# 9500 revs and a bang



## keith (Jun 29, 2001)

This is what was left of my Trust H type conrod.


----------



## paul (Oct 13, 2002)

damn. whats the plan now then?


----------



## Demon Dave (Sep 15, 2002)

Damn. Maybe a tad too many revs there! As Paul said, what's the plan now then?


----------



## LSR (Jun 4, 2003)

Oh dear,

As Demon Dave says D), what's the plan now then? Specs, etc - your not going to go for a more powerful state of tune now, are you?


----------



## charlieskywizmwarr (May 24, 2002)

Keith

Not another disappointment!

How long can you stomach this kinda 'luck' for?


----------



## Piggaz (Sep 5, 2002)

That sucks 

What was the cause (apart from revs)... IE faulty rod ?


----------



## gtsm (Jan 14, 2002)

bugger looks a mess


----------



## Howsie (Feb 25, 2002)

Unlucky dude! Was it a faulty rod then? 9500 isn't really that high...


----------



## KrazY_IvaN (Dec 30, 2002)

paul said:


> *damn. whats the plan now then? *


A new Conrod I guess , that really sucks did it cause any other damage or was the conrod to worst of it?


----------



## jameswrx (Jul 27, 2003)

> did it cause any other damage or was the conrod to worst of it?


Well by the looks of the piston, I dread to think what it's done to the bore ??


----------



## duka (Oct 6, 2002)

*Repair!!*

good machine shop will fix that with some loctite Keith


----------



## keith (Jun 29, 2001)

*total destruction*

Put it like this the block has 2 big holes in it you can put your hand in it and out the other side.

the head is ok thank fcuk,but everything else is scrap it even bent the crankshaft.

all I am going to say is that there are some big changes being done to my car for next year :smokin:

more pictures to follow


Keith:smokin:


----------



## ColinM (Sep 29, 2002)

Whats in your avatar picture ? A new intake plenum maybe ?
You couldn't tell us what new turbos you are fitting, pretty please


----------



## duka (Oct 6, 2002)

*target date ?*

better get the rebuild done for the local spring runway event - don't want your old white datsun to show you up! :smokin:


----------



## Gez (Jan 8, 2003)

Keith,
Any idea to what caused the failure????

Cheers

Gerry


----------



## cokey (Sep 11, 2003)

Condolences mate!
Ive got a thirteen year old block that needs rebored~thats got to be seasoned.
Any use to you ?
Best of luck
cokey


----------



## davew (Apr 28, 2003)

tough luck mate, i know how p****d off you feel. was that your block i saw at rods last week?


----------



## mark r (Feb 17, 2003)

*failure*

Yes, I've seen this failure before, and i know what causes it!

It's the Interface between the seat and the steering wheel that has malfunctioned!   .

Hey kieth, hows me wheel comin along, cord keeps takin the ****.

mark.


----------



## keith (Jun 29, 2001)

davew said:


> *tough luck mate, i know how p****d off you feel. was that your block i saw at rods last week? *


Hi Dave 

Yes that is my block that you had seen Rods 
it's in some mess isn't it Dave.

Just to let everyone know this happened when we were at Santa Pod 


Keith


----------



## davew (Apr 28, 2003)

sure was in a mess mate. rod showed me it as he was trying to cheer me up over the size of my bill!


----------



## gtsm (Jan 14, 2002)

sorry to hear that keith cant believe it happened at pod hope u get her sorted


----------



## hipogtr (Feb 17, 2002)

Sorry to hear about the problems, keith. The pic and description looks and sounds a lot like the mess I made to my 4G63 a few years back. In my case a rod bolt let go - snapped the conrod in 3 pieces, put two holes in the block, buckled the crank, etc. I was only on factory internals - but too much boost and revs.

I'm sure you'll be getting into something bigger and better.  Good luck with the rebuild.

Cya O!


----------



## tyndago (Oct 24, 2002)

Keith ,

What Conrod was this ? Ie #2 ?

The Trust rods are Carrillos - which have a very good rep.

