Fly's winter update thread

CalBoy101 · Dec 31, 2015

I should have looked at that picture I linked more closely, I was just looking at the flush aspect of it.

I see what you mean, that picture looks like the seal edge might be facing out.

Check out the pic of different seal types on the FelPro page below, we're using the double lip style which has two seals, a smaller one that faces out and a lipped one which faces in and you need to use their installation tool to keep this inner one from folding back the wrong way during installation.

http://www.felpro-only.com/rear-main-seals/

I've got my flexplate on now so I can't take a pic of it but I can look at my seal using a flashlight in between the flexplate and the block.

There is only a very slight protrusion of seal material (ie 1/32" or so) out from the seal housing, which is the back edge of the smaller outer lip and you can't see the inner lip which extends in towards the crank.

flyboy1294 · Dec 31, 2015

CalBoy101 said:
I should have looked at that picture I linked more closely, I was just looking at the flush aspect of it.

I see what you mean, that picture looks like the seal edge might be facing out.

I've got my flexplate on now so I can't take a pic of it but I installed mine using the plastic guide that keeps the seal facing in, which I believe is the right way to do it.

I can look at my seal using a flashlight inbetween the flexplate and the block and there is only a very slight protrusion of seal material (ie 1/32" or so) out from the seal housing, I believe that's the back edge of the seal surface that then extends inward towards the crank.

Gotcha, so the way I had it is correct you believe? Looking at the seal, it seems like it has to go that way.

CalBoy101 · Dec 31, 2015

Yes, if you have the long inner lip facing in (and now not visible) you are good to go, you should see just a little protrusion from the backside of the short inner lip.

Please don't send me a letter bomb if this is all wrong and you end up dumping a full quart on first start up.

flyboy1294 · Dec 31, 2015

CalBoy101 said:
Yes, if you have the long inner lip facing in (and now not visible) you are good to go, you should see just a little protrusion from the backside of the short inner lip.

Please don't send me a letter bomb if this is all wrong and you end up dumping a full quart on first start up.

The way I had it installed before had the long lip facing outward. I am guessing it was backwards, in that case.

How about this: the seal comes with that plastic insert, right? That insert is tapered to where one end is large, and the other is smaller. Which end of the insert did you put facing the crank?

This seal is a different design than the OEM one on my car and in my Haynes manual. My stock engine has an oil slinger also, by the way.

I owe you enough favors from all the help you've provided to where I think we could let one leaky rear main slide :grin2:

---------- Post added at 05:42 PM ---------- Previous post was at 05:26 PM ----------

Alright so I removed the oil slinger of my old shortblock and took a hard look at my stock seal.

Although the seal design is different, it's obvious I installed my first seal backwards lol. I'm guessing the sleeve has the fat end facing the crank, then the seal rides up the fat end to fit on the crank.

With all of that said, I can't get my retainer plate off for the life of me. I am guessing the RTV I used is just way too strong. Going to take off the timing cover and whatnot to drop the pan tomorrow to pry it from the back side; don't feel like wasting propane tonight to stay warm out in the garage.

CalBoy101 · Dec 31, 2015

To be honest I can't remember exactly how the plastic sleeve fits but if your new seal looks like the one on the far right in the FelPro link then the long lip should definitely be facing in towards the crank.

The plastic sleeve should be oriented so as the seal slides on the crank it keeps the lip pointing in and when the seal is fully over the crank the sleeve is then pulled off.

---------- Post added at 04:49 PM ---------- Previous post was at 04:47 PM ----------

Don't forget that in addition to the small bolts on the face of the plate there are also two bolts at the end of the oil pan that also screw into the end of the plate.

flyboy1294 · Dec 31, 2015

It's definitely one of the double lip seals, and I definitely had the long lip facing outward.

All in all, it wasn't leaking that bad considering it was installed backwards lol. I'll pop the new one in tomorrow in the correct orientation.

CalBoy101 · Jan 1, 2016

Wow, that sucks, sorry about the bad luck FB.

Put some pics up here when you tear it down, hopefully the damage is restricted to just the thrust bearing.

On my new build the thrust bearings as set up by the machine shop had 2 problems.

When the bearing caps were partway tight but not torqued to spec the crank end play was right on the bottom limit and I guess the shop checked it that way as they had that number in the build sheet.

But when the caps and side bolts were torqued to spec the crank end play would go 0.003" under the spec.

The second problem I believe was related to the machining of the block as it came from Ford.

One of the 2 piece thrust bearings was sticking out about 0.003" more than the other one, even though they were pretty close in thickness, it appeared the machined surfaces on the block were causing this difference.

So to fix both problems I had to take 0.003" off the back of the thrust bearing that was sticking out too much.

