How about we get some more pictures of the actual failed parts?
JazzMan
Sure... I'll PRIVATE MESSAGE them right over to you that way you can share it with everyone in every forum from T/OT to Announcements Maybe even the trashcan... if you and your friends can get it there...
[This message has been edited by 84Bill (edited 11-18-2008).]
IP: Logged
05:49 PM
86GT3.4DOHC Member
Posts: 10007 From: Marion Ohio Registered: Apr 2004
about the only thing left to do is do a real failure analysis on the parts that actually were involved in the failure.
JazzMan
Ahh.. if only it were that easy with him. He cant be wrong... im still not sure why... I would be very interested to see the crank end, closeup of the input shaft, and the flywheel. I thought that was his flywheel earlier with 4 broken bolts stuck in it though.
IP: Logged
06:13 PM
GT86 Member
Posts: 5203 From: Glendale, AZ Registered: Mar 2003
Again the bolt were the proper bolts and torqued to the proper specs...
this was also mentioned in a previous post.
Flywheel bolts have been known to fail, it's not terribly uncommon. You've already said you like to downshift a lot coming to stops, which was putting stress on your components, whether you want to admit that or not. If you had been running around with a broken bolt or two for awhile, the fact that you downshifted to 1st instead of 3rd could have been the straw that broke the camel's back.
They've also been known to back out. Did you notice any strange noises prior to your mishap?
People are trying to help you here. You seem to be fixated on the pilot bushings, even though it's been shown over and over why that isn't the case. Why are you so unwilling to believe that there was a different cause for your problem?
Originally posted by GT86: Flywheel bolts have been known to fail, it's not terribly uncommon. You've already said you like to downshift a lot coming to stops, which was putting stress on your components, whether you want to admit that or not.
I would agree but I never had the chance to even think about letting the clutch out..... so there goes your theory...
If the clutch never made contact with the flywheel (UNLESS IT WAS VIOLENTLY WOBBLING) then there was no reason for the bolts to be stressed.
However the nose of the input shaft has no support it SURLY would snap the bolts off as if they were butter.
IP: Logged
06:34 PM
GT86 Member
Posts: 5203 From: Glendale, AZ Registered: Mar 2003
Originally posted by 84Bill: Oh? So breaking the rules to further you personal vendetta is entertainment?
I dont need your help guy.. but thanks just the same.
Personal vendetta? Please, your persecution complex is showing again. You're not worth the time or effort for a vendetta, but reading your crap is mildly amusing.
And yes, I stand by this: Short version: Bill is wrong, disregard any and all information he gives regarding pilot bushings/bearings.
[This message has been edited by GT86 (edited 11-18-2008).]
Originally posted by GT86: And yes, I stand by this: Short version: Bill is wrong, disregard any and all information he gives regarding pilot bushings/bearings.
Thats your problem.. you have this god complex. Everything you say is right and everything I say is wrong and **** any information I provide.
I dont know how to tell you this but you are wrong on many levels including maturity and respect for others. You apparently have none for anyone unless they kneel before you in agreement... Sorry you sad little homo but I dont suck dick and I aint your bich.
Originally posted by 86GT3.4DOHC: Ahh.. if only it were that easy with him. He cant be wrong... im still not sure why... I would be very interested to see the crank end, closeup of the input shaft, and the flywheel. I thought that was his flywheel earlier with 4 broken bolts stuck in it though.
If you want the bolts I'll send them to you and you can anal lize then to your hearts content.
When I pull the engine and what is left of the trans out I'll be sure to upload the pics... provided there is any shred of this thread left to do it in
IP: Logged
07:17 PM
GT86 Member
Posts: 5203 From: Glendale, AZ Registered: Mar 2003
Thats your problem.. you have this god complex. Everything you say is right and everything I say is wrong and **** any information I provide.
I dont know how to tell you this but you are wrong on many levels including maturity and respect for others. You apparently have none for anyone unless they kneel before you in agreement... Sorry you sad little homo but I dont suck dick and I aint your bich.
Hey, look another post towards your Hypocrite of the Day award! Keep going Bill, you can do it!
