- Joined
- Jun 11, 2004
- Messages
- 11,872
You got an extry 'zero' in those numbers, Bax. Endplay should be .004"-008"
The huge end play in this case is not due to wrong bearing size..can't be. There is not nearly that much thickness variation between a stock thrust bearing flange and the largest undersize bearing available (.040" on the journal diameter). Rod bearings and rod journals have no infuence on crank end play. Here are my guesses..could be either one or a combination of both:
1. The 302/5.0 cranks are famous for the thrust bearing (MB #3) wearing heavily in to the crank journal load face in manual tranny applications. I've pulled and thrown in the scrap pile many of them that were like that..they cannot be turned and saved. Maybe in this case the shop tried to use it anyway.
2. Turning a crank is a very tricky process on several levels and requires a very skilled operator on a well-maintained $60,000 machine. I've turned many a crank in my day but these days I rely on a local old fella (older than me even
) who is quite gifted at it..I don't even know his full name: he's just known around here as 'Deadnuts Frank'. I think you can guess that moniker refers to his ability to hit crank grinding tolerances 'dead nuts on' and not his sexual prowess, or lack thereof.;D It may be simply that the crank grinder screwed yours up.Regardless..there is no way that a crank with almost 1/16" of end play can be salavaged. And whoever put that engine together with that kind of endplay is worse than an amatuer.
signed: Ancient engine machinist guy
