Bend pushrod on #4 intake
 

People,

I need your help/advice please.

This is now the second time that my engine has bent the pushrod and tube on #4 intake. That is why I cant get this engine fired up. After replacing it the first time, I could get the engine fired up and running(although very badly) for a short time until it reaches the point where it dies, or doesnt want to start anymore. I am 100% sure that the reason is this bent pushrod.

Now, this motor has been completely rebuilt with fresh 1776 pistons and barrels. "Supervised" by my previous boss, who is supposed to be a pro. I have mentioned to him the first time about the rod, and asked "Why did this happen?". To which he responded that "it happens". One maybe, but twice in a row..., same rod? I have lost my confidence in him, so I turn to my internet buddies where I am sure, between so many people, I am sure to be able to find the answer/reason. I would hate to strip this motor down to the bone again, but if I have to, I will(have to).

In my time of need, I ask the fountain of knowledge for help.

Thanks fellas!

Have you checked your valve stem length? Put a straight edge across all the valve stems, and see if they are the same. Also, Check for coil bind on that valve. Hope this helps.

Thanks for the reply. I think that all the valves are the same lenght, as they are all new and bought at the same time. The heads are recon ones, valves lapped and 'slides' freely in the guides. So that leaves the coils(you are referring to the valve springs right?) and rocker arms.

So how would I be able to check the coil bind? Turning the engine by hand it seems fine, but as soon as I start it up, it fuzz-up. Also, how would I go about checking rocker arms for problems(and what problems can I expect?).

Thanks for the input. I will pull the head covers on both sides and check the valve stems anyway, hopefully tomorrow.

Thanks!

To check for "coil bind" turn the motor over by hand with valve covers off, and watch for the problem valve to be at full lift. Then check the amount of clearance you have between "coils" of the spring. I think the smallest amount you can have is .050(use feeler gauges to check this if you have them) if the gap is bigger, your ok there. Another thing to check (if you can see it through the valve spring) is the retainer to valve guide clearance. This distance should be way more than the "coil bind" clearance (not sure on how much though)

Are the rocker arms new? You might have two different ratios if you got some used ones.

Did the lifters slide easily in thier bores, and with no side to side play?

I'm no "expert builder" by any means, but just throwing ideas for you to try and help narrow the search down. Hopfully some others will help out too.

Thanks for the advice, I will be following it (and others) CLOSELY!

The other night(after you posted it) I read it, but it all went over my head. It was late, and I couldnt really think all that hard(well, I seldomly can! :laugh: ). I havent given it a once over again(yet), but will do. My first priority is to get that engine out the Vanagon and on the workbench/floor in my workshop(still in the making).

I havent sat on my aR$e though. I have searched the net for "coil binding" as well, for some visual aid. I have not really found something that I could say clears the mud though. Any references would be appreciated though(hint-hint).

I have been thinking about this dilema too. And this is what I have come up with. My previous boss machined the case and heads. The heads was done with the "eye measure" tool. So I think he might have machined the #3 too deep. Giving me a wrong deckhight, causing the intake valve to hit the piston. Would this assumption be correct? This is what I found on STF(which I believe confirms my worries):
The first time when it happened, I took the other/old head off, because I thought that the valve was sticking. When the head was off, I didnt notice any marks on the piston though. Although, it was 'carboned up', if that makes sense. For new pistons, it was black with a 'crust'. I found that disturbing, but didnt make anything of it, as I was guided by a pro when putting all together. So it must've been right.......RIGHT? I know better now. If you want it done right, do it yourself - after some proper research, if you dont know how already. I realise that I dont know that much, but I am learning, thanks to you guys :agree:

So i am not going further with this at the moment, before the engine is back on the stand and stripped to bare case(with c/rods, c/shaft, cam shaft etc installed), or should I strip it down completely and start from SCRATCH?(i.e. is there anything else that he might've missed inside that would cause serious problems later?).

PS. I do think I have got the Cam manufacturer wrong, but still think the "110" is correct. I will try and found the packaging/ask me previous employer.

I was starting to wonder if you were getting anywhere. I guess the best way too describe "coil bind" is turn the crank pulley(with valve covers off), and watch the problem valve until it is completly bottomed out. Then if you can't see a gap between each coil of the spring... you have coil bind. I'm sorry i'm not very good at internet directions, more of a "hands on" kinda person.

