[Verdoro 68]

Originally Posted by TedRamAirII

What's the SNAFU on the Duplicolor DE1616 paint? have you tried it again?

My memory was wrong, I snagged a box of 6 for $40 a while back. Haven't seen that deal since.

https://forums.maxperformanceinc.com...45#post6180145

Figured I'd fit up the pistons and rods before circling back on the ring gap. The trick to the spirolox is to pull them apart, and push the spiral up and towards top of the piston when you put them in. Took me a little bit to figure that out. I also put my first two pistons on upside down (reversed 1 and 2), so I got good at removing them too. The rod vise was a pretty handy tool for this work.

Someone asked if this was zero decked earlier in the thread. I never gave Butler any measurements, so I was curious myself. I put a piston and rod in for mockup to see where things were at. Looks to be a smidge below the deck, but not substantial. My dial indicator setup was kind of finicky in this config, so I couldn't get a measurement I trusted.





Thought it also might be interesting to compare the old rod/piston assembly to the new one. I don't really know what I'm looking for, but they're pretty different. Way less material on the new pistons.

[1_Wild_Cat]

Is that the 6.700” rod length?

[Verdoro 68]

6.8” rods

[1_Wild_Cat]

Thanks for the rod info.. I’ve been trying to decide on a rod choice for my upcoming 4” stroke build.

[HWYSTR455]

Ah, yeah, see where I posted, pretty much the same comments as I did on this thread. Guess my mind isn't as bad as I though it is! Heheh!

I say if you go to the 1st step or more above standard, you don't need to make the 2nd bigger, just make it the same. It's enough of a gap to prevent butting if it does see more heat.

So the block is .030 over? Since the rings are .020 over, that leaves an extra .010 for filing. And that explains why the oil rings are tight.

I thought they would box the file fit rings with the oil rings for the correct bore, and not leave additional for requiring to file them. Maybe that fact isn't correct, and my mem IS as bad I as thought! Heheh!

I have a small screw driver with a V cut into the tip, that I use to install spiral locks. I do the same with my thumb, open up the lock kind of in a spring fashion like you, then use the screw driver on the inside edge and follow it around to seat it. But really, whatever works for you is fine, as long as you don't stretch the lock out in a spring direction.

Technically, many don't do a 'true' zero deck, and shoot for .005-.007 (or more) in the hole. The tolerance allows for additional clearance in the even a rod bearing goes, expansion, or if the bore has a slight chamfer.

.

[Verdoro 68]

Everyone is out of stock of King Bearings. Summit is saying end of October, Butler doesn't have a date.

I have a few options:

1) Wait until the bearings come back into stock and put this build on hold.
2) Speed Pro 113M (no extra clearance available)
3) Try a combo of Sealed Power 4040M and 4040M1
4) Have the crank polished .001 to open up the clearance for the Clevite 743HNs that Butler sent

Not sure which direction to go. Do any of these bearings run on the larger side?

BTW, Butler aims for .018-.020 on ring gap.

[HWYSTR455]

I'm not a fan of mixing bearing shells, you never know if it's going to crush right. With that in mind, I would suggest having the crank polished.

Ring gaps are your call, tighter 'works', all I'm saying looser is safer.

You ask about the oil ring?

.

[Verdoro 68]

I'm going to take your advice on the looser ring gaps. Better safe than sorry and there doesn't seem to be any performance impact. I forgot to ask about the oil ring, will drop them another email.

By mixing shells I assume you mean putting an extra clearance with a standard in the same journal? Going to avoid that if I can. As of right now, it's just the #5 journal that needs a different bearing and it's not because of the journal itself since the Clevites were uniformly all too tight. Polishing the crank to fit the Clevites is probably the right solution here.

[HWYSTR455]

Correct, mixing a top bearing shell with a bottom bearing shell not from the same set. I don't think that's a good idea, and would not be comfortable doing that.

There's a lot of science that goes into how a bearing crushes when torqued, and I'm not going to challenge that.


.

[Verdoro 68]

After doing some reading, I'm going to give Speed Pro 113M bearings a shot. If those don't solve the clearance issue, I'll head over to the machine shop.

Although I said I wasn't going to change cams, you all have me considering changing cams. I don't want to be disappointed in the outcome of this build. Butler has the 236/242 .521/.540 in stock on a 112 or 114. Considering A/C and power brakes, would I be giving up any streetability with this cam? Is the 13" Continental stall enough for It?

[HWYSTR455]

If you go 114, I doubt you will give anything up, should be all gain, but somehow can't recall the exact specs of the cam you were going to use, just that I remember it was small.



.

[Verdoro 68]

I currently have a 230/236 .510/.520 114 for the build.

[HWYSTR455]

Yeah, went back and looked, thanks.

As an example, I ran a 247/253 solid roller, was on a 113.5 LSA, in the 71 LeMans for years, A/C, power brakes, no issues with vacuum at all. You could probably go up one more step if you really wanted to, but it wil be more dependent on rear gears and stall.

I think you're good with that cam, 236/242 on a 114, it's a good compromise between the cams a step in either direction. Should also make it a little less sensitive to octane as well.


.

[napster]

I'm having a very similar build done and have been waiting for almost a year for the build to be done. We are waiting for the transmission to be finished, but don't know when it will be completed due to supply issues. The transmission is a Tremec T-56 and only one part is holding it up.

Anyway, the engine is quite similar to the OP's build. Differences I see are minimal. Mine will be a 461 with a fully forged rotating assembly. Compression will be 9.9 to 1. Same type of heads as the OP's.

