Can my block be saved???
09-24-2008, 07:43 PM
#1
Junior Member
Thread Starter
iTrader: (12)
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Central, NJ
Posts: 487
Total Cats: 1
Can my block be saved???
I bought a 2000 long block off ebay and it turned out to be a rusted piece of junk. Can a machine do anything to fix it? Anyone have any idea of a price?
Reply
0
0
09-24-2008, 07:49 PM
#2
Ouch. You sure have bad luck!
If the rusting is only surface rust and there is no deep scores or other defects, it should take a rebore. The machine shops have different vats to get rid of the rust inside the block itself. If the bores are saveable, the rest probably is.
If the rusting is only surface rust and there is no deep scores or other defects, it should take a rebore. The machine shops have different vats to get rid of the rust inside the block itself. If the bores are saveable, the rest probably is.
Reply
0
0
09-24-2008, 09:06 PM
#5
Depends what you do, what you replace, etc. Also depends on your goals. Pernsonally, I'd find a good used engine rather than build a new stock one. You'll spend 2K probably building a new stock one. That all cost considered. I'd find a good used motor for cheap and swap them myself. Do you have any U pull it yards around your area? There's two good ones within an hour of where I live on the coast. I got a spare long block for my car out of a 96' Kia sephia for 88 bucks. But I had to pull it myself.
Reply
0
0
09-25-2008, 05:58 PM
#7
Boost Pope
iTrader: (8)
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Chicago. (The less-murder part.)
Posts: 33,019
Total Cats: 6,587
Not bad. Given that you specifically pointed out "piston rings" I'm guessing they didn't bore the holes. What all did the "block work" consist of besides dismantle, tank, and probably hone?
Actually, $750 sounds pretty damn cheap for anything I'd describe as a "head rebuild." Apart from lapping the valves, did he do anything else in there?
Actually, $750 sounds pretty damn cheap for anything I'd describe as a "head rebuild." Apart from lapping the valves, did he do anything else in there?
Reply
0
0
09-25-2008, 06:21 PM
#8
Elite Member
iTrader: (21)
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Rochester, NY
Posts: 6,593
Total Cats: 1,259
That block isn't as bad as some I've seen. You'll want to get a good hot tank cleaning before you do any other work on it. Hell, my dad and I rebuilt a Studebaker that looked a lot worse than that, and it ran just fine. We actually had to hammer the pistons out with a sledge and a block of wood.
Reply
0
0
09-25-2008, 07:18 PM
#9
Junior Member
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 263
Total Cats: 0
If you decide to, you might check to see what it might cost to 'sleeve' that motor. Sleeving is where they machine your block, and slip in a cylinder to act as a new bore. Last I knew, they were $50.00 a hole. The good thing about doing this is that you might be able to get a Nikasil (sp?) cylinder, which is what they use in Mercedes. They have a higher nickel content, and they last a lifetime in normally aspirated engines, and last much longer in blown applications.
Reply
0
0
09-25-2008, 07:40 PM
#10
Thread drift....
If you have to sleeve it (seriously doubt it, but...), look into "wetsleeves". They make sleeves for increasing your bore if the bore spacing will allow it. I helped build a wetsleeved 351 windsor ford. You bore the cylinders out A LOT until you reach the size of the OD of the sleeves, by which point you have exposed the water jackets from boring it way too big. Then you press in the wetsleeves and bore it out. With wetsleeves and a stroker crank, we turned a 351 into a 440 small block. Bore ended up being 4.2", .200" over stock. I doubt you can get away with that much on a BP, but research will tell. \\\
Ok, back on topic..
I would either build a new motor with forged stuff or get a used motor for cheap and save up to do a good build later.
If you have to sleeve it (seriously doubt it, but...), look into "wetsleeves". They make sleeves for increasing your bore if the bore spacing will allow it. I helped build a wetsleeved 351 windsor ford. You bore the cylinders out A LOT until you reach the size of the OD of the sleeves, by which point you have exposed the water jackets from boring it way too big. Then you press in the wetsleeves and bore it out. With wetsleeves and a stroker crank, we turned a 351 into a 440 small block. Bore ended up being 4.2", .200" over stock. I doubt you can get away with that much on a BP, but research will tell. \\\
Ok, back on topic..
I would either build a new motor with forged stuff or get a used motor for cheap and save up to do a good build later.