If the case deck, or heads have been machined different from bore to bore, then you couldn't seal the cylinder too the head correctly, leading to major leaks:eek:, or cracked head or case:eek: .

As for your cam. When looking at the cam out of the case (i can't remember if you can see this with cam in case, while heads and pistons are off) , you should check to see if the cam gear was installed correct. There is a mark on the cam gear. The lobe on the cam farthest from the gear should be facing DOWN. If not, your cam timming is way off (carbon and oil on pistons, poor running, or not running) then this would be your problem (I forgot about this in previous posts:o )

Technically, I wasnt getting anywhere, because I did not manage to get more work done:D I am also a more of a hands-on person, that is the way I learn(computers, mechanics, DIY... everything really), But I like to try and find info before hand;)

I am worried about the machining of the heads. As they might appear to be the same depth, they might not be:( So my question is this. since the motor hasnt really been run/driven yet, I dint think that anything might be cracked. So with shims, I should be able to get them all sorted out no?

As to the cam, I believe it is properly installed(well, I hope the advice I have been given was correct!!!) As the dot on the cam and C/shaft lined up. But once the motor is out, I will try and verify this too. Considering all, I cant be too safe/sure about anything anymore.:mad:

Shims are a step in the right direction, but they will screw-up your static compression ratio per cylinder if they are not all the same per chamber. The chamber volumes must be the same(or very close)for the motor to run good, same goes for shims under the cylinder. If you put shims under the cylinder, or copper gaskets in the head chamber they must be the same for ALL cylinders. Example, in one chamber you have a .030 gasket and a .060 in the chamber next to it to get the head to sit level on the cylinders, you will have a different volume in each cylinder(poor running motor). The only way to correct the depth is to remachine:eek: the chambers so they are the same. Then you can use gaskets, and or cylinder spacers, to get a good compression ratio. Sorry:( .

Bugger. That is not good news. A good waste of new(recon) heads:mad: My previous boss flycuts them with the 'eye level' measuring tool:mad: :mad:

So, I was advised that pistons build up carbon fairly quickly. Well, not that quick! Look at the pics below. I kid you not, there is not Photoshop'ing going on here, it's the same engine! #1&2 is clean(and corrosponding head), but check out #3&4!! And this is after about a total of 5minutes of the motor running(however, I didnt clean the #3&4 pistons the first time around).....

Heads:
(clean ones are #1&2. Also bear in mind these are the new recon heads that I have *just* had done)

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v3...W/DSC04121.jpg

#1&2 piston heads:

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v3...W/DSC04118.jpg

#3&4 piston heads:

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v3...W/DSC04119.jpg


So looking at these pictures, would you think that there is something else wrong somewhere?

That is weird! All I can think of is the piston rings on #3 and #4 some how got the gaps lined up so oil just went right to the head chamber. It's strange that it happened only on one side, and not the other side. They could have been damaged installing them also, or installed upside down.

Oh yeah. Forgot to ask about that engine case. It looks like a industrial engine case(don't remember the case code)that was used for non motor vehicle application's (running generators, compressors, and machinery If I remember right). I'm sorry I keep telling you bad news:( . It's not on purpose at all. Just trying to help.:)

Piston/head #3&4 revisited:

After some wire wool this is how the pistons look like after cleaning up:

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v3...2.jpg~original

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v3...3.jpg~original

On both pics you can see where the intake valve nicked the piston head, but is very clear in the second pic. No doubt that the deck high is way off. The "pro" that did the fly cutting on the heads cut them too deep... :mad:

Yikes! I am sure I put the rings on the right way..., or did I? :confused: Well, I will be pulling the sleeves off at some point now too! As to the case, I will verify the code tomorrow. This should be a stock Vanagon case. I did not mention it the first time round I think.

I remember about twenty years ago:eek: seeing a typeI style case with a oil filter on the block, and was told it was a "industrial case". I have not looked at a vanagon case though.

If you get your heads machined to the same depth, you should be able to adjust your deck height with cylinder shims, and your head chambers with copper gaskets to get a good compression ratio.

Are you that old!!?:eek:

:laugh:


As a matter of fact, I have got 2 of those engines here too. I did not notice though if they had the oil filters.

It is good news to know that the head might still be saved. Problem now is to find who can do them. Anyone know where the fly cutting tool can be bought? :confused:

Well, since i'm the only one replying to this thread... Gene Berg makes one that fits in a Mill, or drill press, and has good instructions too. I got one... wait for it... about eighteen years ago:eek: . I think it was about $60 US back then.

