Home  |  Forums  |  914 Info  |  Blogs
 
914World.com - The fastest growing online 914 community!
 
Porsche, and the Porsche crest are registered trademarks of Dr. Ing. h.c. F. Porsche AG. This site is not affiliated with Porsche in any way.
Its only purpose is to provide an online forum for car enthusiasts. All other trademarks are property of their respective owners.
 

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

> Is there a "how to.." for crank measurement, and bearing verification?
malcolm2
post Dec 16 2019, 11:07 PM
Post #1


Advanced Member
****

Group: Members
Posts: 2,738
Joined: 31-May 11
From: Nashville
Member No.: 13,139
Region Association: South East States



I am gonna make a 2 liter from my 1.8. So I have a refreshed 71mm crank that I have been told has been ground to -0.010.

I measured as best as I can with a digital mic and got about 59.66 on the mains and 49.65 on the rod journals.

Where can I find the STD specs and ranges ? were they 60 and 50, respectively?

Since I know nothing about this crank, how can I verify the 71 mm measurement?
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
 
Reply to this topicStart new topic
Replies
malcolm2
post Dec 17 2019, 06:30 PM
Post #2


Advanced Member
****

Group: Members
Posts: 2,738
Joined: 31-May 11
From: Nashville
Member No.: 13,139
Region Association: South East States



OK it passed the hammer test. very high pitched tuning fork ring. The 1.8 has an even higher ring and lasts longer. If that means anything... (IMG:style_emoticons/default/piratenanner.gif)

I have a set of micrometers coming from a workmate tomorrow. If he forgets, there is always Harbor Freight for $40.

With my method of measuring last night, I got a consistent 49.65 on all 4 rod journals.
Book says std is 49.97 - 49.98. That puts them at 0.33mm under which is -0.01299. Seams excessive.

More accurate measurements tomorrow, I guess.

So @Superhawk996 , did this crank ever run in it's current state? Or you took it out and polished it, but never installed?
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Superhawk996
post Dec 18 2019, 08:53 AM
Post #3


914 Guru
*****

Group: Members
Posts: 5,762
Joined: 25-August 18
From: Woods of N. Idaho
Member No.: 22,428
Region Association: Galt's Gulch



QUOTE(malcolm2 @ Dec 17 2019, 07:30 PM) *


With my method of measuring last night, I got a consistent 49.65 on all 4 rod journals.
Book says std is 49.97 - 49.98. That puts them at 0.33mm under which is -0.01299. Seams excessive.

More accurate measurements tomorrow, I guess.

So @Superhawk996 , did this crank ever run in it's current state? Or you took it out and polished it, but never installed?


No the crank was never run in it's current configuration after the polish. I measured it roughly 0.010" under with my micrometer toward the high end of the tolerance. My machine shop said they did a light polish of .0001" - 0.0002". I cannot find any record of my having remeasured the crank after return because by then I had the standard size crank from Kevin. So in my mind, measure it, see what it is but more than likely it will need to to to 0.020" under to get it to be exactly on-size toward the high end of the tolerance.


Here's the bottom line: I never intended for this crank to go into an engine as-is and had assumed it would get plastigage'd for verification and/or taken down to 0.020" undersize.

I had no intention of representing this crank as being a a great crank. If this crank doesn't suit your purposes or you have any reservation about taking it to 0.020" under before use, I'll gladly refund the shippping cost that was paid to me.
My only intention was to help a low buck rebuild with a free crank for the cost of shipping. The shipping cost is trivial and I would feel terrible if you tried to use this crank as-is and had a poor outcome. If you're OK to have it ground 0.020" under you could do that but given you have invested big$$ in the new heads, I can't see why you wouldn't try to find a good standard size crank.

Note: the tolerance on jounal diameters is only 0.02mm which is 0.0008". Eight ten thousands of an inch is the total tolerance between new and worn!

