Spun a rod bearing

[Caliber308]

Clevite rod and main bearings are steel backed with aluminum alloy (bi-metal). Some years ago they were a trimetal bearing but have since changed.

 

You must be smoking something.. Give me some .Clevite 77 Tri- Metal bearings are still available for our cars.Dad sells them. Check on his website. http://www.enginemachineservice.com

 

Bill

Edited July 6, 2011 by Caliber308

[Whiplash]

You must be smoking something...Clevite 77 Tri- Metal bearings are still available for our cars.

 

Bill

 

Trust me Bill. They are bi-metal from Clevite. Been that way for several years now. Unless you have old stock more that 5 or 10 years old.

[intense98rt]

here is some info from clevite that I posted in Feb.

I contacted clevite. They said that those ndc bearings are from their japanesse supplier and they aren't of any less quality than their own. Tooling to make the bearings ranges from $25k to $60k. It isn't worth it for them to invest in the tooling for some bearings. They also said calico coatings is a good company. According to the clevite catalog the main bearings are steel backed bearings with an aluminum alloy lining and the rod bearings are Steel backed bearings with an intermediate layer of copper-lead alloy and an electroplated lead-tincopper overlay. On top of that I have them coated. I'm hoping they will be fine.

Edited July 6, 2011 by intense98rt

[Whiplash]

The Clevite bearing catalog I have dated 2007 states AL-3 (bi-metal). The 2005 catalog did state TM-77 (tri-metal) but it was a typo. The new 2011 bearing catalog doesn't even show the 2.6L engine. !!!

 

Correction! The 2005 catalog wasn't a typo. I had it marked out and written in AL material. Just after the catalog was printed is when Clevite changed the material.

Edited July 13, 2011 by Whiplash

[Caliber308]

The Clevite bearing catalog I have dated 2007 states AL-3 (bi-metal). The 2005 catalog did state TM-77 (tri-metal) but it was a typo. The new 2011 bearing catalog doesn't even show the 2.6L engine. !!!

 

Ask Dad. He sells Clevite 77 Tri-Metal Main and Rod Bearings for our engines.

 

http://www.enginemachineservice.com

 

Check post 21 in this thread.

 

Bill

Edited July 6, 2011 by Caliber308

[Dad]

Cal, Whiplash works for Clevite.. So I think he has first hand info.

 

Dad

[Indiana]

lots of old school guys would buy 2 sets of brgs and use both grove'd brg shells top and bottom , was it worth it , hard to say the bottom shell is the load carrying brg , oil supply to a rod is more of a pulseing supply then a solid flow, this is because the oil feed hole only align up durring part of the crank turn , haveing a full ring arround the crank would increase the oil flow to the rod brgs in theory

but Caliber says I don't know what I'm talking about and that "DAD" with his engine he built that just ate its bearings knows better. Oh well.

[Indiana]

Cal, Whiplash works for Clevite.. So I think he has first hand info.

 

Dad

His only intention is to slam anyone that doesn't do what he does. There's a reason I don't use Clevite unless its old inventory like Michigan 77 or some Federal Mogul. I don't use Autozone Clevite 6.99 rod bearings. Edited July 7, 2011 by Indiana

[Indiana]

I read somewhere that ACL had tri-metal bearings. But one member here ordered some in that were bi-metal. I have yet to find tri-metal bearings for the 2.6L engine.

ACL will be in the box if you get the BeckArnley brand. ACL was the supplier to the AU Mitsubishi engine plant for bearings, gaskets and pistons and that was the last to make the 2.6 except for the new China engines but China has had since the 90s an exported 2.6 BUS and TRUCK, Rosa and Canter, and this is the only reason we still have 2.6 engine parts.

 

http://www.aclus.com...ne_bearings.htm

 

You'll see that ACL mentions Aluminum as a component in tri metal bearings, the 2.6 is no longer listed in their catalogs but there is plenty of old inventory left and they ARE tin copper and steel tri metal design.

 

 

http://www.b2600turbo.com/images/IM003372.JPG

 

http://www.b2600turbo.com/88WB/IM003373.JPG

 

 

This improperly installed ate up bearing is trimetal you can see the copper layer and they are ACL.

 

http://www.b2600turbo.com/images/IM003333b.JPG

 

The engine they were from was imo from the AU engine plant it was different in many ways, it was a much newer casting including an enclosed upper balance shaft cavity (no tin plate) as in the AU fwd vehicles that were made in AU and had that same characteristic. IMO it was ordered then assembled by some Chrysler dealer tech and that's who screwed it up by looking at PICTURES and not reading. It was in an 88 automatic Conquest. Looking at PICTURES with arrows and lines drawn over them will not fix your car. You will have to read at some point.