Did you get your PM?

Sorry to jump in here - I can't add anything new to the problems you are having, but can tell you a bit about the crankcase!

That is not an industrial engine crankcase - it is a Vanagon / T25 "CT" or "CZ" case - 1600 / 50hp aircooled from 05/79-12/82. Cooling fan was on the end of the crankshaft like a type3. Originally had hydraulic cam followers same as the 2.0 CU & waterboxers. If yours is now solid lifters then you will have had to use 2.0 CJ ones or bush the case & fit stock T1 lifters. It used Waterboxer pushrod tubes. Other features of the block are that it has the oil cooler mount closer to the distributor. Cooler lies flat like a type3 but on top of a large ally spacer block.

This engine was generally not reliable as it had marginal cooling in a heavy vehicle, so suffered from overheating, but it was a useful development that led to the waterboxer engine. It is an OK engine if you sort the cooling out, but not one i would do as a performance unit with original CT cooling.

Not many sold in USA - most sold in Europe and then it was only the bottom of the range - most went for the 2.0 CU engine.

Regards

Moog

wrenchnride247,

yeah, got the PM. Trying to mock-up a 'system' to use a dial caliper to measure the valve lift. But I am stuck at the moment, because I cant seem to source a dial caliper anywhere(fast)!!! And a magnetic base support arm, almost impossible to find here. As rare as rocking horse droppings!! Visited 15.....yes count 'em... 15 shops on Friday with no luck. One said that it is not available at teh moment, and MIGHT be available in two weeks time, no gaurantee. And eBay France is of no help either:mad: So the heads are not making as much progress as I want:(

18 years, good lord! :laugh: will this be what you are referring to?
http://www.geneberg.com/images/IMG_0...db6d8d997cabe0

Moog,

Thanks for pitching in. Indeed it is a CT case. I am sure that it is 2.0 CU lifters as we have not machined anything other than the cyl. sizes on the case. I will be looking into an alternative oil cooler with forced air to try and aid the cooling issues. If I am not happy with the results, I might just look into using it for something else :cool:

PS. Where do you source your parts in the UK(specifically dual valve springs?). I have single stock springs on there and am SURE I have valve float....:confused:

Hi Zeroaxe - do i gather you are in France then, not USA as i first thought?

Valve springs - The company i work for sells dual valve springs, but not sure that you need them. If you have an Engle 110 then uprated single springs are necessary, but duals are not needed. BUT... an Engle 110 cam is not suitable for use with hydraulic cam followers! If you want to keep the hydraulic lifters then you need a hydraulic cam profile. So check your cam followers and cam. If it is an Engle 110 then use solid cam followers from a 1-7-2.0CJ engine (they will just slip in without any machine work) and use the the correct length pushrods for solid lifters (282mm long). On our own engines we will only use an Engle 110 cam with uprated pushrods, bolt up rocker shafts, and swivel feet adjusters.

I work for VW Heritage / Street style & Power in the UK. I won't post links here as this is not an advertising forum and i only post here out of my own personal interest, not a work interest, but you can easily find us online should you wish. There are loads of other places in the UK that sells these as well, so look in Volksworld magazine for adverts.

Regards

Moog

Indeed, I have now updated my profile with my location:rolleyes:

I will take a shot of the cam followers tomorrow, but am sure it is solids. I will go and measure the pushrods as well, as they are stock CT ones, and this might also add to the bend PR. And as I mentioned, the springs are stock too. Not helping is it?

I appreciate that you cant post any links here, but can I contact you via PM for more details?

Cheers!

Ps. Just a note about SSP website that you might feel bringing to attention of the web designer... There is a problem when one goes to the website, and view part/s, and leave the computer for a while. The session times out(which is understandable), however, the error message keeps on repeating via Windows popup messages. The problem is for example when one leaves the site 'open' and go to bed/not returning to the computer for a long time(to resume browsing later). I left the computer on once for two days or so before coming back to it, and there where so many pop-ups, that it actually cause my computer to crash! Silly me, not knowing the reason(blaming Windows as usual) re-visited the site and left it on again! Only this time I got back before the computer got 'overwelmed'. It had about 100+ popups though!

Sorry for the off topic addition to my post, but thought that it would help other (potential) vistors to Street Style and Power, or be of use to the web designer:confused:

Stock CT pushrods for Hydraulic tappets are 272mm, Standard 1300-1600 ones for solid lifters are 282mm, so you can't really get them mixed up as you can't even set the tappets!

