 Bearing dowel pins, "Watch for tight fit" |
|
|
|
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. |
|
|
  |
| brer |
 Apr 22 2007, 01:26 AM
Post
#1
|
|
Advanced Member  Group: Members Posts: 2,555 Joined: 10-March 05 From: san diego Member No.: 3,736 Region Association: None  |
The FSM has a note to watch for tight or "perfect" fit in the bearing dowel pins.
I'm wondering how loosy or tighty these little buggers are best at? Mine move a little in the three large mains and kinda loosy in the case at the nose bearing. So are we needing a specific fit here or what? (IMG:style_emoticons/default/huh.gif) fit in the bearing halves (mahle) is not snug at all. I bolted the halves together today without the cam gear and the crank seems nice and smooth. The rod for #3 was plastiguaged and came up at .0015 or so, but its bloody impossible to keep the bloomin' rod still while torqueing it. So I'm not sure its totally accurate. After installing the rod on the crank it would fall on its own weight but kind of quick, not smooth and slow. After I check the deck height I'm thinking maybe i'll take that guy off and fiddle. Cam is snug, I think the axial play is to little.... >.001 Adams Ave. Roots and Blues is happenning down the street, so I had some swinging bluegrass to listen to all day. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/aktion035.gif) |
   |
 
|
| McMark |
Apr 22 2007, 11:36 AM
Post
#2
|
|
914 Freak! Group: Retired Admin Posts: 20,179 Joined: 13-March 03 From: Grand Rapids, MI Member No.: 419 Region Association: None |
Sounds about right...
|
|
|
|
| brer |
Apr 22 2007, 03:11 PM
Post
#3
|
|
Advanced Member Group: Members Posts: 2,555 Joined: 10-March 05 From: san diego Member No.: 3,736 Region Association: None |
I haven't worried about these before, just stuck them in.
The note in the FSM to watch for perfect fit made me wonder. Whats the deal with that? Should they just be kind of loose in there or what. |
|
|
|
| craig downs |
Apr 22 2007, 04:29 PM
Post
#4
|
|
Senior Member Group: Members Posts: 768 Joined: 25-November 05 From: mira loma ca. Member No.: 5,189 Region Association: Southern California |
The dowel pins should slip down in the holes of the case without any side movement
|
|
|
|
| brer |
Apr 23 2007, 12:25 AM
Post
#5
|
|
Advanced Member Group: Members Posts: 2,555 Joined: 10-March 05 From: san diego Member No.: 3,736 Region Association: None |
Ended the day with rod bolt interference with the cylinder. drats. Looking like about a 1/16" too long.
and since i'm measuring deck height on domed pistons I took it at either side of the dome and found .025 on the flywheel side and .035 on the other (cylinder 3), with a base gasket installed. anyone care to comment on what the difference could mean? bent rod? or perhaps its the case? |
|
|
|
| Jake Raby |
Apr 23 2007, 06:57 AM
Post
#6
|
|
Engine Surgeon Group: Members Posts: 9,394 Joined: 31-August 03 From: Lost Member No.: 1,095 Region Association: South East States |
Another point of interest concerning main dowel pins.... They should not exceed 8.0mm in length.
Sounds like your case has a drooped cylinder register, its becoming common after 30 years and is more prominent with 2.0 cases, especially of the GA series. The only way to remedy it is to tear it back down and deck the spigots evenly. If you do not do this head leakage and uneven cylinder wear are to be expected. |
|
|
|
| brer |
Apr 23 2007, 12:27 PM
Post
#7
|
|
Advanced Member Group: Members Posts: 2,555 Joined: 10-March 05 From: san diego Member No.: 3,736 Region Association: None |
I hates leakage.
|
|
|
|
|
1 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:
|
Lo-Fi Version | Time is now: 22nd May 2024 - 04:42 PM |
Invision Power Board
v9.1.4 © 2024 IPS, Inc.