Generation IV Internal Engine 2005-2014 LS2 | LS3 | LS7 | L92 | LS9

Is this oky: Piston Above Block Deck by 0.035"

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 06-25-2016, 11:11 PM
  #1  
LS6
TECH Regular
Thread Starter
 
LS6's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Cherry Hill, New Jersey State
Posts: 486
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts

Default Is this oky: Piston Above Block Deck by 0.035"

Is there a certain limit value for piston above the block deck at TDC.

I'm calculating a Stroker combination, I found the piston will be above the block deck by 0.035", is this within the acceptable limit?

With this clearance, the quench Will be 0.018"!!!

It can be solved with a connecting rod center to center 6.000", but the crankshaft spec sheet say a minimum connecting rod length is 6.098".

Last edited by LS6; 06-25-2016 at 11:31 PM.
Old 06-25-2016, 11:44 PM
  #2  
TECH Addict
iTrader: (6)
 
badazz81z28's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 2,389
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes on 2 Posts

Default

I don't know, but a thicker head gasket will keep the piston from smacking the head.
Old 06-26-2016, 12:31 AM
  #3  
KCS
Moderator
iTrader: (20)
 
KCS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Conroe, TX
Posts: 8,848
Received 307 Likes on 207 Posts

Default

It would be okay with a thicker head gasket. The top ring is usually at least .180" down so only .035" out is no big deal.
Old 06-26-2016, 05:08 AM
  #4  
LS6
TECH Regular
Thread Starter
 
LS6's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Cherry Hill, New Jersey State
Posts: 486
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts

Default

Just for understanding

Is there any issue of angular motion or major stress on the block cylinder wall and crankshaft when going with connecting rods sized smaller length (center to center) than the one is specified by the crankshaft manufacture sheet?

For example, K1 4.250" or 4.125" stroke crankshaft, the manufacture spec.sheet specified minimum connecting rod as 6.098", and if I went with 6.000", will there be an issue on the crankshaft or on the block wall cylinder, or other that I'm not aware of?
Old 06-26-2016, 09:32 AM
  #5  
KCS
Moderator
iTrader: (20)
 
KCS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Conroe, TX
Posts: 8,848
Received 307 Likes on 207 Posts

Default

Originally Posted by LS6
Just for understanding

Is there any issue of angular motion or major stress on the block cylinder wall and crankshaft when going with connecting rods sized smaller length (center to center) than the one is specified by the crankshaft manufacture sheet?

For example, K1 4.250" or 4.125" stroke crankshaft, the manufacture spec.sheet specified minimum connecting rod as 6.098", and if I went with 6.000", will there be an issue on the crankshaft or on the block wall cylinder, or other that I'm not aware of?
Yes. That minimum rod length value is related to how the counterweights are cut. If you run a 6.00" rod where the crank manufacturer requires a 6.10" rod, your pistons will likely hit the counterweights/reluctor wheel hard. I would consider that a major stress.
Old 06-26-2016, 09:39 AM
  #6  
Staging Lane
 
Bill71's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 61
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by LS6
Just for understanding

Is there any issue of angular motion or major stress on the block cylinder wall and crankshaft when going with connecting rods sized smaller length (center to center) than the one is specified by the crankshaft manufacture sheet?

For example, K1 4.250" or 4.125" stroke crankshaft, the manufacture spec.sheet specified minimum connecting rod as 6.098", and if I went with 6.000", will there be an issue on the crankshaft or on the block wall cylinder, or other that I'm not aware of?
The piston skirt may hit the crank counter weight if you use a shorter rod. Best to use a kit where the crank, rods, and pistons were designed to work together.
Old 06-26-2016, 10:59 AM
  #7  
TECH Apprentice
 
Krom's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 328
Received 2 Likes on 2 Posts

Default

Use a thicker gasket to dial in the squish to what you are looking for.
Old 06-26-2016, 11:39 PM
  #8  
11 Second Club
iTrader: (2)
 
A.R. Shale Targa's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Fredonia,WI
Posts: 3,729
Likes: 0
Received 14 Likes on 14 Posts
Default

Pretty sure Cometic makes a .070"
Old 06-28-2016, 12:52 PM
  #9  
On The Tree
 
Fraser588's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 106
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Default

Most likely the piston will hit the heads with that amount of quench. Had .030" quench setups hit the heads, the pistons do rock in the bore, forged pistons have more wall clearance than cast pistons. While that does sound bad its not catastrophic but should be avoided.

Basically the ideas of what is ok for quench with a cast piston is different than a forged piston.

The piston should be at 0 deck, with a steel rod. Look at how the OEM's are, LS factory engines are .006 above the deck.