So check for this issue when putting yours back together.

flyboy1294 · Jan 2, 2016

CalBoy101 said:
Wow, that sucks, sorry about the bad luck FB.

Put some pics up here when you tear it down, hopefully the damage is restricted to just the thrust bearing.

On my new build the thrust bearings as set up by the machine shop had 2 problems.

When the bearing caps were partway tight but not torqued to spec the crank end play was right on the bottom limit and I guess the shop checked it that way as they had that number in the build sheet.

But when the caps and side bolts were torqued to spec the crank end play would go 0.003" under the spec.

The second problem I believe was related to the machining of the block as it came from Ford.

One of the 2 piece thrust bearings was sticking out about 0.003" more than the other one, even though they were pretty close in thickness, it appeared the machined surfaces on the block were causing this difference.

So to fix both problems I had to take 0.003" off the back of the thrust bearing that was sticking out too much.

So check for this issue when putting yours back together.

It's cool. I had a lot of things that I wanted to change about this setup anyway, I just didn't plan on doing it until next year. I'll update everything with pics as I get it torn down. It'll be next month though, seeing as I will be away from home until then. On the bright side, all the ARP fasteners I used can be reused so that saves me some dough.

I'll definitely keep that in mind about making sure the thrust bearing parts are square.

What sucks is I'm not really sure what caused this failure. I seriously doubt it was the converter. So was it an error the machine shop made? Something with MMR bearings, or the machine work on the crank? Or did I screw something up somehow? Hopefully it'll become clear when I tear it down.

CalBoy101 · Jan 2, 2016

Since we're running the same converters I'll take a close look at the thrust bearings on my popped stock short block to see if it looked like they were taking excessive thrust.

A line pressure that is too high puts extra stress on the thrust bearings, I'd lobby to get a line pressure sensor installed with this new build, as you know I can help you sort out the details on doing that.

The internal torque calculation done by the EEC controls these line pressures, in addition to the pressure relief spring in the VB.

When I did my scaling to allow higher MAF values it threw this torque calculation off, scaling up my line pressure values.

I guess its possible that the MAF doubling param you are using also scales up the torque calculation, do you have any logs that include the EEC's line pressure vals, best case both before and after MAF doubler switch was turned on?

flyboy1294 · Jan 2, 2016

CalBoy101 said:
Since we're running the same converters I'll take a close look at the thrust bearings on my popped stock short block to see if it looked like they were taking excessive thrust.

A line pressure that is too high puts extra stress on the thrust bearings, I'd lobby to get a line pressure sensor installed with this new build, as you know I can help you sort out the details on doing that.

The internal torque calculation done by the EEC controls these line pressures, in addition to the pressure relief spring in the VB.

When I did my scaling to allow higher MAF values it threw this torque calculation off, scaling up my line pressure values.

I guess its possible that the MAF doubling param you are using also scales up the torque calculation, do you have any logs that include the EEC's line pressure vals, best case both before and after MAF doubler switch was turned on?

Thanks man!

I checked out my stock shortblock since it's just hanging out in my garage, and it all looks beautiful. No indication of any pressure on the thrust (and I'm running the exact same tune on this setup).

You are absolutely right, though. If line pressure causes the converter to push on the thrust, then I should definitely invest in a pressure sensor "just in case." The only reason I haven't already is that it's a pain to get the data Q to work with my copy of BE since I'm setup to log my wideband directly.

I have been using the MAF doubler function since I first went boosted in 2013 (it's in SCT too under a different name.) I have a few datalogs from when the car was NA, but they don't have any transmission params logged sadly. I seriously doubt that a line pressure caused this, but with a new build I want to take precautions anyway.

CalBoy101 · Jan 2, 2016

It should be pretty easy to see if the doubler function is affecting the line pressure values, just log TRANSP (the EEC requested value), if its often up in the 120's was probably effected by the change, if its in the 80's to 90's it probably wasn't affected.

That logged value is an internal value, not a direct lbs pressure request, on my car the actual pressure is approximately twice that value but that's not an absolute, its probably affected by the VB's relief spring's setting.

Man its killing me to not be able to make any test runs, today was a nice sunny day that would have been perfect to make some passes.

I'm catching on some of the work stuff that was loading me up and I should be able to get back to work on my baby pretty soon.

Its going to feel faster than f*** to me when I get back in it, my DD is now a 95 HP four cylinder '87 S10 pickup.

What's funny is sometimes I forget what car I'm in when a late model import pulls up next to me, my blood gets flowing a little quicker but then reality sets back in.
'

Fly's winter update thread

CalBoy101

flyboy1294

CalBoy101

flyboy1294

CalBoy101

flyboy1294

CalBoy101

flyboy1294

CalBoy101

flyboy1294

CalBoy101

Top Contributors this Month

Recommended Communities