The cam seems to be up in the air at this point with my engine builder. I gave him the Butler RAIV roller cam I bought. I also have a cam with the same specs as previously suggested. It is a roller from Butler with the 236/242/112 specs. My engine builder thinks it is too radical for the build and would like me to go with the HR RAIV cam. I think the slightly bigger cam would be fine. Here are the cam cards. Also, going with Harland sharp roller rockers 1.65 with either cam.

I'm running two other 461's with 87CC Edelbrock aium. heads. The same builder went with the off the shelf Comp XR288HR cam. 236/242/110 and both are run with Doug's headers. Doesn't make any sense to me.

The 110 LSA is with the headers and the 112 LSA is for the RA manifolds.

Jim

[Verdoro 68]

That Ram Air IV roller is right in between the cam I have and the one I'm considering. I wonder what the power difference is between them?

Curious why your builder thinks the 236/242 would be too radical.

[jhein]

When I was spec'ing out my motor, both Butler and my builder thought that the CC 236/242, 520/540 at 110 LSA would be good with a manual trans and power brakes. I actually bought that cam but then had second thoughts and swapped it for the Butler custom grind cam which is the same 236/242, 520/540 but on a 112 LSA. But again, I have a manual trans and no AC. Motor will be on the dyno by Friday so we'll see what it does.

FWIW, my builder thought that cam even on a 110 LSA was fairly mild for a 468 cid motor.

[napster]

Originally Posted by Verdoro 68

That Ram Air IV roller is right in between the cam I have and the one I'm considering. I wonder what the power difference is between them?

Curious why your builder thinks the 236/242 would be too radical.

If my memory is correct, he said it is the iron heads. With the other 461's they have the edelbrock E heads and run the 236/242/110 cam.

[Formulajones]

It all gets confusing because everyone's idea of what is too radical is drastically different.

Part of that has to do with what the individual is looking for or expecting, and also a part of that really has to do with ones tuning ability, and where the cam is installed, and how much compression the engine has.

For example, the cam you have, being 230 @ .050 and on a 114 LSA, When I install that cam in a 455 with the right ICL, and get the timing dialed in where it should be and the idle circuits of the carb correct, that cam will idle baby butt smooth and most people would have no idea it has that much cam in it. I could make it work with a stock converter in a 455. It'll make good power, I would expect 425-450hp in your combination and 500 ft lbs. of torque very early in the rpm range.

Now if the install position is a bit retarded, the initial timing not optimized and the idle circuit a bit on the lean side, then it's going to have a little bit of lope. Not much, but some.

Step up to the cam mentioned, a 236 @ .050, to me that's just starting to get somewhere with a 455 street engine. On a 114 it's still pretty smooth with a slight lope.

Here is a 239 @ .050 on a 112. It works the power brakes and AC just fine and made 13 inches of vacuum up here at 5,000 feet. It's installed on a 106.25 ICL to get the intake/exhaust ratio I was looking for, and timing/carb are dialed.
It idles nice and only drops 150 rpm when put in gear.

https://youtu.be/AOqwz3QlO5k

Dad's old pump gas 455 had a Kauffman custom grind hydraulic roller in it that was 254/262 at .050 and Kauffman had that done on a 110 LSA to work with his ported heads. Now that cam wouldn't run the power brakes and was fairly choppy. Still very streetable, dad drove it everywhere for years. I personally don't mind something like that on the street if it's all set up properly.

For another comparison or data point, I run a 242/248 @ .050 on a 110 LSA in my 454 and it runs the AC fine. Brakes needed an extra vacuum cannister, but I eventually went hydraboost on that one. If the LSA was spread out further it would be fine.

[Verdoro 68]

I just chatted with Butler. The tech portrayed the 230/236 cam as a solid choice that's and easy driver that would produce good power. Like you all, he said I wouldn't be giving anything up by going to the 236/242, especially on a 114, but I may need a bigger converter. Said there's maybe 10-15 ft/lbs and 15-20 hp difference between the two. Obviously, my heads are the overall limiting factor.

I asked about the RAIV roller grind and he said he'd choose the 236/242 hands down over it. He also indicated that it's geared more towards iron d-ports that need more help on the exhaust.

425-450hp is a nice step up from what I had, but I think I'd be disappointed with the mellowness of the 230/236. I'd much rather change out a converter than a cam later, so I'm inclined to switch it up and go with the bigger cam on the 114.

[Formulajones]

Originally Posted by Verdoro 68

I just chatted with Butler. The tech portrayed the 230/236 cam as a solid choice that's and easy driver that would produce good power. Like you all, he said I wouldn't be giving anything up by going to the 236/242, especially on a 114, but I may need a bigger converter. Said there's maybe 10-15 ft/lbs and 15-20 hp difference between the two. Obviously, my heads are the overall limiting factor.

I asked about the RAIV roller grind and he said he'd choose the 236/242 hands down over it. He also indicated that it's geared more towards iron d-ports that need more help on the exhaust.

425-450hp is a nice step up from what I had, but I think I'd be disappointed with the mellowness of the 230/236. I'd much rather change out a converter than a cam later, so I'm inclined to switch it up and go with the bigger cam on the 114.

I agree with the assessment that the larger 236 cam may want a bit more converter than what you have. I'd be inclined to try it first as converters are fairly easy to change later if you decide. Easier than a camshaft change.
If you do the 236 on a 114 LSA, it's going to idle pretty well for you and make enough vacuum. You might find that 13" Continental works well enough to idle fine and drive well around town. Might not be optimum at the track but how often do you plan to do that??.....

Maybe at that point do a custom converter of your choice and see how that compares.