I am recommissioning a 1911 touring car after extended storage. The car was toured quite a bit back in the 50s and 60s and then put into good storage. I have dug into the mechanicals prior to starting it, and have found mostly normal engine wear with (I think) encouraging clearances. The connecting rod to crank clearance measures .002" or slightly less by plastigauge on all journals. There are NO shims anywhere. The crank journals are nice and smooth. I have left the main bearings alone based on the acceptable (I think) condition of the road bearings. I do not want to rebuild the engine now, but want to drive the car this year and see what I have.
I am about to drill the rod caps but am undecided what configuration would be best for the rod cap oiling grooves given the current state of the babbit. I do not intend to groove the rod side, because I want to keep a full-width oil wedge on that highly loaded bearing.
My question is what is happening to cause the wear on the camshaft side of the bearings, and should this be taken into consideration when designing the oil groove? Also note that the babbit has smeared on the trailing edge (opposite the cam) of the bearings, but only on numbers 2 & 3. What might this indicate? Bearing #4 is essentially identical to #1.
Any insights to offer? Thanks, Bill
PS Compression is 50 lbs in all cylinders, valve lash varies from .014 to .022
Showing some wear. Were the caps shimmed? I would use some time saver and they would probably clean up nicely and be usable.
Unfiled caps measure .685-.690 where the bolts go through.
Wat do your caps measure?
If the rods plastigaged .002” just leave it alone and put everything back together. The babbit is smeared probably because whoever babbitted it back in the ‘50’s “ran it in”. Oil dippers probably won’t help longevity so long as you don’t run your engine with very low oil. There is a constant mist of oil in the crankcase that coats everything and capillary action will keep oil in the bearings. 15,000,000 Model T’s left the factory that way and todays worst oil is far better than anything available back in the day.
The best thing you can do is find someone that can check connecting rod alignment. Many vintage rod boring machines did not produce very straight rods and some rebuilders did not (and still don’t) check and adjust the alignment of their final product before use.
Your bearings don’t look perfect, but if the clearances are around .002” , the rods are straight, you check & change oil regularly, and you only drive 30 mph, they are likely to last a lifetime.
Dean, Those are very early caps. Look at how the babbitt is wider than the edges of the bolt holes. I’m thinking the measurements might be different on these?
I would not drill those caps. It would destroy some of the bearing surface. You could file a little off the caps to tighten. Then use timesaver as posted above by Tim. However the clearance now is at the limit without filing and the additional space would allow more oil to enter as the rods dip into the crankcase. If you don't over rev the engine, it should get you through this summer as is.
Rod caps measure all over the place. Number 3 measures .687 on one side and .661 on the other! The others are more even side to side, but overall it looks like a caps-filed-by-hand smorgasbord, all right.
William, about all I would do is clean up the mating surfaces on the rods and caps and put it back together as is. Use some 200 grit wet n dry paper on a glass plate and clean up the caps. This will give you an indication if anything is seriously amiss, while closing the clearance just a tad from your measured .002"
Hope this helps.
Allan from down under.
I see what looks like totally normal wear and reasonably good looking babbitt. I would set the clearance a wee bit tighter and button it up.
I hope when you used your plastigauge, you used a little oil.
When you The rods are wore on the right side of the bearing, because of the Power stroke, or thrust side, which is the cam side. On the power stroke, the top of the piston pushes left, and the skirt is forced Right. The crank is now turning to the left, down ward and so any, or all slack in the rod bearing is shift to the right side of the rod bearing at least until it hits the bottom of the stroke.
Who ever tightened those rods got them to tight, or ran it low on oil. Your smeared part of the Babbitt now is weaker then the rest, and will break off while running, unless you scrap fit them, and get rid of the damaged part.
Many of people have a misconception of what constitutes bearing surface. It is not how much area of a bearing is laying next to a crankshaft, it is how much oil you can feed a bearing.
While drilling a rod cap hole will do little good without, a cap X groove, and dipper, also that will only do half as good with out X grooving the top part of the rod, and the holes in the web.
Those that think that X grooving is no good, The last of the Model T's Had X grooves, dippers, and the web drilled, all the Model A's, and B's. What happened, did old Henry just go crazy.
Here is another Misconception, oil holes in the web on top of the bearing , there to oil piston, and or wrist pin.
The holes are there to let air to escape, to get oil in, you have to have a Hole in the end of the tunnel.
On a splash rod, in the dipper plate, you have plenty of oil being thrown to piston and wrist pin.
On a pressure rod you have a very tiny hole for the rod to squirt oil in the upper cylinder cylinder, because a pressure rod lacks any splash, or dipper tray.
To flatten, about any surface, we use a scraped surface, and 80 grit air board paper. You can get a 100% fit.