Quick note on caliper vs. micrometer accuracy for anyone that is interested in measurement of preciesly machined parts:

My 6" Mitutoyo digital calipers are accurate to +/- 0.001" with a resolution of 0.0005". This is not accurate enough to measure a crank with. Resolution is not the same as accuracy. If you play with a set of calipers like these and try to get a reading of 0.0006" it is not possible. The caliper will jump to 0.001".

https://www.mitutoyo.com/wp-content/uploads...8/07/15003A.pdf

My vernier micrometers are accurate to +/- 0.0001" with a resolution of 0.00005".

That is a comparison of 1/1,000th of an inch accuracy (larger than crank tolerance) vs. 1/10,000th of an inch (still 1/8 of the tolerance and not ideal). That is an order of mangnitude (x10) imporvment with the micrometer. Digital micrometers can be even more accurate to within 1/20,000th of an inch. A micrometer is what you need to accurately measure the crank and I can only say I wish I had a set of digital micrometers but that is too much $$ given how infrequently I use them.
User is online!Profile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post

Posts in this topic
malcolm2   Is there a "how to.." for crank measurement   Dec 16 2019, 11:07 PM
Superhawk996   @malcolm2 My understanding is that this crank th...   Dec 17 2019, 06:17 AM
malcolm2   YES, It seems that @jtprettyman has passed it on...   Dec 17 2019, 08:46 AM
malcolm2   How about the 71mm measurement? Not that it matte...   Dec 17 2019, 08:51 AM
Superhawk996   How about the 71mm measurement? Not that it matt...   Dec 17 2019, 02:13 PM
Mark Henry   How about the 71mm measurement? Not that it mat...   Dec 17 2019, 11:26 PM
Mark Henry   I only use STD cranks or standard (under) cranks I...   Dec 17 2019, 09:24 AM
malcolm2   I only use STD cranks or standard (under) cranks ...   Dec 17 2019, 09:48 AM
Superhawk996   Also for what it’s worth, I provided this crank ...   Dec 17 2019, 02:34 PM
malcolm2   OK it passed the hammer test. very high pitched t...   Dec 17 2019, 06:30 PM
Superhawk996   With my method of measuring last night, I got a ...   Dec 18 2019, 08:53 AM
malcolm2   With my method of measuring last night, I got a...   Dec 18 2019, 10:03 AM
Superhawk996   Thanks for your input. I certainly hope you don...   Dec 18 2019, 02:58 PM
malcolm2   OK, maybe not the super duper accurate tools but I...   Dec 21 2019, 02:47 PM
Superhawk996   OK, maybe not the super duper accurate tools but ...   Dec 21 2019, 07:36 PM
Mark Henry   Sounds like a lot. If you're right about #4 yo...   Dec 21 2019, 03:24 PM
malcolm2   Your rods should at least have the big ends done....   Jan 20 2020, 08:59 AM
Superhawk996   So question 1: how do you "DO" the rod...   Jan 20 2020, 12:41 PM
malcolm2   Both micrometers were checked prior to the last me...   Dec 23 2019, 10:08 AM
Superhawk996   Both micrometers were checked prior to the last m...   Dec 23 2019, 10:34 AM
malcolm2   3) For hobbyists like myself, Plastigage can ser...   Dec 23 2019, 10:44 AM
malcolm2   UPDATE>>>>> Todd is the Director o...   Jan 14 2020, 08:38 PM
Superhawk996   Rod measurements align a whole lot closer to what ...   Jan 15 2020, 06:00 AM
jtprettyman   @Superhawk996 Yes, these were done with a very n...   Jan 15 2020, 08:58 AM
malcolm2   Rod Balancing, End-to-end. I also wondered how in...   Jan 21 2020, 08:30 AM


Reply to this topicStart new topic
2 User(s) are reading this topic (2 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:

 



- Lo-Fi Version Time is now: 29th April 2024 - 03:48 PM