engine rebuild

Collapse
X
 
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • Carl R.
    Frequent User
    • November 1, 2018
    • 62

    #16
    Re: engine rebuild

    Joe Randolph- I will be using the Eagle SIR-5700SBLW rods in the engine. I have looked at the SCE MLS Spartan Stainless Steel head gasket that is suppose to be able to seal a rough surface. The gasket is .039 thick. I am going to have the heads milled just enough to make them flat again, but no milling on the block. Just check it with a machined straight edge and do some light sanding maybe, but not on the pad. I will look at the gaskets that you mentioned to see what there data is. I am going to cc one of the chambers on the head this weekend to see what it is before the milling and then again after. I will also listen to what my over haul guy may suggest, so as not to kill to much of the compression ratio and since I am not milling the block surface.

    Comment

    • Patrick B.
      Extremely Frequent Poster
      • September 1, 1985
      • 1980

      #17
      Re: engine rebuild

      The Fel-Pro composition gaskets are also 0.039 thick. They are good quality and inexpensive.

      Comment

      • Duke W.
        Beyond Control Poster
        • January 1, 1993
        • 15497

        #18
        Re: engine rebuild

        Head gasket thickness is the last step in compression ratio management. Once all other measurements for compression ratio are known, head gasket thickness is chosen to achieve the target CR range.

        Modern polymer coated shim gaskets like the Felpro 1094 will seal as long as the head and block mating surfaces measure flat as I explained in the Special 300 HP tech support paper and compression ratio management paper that are included in the restoration documents thread near the end of the sticky section.

        If the head surface is flat there is no need to machine it. My philosophy is to only remove metal if absolutely necessary. The problem is that most machine shops charge by the specific operation, so they usually want to align bore the main saddles and machine the block and head mating surfaces. It's up to the engine owner to manage the machine shop by specifying what operations to perform.

        If you believe your machine shop will honestly and thoroughly measure to determine if machining operations are necessary, okay, but if you can disassemble and engine you can make all the necessary measurements with nothing but a machinists bar and feeler gages.

        Duke

        Comment

        • Kenneth F.
          Very Frequent User
          • October 1, 1988
          • 282

          #19
          Re: engine rebuild

          I just had a damper rebuilt for a 1966, 350 H.P. It looks good and was not expensive. Contact Us (damperdoctor.com)

          I bought a 1962 Corvette in the mid 1960's that had a connecting rod failure on a 340 H.P. engine. When disassembling the engine, I recall the 2 steel head gaskets under each cylinder head. I think the steel head gaskets had a sealant painted on.

          Ken

          Comment

          • Owen L.
            Very Frequent User
            • October 1, 1991
            • 799

            #20
            Re: engine rebuild

            Originally posted by Kenneth Files (13799)
            I recall the 2 steel head gaskets under each cylinder head. I think the steel head gaskets had a sealant painted on.

            Ken
            Copper from a spray can was a common steel gasket surface treatment.

            Comment

            • Duke W.
              Beyond Control Poster
              • January 1, 1993
              • 15497

              #21
              Re: engine rebuild

              I was called "CopperCoat" - not sure of the spelling. It's not necessary with modern polymer coated shim gaskets, and I recall that the Chevrolet Power Manuals recommended painting steel head gaskets with "aluminum paint", which would be most silver paints since aluminum particles provide the color.

              Double gasketing was implemented in mid-'62 production to address customer detonation complaints, and it carried through to the end of '63 production. A TSB was written on the issue and it's somewhere on the Web.

              The '64 461 head eliminated the small plug side quench area that increased chamber volume 1-2 cc from the '61-to'63 461X head. This and the 30-30 cam's later closing inlet valve reduced DCR to the point where double gasketing was no longer required.


              Duke

              Comment

              Working...
              Searching...Please wait.
              An unexpected error was returned: 'Your submission could not be processed because you have logged in since the previous page was loaded.

              Please push the back button and reload the previous window.'
              An unexpected error was returned: 'Your submission could not be processed because the token has expired.

              Please push the back button and reload the previous window.'
              An internal error has occurred and the module cannot be displayed.
              There are no results that meet this criteria.
              Search Result for "|||"