I was hoping you would weigh in, Herm. I have read a number of your posts and have learned a lot. A question: your last photo shows the X grooves cut through the bevel at the joint between rod and cap. Would this allow the oil to leak out of the bearing, or is this to create a flow of oil rather than a wedge of oil? What is the best way to "float" a crank journal? Regards, Bill
Bill, I am not sure in what sense you mean, "float" a crank journal?
Ok, the bevel at the part line, would be like that on a spun poured rod, to separate the cap from the rod, as it would be poured all in one piece. In that case, special shims encircle the rod bolt, so the Babbitt is not forced around the rod bolt.
When you add X grooves, the oil is under pressure from the dipper coming in to the rod, so you have to have an open end to the grooves to let air, and old oil out.
The top X grooves pick up oil from the oil spread on the shaft from all over, and also quickly through the broach gap, from the cap dipper pressure that I have read which says about 200 pounds.
Flow in the top X grooves is completed in the two oil holes, on either side of the web.
Now on a stock rod, that Broach groove is about the only place oil can enter, (and some builders don't even put those in,) the rod bearing when it goes through the dipper tray, besides the flange area of the rod, but the rods RPM's, are constantly throwing the oil off.
Now, if you put in an OIL WELL, that is like a Broach groove, with both ends closed by about a 1/4 inch. All that you have done is created a air pocket, that will not let air escape, or will trap dirt, and will not let fresh oil in to flush the well.
Oil wells do NOT work at all on splash systems, but are Great on pressure systems.
Nanny goats poo Herm!!
Did you find that out, with the first one you tackled from behind Frank!
Just be careful Frank, I heard from a Goat Herder one time, that the ones with the Red X's on the back side, kick!
I'll answer you question as to best way to "float" a crank journal as Herm's not sure in what sense you mean.
Fluid mechanics is a simple science, if internal pressure is greater that atmospheric pressure then the higher will seek the easiest path.
The last swipe of oil is at the parting line of cap and rod, that swipe needs to last 180 degrees of rotation of the crank for the rod side of the babbitt, as can be seen in diagram number 3, that oil wedge that "floats" the shaft/bearing, has to last until the parting line on the other side. Now to drill a hole and or make oil lines, compromises the working surface of bearing to journal, on the top relieves the internal pressure half way between replenishing, 90 degrees with a lot less than the first 90, not what we are looking for max bearing life. After all, we don't put a hole half way up our garden hose and the ponder on why is the water only dribbling out the end? it was fine before I drilled the hole!
So file and clean up the babbitt at the parting lines, check your clearances, fit dippers and you will have the best way to "Float" your crank journal.
Frank, tard, every thing you showed in some ones article, is for a pressure system! Has nothing to do with a splash system!
Go back to what you know about, your Goats.
Right Herm and modern splash bearings in engines like Kohler, Briggs, Honda and may others have your goat tracks all through the bigends!
I don't think so!!
Thanks guys, now we are getting somewhere. Smokey Yunick found that the best combo of shell bearings in a racing engine was a plain shell on the rod and a annular groove shell on the cap, plus a grooved shell in the block main with a plain shell in the main cap. That makes a strong oil wedge where most needed on the power stroke (meaning when the pistons are trying like crazy to push the crank out of the bottom of the block), yet supplies generous amounts of oil for good endurance.
However, this is for a pressure system, and Herm is right about it being apples and oranges. Or goats and sheep. Smokey was making 60 to 80 HP per cylinder - we are probably making 5 HP per cylinder on a good day in a garden variety T.
Now I know very little about splash engines, it is one of the reasons that I bought my car - to learn about this stuff. I can see that having lots of entry points to a bearing would help fill it with oil, but it also seems it could just as easily get squeezed out. Leak like a sieve, actually. There goes your wedge.
So please enlighten me, in a splash system, do you want to flood the bearing/journal with oil hoping some of it will stay where you need it before it leaks out, do you want to try to capture and keep it where you need it, or something else? Are you looking for continuous flow?
At this point, I am going to run what I have, but may as well do an experiment before I rebuild the engine. I am thinking drill the caps & chamfer the holes slightly , put an annular groove in the cap only that connects the oil hole with the bearing chamfers, install dippers, and clean up the mating surfaces a minimal amount. What do you think? Herm, please don'the hold yourself back, OK?
I am not disturbing the mains, they are probably OK based on the condition of the caps.
And let me correct my terminology, we are talking about floating the journal. BTW, it only takes 4 pounds to float a small block Chevy crank in good condition. There's the target.
I am going to show some pictures of the oil grooving, that we put in Model T blocks, and always have. Two pictures of a 1934 Rod, top, and bottom. Many have seen these before, but they are the best design I have ever found to flood the mains with oil. This is NOT my design, but what Ford went to in the Model A.
