• 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

R

RAD Merc SVT

CEG'er
Joined
Aug 2, 2010
Messages
489
Location
Phoenix, Arizona
Well guys it is official. I have added K1 rods to my budget list. As much as I don't want to throw that much money down on my build I also don't want to have to pull this engine out ever again. From everything I have read I feel this is a necessity, it's not an oiling problem it's the rods. Especially after reading Jaged's thread and how he has spun bearing number 4 and done everything in the oiling system to prevent it. This will be cheaper in the long run. Just thought I would share with you guys. ~Brian
 
RAD Merc SVT said:
Well guys it is official. I have added K1 rods to my budget list. As much as I don't want to throw that much money down on my build I also don't want to have to pull this engine out ever again. From everything I have read I feel this is a necessity, it's not an oiling problem it's the rods. Especially after reading Jaged's thread and how he has spun bearing number 4 and done everything in the oiling system to prevent it. This will be cheaper in the long run. Just thought I would share with you guys. ~Brian
Click to expand...


Jaged hasnt spun another bearing. read his latest update.

that said, if you feel its worth the effort tear the block down, have it honed, install new rings, rods, bearings, gaskets, TTY bolts, etc. then why not add some upgraded pistons as well.
 
just dont forget to add all the gaskets, machine work, bolts, rings for the pistons, etc into your budget as they will have to be done to install rods.
 
Ok well let me get some opinions. Do the 3L's have the same bearing problem as the 2.5's? I will still be driving it just like my 2.5. Should I take precautions or do the 3L's not spin them as easily? Thoughts?
 
RAD Merc SVT said:
Ok well let me get some opinions. Do the 3L's have the same bearing problem as the 2.5's? I will still be driving it just like my 2.5. Should I take precautions or do the 3L's not spin them as easily? Thoughts?
Click to expand...

The Duratec 3.0 uses the same connecting rods as the Duratec 2.5 so the probability is the same on that basis. I would think the probability of the 3.0 spinning bearings has to be worse because the piston should be heavier since it is bigger. There have been several incidences of 3.0Ls spinning bearings but I can't say whether the percentage of the whole population is the same as for the 2.5s. I don't think anybody knows this answer since on average, the Duratec 2.5s in our Contours have much higher milage on them than the 3.0s that have been swapped in.

This is really is a "risk vs. reward" choice when spending the extra bucks. You could choose to not upgrade the rods. The only way you will know it was the right choice is whenever you get rid of the car, did it spin another rod bearing during your ownership. On the other hand, if you spend the extra bucks, the probability of spinning another rod bearing is massively reduced (most likely will never happen unless some sort of other catastrophic event occurs such as busting the oil pan or running too low on oil). I definitely know which way I'm going on this issue (upgrade the rods).
 
Don't waste your money on the rods... period.

The stock rods do not have any problems. It was the cylinder heads, and oil pans that caused oiling issues if anything. Ford fixed these issues with the revised heads and oil pan on the 3L. Stock 3L's have been able to handle 12psi without any problems and put down a lot of power.

Now if your determined to buy rods then you best get pistons and put aside money for honing the block, new rings, new bolts, gaskets... you'll be adding up things pretty quick. IMO your money is better spent elsewhere.
 
I hear from alot of people that the oiling is the issue and I hear from others that the rods are the issue... I don't know. Well I really don't want to spend the money I just want to get my car running but at the same time I don't ever want to have to pull the engiine out again. I just want my fun little car to be reliable. I've read so many threads about this issue, I don't know what to do. I'm gonna be running 04 taurus tray, escape pan and pickup and 04 taurus heads. I hope that will do it.
 
CSVT#49 said:
Don't waste your money on the rods... period.

The stock rods do not have any problems.
Click to expand...

I disagree 100%.

The majority of the spun bearings have been due to loss of bearing crush as a result of rod stretch. The stretching is due to the poor quality powdered metal scintered connecting rods. These rods are fine when put in a car with an ATX and driven like a grocery getter car. Take the same motor and put them in a car with an MTX and start reving the engine higher (the rate of rev change also increases), and the rods fatique over time. Claiming these rods do not suffer from defects because they can survive 12 psi boost is insufficient because the stress of the exhaust stroke on these rods is the problem (rapidly going from compression to stretching state).

I'm not saying that no rod bearings have spun as a result of oil loss because there are several examples of people having run their oil low and done this.

If Ford has fixed the oiling and cooling problems, why are people spinning bearings in their swapped 3.0L engines?

Also, if there are no problems with these rods, why do the 1995 - 1996 Duratec V6s have very little spun bearing issues while 1997 and later versions do? Hint: The rods were changed. Search FCO for the info.
 
Yeah I think over the course of the past couple years, people are coming to a general consensus that the rods are the problem, not the heads or oil pan. There are apparently no drainback problems. Why do you think people who run 6.5 quarts spin bearings?
 
I would say there that for the 'average' person on this forum performing a 3L swap, exposing and replacing the rod bearings adds more risk than reward.

If one is patient and gets a low mile 3L with low shelf time at the salvage yard. The stock bearings are going to be a safer bet. This statement is based on inspecting the cams for any abnormal wear and and checking the contents of the oil pan and pickup tube prior to taking the motor home from the yard.

Just my opinion.
 
SHOgoFast said:
I would say there that for the 'average' person on this forum performing a 3L swap, exposing and replacing the rod bearings adds more risk than reward.
Click to expand...

