SD1 3.5L.
ARP stud kits are back ordered till August. Can I reuse the existing bolts for cap and rods?
Brian, you can reuse the main bolts in the original positions. If removed you should use new bolts and align hone. If you didn't remove the rod bolts you can reuse them. If removed you should use new bolts and resize big end. Same with ARP studs and bolts. Did you try to find a different supplier?
Jim, Both the main cap & rod bolts were removed. TWS back ordered, trying Summit and TA, Rimmer is 2X the cost of everyone else.
Can only find ARP stud kits which are all back ordered everywhere. Cannot find standard bolts anywhere. May need to reuse.
Brian, If you were happy with these guys you visited, you can take your block, rods, pistons and rod and main bolts and have them fitted.
https://actionmachine.com/products-and-services/balancing
Jim, I did visit and I think they'd be a great resource for any machine work, but.....they are months out on service backlog. Also, I've found that having a relationship with the machine shop is very important, you get a little better attention and service this way as in any business relationship and I do not have any previous business with them. They do not do any radical custom strokong, they probaly reserve those services for their best customers. They do do all other engine machine work and they have a good rep.
I have a good relationship with Seattle Autosport and feel they can handle most work though they are a bit far of a drive.
If no bolting parts resource comes up I intend to reuse the existing bolts. I'll torque the bearings and verify gap measurements. This is a straight mild rebuild of a 3.5, figuring 150-175 HP tops. Excellent motor for someone wanting to upgrade but not go crazy. I had a good engine and I wanted to rebuild in preparation for my 300 build. More than likely I'll selll this engine fully dressed at a reasonable price before running it in so the next owner can break it down and verify and make changes as they want or just run it in and go.
Brian, Buick 215 works in Rover 3.5. Ebay:
https://www.ebay.com/itm/323973686127?hash=item4b6e56236f:g:PXMAAOSwDpBhGk7C
https://www.ebay.com/itm/254385449552?epid=1272349888&hash=item3b3a8dea50:g:Be8AAOSw~~phtspv
Still is recomended to align hone mains when changing to studs or changing to ARP rod bolts to resize big ends as caps will distort different.
The shipping is the same cost as the ARP set from TWS...if they had it.
Understood on the align hone, if I change to ARP I'll run the block back to Autosport. I guess I better check to see if they do it. I was not intending to us3 ARP but the lack of OEM drove me that direction.
Didn't see they were from Australia! On American Ebay. Sorry for the false lead. TA should have the Buick bolts.
OK, lets try this again:
https://www.jegs.com/i/ARP/070/124-5401/10002/-1
https://www.jegs.com/i/ARP/070/124-6001/10002/-1
https://www.summitracing.com/search/part-type/connecting-rod-bolts/make/buick
Found both the main caps and rod stud kits with TA, shipping today. Verified with Seattle Autosport that they can do the align hone and resize the rods. $300 for everything plus $150 for the 2 kits, this is getting costly but the block will be right. I was surprised that the original crank journals were in such good shape, requiring standard bearings.
I never thought to check Jegs..thaks, I'll add them to my usual suspects for parts.
Block align honed for ARP studs...costly mistake. Bearings not as tight as I'd wanted but everything was showing as 1.4 to 1.8 thou. Studs tightened to 100 lbs safely. Also did the oil mods. Had a grinder put a pilot point on my 1/2" bit, good to go. Oil galley drill was straight on.
4C93CA20-31FE-4E0C-891A-7912530F0F44.jpeg
A3A63B21-4178-4F7D-A6DA-53B5ABCB2E31.jpeg
30A46030-2529-43C5-A050-C10FF21B3176.jpeg
Ran straight & true.
EEF07C90-31BC-4BD3-857C-0AB8AEC32EE7.jpeg
I use Atlantic British out of NYC for all of my internal Rover parts. Seems to be the most complete and cheapest around. They are Land Rover specialists.
I bought the bearings through TWS. I believe it was more of a communication error on my part with the machine shop. I may need to take the block back as the readings for my rod bearings is less than a thou. I've measured 3 so far and all read very right. I just had the big ends done over due to the switch to ARP studs. Bearings were standard. Also, this rod bearing seems to have a little gap/edge.
8F5191E9-FBBF-4779-BCDD-01C51300D4C5.jpeg
4D82A8AC-A35B-4597-91D4-3C9225F8CA72.jpeg
Brian, .001 is perfect for the clearance. Use 5-30 oil. If under .001 you can polish the crank journal a little to increase clearance.
Brian,
I noticed that those rod bearings do not have the rod spray weep hole notches. I recommend that you use a Dremel to cut some small notches which will allow the rods to spray oil up onto the bottom of the pistons and cylinder walls.
The original bearings had these notches and if you look at the rods you will see the lube port groove machined into one side of the rod. The rods are assembled into the engine with the lube ports facing up.
