[Shotimes] rod bearings

[Jim and Debbie Leyden]

I concur, lugging a car engine doesn't do anything to damage the bearings.
One of the points that I have disagreed on that is popular on the list is
that you shouldn't run it under 2000 RPM.  Heck, 2000 RPM in 5th is barely
55 MPH.  I can't believe that they would design a car that was "lugging" at
what the maximum posted speed limit was in those days.

Jim
'93 MTX
replaced rings and bearings at 200K



-----Original Message-----
From: shotimes-admin@autox.team.net
[mailto:shotimes-admin@autox.team.net]On Behalf Of John Weidenbenner
Sent: Wednesday, August 13, 2003 10:34 AM
To: 'David Schultz'; shotimes@autox.team.net
Subject: Re: [Shotimes] rod bearings


The 3.2 oil pump capacity is 25% greater than the 3.0 pump. This has to be a
major reason why the 3.0 is so hard on rod bearings. Not everyone believes
that lugging the engine kills the rod bearings. Lugging the engine on a worn
engine will sometimes make the oil pressure light flicker at near stall
speed, but that's just showing you the condition of the lubrication system.
I believe its just an old wives tail. Anyone have any real proof?

Sometimes just rod bearing replacement will increase the oil pressure
enough. To do it right replace the rod & main bearings and the oil pump.

John W.



Subject: RE: [Shotimes] rod bearings


> Yeah, the rod bearings on my '95 were trashed at 86K miles. See Rod
Bearing
> Job:
>
>  http://www.picturetrail.com/gallery/view?username=rsporter
>
> But, this was an MTX.
>
> One of our suspicions is that MTXs can have more wear if the engine was
> lugged around, with poor maintenance playing a lesser role.
>
> Now, you are doing a 3.2, which I assume has spent it's life in front of a
> ATX. What did the rest of the engine look like? Was the oil ever changed
in
> 90K+ miles??
>
> Ron Porter
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: shotimes-admin@autox.team.net [mailto:shotimes-admin@autox.team.net]
> On Behalf Of David Schultz
> Sent: Tuesday, August 12, 2003 1:18 PM
> To: shotimes@autox.team.net
> Subject: RE: [Shotimes] rod bearings
>
>
> This is true.  I am in the process of rebuilding a 3.2l, and have replaced
> the main and rod bearings.  Where as the rods had considerable, but even
> wear, the main bearings had considerably less visible signs of wear and
> probably didn't need replacing.  The rod berings however, did not have
much
> life left in them.  This on an engine '94 engine with 90,xxx miles on it.
>
> Dave
>
> >I see it as the other way around. Rod bearings, by design, take more
> >punishment and are more susceptible to failure. Mains have a rather easy
> >life (relatively speaking). I see the loss of oil pressure due to wear on
> >rod bearings.
> >
> >Ron Porter
_______________________________________________
Shotimes mailing list
Shotimes@autox.team.net
http://www.team.net/mailman/listinfo/shotimes