No good PM-ing me tonight - i am off to Germany for the week at 5.00am tomorrow morning. I'm back next weekend, so we can talk then if you want.

Will pass on the info about the website, but didn't realise it does this. It doesn't seem to do it if i leave my home PC logged on to it? I'll let Bill our webby man know and see if he can tell me why.

A Bientot!

Moog

[QUOTE=zeroaxe]wrenchnride247,



18 years, good lord! :laugh: will this be what you are referring to?
http://www.geneberg.com/images/IMG_0...db6d8d997cabe0


Yes thats it.

wrenchnride247,

Thanks for that. I will be looking into getting one sometime soon I hope. I wont be doing a lot of different sizes often, so only one tool would be sufficient. I have got another question though. How does it 'attach' to the mill? In the picture, I cant see/make out how the tool fits the machine, and (to my shame) I can not recall how the one of my previous boss attached. I believe it was the same tool though.

Anyway, back on topic with some news/developements. Here is what were suggested by another aid I have:
And my response to this was:

Zeroaxe, If you get mill set P/N GB 700B the cutter head comes with the 3/4 shank (for 3/4 mill collet) that threads into the 7/8 9 threaded hole in cutter. They do this so the cutter fits their drill press version also. The drill press version would be the easier one to set-up and use. The mill version can be a PITA if you've never used a mill before.

The pictures do show major head leaks, having poorly machined heads will do that.

Moog, thanks for posting. I'm glad someone else is wanting to help too.

wrenchnride247,

I am now officialy confused, lol. Are you saying that there is an optional shank that needs to be bought for a drill press?(I meant to say earlier it is for a drill press I would like). I tried searching for a pic of the fly cutter assembled with the shank but came up empty handed...

The drill press version comes with a base that bolts to your head stud holes, and the shank and stop collar (so you get the hole depth the same, and centered on all cylinders every time;) ) this cost about $275 US:eek: in a 2000 copy of Berg price list I have, maybe higher now though. It includes everything need, but drill press.

Well, here is a quick update...

Today I spend a lot of time modding my engine stand, adding a third 'arm'. I dont feel cofortable with a whole engine hanging only from the two arms. I have seen those mounting plates bend too much for my liking.(plus, the bottom stud that it would normally bolt onto has pulled it's thread again. I fixed it once already! :mad: should I try and get hold of helicoil inserts, or does it not really matter *that* much on a motor that is supported at the back with an engine bar(like a Vanagon/Transporter)?

Anyway, using this tool:
http://www.streetstyleandpower.com/d...s/AC000126.jpg
I found the following deck height readings with a vernier caliper.

#1 = 1.26mm/0.049"
#2 = 1.5mm/0.059
#3 = 1.26mm/0.049"
#4 = 1.22mm/0.048"

What do you guys make of this? Is this considered 'in spec'?

Tomorrow I hope to get the readings off the valves and check for coil/valve spring bind.

Thanks for your input!

I would say those readings are OK as far as making sure the pistons are not going to tap the heads while revving, BUT...

Variation from piston 1 to 2 is quite a bit - why is this? Is it piston variation, or are the cylinders sitting at different heights. Both cylinders on each side must be perfectly matched in order that the head sits square - if not then it sits askew and you blow out of one side of each chamber - as at least one of the heads seems to be blowing on one side of each cylinder only, maybe this is part of the problem?

With these deck height readings what does the compression ratio work out at - have you cc'd the combustion chambers to work it out?

Of course, there is still the possible issue of coil bind, and at least one valve tapping a piston - put some thin layer of plasticene / blu-tack on each piston crown, do a dry build, turn the engine over by hand, then take it apart to see the marks the valves leave in it - slice it carefully and you can measure how close the valve is getting to the piston crown.

Hope this helps...

Moog

moog "hit the nail on the head" as we say across the pond.

If your case was just opened up for larger p/c's then its could be the piston tops are a little thicker on top than one another(quite common), but if the case was "bored and decked" then one of the decks could have been machined a little too much :( .

P.S. you have a e-mail w/autocad program ;)

Moog, I get what you are saying. I am going to torque down the cylinders and re-measure, at least once to see if I get the same reading/s. I suspect that the head is not sitting straight. There is too much evidence to ignore the facts.