You just love to name call dont you, what a shame. I have a 17 year old son is more of a man than you.
Another one! Do you really want me to go find all the names you've called me and others in these two threads? A few samples:
quote
Originally posted by 84Bill:
. Sorry you sad little homo but I dont suck dick and I aint your bich.
quote
Originally posted by 84Bill: .... arent you just a fine bunch of dingleburries.
So by all means kiss my ****in ass douchebag.
quote
Originally posted by 84Bill:
No, I just call a spade a spade when I see it.. you however are not a spade... but an ass hole.
Now that I think of it weren't you the same ass hole who wanted me to go to Afghanistan and hoped I never came back? No... that was a different ass hole.. but thats okay because you are still a cross threading ass hole
quote
Originally posted by 84Bill:
You sorry ass loser.
[This message has been edited by GT86 (edited 11-18-2008).]
Because im noticing a trend here, your posts become more and more unrelated, aggressive, and repetitive the later it gets, yesterday and today. I honestly thought we were on track for a productive conversation.
Im with GT86, we've debunked all the points made by Bill, and everyone else for that matter, the only bickering left is him going *hands over ears* Nah-nah-nana-nah I cant hear you.
Originally posted by GT86: Weren't you just complaining about name-calling
Well after granting your wish I figured what the hell. I'd like to take a shot at you for trashing my thread and spreading your busshit. I figured.. what the hell. I'm sure you can relate...
IP: Logged
07:54 PM
GT86 Member
Posts: 5203 From: Glendale, AZ Registered: Mar 2003
Well after granting your wish I figured what the hell. I'd like to take a shot at you for trashing my thread and spreading your busshit. I figured.. what the hell. I'm sure you can relate...
My wish? I wish you'd stop pushing the bad information. I wish for you to get your car fixed. Hell, for that matter I wish your tranny hadn't grenaded on you.
And I wish you'd stop whining about other people doing the same things that you normally instigate.
IP: Logged
08:08 PM
86GT3.4DOHC Member
Posts: 10007 From: Marion Ohio Registered: Apr 2004
Just explain one thing, ONE THING, and I'll kiss your *** and I'll never post in another one of your threads. . If the input shaft is ~1" Diameter, and the "insert" has an ID of .55" (Both facts documented in this thread) HOW DOES IT FIT?
My wish? I wish you'd stop pushing the bad information. I wish for you to get your car fixed. Hell, for that matter I wish your tranny hadn't grenaded on you.
And I wish you'd stop whining about other people doing the same things that you normally instigate.
Again...
Telling someone that "GM didn't install pilot bushings in FWD cars" and "don't bother installing"... Thats BAD INFORMATION.
Telling them to "disregard" the P22 and FSM which shows the parts and part numbers from GM... thats BAD INFORMATION
Telling them to IGNORE a technical bulletin that out outlines their use and cautions to ensure the CORRECT bushing is installed is ALSO BAD information.
So you can feel free to get the hell out of my thread any time you like.... Please take "your bad information" with you and leave mine the **** alone.
IP: Logged
08:21 PM
86GT3.4DOHC Member
Posts: 10007 From: Marion Ohio Registered: Apr 2004
While I doubt anyone looking for information would read this far,
There was proof made that the flywheel is hub centric based on an insert. I suppose we could have seen that in the first picture of one without a ridge. Most newer cranks have a ridge machined on them. https://www.fiero.nl/forum/F...2/HTML/096400-6.html (at the bottom)
Now, whether there is a insert for this has yet to be proven, the inserts I measured were 1.1", the ID of the flywheel is 1.25"+
But there well could be. Bottom line, if you have a flange that lets the flywheel sit in place without the bolts, then you're fine, and theres nothing to be replaced. I not, and you just have a big hole, get looking, lol.
Here we go. If you have THIS, then you need an insert. Most other cranks have the lip machined into them. This has nothing to do with the input shaft, but the centering of the flywheel. Doesnt neccesarially mean this is Bill failre either though, could be, but not neccesarially it. https://images.fiero.nl/p...ages3/nopilot2_1.JPG
[This message has been edited by 86GT3.4DOHC (edited 11-19-2008).]
