Re: Aftermarket Cranks
 

Larry,
The rods are not custom length?? The center-to-center is the same as factory FE rods? I'll give you the fact the the rod is probably more reliable than the bigger rod end, but that's about it. When there are E/SA Mustangs that can run 10.00 at 3000' at Indy, I think you are barking up the wrong ladder.

Rusty

Re: Aftermarket Cranks
 

Larry,
The guys that ran this combination, had pistons with a shorter compression distance to compensate the deck difference. Like said before by others, if they had removed the rod and piston, they would have been caught.

...and by the way, this same discussion was brought up on this forum many times, including this posting...

http://classracer.com/classforum/showthread.php?t=8142

Re: Aftermarket Cranks
 

Rusty,

What E/SA Mustang might you be referring to? I only remember one at Indy in E, but it's wasn't the one that can run 10.00's in 3000 ft. of air. Care to elaborate on your scientific findings?

Re: Aftermarket Cranks
 

Sorry..it was a 10.25 at 129 in E/SA a couple of years ago in 3000'

Re: Aftermarket Cranks
 

That makes more sense. Rated at 285 back then, 312 now.

Re: Aftermarket Cranks
 

Larry

While you are figuring out all the frictional saving from the 2.200 journal from the 2.438 Ford journal, you also need to take into account that the Ford bearing is only .734 wide as compared to a Chev 2.200 bearing that measure .892 wide. Sounds to me like you not using all the pertinent info in your equation. By my figures it looks like there is 11% less drag with a Ford bearing for a 2.438 journal as compared to the Chev 2.200. Oh, my Crower rods are 6.488 in length and my pistons have the correct C/H number per NHRA.

With that said I think NHRA should take about 10 hp off the FE Crower rod Combo. How bout you???

RJ

Happy Thanksgiving

Re: Aftermarket Cranks
 

Time for a history lesson for Mr. Hill : I was the swinger who submitted the rod! I know what I sent. It was not a custom length. That language appeared in the Accepted List because the NHRA tech man who compiled the data for the rod list simply went to the Crower catalog and copied what was in the Crower catalog, just like he did for all of the combos. I know who did it, and it was done that way because it was a massive gathering of info and he did not have time to verify every demension that was not right there in the catalog. The part number that was used says "specify" in the Crower book, but the rod I sent NHRA, in the same box with a OEM rod, was 6.490, just like the Ford rod. The sole reason for the 2.200 journal was the fact that NHRA approved the Accucrank crankshaft for 428's in Super Stock only at that time, and there was no rod for the accepted crank, which WAS accepted with a 2.2 rod pin. At that time, there were NO rods for Stockers!!! When NHRA approved the rod for SS at that time, it was approved for all FE's.......not just 428's, but that was all we asked for at the time. FAST FORWARD.......several years later, Stockers got the rod list for SS. I called NHRA and confirmed that the rods on the list were legal for Stock...........twice! FAST FORWARD another year or two..............two Shelbys go to teardown at Indy and have the pans pulled off. The rods were checked, and were deemed LEGAL, because the rods are on the list. That confirmed the fact that this was legal.

NOBODY was "cheating" when the crank got submitted. I was not "cheating" when I submitted the rod...........I was trying to cover my own butt so my junk would not be illegal! NHRA gave the rod to all FE's in SS, and then later gave it to FE's in Stock. Nothing underhanded took place. It was all in the open and straightforward. Sorry if it pissed in your Wheaties, but that's the way it happened, and like RJ said, the barn door has been open on it for YEARS. NHRA is not going to tell racers "oops, you can't use rods anymore that you have used for years, because Larry Hill is pissed".

When I sent the rod, I sent it in a box WITH a Ford rod right beside it. If they would have said no, it might be different, but they did not. Ford FE's were fast way before any kind of rods were approved. Do they live better? YES. Are they any faster? No. On the bearing surface issue, the FE has no chamfer, and is .730 wide. The 2.200 "HN" bearings are .830 wide. Do some of your math on the surface area, and you will see that there is not much difference between 2.378 (.060 under) at .730 bearing width, and 2.200 at .830 bearing width. The performance difference is not measurable, but it is a good excuse if you can't run with it, to say that the reason some Ford is fast is because of that "bogus" rod. It might be because some of us get up early and go to bed late to make our LEGAL junk go fast.

Happy Thanksgiving!