Looks like the pistons I pulled out of Nicks motor yesterday...

We did something similar.

http://rbmotoring.com/gallery/album57?page=2


----------



## keith (Jun 29, 2001)

hipogtr said:


> *Sorry to hear about the problems, keith. The pic and description looks and sounds a lot like the mess I made to my 4G63 a few years back. In my case a rod bolt let go - snapped the conrod in 3 pieces, put two holes in the block, buckled the crank, etc. I was only on factory internals - but too much boost and revs.
> 
> I'm sure you'll be getting into something bigger and better.  Good luck with the rebuild.
> 
> Cya O! *


Hi Hipogtr

Yes it looks like it was a rod bolt that let go,
it was not a clean break because the crank is blue with the heat.
it did not look like it was oil starvation either because all the other shell bearings were ok.

Keith


----------



## keith (Jun 29, 2001)

Hi tyndago


Yes it was number 2 that let go big time
there is not much left of the rod 

the new engine will have a ATI damper pulley this could have been the problem ???


Keith:smokin:


----------



## Fuggles (Jul 3, 2001)

Keith,

Really sorry to hear about the blow up. I guess it must have made for a very long drive home.

Hope to see the car back and performing before too long. Good luck 

John


----------



## tyndago (Oct 24, 2002)

keith said:


> *
> Yes it was number 2 that let go big time
> there is not much left of the rod
> 
> the new engine will have a ATI damper pulley this could have been the problem ???*


No .

I think it was due to an oiling issue.

What oil pump did you have ?

What oil pan ?

What mods ?

What were you doing when it let go ?


----------



## tyndago (Oct 24, 2002)

keith said:


> *it was not a clean break because the crank is blue with the heat. *













Does it look like that ?


----------



## tyndago (Oct 24, 2002)

I think its an oiling issue because of this reason.

I **think** #2 bearing gets the oil first . Any burps in the system mean #2 loses oil first . Hence spinning and exiting the block.

This is not the first nor last one we are going to see letting go like this.


----------



## tyndago (Oct 24, 2002)

I got ya beat . We got 2 broked ones.......


----------



## keith (Jun 29, 2001)

tyndago said:


> *No .
> 
> I think it was due to an oiling issue.DONT THINK IT WAS
> 
> ...


----------



## keith (Jun 29, 2001)

Hi Tyndago

your crank dont even come close  

I will email the photos to you now,put them up on the site if you want.


Keith:smokin:


----------



## tyndago (Oct 24, 2002)

Nicks crankshaft











Keiths crankshaft










I know you always wanted to compare cranks.


----------



## tyndago (Oct 24, 2002)

Check out how much block is missing


----------



## tyndago (Oct 24, 2002)

keith said:


>



You don't think it could have been oiling ?

Do you have an oil cooler ? A remote oil filter ?

How much oil was in the sump ?

About how many seconds were you above idle before the motor let go ?

How many G's does your car pull ?

The two failures look too close to me to ignore.


----------



## SkylineUSA (Jun 29, 2001)

Sean,

I recently purchased some parts off of an engine that had number 2 rod let go as well? It let go at 9k. It looked just like Keith's engine.


----------



## keith (Jun 29, 2001)

tyndago said:


> *You don't think it could have been oiling ?because all the other bearings were good
> 
> Do you have an oil cooler ? A remote oil filter ? look at the photos below
> 
> ...


----------



## chas (Sep 19, 2003)

*Keith*

That looks pretty severe. Did anything else get damaged when 
the block came apart ?
Will you rebuild it using similar parts or start again with different
stuff ?
Must be costing you a fortune overall but it'll be worth it if 
you can match or even better your times from last year:smokin: 

Do you plan to run it at Edzell this year ?
Good luck..

Charlie...


----------



## keith (Jun 29, 2001)

*Re: Keith*



chas said:


> *That looks pretty severe. Did anything else get damaged when
> the block came apart ?
> Will you rebuild it using similar parts or start again with different
> stuff ?
> ...


Chas

The head was ok,but everything below it is scrap.