You make a very good point. I've been around a long time and have done a lot of basic engine overhaul on grocery getter cars and on a few performance builds but that was all on older technology engines back in the 1980s. The tighter tolerances required of the newer all aluminum engines such as the Duratecs & Modular Ford V8s makes me seriously question my own skills in being able to measure everything properly. I'm also very concerned about being able to prevent even basic airborn contamination when doing the build at home; probably best to have the machine shop assemble the bottom end at a minimum to be safe.
 
mrspindlelegs said:
Not replacing the connecting rods is a "cheap build" given the known bottom end durability issue.
Click to expand...

again it seems most of those issues are on the 2.5l only. there are more and more 3L's running every year and I just don't read about bearing failure in them as in the 2.5L engines.
 
Ok well is it worth the close to $1000 dollars it will cost for the rods, bearings, rings, bolts, balancing, honing, and installing if I want to be safe? Or should I just not touch the bottom end, save $1000, and hope I get like 80k more miles on my car?
 
RAD Merc SVT said:
Ok well is it worth the close to $1000 dollars it will cost for the rods, bearings, rings, bolts, balancing, honing, and installing if I want to be safe? Or should I just not touch the bottom end, save $1000, and hope I get like 80k more miles on my car?
Click to expand...

That really just returns us back to this statement I made on page one, message #7 of this thread:

"This is really is a "risk vs. reward" choice when spending the extra bucks. You could choose to not upgrade the rods. The only way you will know it was the right choice is whenever you get rid of the car, did it spin another rod bearing during your ownership. On the other hand, if you spend the extra bucks, the probability of spinning another rod bearing is massively reduced (most likely will never happen unless some sort of other catastrophic event occurs such as busting the oil pan or running too low on oil)."

I guess the only enhancement that should be added to it is "When you get rid of the car and if no spun bearings occurred so far, how many miles & years of proven stable service did you get out of the thorough upgrade?" If you spend the bucks to do it right and then decide to sell the car within a year, then it was too much money. On the other hand, if you do the more expensive upgrade and drive the car for numerous years and > 100,000 miles (I would hope for even 200,000!) of hard driving with no spun bearings, then it can be considered a worthwhile investment.

A different take would be: Your signature says you are building a 74 Maverick with a stroked 351 Windsor. Do you have the time, money, and drive to do two big projects at the same time AND then continue to own them for a very long time (barring no Acts of God getting in the way)? Remember, it's almost 100% certain you will not make any money at all when you sell either car.
 
mrspindlelegs said:
I disagree 100%.

The majority of the spun bearings have been due to loss of bearing crush as a result of rod stretch. The stretching is due to the poor quality powdered metal scintered connecting rods...
Click to expand...

Your entitled to your opinion. However most of today's OEM's are using powder metal sinter forged rods. While the process is more costly then traditional mfg methods it does have many advantages. Sinter forged rods provide better control in size, weight, and also allows for a reduction in machining time. The performance they deliver is considered to be better then most traditional rods. It is the quality and consistency that most OEM spend the extra money to use powder metal sinter forged rods in their applications. If what you say is true many OEM's would be having the same problems.

This report shows some results from a study done to compare the two processes as well as a few more links discussing the process and pros/cons...
http://www.pickpm.com/designcenter/Conrod.pdf
http://www.pickpm.com/casestudy/cs8.asp
http://www.epma.com/New_non_members/structural_parts.htm
http://www.circletrack.com/enginetech/ctrp_0407_powder_forged_connecting_rods/index.html


To the OP all that said your much better off purchasing an Escape engine rather then a Taurus engine as there is less things you need to take apart (hopefully you haven't bought anything yet). Find a nice low mileage engine and look it over for what everyone has mentioned above. These engines are performing quite well in many vehicles. If bearing failure was a problem you would be hearing about it from all of the Taurus, Sable, Escape, Mariner, etc owners out there. This engine, and variants of it, are used in many, many vehicles and have worked well. No need to worry about reliability IMO.
 
CSVT#49 said:
Your entitled to your opinion. However most of today's OEM's are using powder metal sinter forged rods. While the process is more costly then traditional mfg methods it does have many advantages. Sinter forged rods provide better control in size, weight, and also allows for a reduction in machining time. The performance they deliver is considered to be better then most traditional rods. It is the quality and consistency that most OEM spend the extra money to use powder metal sinter forged rods in their applications. If what you say is true many OEM's would be having the same problems.

This report shows some results from a study done to compare the two processes as well as a few more links discussing the process and pros/cons...
http://www.pickpm.com/designcenter/Conrod.pdf
http://www.pickpm.com/casestudy/cs8.asp
http://www.epma.com/New_non_members/structural_parts.htm
http://www.circletrack.com/enginetech/ctrp_0407_powder_forged_connecting_rods/index.html


To the OP all that said your much better off purchasing an Escape engine rather then a Taurus engine as there is less things you need to take apart (hopefully you haven't bought anything yet). Find a nice low mileage engine and look it over for what everyone has mentioned above. These engines are performing quite well in many vehicles. If bearing failure was a problem you would be hearing about it from all of the Taurus, Sable, Escape, Mariner, etc owners out there. This engine, and variants of it, are used in many, many vehicles and have worked well. No need to worry about reliability IMO.
Click to expand...

Perhaps my wording of my position has not been specific enough.

I am not expressing a negative opinion of all PM connecting rods, just the specific ones used in the post 1997 and later Duratec 2.5Ls and Duratec 3.0Ls. When PM rods are made correctly, they work well. The Duratec 2.5L and 3.0L rods are deficient w.r.t. long term fatique resistance when the motor is coupled to a manual transmission and driven hard (high revs and rapid rates of change in rpm). These Duratec rods do seem to hold up well when paired with an ATX and driven more like a grocery getter mobile (they do not see high revs and the rate of rev change is slower).

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/

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.

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.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top