Blair Patrick

Re: Aftermarket Cranks
 

RJ, you should get a hold of a set of those super trick Clevite "HN" bearings. I hear there is HUGE POWER in that .062 in width you are giving up there!! That should put you two car lengths ahead of Jeff Tueton's new car! LOL. Man, I hope we get those Honda rods soon!

Re: Aftermarket Cranks
 

Whatever is printed in the NHRA accepted rod list can CHANGE quickly.

Last year,I was finally going to have an engine built with an accepted Crower rod for an Olds 455,and then it suddenly said: SUPER STOCK ONLY.

Re: Aftermarket Cranks
 

The difference that I see about the info on the rods is that your Crower rod listed for the B/B Olds(Super Stock only) shows "B.E. specify S.E. specify length specify custom weight" which is pretty vague.

The FE Crower rod shows "B.E. 2.325, S.E. 0.990, length custom weight 765 grms".

You also have available to you a Eagle rod thats legal in stock with the appropriate dimensions. Eagle makes a great rod and I have run them in the past with a bolt upgrade and never had a problem, cost is around $500.00.

You might also get Crower to add the missing data and then ask NHRA to approve the Crower for Stock also.

Its for sure they won't just do it for you, so you have to invest some time and effort.. Or run the Eagles.

Happy Thanksgiving

RJ

Re: Aftermarket Cranks
 

I was quietly drinking beer, and I get drug into this mess. I will be in E this year. I managed to get myself 'upped' a class. Don't know how I did that. I don't know about the FE or FD's or anything like that. If RJ and Blair are involved, then it's open range law. On the cranks, it just makes more available especially for some of the older cars. It's just gotta look like a stock crank and can't have the whole counterweight gone, and no knife edge. Did I miss something here. The good thing RJ and I have going, is by the time we are in the bottom of the ladder, we will be racing wheel chairs in a home.

Re: Aftermarket Cranks
 

RJ you always bring a smile to my face.

Happy Thanksgiving, we hope to see you out racing more this year.

Blair I like Wheaties "Breakfast of Champions", maybe you should try them. Wheaties helped me get to the winners circle!

I am not pissed. I feel cheated. I believe NHRA has an opportunity to correct an error.

I like History. Scott Wilcox may not be a big fan of history. His 1967 SS/A Corvette, with the stroke of a pen, was removed from the classification guide.

A few years ago every big block Corvette had the L-88 hood, not so today. The stroke a pen corrected an error.

Since we now have aftermarket cranks for the FE Fords, there is no reason to have a connecting rod that is non OEM size.

I may be wrong, but I don't think so!

Re: Aftermarket Cranks
 

Hey Jeff, when you and RJ get into wheelchairs, I'll race you for some of that beer!

Larry, the "strokes of the pen" you refer to were done based on info about combos and hood heights that did not exist from the OEM. There is no disputing that FE's never came with 2.2 rods, but they were accepted as replacements, and alot of water has run under that bridge since then. If there was any advantage, it has been absorbed by now in the AHFS, much like any changes are that affect performance. Aluminium heads and permitted grinding of combustion chambers helped BB Chevys alot more than it did my junk, but I lived with it, and just tried to make my stuff better somewhere else to level up with a change that affected me negatively in comparison to a closed chamber BBC.

You will see lots of Ford blocks, and 50 year-old iron heads, and OEM manifolds on many FE Stockers. Blocks, heads, and manifolds make alot more difference than different bearings with MORE surface area. Everyone gets a perk here and there.............maybe yours is next............if it makes your Mopar a rocket, you will either move up a class like Mr. Jeff, or you will outrun our FE junk until we get smarter!

I usually don't post on here..........don't have much time, but I had to chime in on this one. Happy Thanksgiving to all. I hope I get to see you guys at the races some next year. I'm not much of a beer drinker, but I would drink at least one with Jeff Tueton just because he is an asset to class racing and a fine feller.

Re: Aftermarket Cranks
 

Do these have to be Stock wheelchairs????

RJ

Re: Aftermarket Cranks
 

There was one with a Hemi next to the Hemi Powered Sno Blower at the new car show a couple years ago. What is a sno blower anyway? R J, do you know?

Re: Aftermarket Cranks
 

Jeff don't have a clue, but no Factory Drag Pak wheelchairs, that ain't fair!!

RJ

Re: Aftermarket Cranks
 

RJ I have been trying to figure how two .892 width bearing that fit into a rod that is .995 wide fits on the crankpin without interferance.