All that i am going to say is that there are some BIG  things going down  :smokin: 

Yes the car will be run at Edzell not going back to Crail you will know why 

Keith:smokin:


----------



## keith (Jun 29, 2001)

*Apart from the trust sump*


----------



## ColinM (Sep 29, 2002)

I have not heard of Edzell. Is it a runway strip 1/4 venue ? Do they have proper Portatree style start lights and timing gear ?


----------



## chas (Sep 19, 2003)

*As*

far as i know Edzell will be the 1/4 mile venue this year, i think
it's the same people running it who ran crail but not sure 100%.
It's off the A90 between Dundee and Aberdeen.
It's an old U.S. airbase.
Charlie...

Sorry for the slight hijack info here
http://www.s150club.co.uk/forum/Blah.pl?,v=display,b=gen_Events,m=1068290332


----------



## tyndago (Oct 24, 2002)

So how can we account that #2 rod just lets go in these RB26's ?

If it were a rod problem - wouldnt it be more normal to see a few different cylinders let go ?

If it were detonation - we all know #6 is the leanest hole.

Harmonics ? I dont know of any particular reason why this cylinder / this rod would have more problems than any other rod.


I am going to theorize why these two motors let go . We check the oil in the motor with the engine off .Most of all the oil drained back in the sump.

GT-Rs move a lot of oil . Oil Squirters , 7 main caps , 6 rod bearings . Twin cams .Turbocharger/s 

Lots of oil gets pumped around . The head - has a large oil gallery at the back. 

We have remote oil filters -10 lines to the filters / from the filters. We have oil coolers . -10 lines to and from the oil coolers.

At around 8000 rpm - the oil pressure is probably 80 psi or so. Even with the restrictor in the block - a lot of oil is getting pumped up to the head . 

Under hard acceleration oil pools at the back of the head. Oil rushes to the back of the motor. Oil flows out to the oil filter . Out to the oil cooler , the turbos , to the head.

Uncovers the oil pickup due to a lack of oil in the sump.

For whatever reason #2 rod is the last/first place to truely feel the effects of a burp /bubble in the oiling system.

You lose the oil wedge on the rod . At 9500 rpms it all comes apart very all of a sudden.

Nicks motor may have been slowly feeling this effect , but the revs were never kicked up high , with high boost , pushing really hard till we were under the timer on the road course. Hence all his bearings looked trashed ,but #2 rod , crank , etc almost all looks the same.


----------



## tyndago (Oct 24, 2002)

There are several items there .

There are the baffle plates , there is the oil restrictor , the oil pan(sump) extension.

Nicks motor had standard oiling on an N1 block. The N1 block has a 1.2 mm restrictor in the block. Nick had a remote oil cooler , remote oil filter.

Keiths motor had a Trust sump extension - which sits pretty low , and the Tomei oil restrictor in the block.

Under acceleration - hard acceleration - 1 G the oil will want to move in the opposite direction that the car is going... Does that make sense ?

Car Craft Jan 04 did an interesting test of a stock oil pan and a Moroso oil pan for a Camaro.

http://www.carcraft.com/techarticles/116_0401_oil/

Figure the stock oil pan / dipstick is setup for an all stock car.

Now you add in the remote filter with the -10 lines . The remote oil cooler. The lines have to be filled up to work.

Look at what happens to this stock pan when its about a quart low . Uncovers the oil pickup...

Even a good baffled pan like a GT-R. With all that going on... we should have probably overfilled the pan a quart or two...


----------



## tyndago (Oct 24, 2002)

All this stuff seems to be for side/side movement . But under hard acceleration or braking a car will produce more than 1 G.


----------



## paul (Oct 13, 2002)

this is turning into a very informative thread sean


----------



## Howsie (Feb 25, 2002)

Agree. Is it common to place a restrictor to reduce the flow to the head? 

Nice sump Keith!

Howsie


----------



## ATCO (Feb 2, 2003)

Sean/Keith et al,

There are some valid points being made here, however as always in these things you have to be certain its either the hare or the fox you are chasing.