OK, I've seen way too many A$SHOLES post in here who are full of opinions one way or the other; people that don't have enough background working on 2.5 cars to have a valid opinion worth listening to.
Here's what the pilot bearing does: This is a picture of an iron duke flywheel installed on the back of a crankshaft which has a FACTORY INSTALLED pilot bearing in it. The engine is in a "normal" orientation. The only thing holding the flywheel on to take this picture is the "snug" fit of the flywheel bore being piloted by the bearing. It is the only feature which keeps the flywheel centered; there are no dowel pins or shoulder bolts to do the job!!!
If you don't believe me, pull out your Iron duke and do the following: 1) Get a measurement off the flywheel bore 2) Take calipers over to pilot bearing; note that bearing diameter is the same as flywheel bore diameter (duh, that's why it was put there for stick cars.)
Everyone in this entire thread except for Will and I have made unfounded statements. Check yourselves.
IP: Logged
10:33 AM
Fiero STS Member
Posts: 2045 From: Wyoming, MN. usa Registered: Nov 2001
The reason that the flywheel bolt may have failed is the alignment dowel was not in the crankshaft. I see no indication of the alignment dowel in the pictures. I could be wrong it may have exited when the flywheel let loose.
[This message has been edited by Fiero STS (edited 11-19-2008).]
The reason that the flywheel bolt may have failed is the alignment dowel was not in the crankshaft. I see no indication of the alignment dowel in the pictures. I could be wrong it may have exited when the flywheel let loose.
I asked about installing one when I replaced my engine about a year and a half ago. I assumed this was a pilot bushing however it appears I used the wrong "nomenclature" and the forum guru's were quick to point out to me (ONCE AGAIN) it was a useless item. I refused to accept that as an answer.
Apparently it IS a very important part even if I (nor they) knew the true purpose of it at the time... apparently NO ONE did until now.
One thing I stood firm on after this incident is THERE IS A REASON FOR INSTALLING ONE. Never give up when you believe in something, the answers will come in time.
Thanks again to all of you who took the time to look and find the answers. I owe you all a debt of thanks.
WARNING
If you have a 2.5 and didn't put this bushing in I STRONGLY recommend you stop driving your car and fix this.
[This message has been edited by 84Bill (edited 11-19-2008).]
IP: Logged
11:03 AM
86GT3.4DOHC Member
Posts: 10007 From: Marion Ohio Registered: Apr 2004
Originally posted by 84Bill: One thing I stood firm on after this incident is THERE IS A REASON FOR INSTALLING ONE. Never give up when you believe in something, the answers will come in time.
For Bill, the answer is "wow how can someone be so dense, I give up"
Had you dropped the "input shaft" theory when it was debunked the first 10 times, we could have explored the allignment theory, which was brought up many times, not just by myself. You totally trashed any kind of conversation there could have been about it.
Had we stopped arguing about this with you, the topic would have been dropped, and no one ever would have come forward to reveal there is a removable allignment insert, and people would have gone around putting pilot bearings in dukes, and, should it be relevant, omitting the allignment insert. anyhwere you asked for a pilot bushing for a duke, they would have given you a pilot bushing, that wouldnt have done jack.
Originally posted by 86GT3.4DOHC: For Bill, the answer is "wow how can someone be so dense, I give up"
Had you dropped the "input shaft" theory when it was debunked the first 10 times, we could have explored the allignment theory, which was brought up many times, not just by myself. You totally trashed any kind of conversation there could have been about it.
How about you just get over it and move on... or does it make you feel better stomping all over this thread spitting your anger at me for not accepting your word?
Refresher...
Telling someone that "GM didn't install pilot bushings in FWD cars" and "don't bother installing"... Thats BAD INFORMATION.
Telling them to "disregard" the P22 and FSM which shows the parts and part numbers from GM... thats BAD INFORMATION
Telling them to IGNORE a technical bulletin that out outlines their use and cautions to ensure the CORRECT bushing is installed is ALSO BAD information.
So you can feel free to get the hell out of my thread any time you like.... Please take "your bad information" with you and leave mine the **** alone.
