The stock silent chains I have seen all stretch out, even on low-miles engines.
I bought a Cloyes chain for my Fiero, and I was concerned that additional noise (vs. a silent chain) could cause the knock sensor to be falsely triggered.
Well, that didn't happen. I don't have have unwanted knock retard all the time for no reason, so the Cloyes chain seems OK in that respect.
JVD, like Blacktree and PMBrunnelle have testified I have a double roller chain. The stock chain at low miles WILL stretch specially if you have stronger spring pressures. The heavier the valvetrain the more stretch you will have and those stock valves are heavy. That's why this Supernatural 3.7 has super lightweight valvetrain.
[This message has been edited by La fiera (edited 09-10-2020).]
It is, it took me while to get this one. You might find a NOS somewere. I don't remember the part number but search it in Summit or Jegs. Search if for a 2.8 not for a 3.4. Once I take the 3.4 out I'll check the play, maybe I can re use it. I know that the stock chain was stretched A LOT in the 2.8 with only like 600 miles of hard pounding between dyno and the track. If you can't get it them the other option you have is to lighten the valves as much as you can.
[This message has been edited by La fiera (edited 09-11-2020).]
That's what i thought. It seems like I have one of the last ones new in box. Anyone remember how much they go for new? I found a stash of parts that I bought years ago when I cleaned out a storage unit.
That's what i thought. It seems like I have one of the last ones new in box. Anyone remember how much they go for new? I found a stash of parts that I bought years ago when I cleaned out a storage unit.
I published these numbers because for me these are only reference. They seem low right? If I change something in the package they will change for the good or for the bad. I can make these bigger if I make the intake/valve combo more efficient. So, in other words these numbers are not concrete. That's why some of you, specially the Third Gen crowd can't believe I made this much power with iron heads. All the aparatus above and below the heads/numbers are critical factors.
I was just fishing for feedback before smashing the PAY NOW button for 2 of them.
Hey, don't want to scare you but your crank has some welded discs on it.
Yes, that’s Mallory. It’s used to balance rotating assemblies. I took weight from the outer perimeter of the counter weights and relocated that weight towards the center axis of rotation. The entire rotating assembly is balanced.
That's a regular 3.4L crank. The difference is that I reduced its outer perimeter thus relocating the weightmore towards the center were that same weight will spin at a slower rate. It also needed a bit more Mallory to balance the beefier rods and forged pistons.
My thoughts exactly. This is looking more and more like a "maximum effort" racing engine.
Yep, for the class I'll be running it is. I'm capped at maximum displacement, so anything I can think of that can give me an advantage I'll try. A turbo would be like giving up and would give me a huge handicap. Installing an LS will also be like throwing the towel plus an even bigger handicap. Replacing some engine parts is still a lot cheaper than an EFR turbo + hardware or an entire built LS swap. Now that leaves me as a driver to make up for the rest. Its more fun that way, I love being the underdog!
Is it possible to drop the LX9 crank in the the 3.4L block? Of course, changing rods and make the MS work the the 24x signal.
Thank you.
LX9 crank should fit the 3.4 block with some minor clearancing of the pan rail. You could offset grind it if you wanted more or less stroke if you cut it down for a 2.0 rod journal. You would probably want to have the bearing surface rehardened afterwards though. You can find more info on the LX9 cranks on the 60degreev6 forum