Assumptions are being made, which is fine if you have a high degree of confidence in the data those assumptions are being made on. 

Firstly, whilst the "result" may be the same, i.e. #2 rod went awol in two (or more) engines, verification is required that the precise reason is the same. Sean is persuaded there is a lubrication issue (for him), Keith is not (for him). In fact both could be right.

I originally asked Keith if the initial cause of failure was known. Its often very difficult to tell viewing the material carnage to know the "trigger". Key information often is available only too the individual "in control" at the time. They know what was going on before (e.g. late gearchange in previous gear......), how the engine was behaving, what happened at "the moment" (oil warning light?), oil pressure reading etc. etc. 

The consequences of both engines fit the profile for both insufficient oil as well as rod bolt failure, possibly even bearing failure - once the bearing goes and "play" (vertical or lateral) sets in the domino effect is swift and dramatic, re-engineering an awful lot of parts on the way, especially at high RPM. 

The reality is that mechanical failure does occur on highly stressed parts. Considerable reliance is placed on the quality of components as its not a practical reality (unless you are obscenely rich) to strip down and replace down to "rod bolt" level after every meeting. I've known replacing rings frequently enough (which means new gaskets etc.) after every meeting plus a minimum of one new crank each year - believe me, that is expensive enough before you start doing it at Skyline prices.

If Keith believes it was rod bolt failure, why should we doubt it? Rod bolts are a critical stress area and it is not unknown for them to fail or be replaced as preventative maintenance - I automatically would replace small ends, pin and circlips for example whenever I took a piston off. Many only do the circlips.

Sean suspects that there is also an oiling issue, why should we doubt him either? His postings indicate he has thought matters through and baffled sumps have been around donkey's years. If you think its a problem on GTR acceleration, try motorcycles, not only acceleration but wheelies too. A brass door hinge (yes it was a cheap effective solution!) fitted in the cases has saved many a motorcycle crank/engine.........

Keith/Sean/Dirk/Rod et al are pushing the envelope way out past the original design plan. All you can do in those circumstances for reliability is cover as many bases as possible. 

Oil scavanging and pump pick-up are known "bases" and some way has gone to addressing them. The aftermarket sumps take the simple approach, make it bigger and baffle it and "generally" that should be enough. However, what is the definition of "generally"? Sean may well have reached "generally" plus a bit, so the "simple" approach may no longer hold good. His suggestion of an extra couple of pints covers "this" base MAY be true, although adding extra oil will have other consequences. In reality he/we could do with more facts, like having the results from monitors/sensors that identify if/when the oil feed to the pump goes and the circumstances. An alternative to extra oil might be a "more intelligent" baffle design within the deep sump, and/or re-work to the galleries. An "off the wall" question could be - the hi-spec oil pumps, they may ensure high volumes of oil are being pushed around the system (desirable) but are they also contributing to the problem by exacerbating low oil sump levels? Anyone ever done a calculation of oil pumped rate verses oil scavange rate at extremes? 

Rod bolts? You cannot beat quality, even though it costs. This is real material science stuff, no mild steel please! Only Keith (and Rod Bell - or is that Rod Bolt ) know the origins, age and life of the bolts in Keith's engine. Perhaps the level has been reached where these have become a "service consumable" item when operated in "Keith's" environment. Anyone any idea what the teams in Japan/Oz do with respect to replacement on their engines which I guess are running even more power? Is it once a season or once a blow up! 

So many questions, so few answers.........
DaveG


----------



## tyndago (Oct 24, 2002)

HKS oil pump - rating

13.1 cc/rev

600 rpm 5 l/min
2000 rpm 17.3 l/min
6000 rpm 53.1 l/min

Std

9.8 cc/rev

600 rpm 3.7 l/min
2000 rpm 12.9 l/min
6000 rpm 39.9 l/min

Interesting Greddy has completely different numbers for stock pumps

Greddy pump
800 rpm 5.5 l/min
2000 rpm 19.7 l/min
6000 rpm 59.0 l/min

Std

800 rpm 4.4l/min
2000 rpm 15.2 l/min
6000 rpm 46.7 l/min


----------



## tyndago (Oct 24, 2002)

I have heard from more than a few people over the years that they do not use " high flow" oil pumps just for the very reason that they do not leave enough oil in the sump.