So Frank, please tell us all how Ford screwed up when he went to the best design there is for a dipper rod, in the Model T's,, then kept screwing up by using the same design for all the Model A's, and then All the Model B's, Really!
As many know, Model T's only had a straight line groove in the block, and nothing in the cap.
Back to the rods again. Ford went to the built in rod dipper, X Grooves, drilled web, and part line relief, some time in 1927. Chevy also went to the same style of dipper, X groove as Ford in there last year of four cylinder, some time in 1928. ( They must have screwed up also, ( Wrong way Frank ). To accommodate the depth of the X groove, Chevy bored out there rods to make room, for more Babbitt. From 1932 to 1936, there rods had bigger crank holes, but still used X'ed, and drilled rods, with bolt on dippers.
Most of the wear in any bearing comes from stopping, and starting the engine. When oil is hot, say oil of 5-30 WT., the hot oil runs out of the bearings, easier then 30 WT. When 30 WT. is used, it will have a much more of a cushion effect, then a light oil, that is used with oil pressure. Pistons will also suffer, in a splash system, and light oil.
Now a Model T rod, with out grooves, has no place to store oil at rest, but with X grooves, droplets seem to wedge, or hang up, in the bottom grooves especially, and I know this from checking adjustments in rods for 54 years.
I know I am going to hear about light oils that work fine for others, but here is a story that made me look a little closer an weights of oil.
My dad bought a 10-10 John Deere new. I was the one that used it all the time, to plow, disk, ect. The factory book said to use only 10-30 oil, and that is what we did. We always changed oil, and filter, at 50 hours, I would drop the oil at Noon Hour, the oil being hot was always like water, but oil being always cheaper then engine repairs. So, from the first time I changed oil, when I pulled the filter out of it's cavity, when I flushed with gas, there was what looked like Sliver Seal. It laid in a recess, in the filter area. I pulled it out with my index finger, it was about the size of about to large peas. I never thought to much about it at that time, but every time after that, the same thing happened.
Well, we got about 600 hours hours on the tractor, and the oil blow by was supper bad. Now my brother-in-law owned a John Deere Implement, that I helped him rebuild tractor engines, when he got behind. We pulled it apart one night, and what we found was, the pistons were scored very bad, hence, the Sliver Seal. So we put all new parts in the engine, and traded the tractor for a New 10-20 John Deere.
The next spring, the first thing I done was the spring plowing. I changed the break in oil at 20 hours, and the filter had the sliver seal stuff in the oil filter cavity again. The book for the tractor also recommended the same light oil of 10-30 Wt. So that is what I used again. So, instead of changing at 50 hours, I changed at 20 hours again, and the filter area still had the sliver Seal. I told Dad about it, and said I was going to put straight, 30 Weight Detergent in, would he care, being the tractor belonged to him, that we already used in 3 modern cars, at that time, Two Model A cars, and one Model A Motor used on the elevator. Two Model T cars, 4 other Tractors, a 8 horse Crushmen scooter, a Wards garden tiller, two lawn mowers, and never had any kind of that trouble with any of them. OK, so I put in the 30 WT., and again changed at 20 hours, and wow, NO Sliver Seal! I changed again at 50 hours, and still no Sliver Seal. So my conclusion was, don't use pee water where good protective oil film is needed. Oh, and Dad traded the tractor at 1600 hours again, and it was using about a quart in 50 hours.
Right Herm and modern splash bearings in engines like Kohler, Briggs, Honda and may others have your goat tracks all through the bigends!
I don't think so!! " END QUOTE "
LOL, Wrong Way, Frank, your small engines have nothing at all to do with this. They are NOT even made the same! Nice try though, LOL!
And guess what, our small engines all get 30 WT., even our Air Compressors!
Thank you Herm, I appreciate your time and trouble to educate me. I think I can better see how the spiral grooves work. Cheers, Bill
Basicly Herm, it's your lack of understanding of the science of Fluid Mechanics, Hydrodynamic lubrication.
Those smaller bearings, T's being on the turning point, require a minimum amount of bearing to surface size in order to operate correctly with it's own hydraulic pressure to prevent metal to metal contact. Model A's B's, Chev's, dodge or any other you care to compare with, offer the larger surface area size to be an effective lubricated bearing with the channels cut.
L. O. L.
Good on-ya Herm,
did you L.O.L or just give a little smirk and a chuckle when Dean Yoder posted that he only got half the mileage out of X'ed rods compared to non X'ed??
I did both LOL.& smirk, on your last post.
I do NOT like x'ed rods.
