LS1 Block Material
02-27-2008, 11:13 PM
#41
All this talk about FSAE got me excited...too bad my schools program was just an embarrasment...I tried so hard to organize it better for 3 years and finally I just gave up. I learned SO MUCH from other schools out at the competition though, what an amazing few days.
As for the alloy talk...I did a lot of work with GM's castings in school for metallurgy research, but I'm not allowed to talk about them. I can say that they put a LOT of research into the production alloys to save money and have a good product (for their intended use).
Matweb is a pretty good resource to look up properties on the alloys mentioned in this thread.
As for the alloy talk...I did a lot of work with GM's castings in school for metallurgy research, but I'm not allowed to talk about them. I can say that they put a LOT of research into the production alloys to save money and have a good product (for their intended use).
Matweb is a pretty good resource to look up properties on the alloys mentioned in this thread.
02-28-2008, 09:56 AM
#42
Im a VERY thick skinned individual.. Anyone who knows me personally will vouch for that... On that note, there was no reason to belittle someone in this post.... If he wants to prvide information I think all ears were open... Giving the guy grief about posting up in hopes to hear from such knowledgeable people as OldSStroker is/was in bad taste in my opinion....
To each their own.. Everyone has an opinion just like an.......
To each their own.. Everyone has an opinion just like an.......
I hate to stir the pot any more, but I would rather have good info from a complete dick than bad info from the nicest guy on this forum. I think a lot of people here are a bit "thin-skinned" when it comes to criticism. However, that was one of the harsher posts I've read from OldSStroker. Maybe he was having a bad day?
02-28-2008, 07:05 PM
#43
Yes, that's why it's not a melt. The metal retains its particulate characteristic as most processes, including sintering, only heat the materials to just below the melting point of the base metal. Having said all that, I actually have no idea what the composition of the Metaldyne (if, in fact, Metaldyne is the correct Tier) material is. It could have no Al it could have a lot. You can find out a lot here and here.
02-28-2008, 09:12 PM
#44
LS1 Tech Veteran
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Wichita, Ks
Posts: 1,170
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Im a VERY thick skinned individual.. Anyone who knows me personally will vouch for that... On that note, there was no reason to belittle someone in this post.... If he wants to prvide information I think all ears were open... Giving the guy grief about posting up in hopes to hear from such knowledgeable people as OldSStroker is/was in bad taste in my opinion....
To each their own.. Everyone has an opinion just like an.......
To each their own.. Everyone has an opinion just like an.......
You brought up a good point yesterday and I didn't see a need to restate that point today. It's time to let this go and move on.
It appears that people in general are just trying to get this thread back on track and I believe that that is the business at hand.
Regards,
Steve
02-29-2008, 06:23 AM
#45
TECH Regular
iTrader: (5)
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Washington Crossing, PA
Posts: 422
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thanks! I have alot to read. Very cool I knew about powder metal but didn't know it's comp. The factory where one of my friends worked did PM parts with presses in the 100's of tons but they just bought preloaded barrels depending on the target strenght. No one there did engineering on the metal comp. Just the metal shape.
03-04-2008, 07:42 PM
#47
TECH Senior Member
Hmmm... interesting use of Cu (in reference to post #3)...
makes sense, cam lobe surfaces need to be hard, but the shaft must not be brittle (even on the surface) or it would crack/split/break.
makes sense, cam lobe surfaces need to be hard, but the shaft must not be brittle (even on the surface) or it would crack/split/break.
03-04-2008, 08:42 PM
#48
TECH Fanatic
Yes, carburized 8620 makes an extremely good wear surface (cam lobes). The core hardness even under the Cu masking is high enough to impart very good strength and some ductility to the cam. You get many of the same characteristics by induction hardening the lobes of a 5150 core which is direct hardening and doesn't need many hours in a carburizing furnace. Metallurgists could probably argue which is the better method, but for most applicatons, either is usable.
IOW, with today's outrageous copper prices and the cost of the energy to carburize to the required depth, 8620 cams are becoming rarer. The material cost and machining/grinding costs are pretty much a push for either material, so it is most likely energy (heat treating) and copper costs which are driving steel cam production. It might make cam manufacturers look fondly on the days before rollers, where all flat lifter cores were cast.
I still like built-up cams which some OEMs use. You get to choose different materials and heat treatments for the shaft, gear, bearing journals and lobes. The capital equipment cost is excessive for an aftermarket cam application, but I wouldn't count it out in the future.
This is probably a thread hijack because it doesn't relate to the OP's topic. At least it's technical.
Jon
03-06-2008, 09:53 PM
#49
On The Tree
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Toronto
Posts: 148
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
03-27-2008, 11:13 AM
#50
Restricted User
Join Date: May 2006
Location: virginia
Posts: 132
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
