Turbo 6.0 powered mud truck, weird ticking noise with vid
03-31-2014, 08:28 AM
#23
Staging Lane
Thread Starter
Join Date: Apr 2013
Posts: 54
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well finally started to look at the motor and looks like melted a piston 
So need some advice on what pistons I should upgrade to, would still like to keep it on pump gas.
Thanks
So need some advice on what pistons I should upgrade to, would still like to keep it on pump gas.
Thanks
03-31-2014, 09:23 AM
#25
TECH Enthusiast
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Illinois
Posts: 611
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
sorry to hear about the troubles, it will all be worth it once you get this thing running right and get the chance to crank up the boost.
I don't know why, but it's awesome that you threw this set up in a super duty lol. Pretty sick so far, keep us updated on everything.
I don't know why, but it's awesome that you threw this set up in a super duty lol. Pretty sick so far, keep us updated on everything.
03-31-2014, 09:50 AM
#28
700 shouldnt be a problem all day long at the crank and you can beat the snot out of it for the year. get the 04+ style rods they take more of a beating and get those iat's down and you will be very happy. Like i said meth or if you can get some corn in that bitch
04-02-2014, 07:59 AM
#29
Staging Lane
Thread Starter
Join Date: Apr 2013
Posts: 54
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well got the motor somewhat tore down, ole number 7 didn't make it, looking at the data logs looks like we were pushing 14+ pounds of boost, not 100% sure it maxed out the sensor and it stops a 14, plus had the injectors at 99% duty cycle, so now we know where we went wrong, but it ran good for the couple runs we made
04-02-2014, 08:35 AM
#30
Well got the motor somewhat tore down, ole number 7 didn't make it, looking at the data logs looks like we were pushing 14+ pounds of boost, not 100% sure it maxed out the sensor and it stops a 14, plus had the injectors at 99% duty cycle, so now we know where we went wrong, but it ran good for the couple runs we made
04-02-2014, 01:33 PM
#33
Well got the motor somewhat tore down, ole number 7 didn't make it, looking at the data logs looks like we were pushing 14+ pounds of boost, not 100% sure it maxed out the sensor and it stops a 14, plus had the injectors at 99% duty cycle, so now we know where we went wrong, but it ran good for the couple runs we made
04-02-2014, 05:22 PM
#34
Staging Lane
Thread Starter
Join Date: Apr 2013
Posts: 54
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
plan is to put better rods and pistons in it, put it on a dyno and fine tune the boost so its running around 10 pounds, everything looked fine on the chart at those times, just got out of hand when the boost got to high
i dont remember the exact timing that it had when running but was getting a lot taking out of it
i dont remember the exact timing that it had when running but was getting a lot taking out of it
04-02-2014, 09:35 PM
#35
TECH Senior Member
iTrader: (7)
Well got the motor somewhat tore down, ole number 7 didn't make it, looking at the data logs looks like we were pushing 14+ pounds of boost, not 100% sure it maxed out the sensor and it stops a 14, plus had the injectors at 99% duty cycle, so now we know where we went wrong, but it ran good for the couple runs we made
Andrew
04-03-2014, 07:34 AM
#36
If you read around a bit, 2 vents on the front with the rear plugged works better. Helps keep the pressure up, race teams been doing it this way for years. Jamie meyer (head of GM performance group) did extensive testing on this. Thats why the newer LS engines have the aft ports blocked.
04-03-2014, 07:46 AM
#37
Just FYI... If you read around a bit, 2 vents on the front with the rear plugged works better. Helps keep the pressure up, race teams been doing it this way for years. Jamie meyer (head of GM performance group) did extensive testing on this. Thats why the newer LS engines have the aft ports blocked.
04-03-2014, 08:09 AM
#38
TECH Senior Member
iTrader: (7)
Just FYI...
If you read around a bit, 2 vents on the front with the rear plugged works better. Helps keep the pressure up, race teams been doing it this way for years. Jamie meyer (head of GM performance group) did extensive testing on this. Thats why the newer LS engines have the aft ports blocked.
If you read around a bit, 2 vents on the front with the rear plugged works better. Helps keep the pressure up, race teams been doing it this way for years. Jamie meyer (head of GM performance group) did extensive testing on this. Thats why the newer LS engines have the aft ports blocked.
I am not here to get in a pissing match, but I think it is fair to say that there are differing opinions on this, at all levels.