I have over 100.000 on my 24 touring 37,000 miles on three x'ED rods 2,000 ? miles on one x'ed rod.
the failed rod was replaced with an old standard rod to get to the 37,000 when My crankshaft broke.
I replaced the crankshaft & rods not X'ed and they are still going.
Another observation on the three rods that made 37,000 miles, the rod end is what was wore out. The caps were still good.
P.S. William thanks for your post
Dean, what were you using for oil?
I am going to add my engineering knowledge to the discussion. I have a degree in mechanical engineering and have been around old cars all my life. It is a fact that the oil film develops pressure by the wedge action as Frank has shown and this is what supports the bearing. It is also a fact that, baring contaminates, most of the wear occurs at startup before the film pressure has a chance to build up. It is also true that the X grooves in the bearing do not contribute to the oil film pressure or we all would be running 1/8-inch clearance in our bearings. Herm has lots of experience rebuilding Model T's so he has something to say and his opinions cannot be dismissed. For my money I would like to see more bearing surface and less grooves, as long as the rod bearings are supplied by plenty of oil from a dipper.
All I can say is, Model A, & B rods will burn out very quickly with out the X oil grooves, and also the Mains in a Model A block. There are hundreds, of thousandths of Chevys that used the Xed rods.
Again I will say, there is no bearing surface, with out all the oil a bearing needs.
We have put out over 33,000, spun poured, Xed Model T rods, not counting other makes of cars, with all kinds of groove configurations, and have never had any kind of bearing come back, or cores that we can clearly see we have done by knowing our own work.
Dean is the only one I have ever heard of with one of our rods going bad, and I really don't remember him ever calling me, at that time, to tell me that, it was out. or we would have replaced it, or them.
All rods always wear on the top part of the rod bearings, and that is from the power stroke.
I put our rods in my 21 center door sedan, and a 23 touring when we built the engines, back in the late 70's, and those cars were run hard, and often, had about 20,000 on them, and could not even pull a .001 thousandths shim.
There are a lot of things that can make a rod blow.
1. Wrong Oil.
2. How much compression.
3. Rod Alignment.
4. A big one is having ANY Motor, high RPM's and forget to drop the RPM's when shifting. So what you have is a screaming engine, with out a load, fore, or aft. It will take out a rod, slicker then S*&^.
5. Dirt, steel, and Aluminum debris.
6. It don't take much Antifreeze in the oil.
7. Low oil.
8. Preignition, can also raise Hell with rods.
Neil, it is not true about X grooves not contributing to the oil film. The grooves are constantly laying a wipe of oil on the crank, the exact same as an oil well in many rods. Model T rods are 1.500 wide, even a two inch wide rod will burn out with out oil, and will wear uneven with oil pressure. Again, bearing surface is not the amount of Babbitt surface next to a crank pin, it is the amount of oil molecule between a rod bearing, and the crank pin.
If that were not true, why would any one want to go with oil pressure, for improvement.
As I said, a Model T crank is 1.500 wide. Lets just say you can put an X groove in a certain T rod bearing, and now like two pieces of string you can just pick up those two X grooves. What you would have now is two pieces of string in round circles. Now, measure the width of the grooves, or said string, and then remove that amount, off each side of the rod. In most cases, you would still have some Babbitt thrust on either side of the rod, but the rod would be to narrow to use there. So, even if you took enough Babbitt off each side of the rod, for groove width, say, 100 thousandths wide, the rod would still be 1.300 in width, with out grooves. The bottom line being, if you had x grooves or not, you would still have a rod that is 1.300 wide, and still about the same, for what you think as bearing surface.
So, modern rods are very narrow, way less bearing surface as you see it, how can they run such bearings 7,8 thousand RPM's without all that extra bearing surface, oil pressure, same as x grooves would be for a Model T .
A standard Model T rod runs more on oil vapor, then oil. A dipper forces oil into the bearing, of 200 pounds, as one test said.
So, Mr. Neil if Ford used xed oil grooves, Chevy, and many other manufactures, and if I told you the rods would fail with out them, and in this I do know, you may want to look at what you call, bearing surfaces a little closer.
I am going to try to find some pictures of a T Motor we built, showing our mains, and rods. Number 3 rod blew, No. 4 piston melted. The rebuilt motor spent 70 % of its life running wide open. When it quit, it only had a 1/2 coffee cup of oil in it. Reason, was oil checker gave false reading.
The bearings, block, main caps, and 3 rods could have all been used over again, as they were all still at the same Spects. as when they were machined.
Only. they were all were impregnated with piston Aluminum. The bearings all had to have been run low on oil for a long time, and only one blew rod, from catching the Aluminum from No. 4 piston.