 

 

 

This was the aluminum rod bearings that were in that engine. Do you see any copper in there where I filed down to the backing material? Aluminum is too hard and crap in your oil, like from not using an oil separator and letting the soot and blowby crap contaminate your oil especially when you use check valves that PREVENT the introduction of fresh air to ever enter thus leaving pressure to first build up then have to blow out. Why do you think Mitsibishi got rid of them and had the recall for turbo engines but left them in the n/a vehicles? Do you think not only was it for the reason they stated but that they knew by the late 80s of the potential issues with the Starions and that blowby was one of those factors. Any reason to change your oil so frequently and that they state that race or sustained heavy duty use will require even more frequent oil changes? You think its the heat that ruins the oil or that its full of crap from blowby? or both? We just beat on them and see the results and when you do that long enough you'll see the same thing Mitsubishi did 25 years ago.

 

 

http://www.b2600turbo.com/images/IM003240.JPG

 

 

The OEM supplier for our engines was Taiho but there was fake China copies of what is IMO a superior bearing for this engine in every way. OEM bearings have lasted and stood up to the abuse longer than any other. I bought some of those bearings off ebay then I got a magnifying glass and I did see the lines in the outer layer then I got a file and started to chew up one of the inserts to see if they were the fakes or not and I can't tell but I've not used any of them so I can't say where there is a reliable source for them.

 

You need to ask someone about a part you ask that one that is USING it not the one that is SELLING it. "DAD" as I said just had his engine eat its bearings. What does that tell you? Was it those bimetal Aluminum bearings that won't embed the crap if it gets in the oil or was it the weight oil he was using? Was it a combination of both? Maybe he used a different bearing. He has the engine and the car only he can tell you. It won't do any good and nobody will learn anything if you listen to Caliber his only intention is that you use what HE uses and you do what HE says. Now, nobody is running around hitting their engines with a hammer and he knows that but he missed the point again. Remember, if you read it, that I commented about seeing only in black and white.

 

and now someones problem with what is just likely using the wrong rod cap turns into Calibers Folly AGAIN

[Dad]

My bearings did not get eaten, My upper balance shaft spun... ok I admit somwhere I messed up, But I will tell you that the clevite bearings did their job, Debris was caught and embedded in the bearings, The crankshaft was not hurt in any way- took just a polish job to clean it up.

Dad

Edited July 7, 2011 by Dad

[Metric-man]

Since it is being brought up, I'll throw this into the Discussion

 

SC-89-001 REVISION

DATE November, 1989

Model Starion

 

This bulletin supersedes SC-89-001 date June, 1989, which should be discarded.

 

PURPOSE

 

This bulletin describes a new connecting rod bearing that is available for Starions. The material

in the bearing has been changed from an aluminum alloy to copper/lead alloy.

Starions produced between July, 1987 and March, 1989 should have the aluminum alloy

connecting rod bearings replaced with ones made of copper/lead alloy.

 

=> MMSA is sending a letter to owners of these vehicles urging them to have the connecting

rod bearing replaced along with a complimentary oil and filter change.

A sample of the customer letter is shown on page 7

=> If you have a 1988 or 1989 Starion produced between the above dates in Dealer inventory,

the connecting rod bearings should be replaced prior to selling the vehicle.

=>If the original connecting rod bearings have already been replaced in any of the affected

Starions, you will need to replace them again with the new copper/lead bearings.

 

Crankshaft main bearings are not part of this service campaign.

 

DETAIL OF CHANGE

Beginning March, 1989 the turbocharged G54B engine in the Starion has a new style connecting

rod bearing material made of copper/lead (kelmet). Due to the engine horsepower & torque

increase that occurred in 1988, the connecting rod bearings should be replaced on 1988/1989

Starions.

 

Note: The older style aluminum alloy bearings are still appropriate for use in the G54B engines

found in the Truck and Montero, as well as the G54B engine found in the 1983-1987 Starions.

 

....

[Shelby]

My bearings did not get eaten, My upper balance shaft spun... ok I admit somwhere I messed up, But I will tell you that the clevite bearings did their job, Debris was caught and embedded in the bearings, The crankshaft was not hurt in any way- took just a polish job to clean it up.

Dad

 

 

question Randy were these bal shaft brgs ones you had replace'd durring the rebuild

[Dad]

question Randy were these bal shaft brgs ones you had replace'd durring the rebuild

 

 

Yes sir.