Andrew
04-03-2014, 08:14 AM
#39
TECH Senior Member
iTrader: (7)
Check out the C6R racing engine. I don't want to imbed the pics because they are huge.
Check out the water manifold that runs under the intake:
http://cdn.speednik.com/files/2012/10/SEMAIMG_3960.jpg
Now check it out from the rear:
http://stblogs.hotrod.com/files/2013...orvette-02.jpg
There is clearly a 4 point system.
Andrew
Check out the water manifold that runs under the intake:
http://cdn.speednik.com/files/2012/10/SEMAIMG_3960.jpg
Now check it out from the rear:
http://stblogs.hotrod.com/files/2013...orvette-02.jpg
There is clearly a 4 point system.
Andrew
04-03-2014, 09:59 AM
#40
I think Kurt Urban would disagree with Dr. Meyer. Also, the elimination of the rear vents does not increase the pressure in the cooling system. The cooling system pressure is constant and is controlled by the radiator cap. I can understand how running the system at a higher pressure would help eliminate the steam pockets, but just eliminating the rear vents doesn't accomplish this. By that logic the front cylinders would be more susceptible to this phenomenon, but we all know that it is usually the rear cylinders that tend to pop, especially the way this one did, with the broken piston crown.
I am not here to get in a pissing match, but I think it is fair to say that there are differing opinions on this, at all levels.
Andrew
I am not here to get in a pissing match, but I think it is fair to say that there are differing opinions on this, at all levels.
Andrew
Also the coolant system is NOT at a constant pressure at every point. Depending on the size, shape, and number of the coolant passages, pressure will raise and fall and the fluid will speed up and slow down. That’s Bernoulli's principle. 2 smaller passages branching off of a larger supply will net a higher pressure than say 4.
I can post up pictures of 2 point vents as well... what does that prove? What kind of pump is that engine using? what kind of pressure do they run in the coolant system?
Pratt & Miller (Pratt & Miller Engineering New Hudson Michigan) and Dr. Jamie Meyer (head of GM Performance) both say that the rear two should stay blocked off.
I used to advocate having fittings that went to -4an on all 4 steam vents feeding into a coolant swirl pot, which then drained back into the lower hose or return heater line... this is a setup that was used successfully by a few race teams, but it looks like this was a band-aid once I got 'real' information from REAL race teams.
The issue is not flow - the coolant passages flow plenty - it's pressure.* When driven hard, engines need coolant pressure to "scrape" the steam bubbles that form on hot spots in the head off the wall of the passage.* With all 4 ports open, there's not enough pressure locally (in the head) to promote proper heat transfer unless you run your overall coolant pressure extremely high (30psi or so).* Indy and F1 cars run MUCH higher than that, due to higher hp/liter (heat concentration).
The proper setup all my LSx racers are using is, assuming the top of your radiator is below the steam vent port:
*The rear vents blocked off, the front tee'd (LS6-style).
*Radiator cap replaced with "open" cap (free flow through radiator overflow port)
*Steam vent tee and radiator "overflow"/free flow feeding into coolant swirl pot (aka expansion tank)
*Swirl pot has pressurized radiator cap, bottom drains to non-thermostat-controlled water pump return
I used to advocate having fittings that went to -4an on all 4 steam vents feeding into a coolant swirl pot, which then drained back into the lower hose or return heater line... this is a setup that was used successfully by a few race teams, but it looks like this was a band-aid once I got 'real' information from REAL race teams.
The issue is not flow - the coolant passages flow plenty - it's pressure.* When driven hard, engines need coolant pressure to "scrape" the steam bubbles that form on hot spots in the head off the wall of the passage.* With all 4 ports open, there's not enough pressure locally (in the head) to promote proper heat transfer unless you run your overall coolant pressure extremely high (30psi or so).* Indy and F1 cars run MUCH higher than that, due to higher hp/liter (heat concentration).
The proper setup all my LSx racers are using is, assuming the top of your radiator is below the steam vent port:
*The rear vents blocked off, the front tee'd (LS6-style).
*Radiator cap replaced with "open" cap (free flow through radiator overflow port)
*Steam vent tee and radiator "overflow"/free flow feeding into coolant swirl pot (aka expansion tank)
*Swirl pot has pressurized radiator cap, bottom drains to non-thermostat-controlled water pump return
Last edited by Forcefed86; 04-03-2014 at 10:28 AM.