Neil, what you refer to as ( Frank has shown and this is what supports the bearing.) "END QUOTE "
What is shown there on his post is a picture on a pressure rod pushing out oil out the sides of the rod, and what is supposed to be a squirt hole for the piston.
It is a pressure system, you don't get a wedge from a splash system, it is not under pressure, period. At best, an oil film, to separate pin, and bearing. This is where the X groove improves luberication.
My turn Herm, L.O.L
Well Herm, I know it's like trying to convince you that a T rod has a centre line but we can only try.
I'll start by posting this so you can see what the differences are in the type of hydro lubrication we are dealing with, from there, re-read this thread and all will make sense to you.
Herm, I have always used 20w50.
Well, wrong way Frankie, the Model T is fresh out of oil pumps! Live with it.
Herm, you must be tired, have another cup of joe and re-read! Hydrodynamic lubrication has nothing to do with "oil pumps"
No, Frankie, a Model T does not have anything to do with oil pressure, or oil wedges. That is what I have been saying, you only get oil wedges from oil pressured bearings.
1. And on your 12:16 AM post you were trying to sell us oil wedges.
2. 2:15 Am, tried to compare, small engines, with Aluminite rods, with thinner widths, ect. Poor comparison, didn't sell.
3. 7:23 PM, You think you are sounding Intelligent, I hear all of your lack of bearing knowledge, as all what you said, is not true.
4. 12:16 AM, you tried to pass off some guys information about oil pressure, as falsely pertaining to a Model T
5. 11:51 PM. Commented in a post on Dean that you literally screwed up. LOL
6. 9:23 PM. Now, with this post, you are loosing ground, and are back tracking, and still don't under stand bearings and oiling. It reminds the many years that you said you don't have to check rod Alignment, as your mill bores them straight. And I still don't think you know anything about rod offset! LOL LOL LOL LOL!!!!!!!!!!!
On a Model T and a like, you only get a vapor, or oil film, if your lucky. The only way to improve bearing surface is to increase oil to the bearing, and you can only do that by Xing, or oil pressure. It has always been, the less oil, the more wear. And that's a fact, Jack.
O Herm, you are broken!
Frankie, give it up, I already told you how it is. LOL. You trying to make it look like your showing me something new. LOL
The truth is there is not a single thing that you can show me, that I haven't known for 54 years, that we have been building bearings, many times, 7 days a week.
Frankie, you will never know, even close, what I know about bearings. You remind me of a Guy that has a Little Man Complex!
Don't worry Herm, you can still be my mate and one day we will have a beer together. Oh I did tell you about tin poisoning didn't I? nasty health effects on the poor old brain!!
Can I jump in here with another question? I received my dippers, but they do not fit the caps very well, even after doing some grinding and bending. The cap bottom surfaces are rough castings and a couple even have some lettering or bumps on them. Lots of gaps. So, how closely do the dippers need to fit the caps? Thanks, Bill
BTW, I ground down the dippers to narrow them enough to fit between the "shoulders" on the cap. I did NO grinding on the cap.
You can't argue with stupid. They can't comprehend the science.
I respect your workmanship and your contributions to this forum. However, your comment, "...you don't get a wedge from a splash system, it is not under pressure, period.", is just NOT true.
The pressure is generated due to the viscosity of the oil and its "clinging" to the crank journal, as the journal rotates towards the ever decreasing clearance between the babbitt and the crank journal. The oil resists being squeezed out due it's viscosity, (or more precisely, due to its shear film layer), and gets "squished" into the closing clearance. This "squish" generates the oil film pressure in non-pressurized bearings. In other words, each bearing, in effect, becomes its own "oil pump". If you disagree, as you are likely to do, please be polite about it, as I have been to you.
Just put the dipper on the cap and mash down with the nuts. Seems crude, but that's typically how it's done.
For anyone interested in the most durable bearing designs for Model T engines, I would urge you to do your own research and NOT rely on posts from this forum!
I can offer some tips to get you started:
1) Most factual information is not going to be found online for free. Internet chat rooms, forums, and message boards are often populated by “people with an agenda” and “the angry”. Websites for anything are generally some sort of advertisement.
2). Be scientific in your reasoning. Once you find appropriate resources; do the math for loads, oil film strengths, surface speeds, clearances, etc and see what you come up with.
3) Your local library may have a book or two with a little good info, but its not real likely. If you have a Technical School or College nearby that is known for its engineering or industrial program, then that is the library you should visit. There likely will be many more modern textbooks and reference works on bearing design available there than you could ever see at the local public library or online.
4) ISO documents are available on the subjects and are available online for around $75 each. The information is strictly copyrighted so if you obtain a document, you may only use it for your personal information, you can’t copy & share it or post it in any form on the internet without their written permission and they do enforce their copyrights.