 

Dad

[Dad]

but Caliber says I don't know what I'm talking about and that "DAD" with his engine he built that just ate its bearings knows better. Oh well.

'

 

 

Thank's for the "slam" Indy. Really appreciated!

 

Dad

[Indiana]

'

 

 

Thank's for the "slam" Indy. Really appreciated!

 

Dad

It was nice to see you thank Caliber when he intentionally tried to make me look stupid.

 

 

Your issues imo were related to oil weight. If not, and you never saw me even imply this, then was there issues with the rear bearing? More on that upper rear bearing in a minute. How many times have I posted about using 5W oil and you post afterward and say you do use it like its just fine and makes no difference?

 

Rewind back to the 80s and look at what happened with Mitsubishis engines. I've posted this before, its on my site and I'm sure its in books laying around everywhere maybe in your shop but its old and maybe forgotten about but I bet most just aren't aware of it. When I mentioned about the full and 3/4 groove mains, Caliber jumps in and says some BS about Clevite because he had no clue what I was talking about then someone says that yes the 2.0/2.4 builders buy two sets to get full groove bearings again for their particular purpose.

 

Look at the time line of these TSBs, they are all related to oil delivery and mainly to balance shafts

 

1.6

9/85 no 5W oil, this was the turbo engine in a Colt/Mirage

 

1.8

9/84 BS oil groove, same as the 2.0 since this is really the same engine

9/85 oil pump gears, journal diameter increased, case modified for larger journal diameter

10/85 BS oiling and journal width, same as 2.0/2.4

 

2.0

9/84 deeper grooves in the front journals of the balance shafts and grooves added to the rear journal

3/85 about bleeding air from lifters, same as in the 2.6

9/85 pump gears journals increased

10/85 BS oiling and journal width, the rear lower shaft had the oiling path changed and made much shorter and the width of the front journals increased

 

2.4

9/85 pump gears journals increased

10/85 BS oil and journal width

 

2.6

83 turbo engine had taller pump gears, "high" volume

84 n/a engines receive the same taller pump gears, no more "low" volume oil pump

3/85 after the change to hydraulic lifters for the 85 model year, they had issues with AIR in the lifters so they made sure people knew how to bleed them

7/85 knocking on start up so they put a stick in the plunger spring to take up space, this was an issue with the time it took oil pressure to develop with the rod bearings, they didn't mention the BS upper bearings but you know they get oil after the rod bearings does on #1 main

9/85 no 5W oil in turbo versions

9/85 they cut that extra paper out of the way on the back of the oil pump where oil flowed across it and particles from it could cause blockage not to mention the paper got in the flow path when it moved off the block face

11/89 no aluminum rod bearings after 87 model year, 88 models effected were recalled

 

after 89 there were no more turbo engines but there were still 2.6s being made and further changes were made. The one we could have used was the auto tensioner for the BS chain

http://www.b2600turbo.com/images/adjustguide.jpg

 

 

If you look, the engines other than the 2.6 they seemed to care a great deal about and modified the oiling for the balance shafts but a 2.6 the only changes were ones that cost them little cash. Remember this is a truck engine in our car was a low production vehicle and not all Starions were 2.6 many were 2.0. The issues with all the engines are the same, the oiling for the balance shafts in the original design was inadequate. What is the red line on a 2.0 Vs 2.6? What can you do to improve the 2.6 BS oiling? You could put a feed line to the upper shaft from the oil galley and not steal flow off the #1 main journal for one. The shafts you could put grooves in the rear journals OR as I mentioned I'd get back to this, use the grooved bearings already available. The BS bearings that have a groove in them make up where the 2.6 didn't get a change to put a groove in the actual shaft as the other engines did. This effects oil flow and that bearing change left more oil for the rear journal and when you started up the engine there was some oil still laying in that groove to get stirred up and that is better than none. The issues you see with upper rear bearings are always related to being oil starved and later debris not that there is not sufficient bearing surface area. The same oil volume differences that go back to those full Vs 3/4 groove mains where Caliber was confused and jumps in and sells the Clevite brand name since he was sold those for his engine and had no clue was I was talking so he implies that nobody is to pay attention to me. I didn't write the manuals or the TSB or design the engine but I've ran the crap out of them and that's how you learn about them there is NO other way.

 

There's a reason this gasket was changed too and that little HOLE in the Mitsubishi TSB is not enough. The reason is clear when you see it deflected and sticking out in the oil flow path after it pulls away from the block face.

 

http://www.b2600turbo.com/images/IM003289.JPG

 

Why put a gasket here and remove material from the backing plate for a flow path only to have a gasket get back in the way and restrict it? No, CUT IT OUT.

