auntysquat - 16 July 2009 02:02 AM

There is no need to be either obtuse or condescending here ... this is the technical board, not the baiting and biting at each other forum.

I totally agree. Could you please point that out to this author as well?

auntysquat - 09 June 2009 01:15 PM

so ... crankshaft bearings and/or crankshaft journals are thin in length and wall thickness. I had no idea.

eddo - 16 July 2009 10:57 AM

auntysquat - 16 July 2009 02:02 AM

There is no need to be either obtuse or condescending here ... this is the technical board, not the baiting and biting at each other forum.

I totally agree. Could you please point that out to this author as well?

auntysquat - 09 June 2009 01:15 PM

so ... crankshaft bearings and/or crankshaft journals are thin in length and wall thickness. I had no idea.

Good catch. You're right ... sometimes I lose my way. Thanks.

This thread is not just a new topic. The concept of a high rpm pushrod v8 was significant as far back as the 60's and 70's in sprint car, Can Am and F500 motors. Early forged GM cranks used to be a good solution to high RPM frictional losses because of their smaller journal size. Frictional losses are greater for higher speeds that are a part of larger journal sizes in crankshaft bearings. The increase in friction goes up proportional to the square of the velocity and for a given RPM, larger crank journals have higher velocities between the journal and the bearing. Smaller journals mean less velocity and therefore less friction.

Bearing material is Clevite 77 the last time i heard.