Reply
0
0
09-25-2008, 07:50 PM
#11
Originally Posted by Joe Perez
Not bad. Given that you specifically pointed out "piston rings" I'm guessing they didn't bore the holes. What all did the "block work" consist of besides dismantle, tank, and probably hone?
The head's a complete rebuild from Dover machine. Strip, bead blast, replace valve guides, seals, sonic clean the valves, head, cams, bearings, re-lap the valves, replace HLAs, check spring height, replace retainers. $375 for this
Including the purchase of the spare motor, I'm still under $1000.
Reply
0
0
09-25-2008, 07:59 PM
#12
I took them the bare block. They pulled the oil galley plugs, freeze plugs, checked cylinder bore with a dial gauge, deglazed, surfaced (decked), tanked, replaced freeze plugs and machined new oil galley plugs. $450 for this
The head's a complete rebuild from Dover machine. Strip, bead blast, replace valve guides, seals, sonic clean the valves, head, cams, bearings, re-lap the valves, replace HLAs, check spring height, replace retainers. $375 for this
Including the purchase of the spare motor, I'm still under $1000.
The head's a complete rebuild from Dover machine. Strip, bead blast, replace valve guides, seals, sonic clean the valves, head, cams, bearings, re-lap the valves, replace HLAs, check spring height, replace retainers. $375 for this
Including the purchase of the spare motor, I'm still under $1000.
Reply
0
0
09-26-2008, 09:08 AM
#15
I tried a new shop this time, Dixie Performance Machine. They gave me $100 off since they had my motor over 2 weeks. I think the Miata motor was the smallest one in the shop. Next to the vat was a ginormous big block. I could put my fist in the cylinder and it didn't touch any walls. The machine shop guy said it was a 624. The owner's planning on spraying 750 on top of that 
Reply
0
0
09-26-2008, 10:19 AM
#16
If you decide to, you might check to see what it might cost to 'sleeve' that motor. Sleeving is where they machine your block, and slip in a cylinder to act as a new bore. Last I knew, they were $50.00 a hole. The good thing about doing this is that you might be able to get a Nikasil (sp?) cylinder, which is what they use in Mercedes. They have a higher nickel content, and they last a lifetime in normally aspirated engines, and last much longer in blown applications.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BMW_M60
Reply
0
0
09-26-2008, 11:13 AM
#17
Junior Member
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Tulsa, Oklahoma
Posts: 345
Total Cats: -1
don't get the nikasil (whooptydo if Mercedes used it, so did BMW) BMW used it in their M60B40 and the metal reacted with low quality American gas, damaging the top of the cylinder, you want Alusil (if you would even consider sleeving)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BMW_M60
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BMW_M60
Reply
0
0
09-26-2008, 03:36 PM
#19
Junior Member
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 263
Total Cats: 0
I think you might have misunderstood the intent of his response...
As for my response, after searching I see that BMW has indeed had some problems with Nikasil cylinders. However, they appear to be the exception and not the rule. Mercedes have a reputation (as do -most- BMWs) to go for 200K plus and still have good compression. I think there is something more than meets the eye at play here. What's more, I found this while searching...
http://forums.roadfly.com/forums/jag...4959921-1.html
To add to the posters' statements, some of you may have noticed that the US now has ULSD, or Ultra-Low Sulfur Diesel. For the whole year of '06, VW didn't have any diesels in the US because they refused to make any to deal with the sulfur problem. In the long run, all this has done is increase the demand for the diesels, which was smart.
But back to the point; I think the older engines that might have had an issue either did not have sulfur fuels in their area, or there was already such a build-up of carbon in the squish area of the bore that the sulfur'ed fuel could not get to it to cause a problem.
At this point, this is all just theory, but from where I am sitting it is plausible.
As for my response, after searching I see that BMW has indeed had some problems with Nikasil cylinders. However, they appear to be the exception and not the rule. Mercedes have a reputation (as do -most- BMWs) to go for 200K plus and still have good compression. I think there is something more than meets the eye at play here. What's more, I found this while searching...
. . . unless you live in a high-sulphur area, and even then: (a) your engine has already been replaced, or (b) you bought your gas at one of the brand-name chains who went low-sulphur before being required to by law. Either way you are off the hook.
These days, sulphur is becoming almost as rare in American gasoline as WMD are in Iraq. Which can only be GOOD news for us Nikasil-engine owners, because we will soon be able to drive in less fortunate areas of the country, like Texas! (J/K - I don't know the current sulphur levels in the Lone Star state.)