 

http://www.b2600turbo.com/images/IM003348.JPG

 

http://www.b2600turbo.com/images/IM009197.JPG

 

You have some recent new first hand information you can add that to your experiences. It wasn't to turn something bad into a slam, it was that others reading this get to see WHY things happen so they don't make the same mistakes. I asked you what happened; you hadn't answered. Posts made unanswered help no one. I could care less what brand they are.

 

So, there is still no answer on the OP issue.

[Dad]

I was thanking Caliber for referring that I work on engines for a living and may have first hand knowledge. I did not see any reference to you being stupid.

 

I appreciate all the information that you put out, However it seems that when someone tries to discuss it with you the person is ”:stupid” or the part is “crap” Junk, Chinese knock off… Once you see a printed bulletin you are not open minded when someone questions it. Here are a few examples. You may be right on about the oil weight however answer me this…

 

The oil weight bulletin was put out in 09/85 . Then why is it still recommended in the 1988 service manual???. My other question would be don’t you think that oils formulations may have improved in 26 years??

 

Another is the oil pump gaskets…. Isn’t the OEM M191432 gasket still made with the additional gasket material???

 

You have a lot of experience on these engines and I respect that, Maybe you can’t understand why I question some of the information but these are two examples.. why would they state in 1985 not to use 5W30 oil yet still have it recommended in a service manual 3 years later???

 

Why hasn’t the oil pump gasket been improved? If Mitsubishi put a bulletin out.

Are there other bulletins that came out later to revise the first ones? I don’t know.

 

 

Dad

[Caliber308]

It was nice to see you thank Caliber when he intentionally tried to make me look stupid.

 

 

And where did that come from? All I said is this: "I'm not Indy, but I would ask Dad about bearings, after all he does this sort of thing for a living" Where do you get that I was trying to make you look stupid? But, you ARE making yourself look stupid by that comment. Indy, I have been running Clevite Rod and Main bearings in my engine since 2005, at rpms up to 7000 and using 20W/50 wt Castrol GTX after the initial engine break in period.Would I install Clevite bearings again??? Yep.

 

Bill

Edited July 9, 2011 by Caliber308

[marso]

Indy, I am putting the balance shafts back in my engine but the new bearings I bought have no groove. Would it be better to get the grooved set or groove the shafts? Edited July 10, 2011 by marso

[Shelby]

i'm certianly not a machinest but i'd think aligning the grove in a brg shell with oil feed hole in the shaft would be hard to do ,

the biger question is how do i adjust oil clearance in the new brgs once they are install'd

 

you can't slap in a new brg, throw in the shaft and expect to spin it @ 8-10k with out proper oil clearance

[on4now4]

does anyone know the order that the bearings would receive oil? i pulled the motor apart last night and i think i can trace this back to oil pump failure...

[Shelby]

i have never actualy seen a 2.6 oil pump fail,, i have seen the pressure control releif valve stick and the drive chain break but never a pump fail

[on4now4]

okay, i got into the rebuild tonight and after taking a close look at everything. it WAS a oil pump failure and ignorance on my part... well i guess ya learn from your mistakes. either way the prob was that the pumps bearings were shot to hell. causing the pump to just pump all the oil into the timing cover instead of through the motor. i should have noticed this on initial install but at least i will never forget it again haha.

http://i129.photobucket.com/albums/p209/on4now4/IMG_20110813_234727.jpg

I went through all my spare oil pumps and they are all the same... i guess that's why they are spare well now i am looking for a new oil pump if anyone has one laying around?

[Indiana]

So the gear wobbles in that hole?

[Indiana]

Was there a BSEK in there? That's not the chain drive gear bearing that's the balance shaft front bearing. A shaft that had a really bad ate up rear bearing might have worn that out is that what happened or did you buy it that way? What does the other bearing look like?

 

The new balance shaft bearings include a new upper front bearing. I wonder if anyone ever tired to refurbish that front cover with one of those? I don't see why you couldn't.

 

The upper front BS holder its cast into the part starting around 1984 when they were changed to all aluminum and you're to bore out the old bearing and push in this new one if its bad rather than buy an entire new piece.

 

http://www.b2600turbo.com/images/IM009197.JPG

[on4now4]

its running a bse kit, that's how it was before i installed it just pushed the prob to the side... as i said i was ignorant and learned from it. i was actually wondering if i could get a bearing kid for the pump... were did you find that? BTW both the bearing are chewed up that's just the worse off one that i took a pic of.