The Daily Yardman Thread

BlazNT said:

From my calculations we are on the up compaired to the site as a whole. Fewer visitors and our viewing is still strong. The site is about 30% down and we are still going strong.

No I will not add in the site statics. It is not easy to come up with. I have not been able to create an automated way to get the information.

Click to expand...

Ronno6 said:

Sorry in advance for the length of this post.

The building of the 355 for the '84 C10 is progressing in the normal 2 steps forward, 1 step back.
After learning about differences in timing chains for roller cams, as well as different thrust plates for the same,
assembly lube, oil pump intake sizes, and the helpfulness of of various forum and linked websites,
engine construction, well, maybe not (you'll see...) has moved into a new phase: Compression ratio,squish and deck machining.
After I buttoned up the bottom of the engine with the oil pan,timing cover and rear main seal, sealing all
in place with some black silicone sealant, I made an alarming discovery.
I knew that the piston tops did not come up flush with the block deck (short by .040").
Kinda figured that that was normal.
It is, sorta.
I utilized an online Compression Ratio (C/R) calculator, and, plugging in the bore,stroke, piston to deck height,head gasket thickness,
piston valve dents,and combustion chamber volume, I calculated my C/R to be 9.25:1.
Hmmm, I thought...........that's a bit low.
My cam was designed for an engine having a C/R of 10.4:1. This concerned me.
That was not all..........
With my pistons sitting down in the bore .040" and a head gasket thickness of .043", the quench distance, or "squish" would be .083".
Research told me that optimum squish should be .038" to .042", with .044" being about the max before performance would begin to fall off.
Question was: How to I get from .083" to .042" ???
Well, step 1 would be a thinner head gasket.
I found a HG that was 015" thick. That would get me a lot closer, but it required mating surfaces to be a bunch smoother than my block decks were.
I would need to disassemble (GRRRRRRRRRRR) the short block and have more machining cone. PITA
Another way would be to swap pistons.
My pistons have a "compression height" of 1.54". Pretty typical for stock type applications.
I found pistons which have CH of 1.563". That would reduce the piston deck height from .040" to .023"
Again, disassembly, more $$$ then reassembly.
With my head gaskets, the quench zone would be .066", and with an available .026" gasket, quench would be .049.
Getting closer.
But, those .026" gaskets are over $120.00 for the pair, and machining for a smoother deck would probably still be required.
Mo money.............. (The .015" HG were $45.00/pr.)

So, I concluded the best way was to have .012" removed from the decks and use the .015" gaskets.
Quench gonna be .043". close enough.
NOW, the bad news: I needed 3 new gaskets (! piece oil pan gasket pricey...) + head gaskets and, after machining the block decks,
the block gotta be hot tanked again to clean out metal shavings. This means NEW cam bearings (again)..............
Having the block decked with the original machining would have been kind of a shot in the dark.
I would have had to mix and match parts in order to achieve the closest result.
At least now, the critter will be dialed in.
I just hate negative labor.
Knowledge and experience CAN be expensive.

So........... Now my C/R gonna be 10.1:1..............it may ping....I may end up using mid grade or premium gas.......
I DON'T CARE.................I don't put many miles on my truck nohow..........
All I know is that I did NOT want to leave any HP or torque on the table when I could have had it for a few $$$$ more.
I want the MOST power I can obtain with the components I selected.
I think I have that in sight.

I may never build another engine, and that would be a pity. I have sure learned a LOT with this one!

Gotta take a nap now; my fingers are WORE OUT !

Click to expand...

BlazNT said:

It is always better to figure it out before you finish it and decied it was done wrong.

Click to expand...

BlazNT said:

It is always better to figure it out before you finish it and decied it was done wrong.

Click to expand...

BlazNT said:

How about longer rods? That would take the least amount of time and money if it is possible.

Click to expand...

Boobala said:

NOT being sarcastic RON ... this is a good example of why some guy's just get a "crate-motor" These are my brothers in laws trucks, The Yellow Dodge ( and 2 more belongs to 1 BIL and the Black El Camino and blue Nascar truck belong to his brother ( BIL #2 ).. the yellow truck and El-Camino both have "crate motors" 500 HP streetable versions of course they all all have a "tire-wear" problem, especially the detuned (860 HP ) Nascar truck ...

Click to expand...

nice to have money ...Ehhhhh ???

Click to expand...

Ronno6 said:

ANYBODY can just open the wallet.
Then I'd be just as dumb about this stuff as I was before.
My head is HEAVY with knowledge now........



I wouldn't know....I've sunk all mine into my C10........

Click to expand...

Roger B said:

Chuck, it looks like we are leveling off in the 500's.. Not bad for having been relocated not once, but twice!

Rog

Click to expand...