5) Seek out and examine modern engines that have similar design characteristics.
6) Keep an open mind and never be afraid of the possibility of disproving your prior theory!
7) This may be a good starting point: “Machinery’s Handbook” has a section about bearing design & lubrication. The book is around $85 or many local libraries probably have it. Some info in the book has changed over the years, so a copy from 1930 might not have the same info on bearings as a copy from 2005...
I could post more, but this should be plenty to get anyone started.
Good advice by the way.
So right Jerry,
it's just the physics of lubrication, dosen't matter what bearing, it applies to all.
Bill, after drilling the hole, and if that is the only thing you are doing, just chamfer the babbitt at the hole with a large drill bit by hand.
Jerry, I do NOT disagree on the way you stated your post, and I have never once argued that there is not an oil wedge in a bearing.
But Frankie was trying to sell me the wedge affect on a pressure bearing, and using that as a reference to a splash bearing, while it is similar, it is not the same, so why should it be used as a mater of fact. Jerry, you said the shaft creates it own pressure, there is nothing to feed oil, if the oil source is cut back, there is a big difference in what the bearing does It is just not common to a splash, system like a Model T. Like I said, there is nothing about bearings that you can show me, that is new to me.
In other words, each bearing, in effect, becomes its own "oil pump". ( END QUOTE )
This I also know, as in a Model A rear main, if the shaft to bearing clearance is past .003-50 thousandths, the shaft will pump an over load of oil out the rear main, way more then the drain tube can handle. Bring the clearance back, and problem solved.
Jerry, I knew all this be for I got out of my teens. Believe it or not, there were a lot of engine books around when I was 14, and the car engines had already made oil pressure King.
I started pouring Babbitt for myself at 14, and at 18, started it as a career, with all the car Clubs we had with in a 100 miles. It was a very short time, that the work load got overwhelming, as our bearings were showed for show & tell, at the car clubs, Model A, and Model T clubs, and then AACA clubs, and then the many tractor clubs. For many years, we had 5 Guys, and me and one woman, Pouring and cleaning bearings.
I have said before, and I will say again, we have never had a bad bearing!
Two points yet,( Frankie The Wonderful ) always tries to pull me off track, of what I post about, trying to play got ya, he just doesn't have a full deck to play with. He always comes out with some B.S. that has nothing to do with the subject, trying to sound intelligent like he is enlightening his flock. The whole idea of my post on X grooves was to explain the added advantage of more oil to the bearing.
This has always been funny to me, and there are MANY subjects on this. When water pumps are discussed, the same people that say Ford knew best when Ford didn't use them, are the same people that say that Ford rods don't need X's, and dippers, when that is the very thing he done.
To me, that is just like picking, and choosing which of Gods commandments your going to follow.
Oh, really, Frankie, and others, it does not triple the oil to the bearing!!!!!! Dam, that is really to bad, all those companys could have consulted you Guys if you would have been around when Ford went to dipper, and X grooves on the last of the Model T's, all the Model A's, and all the B's, the Chevys, from 1928 to 1936, Hudsons, Hart-Parr tractors, Essex, ect., I am sure they would have valued your non stupid opinion about all your science you could have showed them, as one FH Posted.
Oil that can be produced with that configuration. Like putting a dipper on a rod with only a hole in the cap, it will do no good, what so ever, and it will just wash the cap off with hot oil, what is useful about that.
OK, lets see what we get back from this can of worms!!!!!!!!!!!!
You don't comprehend what's posted to well do you, you are so incoherent in trying to answer!
Frankie, I think your IQ came back negative!
Imagine that, a negative IQ and a man of my education, under standing the principles of hydrodynamic, hydrostatic, fluid mechanics, engineering chemistry of liquids, liquid pneumatics and hydraulics!
And yet!! a man of you intelligence can't!
Thanks for your response. Much appreciated. Glad to see that we agree on those points.
One more go Herm, on Hydrodynamic lubrication, after all we have got you from.
"you don't get a wedge from a splash system, it is not under pressure period"
'I have never once argued that there is not an oil wedge in a bearing"
Then to "pressure wedge is not the same as splash"
I could down load the maths too but based on how you worked out and a stated I screwed up Deans post, maths is not a strong point for you either.
Read the lot before you rant.
+++ jpeg +++ 832731 +++
It seemed to have lost the first page. so try again.
My first job after high school in 1960 was pressing Boston bushings into cigar equipment castings during rebuilding. I always wondered how the spiral oil grooves were machined by Boston or Dodge?
I completed a Tool and Die apprenticeship. Then designed plastic injection molds for 20 years. Still do 2 days a week consulting for automotive plastic parts. All my life a machine shop has been in the building somewhere so I am familiar with quality tool work.