Anything is possible. All the oil the pump is moving must go somewhere. If its at the top of the motor - its not going to be at the bottom of the motor.

I did a little experiment with a stock GT-R oilpan and some fluid to see what the pickup looks like.

http://rbmotoring.com/gallery/album93

From what I can tell - there would have to be less than 2 liters of oil in the sump to uncover the oil pickup partially under some partial G- loading.


----------



## MINTY (Dec 23, 2003)

*Sump*

Hi,

I have heard people discuss sumps in racing before and they talk about dry sumps, not sure how these work as surely you still need oil in the engine?


----------



## tyndago (Oct 24, 2002)

Dry Sump .

About Dry Sumps

http://www.moroso.com/articles/articledisplay3.asp?article=AboutOilPans.html

The only issue with this is the cars I am working on are street cars.

With the Dry sump pump you have to lose something - probably the A/C . Since this is a street car , and we like A/C we would have to get creative with the mounting.


Getting back to dry sump. There is a tank that holds oil. The pump scavenges oil from the oil pan /etc. It then supplies oil to the motor.


----------



## Kevin Sharp (Aug 18, 2003)

*Re: Re: Keith*



keith said:


> *Chas
> 
> 
> 
> ...


why are you not going back to crail keith?...they have sorted out the timing gear now 

good luck with the build..look forward to seeing it this year 
cheers
kev

PS i hope your not scared of that fast cossie at crail


----------



## keith (Jun 29, 2001)

Hi Kevin

I will not go back to Crail because of all the pot holes it is a joke,
plus it is a bit down hill for the last 150 meters,at Crail there is not much of a run off after the finish line 300/400 meters then you are in the sea 
next year I will be looking to break 160 mph terminal speeds.

I am not scared of any ford    


Keith :smokin:


----------



## SteveN (Aug 6, 2002)

2things-

A- 160mph terminals       :smokin: :smokin: 

B- The oil issue, wouldnt an Accusump kit like Ron Kiddels got on his R32 sort that problem? 

If it will i think itl be on my shopping list, better safe than sorry.


----------



## ATCO (Feb 2, 2003)

Sean, You must be a real geek having the oil pump figures to hand!  

Generally the high volume pumps move around 30 percent more oil, which is what you are looking for. The flip side is whilst more oil is going in the top, what is the correlating "flowdown" back to the sump? I suppose if you know the "collection rate" (under acceleration) and overall return oil way cross section its possible to determine the "capability" from which you can possibly detremine the minimum "baffled area" volume needed under "scenario A" to keep the pick up covered. I suspect the math derivation is a nightmare so its logical for people to take the lazy approach and put more oil in!

I've always been cautious regarding "over filling". It might be an old wives (mechanics) tale, however I was always advised against it for (at least) reasons of increased pressure on seals, diminished vacuum in the bottom end and increased drag on splashed components. I suppose the real esoteric would probaby also say it adds weight!  

The dry sump approach has the technical vote because it resolves many of the issues. You have removed much of the oil drag, probably improved vacuum and the remote tank is not as susceptible to car movement  as in the sump. Of course, you still need to get the numbers right in that the remote tank must be sized to avoid emptying under high load conditions, if its dumped its all into the top and not a lot has hit the bottom for scavanging its still the same result!

Kick back of course is that dry sump solution costs (cheaper than cranks though) and you need a drive for the external pump (although an electric version might be an interesting alternative).