Another option would be to cut the tops of the pistons in a lathe, which isn't difficult. Any of the piston companies could do that to an existing piston, or a machine shop or Rebco.

Bottom line, order the correct piston with the appropriate compression height.

Last edited by Fraser588; 06-28-2016 at 01:03 PM.
Old 06-28-2016, 05:00 PM
  #10  
Launching!
 
KiwiKid's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2014
Posts: 215
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Default

Originally Posted by Fraser588
Most likely the piston will hit the heads with that amount of quench. Had .030" quench setups hit the heads, the pistons do rock in the bore, forged pistons have more wall clearance than cast pistons. While that does sound bad its not catastrophic but should be avoided.

Basically the ideas of what is ok for quench with a cast piston is different than a forged piston.

The piston should be at 0 deck, with a steel rod. Look at how the OEM's are, LS factory engines are .006 above the deck.

Another option would be to cut the tops of the pistons in a lathe, which isn't difficult. Any of the piston companies could do that to an existing piston, or a machine shop or Rebco.

Bottom line, order the correct piston with the appropriate compression height.
Agreed Fraser, most engine builders I know will re-machine the top of the piston to give .032" quench, which is considered about the optimum quench for a high performance engine, and exactly what I run in my LS race engine's.

Cheers,

Mark.
Old 07-01-2016, 12:43 PM
  #11  
On The Tree
 
Fraser588's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 106
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Default

I would run .040" (or more) quench with forged aluminum 2618 type pistons. Specially if its a 4.125"+ bore size boosted motor with .005-or .006" wall clearance. If you had a naturally aspirated engine with less clearance, 4032 pistons, or cast, .030" or .032" quench could be optimal.

This isn't something I read in a book or magazine, this is from tearing down a motor and seeing the chamber imprint on the piston.

One spec doesn't work for all engines.
Old 07-01-2016, 12:52 PM
  #12  
FormerVendor
iTrader: (1)
 
LivernoisMotorsports's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Dearborn Heights, MI
Posts: 1,204
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post

Default

Originally Posted by LS6
Is there a certain limit value for piston above the block deck at TDC.

I'm calculating a Stroker combination, I found the piston will be above the block deck by 0.035", is this within the acceptable limit?

With this clearance, the quench Will be 0.018"!!!

It can be solved with a connecting rod center to center 6.000", but the crankshaft spec sheet say a minimum connecting rod length is 6.098".
what your looking for is a min. of .040" piston to cylinder head deck clearance for a street car. this # is not for when things are new these #'s are for when the engine is a little worn and things start rocking a little to prevent the piston from kissing the head.
If you have a virgin deck and are going to run a much thicker head gasket you will need to mock up your intake to ensure it will still fit.
A min rod length # means anything shorter than that will hit the counterweight. So unless your having counterweights machined and spending a small fortune on heavy metal for balancing I would reconsider or have a special crank made
Old 07-01-2016, 09:43 PM
  #13  
Launching!
 
KiwiKid's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2014
Posts: 215
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Default

Originally Posted by Fraser588
I would run .040" (or more) quench with forged aluminum 2618 type pistons. Specially if its a 4.125"+ bore size boosted motor with .005-or .006" wall clearance. If you had a naturally aspirated engine with less clearance, 4032 pistons, or cast, .030" or .032" quench could be optimal.

This isn't something I read in a book or magazine, this is from tearing down a motor and seeing the chamber imprint on the piston.

One spec doesn't work for all engines.
Fair comment Fraser my Ls engines are N/A and we also run fairly tight piston to bore clearance, and .040 Cometic gaskets and I have never seen an issue at .032, but we don't push it any tighter than that, but nor do we like to see anymore than .035" quench.
Old 07-02-2016, 05:03 PM
  #14  
11 Second Club
iTrader: (2)
 
A.R. Shale Targa's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Fredonia,WI
Posts: 3,729
Likes: 0
Received 14 Likes on 14 Posts
Default

Aluminum blocks grow more than iron
Room temp .032" becomes close to .040" at
Operating temp.
Old 07-05-2016, 10:47 AM
  #15  
Launching!
 
KiwiKid's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2014
Posts: 215
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Default

Originally Posted by A.R. Shale Targa
Aluminum blocks grow more than iron
Room temp .032" becomes close to .040" at
Operating temp.
Good point Tony, and probably why we have not seen any evidence of physical contact between the piston and the head surface.

We are also not revving these engines much above 7,000 RPM.

Cheers,

Mark.



Quick Reply: Is this oky: Piston Above Block Deck by 0.035"



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 08:09 AM.