assumptions.

I'm done, cause I may be a bit guilting of taking the orignal post off topic.

Would you agree that a block designed for higher HP applications than an OEM block that has a Brinell reading that's much lower than an OEM block would be unacceptable?

[Chris Roach]

Originally Posted by Brian Baker

Would you agree that a block designed for higher HP applications than an OEM block that has a Brinell reading that's much lower than an OEM block would be unacceptable?

Only if it was proven to fail.

If that same block was proven to support its intended use, as designed, would it still be unacceptable?

See my point yet?

Originally Posted by Skip Fix

On the general question of what Brinell/grade cast iron is needed for what HP. I think there are probably too many variables in individual motors to give a definitive answer

Now your on to me!

I'll say it once more, we all know the smaller the brinell # the softer the cast, but at what point does it become an issue?

Cheers guys, its been fun, but I need to get in the garage before it becomes winter again.

[Brian Baker]

Originally Posted by Chris Roach

Only if it was proven to fail.

If that same block was proven to support its intended use, as designed, would it still be unacceptable?

See my point yet?

I'll say it once more, we all know the smaller the brinell # the softer the cast, but at what point does it become an issue?

No, I don't see your point, because you have no empirical evidence to back it up, it's just a supposition. The Spidel's, now they have some empirical evidence. It becomes an issue when, as in the Spidel's experience, torquing down the cylinder heads on a block that is too soft causes the deck surface to raise around the head fasteners, causing improper gasket crush due to the uneven raised surfaces of the deck, and the inadequate clamping force from the inaccurate torque reading on the wrench caused by the deck lifting...AND THIS IS ALL BEFORE THE ENGINE HAS BEEN FIRED AND IS MAKING ANY HORSEPOWER.

[Chris Roach]

Originally Posted by Brian Baker

The Spidel's, now they have some empirical evidence. It becomes an issue when, as in the Spidel's experience, torquing down the cylinder heads on a block that is too soft causes the deck surface to raise around the head fasteners, causing improper gasket crush due to the uneven raised surfaces of the deck, and the inadequate clamping force from the inaccurate torque reading on the wrench caused by the deck lifting...AND THIS IS ALL BEFORE THE ENGINE HAS BEEN FIRED AND IS MAKING ANY HORSEPOWER.

Aren't those the guys who use a breaker bar and 6-foot piece of pipe as a torque wrench?

[PONTIAC DUDE]

Originally Posted by Chris Roach

Aren't those the guys who use a breaker bar and 6-foot piece of pipe as a torque wrench?

FWIW Chris. I know Brad and his family very very well. Consider them Friends.

I think that was an uncalled for personal slam & demeaning statement.

Hope Brad doesn't see this. He doesn't put up with crap.

[Brian Baker]

Originally Posted by Chris Roach

Aren't those the guys who use a breaker bar and 6-foot piece of pipe as a torque wrench?

Now you're questioning Mr. Spidel's engine assembly capabilities?

Keep deflecting, Mr. Cheerleader.