Guessing rod, bolt, nut etc doesn't count...
(http://amradio.freeiz.com/turbocoupe50/guesswhat.jpg)
I would love to guess but how can i see it!!!
Try this link, should be OK...
http://s1358.photobucket.com/user/xxAMxx/media/guesswhat_zps4e1a4aa6.jpg.html
Give us a hint, what area of what vehicle are we looking at?
looks like a thrust bearing
Looks like a lot of crank walk.
Looks like a combination of these.
What it is...isn't good. Hope that ain't in your new engine..
And..stay tuned..I'll PM you those wolverine cam specs in a few, since seeing your post here reminded me that you'd asked..
Be right back.
Zactly, that's the bottom end of the old 5.0... It measured .093 thrust clearance, bearing and crank are both wiped out, thrust was mainly on #2 & #4 main saddles and caps... Block and caps are slightly scored where the crank washiznitting but would be OK for a rebuild... Rod side clearance is between .020 & .035, I'll probably take the whole thing to the s yard...
Hey Tom
Do you think the block was flexing under spray with the heavy nature of our cars???
Travis
IDK, all I'm sure about is that it was in spec when assembled and sometime after spraying the crank was flopping back and forth... It ran at least three years with the crank walk, part of the time I was waiting for the 331 to be assembled(have a friend that SBF are his specialty)...
I did find this article online that goes into depth on the issue and will say my failure was probably a combination of transmission high line pressure combined with the spray...
BTW the main bearing surfaces all looked good with none showing even a hint of copper...
http://www.4secondsflat.com/Thrust_bearing_failures.html
IDK either...seems to be a pattern on heavy 302 users..
The block flexs a lot under big power in a heavy car.
I guess I'm glad I went 351w.. ..
If you have a 3000 fox mustang u can get away with more.
We are not as lucky.,.
Travis
Somehow I have a problem with the block flex theory, I'd think the other main bearing surfaces would show odd wear but all mine looked good... The SC Stang guys have issues with thrust bearings as well...
Just spit balling... But it seems to be a pattern. 5.0 guys blow a HG with boost/nitrous...but uber headgaskets and studs.. then continue to make power, more revs...whatever. Then more damage occurs.
Travis
I have a problem with the entire theory of "external forces" being imparted on the crank. That is, assuming things are installed correctly. I have read/heard about this, including a local yahoo that thinks his E4OD is "pulling" the crank out of his 5.4 in an F150 Lightning. On the no less than four occasions I have installed the AOD in my red cougar, I have put the converter all the way on, to the lockup shaft, until it bottoms out. I then mate the trans up to the dowel pins, make sure it is actually lined up, start the bolts, begin to crank them down, find that it's working on straight, finish tightening the bolts, find the trans perfectly mated up....and then rotate the converter and flexplate little by little with the balancer, doing the converter nuts of course, through the inspection cover. The studs on the converter stick through *just* enough to start the nuts, and they get pulled through 1/4" or so while tightening the nuts down. This says to me that the converter is definitely spaced AWAY from the tranny input shafts a good 1/4" or so.
At no time should a torque converter impart ANY thrust force on a crankshaft, if installed properly, by this anecdotal evidence and by what I think is common sense from a design perspective.
For a stick? Same deal. I think many people misunderstand the construction. I did myself until I looked at pictures and thought about it. The entire clutch assembly is bolted to the flywheel, not to the bell or block. So the force of the pressure place acts on the clutch plates and the clutch casing...which is then acting on the flywheel. Now, a misadjusted throwout bearing, is causing a constant force against the pressure plate, from the outside. From the frame of the car. This would pull/push on the flywheel. However I have read claims of "too strong of a clutch" causing thrust failure, and this is simply not possible, at least when engaged. I guess over thousands and thousands of miles, with many clutch in/outs with a very strong pressure plate, this might cause significant wear. Maybe I am misunderstanding what I read anyway. 90+ % of the duty cycle the clutch is engaged, a very small amount of the time is an outside force (the forks) acting on the pressure plate. Perhaps this is all you need to ruin the bearing.
In a automatic trans the torque converter is pressurized with fluid, so it's always exerting pressure by trying to push it's self away from the trans, into the flexplate... If pressure is high enough(as in trans with a shift kit), this foorce will cause excessive wear on the thrust bearing... Only time there is pressure from a manual trans is when the clutch is depressed...
It has been explained to me that auto trannys do not put any excessive loads on the thrush bearing. Franky Loupo FAIRBANKS RACING TRANSMISSIONS has dun tuns of units for us over the years and he explained that normally auto trannys pull the crank back to the rear of the engine rather than the front that a stick car does. Other than an LT1 pull clutch this seems to hold true. A normal clutch pushes the crank forward. And yes heavy clutch covers adds more pressure as spring pressure is increased. But having thrush issues is rather rare because most of the time the clutch is released. Thats why i never hold down a clutch in gear waiting for a light to change. Over the years i have inspected many a thrush bearing and this seems to hold true. Some fords only use a single half bearing for the thrush of the crank. Thrush failures are rare other than some fords. On the 2.3 it is not an issue and we do not see to many issues. If you inspect a bearing from an auto car you will notice the wear on the front side other than the rear side of a stick car. This is just me could be wrong.
Diaphragm clutches have reduced this issue by leaps and bounds as they take very little force to release them and there clamping force is high when engaged. The old style 3 finger clutches are long gone and ford long style clutches as well.
Example a TH400 exerts app 225-260 LBS of line pressure in reverse and run at app 225 in drive ranges. Normally pressures do not increase to much by adding a shift kit Normally most auto trannys run somewhere around 200 PSI line pressure even with a kit. So having a line pressure of a normal and or a performance tranny would not wipe out a bearing. There are millions of trannies on the roads today weather auto or stick that dont wipe out a thrush bearing. I know Ford has some issues with the 302 with this but i think CLEVITE designed a bearing to fix that issue. Lack of oil is what we have found that is the issue. You need to get more oil behind the thrush bearing surface. A small hole is all that is required. IT WORKS with the newer designed bearing by clevite and remember to polish the crank surfaces in the direction of rotation.
NOTE a ballooning converter can wipe out a thrush bearing. But i have not ever had this issue
For some reason it surprises me that the converter snout seal can hold that much pressure in LOL. Converter didn't seem to fit into it super-tight.
Tom - are most new/aftermarket cluches diaphragm clutches? Obviously the manufacturer probably specifies that in the catalog/online/whatever listing right?
Yes the most of what i see are now Diaphragm clutches. The old style clutches are no longer used in cars. That is i have not seen them in years. And we do a good amount of clutches. The front seal as i was told does not control line pressures. But then again my auto tranny knowledge is skimpy at best. The front seal to my thinking could never withstand those pressures. And the tranny coolers as well as it was explained to me that the pressures are low. Not 100% on this as i am not an auto tranny guy and i only have one car with one!!