Slant Six Forum
https://www.slantsix.org/forum/

New piston rod combo, here's our logic
https://www.slantsix.org/forum/viewtopic.php?t=28804		 Page 2 of 4
Author:  madmax/6 [ Thu May 08, 2008 9:49 pm ]
Post subject: 
Also curious,have had pretty good results with them,,,then again,my shop is only about 2 miles away from them,Mark
Author:  slantzilla [ Fri May 09, 2008 6:01 am ]
Post subject: 
Quote:
What happened and did they make it right?
Yes, they did, but the kicker was that the pistons were way late to start with. :?
Author:  briannutter [ Fri May 09, 2008 7:30 am ]
Post subject: 
Sorry I confused some people, yes the rings would be included in the set and the RODS would be roughly $500.

As I said in my first post, it's just as easy for us do the package with a 7.000 or 7.400 ish. The piston would cost the same regardless, but would weigh quite a bit less. Basically bringing the piston up to modern standards.

yep, there's plenty of cheaper alternatives out there, but I can assure you that these pistons would be priced on the low side of the scale. Wiseco has a standard and won't make parts to a lower standard just to play pricing games with competitors. These parts would stand on their own and I think they'd make a lot of people ecstatic.

-Brian Nutter-Wiseco Piston
Author:  k1tom [ Fri May 09, 2008 8:00 am ]
Post subject: 
Quote:
Quote:
I'm lost.... I was looking at pistons for my turbo build...
Ya, how many people are working on rods this week?

I like the way this is going though. Towards a rod/piston combo.

From what I am hearing, there are 3 of you working together on this but all posting your thoughts? So do I say I am in on rods and pistons on this thread or http://www.slantsix.org/forum/viewtopic.php?t=26519 ???
We are the only one working on connecting rods for this application. Brian Nutter is from Wiseco Piston who is a a sister company to K1 Technologies. The combination of the 2 companies is what allows us to put together the perfect match of rods and pistons that I am sure everyone will be very happy with.

Tom Molnar
K1 Technologies
Author:  Doc [ Fri May 09, 2008 9:01 am ]
Post subject: 
Wow, this is looking promising, keep us posted on your progress and the estimated release date.

I still think K1 should make the con rods just a tad bit longer then 7 inch seeing that the current factory 7.005 c to c 198 rod combined with an Off The Shelf 2.2 piston still leaves us about .020 down in the hole.
I would love to get to zero deck with an uncut cylinder block. (clean-up cut only)

As noted, the lighter piston with a higher pin is also a plus and the current design / OTS combination still has some room before the piston pin get's into the oil ring groove. I need to do some additional measurements but even a 7.060 c to c rod would really help in a lot of ways.

Tom, has anyone sent you a factory 198 con rod and a OTS 2.2 piston?
If not, send me a PM with your address and I will send you the samples.
DD
Author:  mopardemon71 [ Fri May 09, 2008 10:49 am ]
Post subject: 
I sent him a,tom at k1, stock 225 rod and piston and he laughed at me for 5 min. the next time I called him. I told him make a rod like that but 7.000 and the piston will come later.

Does the 2.2 piston sit that low after someone shaves their block .100?

If this all pans out Doc, this combo of rods and pistons will use stock deck height, based on 10.692, and stock combustion camber sizes.
Author:  CARS [ Fri May 09, 2008 11:27 am ]
Post subject: 
Quote:
I sent him a,tom at k1, stock 225 rod and piston and he laughed at me for 5 min. the next time I called him. I told him make a rod like that but 7.000 and the piston will come later.
Why exactly did Tom find the rod and piston funny?
Author:  briannutter [ Fri May 09, 2008 11:28 am ]
Post subject: 
Quote:
I sent him a,tom at k1, stock 225 rod and piston and he laughed at me for 5 min. the next time I called him. I told him make a rod like that but 7.000 and the piston will come later.

Does the 2.2 piston sit that low after someone shaves their block .100?

If this all pans out Doc, this combo of rods and pistons will use stock deck height, based on 10.692, and stock combustion camber sizes.
Hey there, sorry about being incommunicato over long periods-I'm not able to get on the site as often as I like.