Accusump seems to be a clever compromise. Its the same as adding more oil but without in effect running with increased volume in the sump other than at startup. Also it looks like a relatively low cost option too. RonK seems to like it, so question for you *Sean* is, have you investigated/used the Accusump? Are they reliable? What was the result? Given the Sixth pot bearing issue amongst other things it may even be a better option than the deep pan sump approach, although the Trust Sump does look nice!
DaveG


----------



## Cord (Aug 21, 2002)

Another way of ensuring you get good oil pickup under high G is to make a rotating oil pickup pipe. If you have the pickup pipe running on a bearing that is mounted centrally at the top of the sump, and free to rotate 360º. If you have a bit of weight added to the very outside end of the pickup pipe it will rotate to wherever the G force sends it, which is also where the oil will be. Hope that makes some sense.


----------



## ATCO (Feb 2, 2003)

Cord said:


> *Another way of ensuring you get good oil pickup under high G is to make a rotating oil pickup pipe. If you have the pickup pipe running on a bearing that is mounted centrally at the top of the sump, and free to rotate 360º. If you have a bit of weight added to the very outside end of the pickup pipe it will rotate to wherever the G force sends it, which is also where the oil will be. Hope that makes some sense. *


I don't know why, but that sort of reminds me of the story about NASA spending 1MillionUS$ developing a pen for its astronauts to use in space that wrote "upside down", whereas the Russians just used a pencil..........


----------



## Demon Dave (Sep 15, 2002)

Cord,

Sounds like a good idea that!  As long as the bearing stays lubricated the oil pick-up pipe should follow the oil around the sump as its moved by the varying g-forces.

Dave


----------



## tyndago (Oct 24, 2002)

ATCO said:


> *
> Accusump seems to be a clever compromise. it, so question for you Sean is, have you investigated/used the Accusump? Are they reliable? What was the result? *


I have a 3 quart Accusump on the shelf . One of the first things I bought after Nicks car blew up. 

I have heard some good things about them. We are going to give one a try . See how it goes.

http://www.accusump.com/acc_products/acc_units.html

The theory is sound .


----------



## tyndago (Oct 24, 2002)

Cord said:


> *Another way of ensuring you get good oil pickup under high G is to make a rotating oil pickup pipe. *


Smokey Yunick shows an assembly like this . He discusses it briefly . Saying he tried it and ended up giving it up with race cars and going to dry sump.

The theory is cool , but getting it all to work around all the baffling in the stock pan doesn't look fun.

And then unless you can get it really close to the edge of the pan - or ride up on the walls , under extreme G loading - you could still uncover the sump.


----------



## Cord (Aug 21, 2002)

It works VERY well if used with a circular baffle system, but it isn't an easy thing to make.


----------



## Peter (Jun 27, 2001)

Cord said:


> *Another way of ensuring you get good oil pickup under high G is to make a rotating oil pickup pipe. If you have the pickup pipe running on a bearing that is mounted centrally at the top of the sump, and free to rotate 360º. If you have a bit of weight added to the very outside end of the pickup pipe it will rotate to wherever the G force sends it, which is also where the oil will be. Hope that makes some sense. *


 Rod showed me one of these last year, seems like a great idea. I think that Mines and Top Secret do a similar part, good but quite expensive. This issue is something which I shall be paying particular attention to when I replace/repair my engine as I'm told that a sump extension will make my car hazardous because they hang so low.

Sean,

Superb stuff especially the pics of the sump test. I didn't realise quite how baffled the stock sump was until I saw those shots....


----------



## SteveN (Aug 6, 2002)

Regarding number 6 bearing, or number 2 rod, or whatever failing...

Is there a noticable oil pressure drop at the time? I presumed it was just a starvation at that point in the engine, but not actualy showing a oil pressure drop on the oil pressure gauge. 
Is that right, or is it always because of the oil pickup pipe sucking air becuase of oil surging somewhere else? (and hence the oil pressure dropping)

Its just that the accusump works on oil pressure, and if the pressure dont actually drop, well the accusump isnt gona do anything...

Im probably getting the wrong end of the stick here (jus got in and knackered so cant think straight) but thas what im thinking.

Wheres the accusump installed anyhow? Just plumbed into any pressurised part of the oil sys, or is there a preferable place to use?

Thank god for decent tech posts like this :smokin:


----------