Lets do the math: BBC rod width .995 X 2 = 1.990 + .015 rod side clearance = 2.005''

FE Ford rod width .868 X 2 = 1.736 + .015 rod side clearance = 1.751''

BBC assembled width of two rods and .015 side clearance 2.005

FE Ford assembled width of two rods and .015 side clearance 1.751

2.005 - 1.751 = .254 interferance.

You could not assemble these parts with a four pound hammer.

Its kind of humorous to know the width of two stock ( remember Stock) Chevy bearings is .033'' wider than two FE rods.

Either the rod was narrowed at the big end or the crank really had to be ground on to make the crankpin wide enough to accept two rods that were 1/4 " wider than OEM. Just a guess but I think the crank lost another pound or so.

So did the postman grind on the rod?

I would like to buy a new Auccucrank for a 428 and a set of new Dove heads. Let me guess neither are available, but new oem size cranks can still be purchased.

I just want the 2.200 crankpins for the FE and 429/460 Fords out of Stock. It was approved for Superstock by NHRA and I don't know S/S rules well enough to discuss the subject.

Thanks Dan

Re: Aftermarket Cranks
 

It ain't a Chevy rod Larry.......it only uses a 2.2 bearing, Dan. Dan? who's Dan? .830+.830= 1.660.

Jeff, I don't think the Hemi is legal in a wheelchair, but we could probably rig some chainsaws on there.........one for each rear tire, and two throttle controls! You'd have to supply the beer.......The brakes really suck on these things, but who needs brakes, right?

Re: Aftermarket Cranks
 

Hey Dan .....is that you?????? What happen to Larry?? Who makes New OEM 3.784 stroke cranks for the FE?? I'm all ears......

RJ

Happy Thanksgiving Dan

Re: Aftermarket Cranks
 

Using a narrower bearing on the rods has been done for years.
You just have to relocate the tang chamfer on the connecting rod.

Re: Aftermarket Cranks
 

SSdiv6

You are very correct and it has been done for a long time on many different engine models. But you do not have to do anything to the tang on the rod or the bearing. As the Wizard posted before Clevite makes a "HN" bearing that is .062 narrower than the regular bearings and they are drop ins.


RJ

Happy Thanksgiving!!!!

Re: Aftermarket Cranks
 

Hi RJ,

I was also trying to make reference to other makes of cars that need the tang chamfer moved in order to use a narrow bearing.

Happy Thanksgiving to you too!!!

Re: Aftermarket Cranks
 

Thanks for the info

After looking at the "NHRA Approved Products List" I am amazed that there are over 25 different engines that have a NON-OEM housing bore aftermarket rod. I believe there are 2 Ford application and the rest are AMC,Buick,Chev, Olds etc. I guess we need to wipe them all out and go back 10 years and run the Factory OEM stuff. What was NHRA thinking? Could it have been for the continuation of the the Class? Nah!.....makes too much sense.

I have to agree with the Wizard about the AHFS making it equal, thats whats it for, right?

Yo!....Dan...you still out there?? Helloooooo?? Still waitng on my New OEM style 3.784 stroke crank supplier info......Helloooo!!

Anyway, Happy Thanksgiving to everyone, this was all in good fun.

RJ

Semper FI

Re: Aftermarket Cranks
 

RJ,

You really have a good grasp on the FE engines. So good, in fact, that I feel you should walk away from the Cobra Jet project. It doesn't become you to run a new car especially in C/SA.

Don't want to upset your image as an innovator. I was very impressed that you came up with the idea to teflon coat the front clip on your Fairlane so it doesn't cost more than a couple of hundredth when you scrub the wall. Just trying to do you a favor bud. You know I am there for you. :cool:

Re: Aftermarket Cranks
 

RJ, you do need a new car and a newer car. You would look good in one of the Mustang things, just remember put the swing out bar so you can get in and out, and think what to do with the spare time since the new stuff don't seem to break as bad. Maybe a little Vodka.

Re: Aftermarket Cranks
 

Thanks Kyle....but its not"walk away" its run away!! Wish I had never started that project. Hey, you got plenty of money and knowhow, how bout bailing me out. You know something like the "Sympathy Tune" deal....."Sympathy Purchase"....Yeah thats it. You'd look good in it!!

Oh, I never said "Teflon Coat" it was "Pam Cooking Spray" , Teflon is pretty expensive.

RJ

Re: Aftermarket Cranks
 

Jeff its got a swing out bar and I know where to find the Vodka (mandarin orange is my favorite!) You spoiled me.

RJ

Happy Thanksgiving Buddy

Re: Aftermarket Cranks