The pictures of your work is impressive. Can you add a photo showing the spiral groove being machined or the fixture which produces them. Your finished products are like jewels.
Thanks for posting your photos.
Pushtruck. 30 miles south of Hershey
Frankie, honey, I know you are desperately hoping for some one to chime in and help you here, and be on your side, and I know how you want to be a force on this Forum, and spue all that knowledge that you think you have, but nothing has changed what I said.
You wrongly think an oil wedge comes from a splash system, a true oil wedge comes from a pressure system, under pressure.
Splash systems, the oil coats the shaft, and bearing and rides on oil Molecule, between the bearing, and the shaft. Unless you use a forced oil dipper, with a canal system, with an in, and out, you will never come close to a true wedge. Even the Model T rod varies how much oil it gets at any one time with different R.P.M's.
Like I said, a long time ago, Stock Model T rods run mostly on oil vapor, especially, at high R.P.M's.
Well Frankie, as I have told you many times, you are wasting my time.
Frank, sometimes I really think your parents must have been siblings.
Wayne, I will send you a PM with pictures if I can find them. I used to have about 8, or 9 different kinds of grooving machines. I have 3 right now, all alike that have interchangeable dies. These are Storm-Vulcan brand. There are several wobble wheel types that are good, but are rare to come by. The best one of that type is Clawson & Bals bearing co. Some Brands are junk.
Plenty of vapor all right Herm, between your ears!
Here are some spun poured, late Model T rods, that are .060 under. That is what we leave them at, until we knew what size the Owner wanted. We might have done about 20 sets over the years.
Just have to cut the shaft size, and the Radius.
Thatttt----- meanssssss----, theeeee---- insideeeee-----, andddddd---- innerrrrr---- sidesssss---,,,,, Frankkkkk!
I'm not saying your stupid, Frank, i'am just saying that you have bad luck when it comes to thinking.
The whole thread of your side of the debate is based on,
"because I say so"
Against publications from Engineers and Professors, giving the facts.
And you try to imply I'm slow, you dig your own hole Herm, I don't need any help from forum posters to do that.
I have just re-read most of this for the third or fourth time and I think the truth is in here all right. I think I understand the importance of flow in splash lubrication, and how it will vary with RPMs. It looks like venting the oil to atmosphere is needed or the flow will be restricted. It looks like the X pattern would do a good job of wiping the maximum area of the bearing with oil on a continuous basis. Without the non-compressible oil between the bearing and journal, she goes bang.
That said, on this engine at this time, I have the ability to drill the caps and cut an annular groove from the right to left parting line bevels going through the oil hole. I will leave the bearings on the rod side alone - no grooves. I will fit the dippers. My thinking here is that at low crank speeds where it is more likely more oil will be in the pan wells, the dippers on the caps will force the oil up through the drilled holes and through the grooves to the cap/rod parting line bevels, where the oil will get a full width wipe onto the rod half of the bearings. At higher crank speeds with the resulting misting of the oil all bets are off, but since I am not disturbing the rod half of the bearings, my theory is they should perform as stock. The downside to all this is by drilling the cap, it gives the oil a place to leak out if the cap is at TDC or BDC when the engine stops. Maybe I can post some pics as I go. Also, I will run 30 weight detergent after the initial start and flush.
Your work IS beautiful Herm, and mine will not look as nice as yours. I would really like to visit some day and see how you do all this. I am still trying to envision your methodology for straightening rods, but I'll get there eventually.
Frank, thanks for the posts on hydraulics. I never considered how a spinning shift can stack up oil simply by rotating in a bearing!
I would take both of you guys out for a beer, but I would be afraid we would get thrown out of the joint.
Cheers, and thanks to all. Additional comments more than welcome! Bill
I don't need any help from forum posters to do that." END QUOTE "
Ya, I know Frankie, I have to say, you have always done a good job of it, by yourself.
You never learn Frankie, that when you involve my name in a post, or an insinuation to me, we are going to have some fun!
So lastly, let me leave you with this most humble observation of the time I have known of you.
I have noticed in the two parts of your brain, (left) and (right) that, in the left side, there's nothing right. In the right side, there's nothing left.
Keep on riding, little Buckaroo!
You two guys could take your act on the road!
Seriously though, I can never get enough of Herm and Frank going at it. It's actually very constructive and I always learn a lot form their "conversations".
Keep in mind though- facts aren't allowed on the forum because they have a tendency to offend people.
Someone on here reinforces my beliefs that normal people can't defend their ideas very well and resort to disgusting personal attacks, and that people who love their go being stroked on (usually car) forums on the internet are the worst offenders.