The 7 to 7.030 isn't a bad idea to allow the use of a 2.2 piston. Most of custom 2.2 pistons we do are 1.600 c.h. The only unfortunate thing is we're going from 60's technology up to early 80's technology...if that. The valve pockets on a 2.2 aren't the same as a slant 6 either and for an average guy to flycut pistons (especially thin cast pistons without the meat to do it right...can cause them to burn through. Going to the dished parts just to get piston to valve clearance ok is a bit silly because we just just end up lowering the compression right back down again.

If we do it, I'd really like to do it right the first time. Make it so people don't have to mod parts whatsoever to build a good 10.25:1 compression engine. I know a lot of turbo guys might be looking at a o.e. cast 2.2 piston as a decent piece, but it's not. We sell tons of forged pistons to the 2.2 guys due to a tendency of them to blow the o.e.'s apart. If there is a market for turbo parts, we can do them a bit later.

Keep the good opinions rolling in.
Author:  briannutter [ Fri May 09, 2008 11:44 am ]
Post subject: 
Quote:
Quote:
I sent him a,tom at k1, stock 225 rod and piston and he laughed at me for 5 min. the next time I called him. I told him make a rod like that but 7.000 and the piston will come later.
Why exactly did Tom find the rod and piston funny?
I know you guys are used to looking at these all the time, but Tom and I see a whole lotta pistons and rods from a lot of different engines. We don't have an appreciation for one brand of another...just a tendency to look at the basic architecture of an engine. That part is comparable to a lot of other engines.

If I got to build a part like I'd like to build you, it will really make a lot of sense. You'll compare our piston and rod to the o.e. and say..... Damn, I've been spinning that much extra metal around for all these years?
Author:  Red [ Fri May 09, 2008 12:31 pm ]
Post subject: 
Well, I'm still interested (FWIW). Will be watching for finalized specs, availability date and cost. Thanks.
Author:  CARS [ Fri May 09, 2008 12:36 pm ]
Post subject: 
Quote:
If I got to build a part like I'd like to build you, it will really make a lot of sense. You'll compare our piston and rod to the o.e. and say..... Damn, I've been spinning that much extra metal around for all these years?
I think that is why so many think that aftermarket rods are unneccesary at the factory lenght. They are pretty strong but too short.
Author:  Doc [ Fri May 09, 2008 2:09 pm ]
Post subject: 
Quote:
...Most of custom 2.2 pistons we do are 1.600 c.h....
This is good, that will get us to the top of the bores, plus .009 or so.
How far down is the first ring on the piston?

As you already know, we have a good 'workable' range with a 7.000 rod and a 1.600 c.h. piston. With the flat top, no valve reliefs in a 3.445 bore X 4.125 stroke 225 and a 58 cc combustion chamber, you get 11 to 1 CR if the piston pop-out the bore by .009

Note how the small bore to long stroke relationship makes this engine sensitive to combustion chamber cc changes. Go to a 54 cc head chamber and the CR is now 11.69 or going the other way, add 6 cc's of valve relief and you now have 10.17 to 1.
Add a 14 cc dish and you get a 8.98 to 1 CR engine.

So, a good quality forged piston that gets to the top of the bore and has enough thickness on the piston's top to allow the addition of valve reliefs or a small (medium) size dish, would do us well. Basically, use the same 2.2 piston you currently make and do not machine any reliefs into it.
If your current 2.2 offering is a "no off-set" piston, then there is a possibility that the 2.2 valve reliefs (depending on size and position) will work on the SL6, by rotating the piston 180 degrees upon installation.
DD
Author:  CARS [ Fri May 09, 2008 2:45 pm ]
Post subject: 
Brian, do you have a slant to mock-up your parts? the last time I relied on deck height and valve position I bent a couple valves. (not on a slant though)
Author:  Shaker223 [ Fri May 09, 2008 7:51 pm ]
Post subject: 
Is there an ETA that you can give for the rods/combo? How far are you into the development?
Author:  k1tom [ Sat May 10, 2008 11:33 am ]
Post subject: 
Quote:
Is there an ETA that you can give for the rods/combo? How far you into the development?
The rod design is complete and Wiseco has made pistons like this before so we are ready to pull the trigger but like I said in an earlier post, I am waiting to gather feed back to see what length rod everyone wants. It will take 6-8 weeks to produce the rods and they will be in the $500 range. If it works out that we have to make 3 different rods to make everyone happy, the cost of rods will be over $600 per set.

Thanks,

Tom
Page 2 of 4 All times are UTC-07:00
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Limited
https://www.phpbb.com/