Ok, so I just CC'ed the heads today. And what a surprise. I must eat *some* of my words. This guy actually had a good eye for machining those heads. Here are the readings:

48,48,48,49cc !! The 49cc reading is on the head where the valve hit the piston(#3). But this doesnt make sense to me. If it was machined 49cc, that means he took 'too little' off. And the piston doesnt come up that high compared to #4. So I dont get that, that should be the problem. Or am I missing something obvious?:confused:

According to this site's calculator I calculated the compression ratios per cylinder as follows:
#1 - 1.26mmDH 48cc = 8.9CR
#2 - 1.5mmDH 48cc = 8.69CR
#3 - 1.26mmDH 49cc = 8.76CR
#4 - 1.22mmDH 48cc = 8.93CR
They are all over the place! :mad:

After rechecking deck height, I am going to clean the piston crowns and do the blu-tack thing. following that with the coil bind check.

I also want to ask... Under the rocker shaft, do I need some kind of washer/spacer? I have been told just to assemble it with the little rubber ring/washer underneath to prefer an oil leak:confused:

Update...
 

Ok, so I mocked up the #3&4 side with blu-tack and torqued the head properly. I put in the cam lifters with the pushrods and turned the motor a few times to see if the lift-n-fall smoothly on their own steam. #3 exhaust side lifted but didnt go down on it's own steam(with the weight of only the pushrod), so added some oil and 'aided' down a few times turning the engine. After that it would lift-n-fall fine. Next, put the rocker arm on, back the adjusters out all the way and bolt it down securely. Again I turned the motor a few times, and then commenced with valve adjustments. Turned the engine a few times and there were no obvious 'counter force'. No resistance at all.

Disassembled everything(while saying to the wife:"Stay here. Before you leave I want to show you something") and went ahead making a fool out of myself in front of her(oh, the humiliation. There goes the ego! :confused: ). No marks on the blu-tack at all!? Huh!? What the heck? The blu-tack was about 3mm thick on the piston head!? At first I thought that I didnt place it well on the piston, BUT, where the intake valve hit the #4 piston the blu-tack was on the mark!?

Now I am at a loss. the only thing I can think of now is that I had a coil bind on that valve, causing the bend PR(but saying that, I should've felt it turning the motor over by hand). Or, it slipped out of the rocker's cup and on the way out the edge of the cup caught it and added +/-5mm of lift, pushing the valve too far? I understand it like this: The valve got hit when the piston came up for the compression stroke? How else can an intake valve be hit? Valve float? It should never be open when the piston is on it's way to TDC, no?

I will do this same excersize AGAIN tomorrow, just to make sure I wasnt a moron. I will (hopefully have time to) do the rocker geometry measurements, if they check out, then I dont know what the reason would be for 2 bend pushrods? It cant be badly adjusted valves, because by nature(when it comes to these kind of things) I am paranoid and re-check measurements 3 or 4 times!

More later. :mad:

If you have hydraulic lifters, then i wonder if turning the engine over by hand will lift the valve its full amount. The lifter has a ball check valve which shuts when under pressure and effectively turns it (almost) solid, but will this work when turning over by hand, so the valve doesn't lift fully as the lifter drains down?

Don't know if this is what is happening, but just an idea?

Moog

Moog,

Checked SSP but didnt find a pic of the ones I have got, however, found them on another site:
http://www.marksbugbarn.com/Administ...-109-309-g.jpg

The site states:
"This cam follower (also called lifter) is for 1972-77 Vans with 1700, 1800cc, 2000cc NON-Hydraulic engines."

Does this help to clarify some things? :confused:

Externally 1.7(CA), 1.8(AP) & 2.0 (CJ) Solid lifters look the same as 2.0 (CU), 1.6 (CT) and WBX hydraulic lifters, and they can be swapped from case to case, but only used with the right cam.

Look at the end where the pushrod sits - do yours have a spring clip inside them with an internal piston? Remove the spring & the piston comes out to release a ball & spring.

What length are your pushrods? 272mm (hydraulic) or 282mm (solid)

Moog.

I had a look at the cam followers and there is no sign is any clips/springs/internal pistons. I also put some oil in the 'cup' and it syphoned through the hole out the two holes on the oposite sides. I think we can safely say that these are solid lifters?

As to the PRs, I measured 4, and all of them measured 281mm ( :confused: ). I can only assume that these are rods that started their life as 282's and wore off a bit?

Hope this helps.