Remember the time someone on here told me my engine was toast and needed new babbitt and pistons? Well i filed the pistons smooth and built up the babbitt by soldering in more & scraped it, made a piston ring with a file ect ect. Runs perfectly fine, not even excessive blowby.
Bet they wouldn't believe me if i said it was possible to weld cracks between cylinders and file the bores round. Well it must be, i've seem it done and it worked just fine.
Trust me, expose the falsehoods of peoples beliefs of what they think they know on the internet and they'll resort to ganging up with nothing but lies, personal attacks and more in an effort to shut you down. Happens to me every time i use facts or logic.
Yup, that is what I have always said, what is nice about the tough Model T engine. They will run wore out.
Kep, if he knew your last name, he'd be calling you by it. Probably will just resort to adding an ie to it.
PM's are of interesting reading as well, nothing but encouragement form fellow forum members who don't wish to get involved, to keep up the struggle!
Apparently my Herm is very popular as well on another forum, AACA, with his same personality.
"Because I say so"
A tempest in a tea kettle.
"Trust me, expose the falsehoods of peoples beliefs of what they think they know.."
Kep, I couldn't have said it better myself. Folks don't like finding out what they have believed and preached all along might not be true or accurate after all.
I get PMs all the time too from silent members offering encouragement- it helps me keep my sanity.
(Message edited by Antique_iron on January 31, 2018)
Just some Ford trivia for you, Henry ran built in dippers for the first few years of T's, scrapped them and was happy with the next 15+ million to run without.
William, I think you have a handle on it now.
I would take both of you guys out for a beer, but I would be afraid we would get thrown out of the joint. " END QUOTE "
We would have to go to a Food Center anyway, as I can't drink a Beer anymore, because of some meds I take. So I now drink Orange Juice from China, you know, the stuff with lead in it, so I can keep my pencil full.
Now woooo, with Frankie though, when he gets in to a Food Store, he can't resist a Quart of, Special Import, In Heat, Nanny Goats milk, from Iraq. You know the one, with the Cross eyed, Bald Nanny Goats picture, with only three teats. Its from the ancient civilization of Mesopotamia emerged in the valley between the Euphrates, and Tigris River, in that lush Green Valley,! Frankie tried to drink some unpasteurized at home one time, but he got his ear stepped on.
The problem with that, William, after a half hour, and an empty Quart jar of pure, un adulterated love juicy, vitamin laden, bone builder, he can be found attached to some clerk leg, in which case, we could just walk out like we don't know him.
Here is a picture of an opened faced model A rod. It is the same grooving pattern as a Model T would be.
We will only end up with the same result as usual, Herm will sabotage the thread with his personal attacks until Chris has a cut full of it and delete the thread!! He does't like the truth to be out there.
4:18 post, LOL, Frankie, not even close to the truth.
Just some Ford trivia for you, Henry ran built in dippers for the first few years of T's, scrapped them and was happy with the next 15+ million to run without. " END QUOTE "
No, Frankie, NOT for the first few years, that he ran dippers, it was more like the first 2,500 cars, in late 1908, and or, very early 1909, when he changed all the other things, like the two levers, water pump, timer, cylinder head bolts, shorter crankshaft, oil fill tube, time gear cover, Ford Script, oil cap, cooling fan, cylinder head, crankcase, rear end housings ect. The rods were made of bronze, to heavy, and to costly. You can bet the main reason was for money savings.
Then, Frankie, like it or not, he went back to the dipper, and X grooves, in the last of the Model T's, an all the Model A's, and B's.
Well it is this way, I don't care what anybody does with any one part of a T, engine rebuild.
The reason being, my customers only care what I do.
So, yup, stock rods will run, but compared to what.
Gee, Frank, what sanctimony!
Some one might chime in on a date Herm, but parts books run the dipper rod #587 until a change to non dipper in Jan 1911 # 3024
I will tell you what Boys, I am going to start a Post, and all you have to say is "YES", or "NO", and leave your Vote.
It makes no difference to me what so ever. I sure couldn't guess, you see Boys, I got a lot of e-Mails also. L.O.L.
I think that would be about right, as the early rods were different, and a car would still need parts, so what's the point?
Your time frame Herm, fiction not fact!
I've never come across 1927 dipper rods here, may be a Canadian thing that they never used them? all parts books right into the early 30's still only list #3024
The engines we took them out of were NOT Canadian !
The prints on the x -dippered rods I think is 1924 why do we see so view of them?
I get ya Kep. I know ten ways to get the job done that are way wrong! :-) You know 100 ways!
Gotta change the clutch pack? Pull the engine? Nope.
Dave Gingery told me and my buddy, "If it works, that's the right way to do it."
I'd poop my pants if my '28 T engine has some cool rods in it!
Dipper cap for T x rods 1-28-25-----10-27-26
print change dates