Here is an excerpt from a letter written by one Marilyn Bennett of the EPA, in reply to my request for information about regional suplhur levels in gasoline:
"The federal gasoline sulfur regulation requires all refiners and importers of gasoline produced for use in the U.S. to produce low sulfur gasoline beginning in 2004. The regulation provides for a phase-in period in which refiners and importers must meet a 120 ppm average sulfur level in 2004, a 90 ppm average in 2005, and a 30 ppm average thereafter. There are also per-gallon "cap" limits to ensure that no gallon of gasoline will contain an unusally high sulfur content as a result of averaging. Many refiners will be producing gasoline with sulfur levels well below these limits. We believe that the federal low sulfur program will significantly reduce the average sulfur level in gasoline nationwide."
As luck would have it, the manufacturers (BMW, Jaguar and other premium lines) phased out Nikasil just as the gas companies were phasing out sulphur. Today, a few years after the fact, whatever damage was going to be done by the stuff has already been one. For the vast, VAST majority of Nikasil-engined owners who have NOT been affected by high-sulphur gas, our now middle-aged engines are about the reap the benefits of Nikasil, among which are longer engine life and a pleasant reprieve from the decrease in performance and fuel economy that usually accompany higher mileage. (I know this for a fact. When I sold my Nikasil-engined 1995 BMW 740i it had 120K on the clock and was as tight as new -- BMW's leak-down test confirmed the engine's compression was at "new" specification.)
Nikasil is a far, FAR more elegant solution to the problem of heat management in alloy engine blocks than cast-iron cylinder liners. Nikasil technology is still used in the finest piston aviation and racing engines, which have have never suffered from sulphur headaches: pilots and racers always use reliable gasoline.
In fact, there was never anything wrong with Nikasil in mass-produced automobile engines. It was the gas that was bad, and finally it's better.
These days, sulphur is becoming almost as rare in American gasoline as WMD are in Iraq. Which can only be GOOD news for us Nikasil-engine owners, because we will soon be able to drive in less fortunate areas of the country, like Texas! (J/K - I don't know the current sulphur levels in the Lone Star state.)
Here is an excerpt from a letter written by one Marilyn Bennett of the EPA, in reply to my request for information about regional suplhur levels in gasoline:
"The federal gasoline sulfur regulation requires all refiners and importers of gasoline produced for use in the U.S. to produce low sulfur gasoline beginning in 2004. The regulation provides for a phase-in period in which refiners and importers must meet a 120 ppm average sulfur level in 2004, a 90 ppm average in 2005, and a 30 ppm average thereafter. There are also per-gallon "cap" limits to ensure that no gallon of gasoline will contain an unusally high sulfur content as a result of averaging. Many refiners will be producing gasoline with sulfur levels well below these limits. We believe that the federal low sulfur program will significantly reduce the average sulfur level in gasoline nationwide."
As luck would have it, the manufacturers (BMW, Jaguar and other premium lines) phased out Nikasil just as the gas companies were phasing out sulphur. Today, a few years after the fact, whatever damage was going to be done by the stuff has already been one. For the vast, VAST majority of Nikasil-engined owners who have NOT been affected by high-sulphur gas, our now middle-aged engines are about the reap the benefits of Nikasil, among which are longer engine life and a pleasant reprieve from the decrease in performance and fuel economy that usually accompany higher mileage. (I know this for a fact. When I sold my Nikasil-engined 1995 BMW 740i it had 120K on the clock and was as tight as new -- BMW's leak-down test confirmed the engine's compression was at "new" specification.)
Nikasil is a far, FAR more elegant solution to the problem of heat management in alloy engine blocks than cast-iron cylinder liners. Nikasil technology is still used in the finest piston aviation and racing engines, which have have never suffered from sulphur headaches: pilots and racers always use reliable gasoline.
In fact, there was never anything wrong with Nikasil in mass-produced automobile engines. It was the gas that was bad, and finally it's better.
To add to the posters' statements, some of you may have noticed that the US now has ULSD, or Ultra-Low Sulfur Diesel. For the whole year of '06, VW didn't have any diesels in the US because they refused to make any to deal with the sulfur problem. In the long run, all this has done is increase the demand for the diesels, which was smart.
But back to the point; I think the older engines that might have had an issue either did not have sulfur fuels in their area, or there was already such a build-up of carbon in the squish area of the bore that the sulfur'ed fuel could not get to it to cause a problem.
At this point, this is all just theory, but from where I am sitting it is plausible.
Reply
0
0