I once built a 10.25 to compression 215 and I noticed that the rod bearings didn't have the notches. I thought that it was odd, but assembled the engine with the bearings as is. A few years latter when I tore the engine down to build the supercharged engine. I noticed that the pistons and cylinder walls had excessive scoring. The engine only had about 7000 miles on it and piston to cylinder clearance was correct with the exception of the heavy scoring.
I concluded that the abnormal wear/scoring was due to lack of lubrication, from the rod spray holes being blocked off.
Normally I wouldn't be tearing down an engine with 7000 miles and if I had not been doing a compression ratio change I probably wouldn't have caught it until the pistons were worn enough to cause piston slap.
For the supercharged engine, I did cut matching notches in the bearing shells as I wanted to make sure that the pistons received proper lubrication.
Bill
Bill,
Appreciate that info. I looked at my rods and I'm not sure I'm seeing the notches you're referring to. This engine is a Rover 3.5 also though I didn't see any notches on the Buick 300 rods I have on my bench. Pics are of the Rover rods.
Brian
2CCC6704-F77B-4316-937F-891592A678EC.jpeg
6C7BA9F1-B58E-43FD-AC6F-1A4F91A07762.jpeg
I don't know if the Rover had them but the Buick 215 did. Brian if you take a cap off you would see a channel going to the side, On the bottom of this page is a good description:
http://www.britishv8.org/Articles/Affordable-Stroker-V8.htm
Rover had them. Not sure if all years did. Went down to the garage & scrounged around. Took a couple of pics of a rod from a 1989 Rover 3.9 rod.
Rover3.9ConnectingRodpeehole.jpeg
Rover3.9ConnectingRodBearingpeehole.jpeg
I thought those went away with the intro of roller cams.
Jim
'Cept Rover didn't use those fancy cams. :)
Don't think they were for the cam, as Chevy & Ford quit using con rod squirt holes in the 60s.
I believe they will only squirt when the big end goes below the main bearing parting line about 20 degrees or so. Not sure how much oil that puts in the cylinders.
Jim
Yeah, almost all modern "V" engines don't have them. Some of the newer stuff uses spray nozzles off of the main oil galleys to lube/cool the pistons. This is particularly true with high performance and boosted engines.
It was a bit of an eye opener after seeing the pistons. It tells me a couple of things though,
1, the 215 needs those squirt holes and that they do indeed have a purpose.
2, "A" likely the replacement rod bearings being sold for 215/3.5L also fit another application which doesn't have squirt holes. "B" they probably combined the part #'s to save costs and streamline manufacturing.
I believe that I still have the old pistons somewhere, If I think about it, I will try and remember to post a pic.
Bill
Brian, you torqued 3.5L mains to 100 ft/lbs , with studs ? Where did you find that spec. ? If so, I'm totally surprised you
didn't pull the threads out of the block ? When using .500" studs, you should reduce torque by 35% ! 20 tpi. vs. 13 tpi.
Good Luck, Art.
Honda was pretty serious about oil squirters to keep the S2000 pistons cool. What does it do to the oil temp?
S2000OilSquirters.jpg
I would think that it increases it slightly, after all the heat has to go somewhere ;-). Not sure if the S2000 uses an oil cooler, I know that a lot of GM engines do.
Art,
ARP directed 110 lbs. The directions were specific to the 3.5 Rover. My courage only took me to 100lbs. Machinists did initial torque and recommended I retorque to the same as the studs require stretch to hold. They were solid to 100 lbs.
I appreciate the guidance on the squirt holes. I inspected and they're definitely there. Neither manual I have talks to these feature though both manuals tell you to put the dimple on the rod forward for right bank and aft for the left. This puts the squirt hole at the top. I notched the bearing to match the hole.
D83F540E-A9CC-41B9-BBBB-BEA549DED5C5.jpeg
AE9D7534-2F41-480E-BC78-635E6E8C2FBC.jpeg
If you look at the oil holes in the crank, of course they follow the throws, unless cross drilled. The top main has the oil groove. So pressurized oil is only available on about the bottom 140 degrees or less of crank swing. That means the only oil available to the squirt hole is what remains in the "wedge" as the rod comes around the top, meaning also that the squirt hole is depleting the oil cushion available for the bearing on the power stroke.
Everything has a cost.
Jim
IMG_3986.JPG
IMG_3988.JPG
This is actually one of the better (least scored) pistons and it's difficult to photograph the scoring and have it show in the pic. In the pic they look like scratches, but you can actually drag your finger nail across them and feel that they are fairly deep. Also disregard the corrosion as they have been laying outside in my scrap metal recycle pile!
All 8 pistons have it and the thrust side is worse than the non-thrust side. Upon tear down it definitely caught my attention as it is something that I do not usually see on a low mileage engine.
One problem is the 60 year-old design. Fortunately, piston/ring designers evolved.