• Welcome to the Contour Enthusiasts Group, the best resource for the Ford Contour and Mercury Mystique.

    You can register to join the community.

K1 rods

Ok well I am planning to own both cars for a very long time because I love them they are great cars and I don't ever want to sell them. In regards to my Maverick I am building the original 302 and completely trying to restore the car. That beiing said I am in no hurry and I am not concerned with how long it takes. It has a 351 in it now that I use as my DD. I want to get my Mercury running to take to school so I can have AC in Arizona and better gas mleage but I never want to pull the engine out again if I own this car for another 200k miles. I don't want to do this right and I believe rods are the problem. On my 2.5 I took great care of it it never had a low oil condition no road track time for sweeping turns and still spun a bearing. I do drive my car hard and go up to full revs at least once everytime drive it which I know is not good for it but I love driiving it. Thank you for all your help I really appreciate it and I learned alot from this thread and I hope others will too. I have decided to go with the new rods and never have to worry about this problem again. Thanks for everything ~Brian
 
mrspindlelegs said:
Perhaps my wording of my position has not been specific enough.

I am not expressing a negative opinion of all PM connecting rods...
Click to expand...

Alright from what I read it seemed as if you thought PM rods were not up to par.

mrspindlelegs said:
...I'm really surprised that you are such a big backer of these Ford PM rods given all the research you have done on your big build. Did you miss this thread?

http://www.fordcontour.org/topic/10943-conrod-bearing-info/...
Click to expand...

I am building a bullet proof motor to withstand the power I'm looking to achieve. The stock PM rods were not designed for that.

mrspindlelegs said:
...I'll take the word of an engineer who has been properly trained in doing failure analysis and then applied that knowledge to doing "Post Mortems" on numerous Duratec V6 failures vs. the myths that nearly everybody else is still passing around after so many years...
Click to expand...

I'm an engineer and I also understand failure analysis quite well. However I have never seen a failed rod from a Duratec engine.

mrspindlelegs said:
...I think you are incorrect about the PM process being more expensive; it's cheaper. A mass manufacturer would never change to a more expensive process when the old school cast and forged processes worked fine and supposedly cost less...
Click to expand...

The process may have come down in cost since its inception. However think about what you just said... the same thing could said about the good old rear projection TV's version the LED TV's. They both work fine and the rear projection costs less...
 
MikesStripedSVT said:
It seems to me someone should measure a rod from an engine that spun a bearing.
Click to expand...


I have 2 SVT engines sitting in my garage, both of which spun a bearing and blew holes out the side of the block. I intend to pull a piston/rod from each, or perhaps a couple, and measure them.
 
striker2 said:
I have 2 SVT engines sitting in my garage, both of which spun a bearing and blew holes out the side of the block. I intend to pull a piston/rod from each, or perhaps a couple, and measure them.
Click to expand...

If it shot out the block usually the problem rod is in a few pieces. I suppose you could measure the ones intact but they might not get you the info you want.
 
Blackcoog said:
If it shot out the block usually the problem rod is in a few pieces. I suppose you could measure the ones intact but they might not get you the info you want.
Click to expand...
well yeah, each one is now a million piece 3D puzzle :laugh:


that said, I know for sure of at least one rod that is broken in half but still has the big end in 1 piece. what im really looking for though is proof that the rods ovalize or expand over time, so the ones still in good shape are actually the ones i need anyways.
 
BrApple said:
got a link to the post? i don't recall ever reading that inforamtion.
Click to expand...

Im actually more curious as to where they are relative to spec before they spin the bearing since you have no guarantee that any damage to the rod wasnt done after the bearing spun.
 
BrApple said:
got a link to the post? i don't recall ever reading that inforamtion.
Click to expand...

Sure do:

http://www.fordcontour.org/topic/10943-conrod-bearing-info/

The link is the start of a 5 page thread that is a terrific read on PM rods and bearing failure due to oil loss vs. stretching rods. The first time in the thread where Terry mentions the out of tolerance parent bore on the connecting rod is Message #40 on the bottom of page 2.

I think I've read a few other threads on FCO where he brought the bore stretch up but I don't have those threads bookmarked or memorized.
 
striker2 said:
Im actually more curious as to where they are relative to spec before they spin the bearing since you have no guarantee that any damage to the rod wasnt done after the bearing spun.
Click to expand...

Some of the answer you are looking for may be in the thread I linked in a response to BrApple. Terry does mention what he has typically seen in connecting rod parent bore i.d. on new unused rods vs. rods that came from a motor that had a spun bearing failure.
 
mrspindlelegs said:
Sure do:

http://www.fordcontour.org/topic/10943-conrod-bearing-info/

The link is the start of a 5 page thread that is a terrific read on PM rods and bearing failure due to oil loss vs. stretching rods. The first time in the thread where Terry mentions the out of tolerance parent bore on the connecting rod is Message #40 on the bottom of page 2.

I think I've read a few other threads on FCO where he brought the bore stretch up but I don't have those threads bookmarked or memorized.
Click to expand...

Terry doesn't actually state any numbers for rod length changes. He only mentions he has measured some and has noted differences that support his claim that rods are stretching. It is an interesting read although I find it difficult to read his threads. He talks down to everyone like they are 5 years old.
 
Blackcoog said:
Terry doesn't actually state any numbers for rod length changes. He only mentions he has measured some and has noted differences that support his claim that rods are stretching. It is an interesting read although I find it difficult to read his threads. He talks down to everyone like they are 5 years old.
Click to expand...

True, he didn't show actual numbers. Then again, I haven't seen what I feel could be called a "Properly Documented Post Mortem" report on a failed engine on CEG, FCO or NECO. Very few of us have all the necessary tools to do a full measurement analysis.

Terry's teachings definitely have the "air of condescension" in them. Maybe it's just a cultural difference as a result of him coming from the other side of the pond? I just learned to adjust to his style because there is so much good information to be found.
 
Blackcoog said:
Terry doesn't actually state any numbers for rod length changes. He only mentions he has measured some and has noted differences that support his claim that rods are stretching. It is an interesting read although I find it difficult to read his threads. He talks down to everyone like they are 5 years old.
Click to expand...


It is from his English upbringing. Pretty nice one on one. He tries to be short and concise as possible and some people think he is being arrogant. I don't think that is the case at all.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top