Stroker: Titan Engine: My Story

[Slo-Sho]

Re: Stoker: Titan Engine: My Story

.040" quench height is optimal.

 

[mhead]

Re: Stoker: Titan Engine: My Story

I've measured the cylinder head volume. I can accurately weigh up to 300 grams to 0.01 gram. I filled a container with mineral spirits, weighed it, then poured sufficient mineral spirits into the (inverted) cylinder head to completely fill it to the level of the head surface. Then I weighed the container again. The difference in weight is the weight of the mineral spirits poured into the head. I used a density of 0.78 gm/cc to determine the volume of spirits from the weight. Here is the result and also some other information taken from earlier in this post.

Cylinder bore 3.922" (measured, but 3.935 would be the .060 over claimed by Titan)

Stroke Length: 3.90" (measured)
Head gasket thickness: 0.044"

Position of flat top of piston below the top of block:
Cyl 3 - 0.059", 0.055"
Cyl 4 - 0.060", 0.052"

Volume of cylinder head:
Cyl 3 - 55.6 cc
Cyl 4 - 54.9 cc

Recess into top of piston is approximately
0.093" * 2.875" * 2.550" but this could have 20% error.

Some computations with guesses as to accuracy:

Vr = piston recess = 11.1 +/- 2.24 (cc)
Vh = cylinder head volume = 55.2 +/- 0.5 (cc)
Vg = volume within gasket = 8.7 +/- 0.01 (cc)
Vp = volume above piston top to block top (.056" below block top) = 11.1 +/- 0.1 (cc)

Vs = volume swept by piston on stroke = 772 +/-1 (cc)

Vtdc = Vh + Vg + Vp + Vr = 86.1 (cc)
Vbdc = Vtdc + Vs = 858 (cc)

Notice that 6 X Vs = 4.63 (liter). This seems encouraging.

Static compression is Vbdc/Vtdc = 9.9:1 (10.2 to 9.7 allowing for measurement errors above)

Quench - I don't know how this is defined or why.

If the definition is the distance from the flat top section of the piston to the top of the gasket (bottom of head) then the quench is 0.099" for cylinder 3. Now the head has recessed areas so why not define the quench distance to some point up in the head? Also, much of the top of the piston is recessed by 0.093 so defining the quench distance from the recess to the top of the gasket gives 0.099 + 0.093 or 0.192"

References on the net

http://www.nitrophotos.com/240z/nitrous.html

indicate that excessive quench height (more than 0.060") will result in detonation, and my engine detonated badly.


Summary - my Titan 4.6 stroker
Static compression: 9.9:1
Compression test pressure: 200 (psi)
Quench: at least 0.094 and maybe more if the piston recess is considered

Despite 24 lb injectors, this titan engine ran really warm, bent an intake valve in #5 cyl and probably one in #6 cyl, and cracked the head.

Titan is sending a new head. Before I go to the trouble of installing it I'd really like to know if the block is properly machined. Back in this post I measured the piston distance below the block tops which was


Cyl 1 - 0.053", 0.044"
Cyl 2 - 0.049", 0.044"
Cyl 3 - 0.059", 0.055"
Cyl 4 - 0.060", 0.052"
Cyl 5 - 0.045", 0.054"
Cyl 6 - 0.039", 0.039"

So, after all this, my question is:

Do the above distances below the block top seem wrong?

Thanks!

Mike

 

[JJacobs]

Re: Stoker: Titan Engine: My Story

Those seem pretty far in the hole, but I haven't had my hands on a 4.0 lately.
As for precisely measuring the depth, that depends on the piston to wall clearance. Yours are, what, hypereutectic? They run a pretty tight clearance so you shouldn't have too much rock. The best bet is to measure directly above the piston pin on the side of the squish area to eliminate measuring errors from the piston rocking in the bore.

 

[corbinafly]

Re: Stoker: Titan Engine: My Story

uh oh. Not another Titan engine problem....

Someone on the strokers forum (also on the hesco board) is having serious problems with his titan stroker. Wrong parts used, dirty assembly, etc....
http://www.hesco.us/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=711&PN=1

 

[mhead]

Re: Stoker: Titan Engine: My Story

Those seem pretty far in the hole, but I haven't had my hands on a 4.0 lately.
As for precisely measuring the depth, that depends on the piston to wall clearance. Yours are, what, hypereutectic? They run a pretty tight clearance so you shouldn't have too much rock. The best bet is to measure directly above the piston pin on the side of the squish area to eliminate measuring errors from the piston rocking in the bore.

I'll try pushing on opposite sides of the piston with the dial indicator in position to see how much I can get the gauge to indicate.

As for others having Titan problems, yeah I'm getting the feeling their quality control isn't good. Fortunately my Titan ran 2500 miles and never knocked a bit. It just bent a valve and pinged.

But I've still got the question of piston depth unanswered. Are my depths OK? Titan has put a kit of some sort into the block. There must be a common design out there...

Thanks!

 

[corbinafly]

Re: Stoker: Titan Engine: My Story

I'm looking forward to your new measurements. I can't believe that there is so much variation in deck clearance.:shocked:

 

[mhead]

Re: Stoker: Titan Engine: My Story

Those seem pretty far in the hole, but I haven't had my hands on a 4.0 lately.
As for precisely measuring the depth, that depends on the piston to wall clearance. Yours are, what, hypereutectic? They run a pretty tight clearance so you shouldn't have too much rock. The best bet is to measure directly above the piston pin on the side of the squish area to eliminate measuring errors from the piston rocking in the bore.

Yes, the piston does rock! Here are the previous measurements from back in this post somewhere:

Cyl 1 - 0.053", 0.044"
Cyl 2 - 0.049", 0.044"
Cyl 3 - 0.059", 0.055"
Cyl 4 - 0.060", 0.052"
Cyl 5 - 0.045", 0.054"
Cyl 6 - 0.039", 0.039"


(Just a quick repeat: I measure the depth of the piston below the deck using a dial micrometer. I set piston to TDC, set the micrometer to touch piston, then lift micormeter probe and bridge cylinder with a machinests steel parallel. Releasing the micrometer probe onto the top of the now inserted parallel gives a reading that is higher than the deck by the thickness of the parallel. Subtracting this thickness I calculate the distance from the deck to the piston top. Note that this measurement must be done without moving the micrometer stand, only lifting the probe up to insert the parallel. When the parallel is removed the micrometer should give the original reading. Wish I could post pics.)


I did a careful evaluation of cyl 1 and 6. First I steel wooled the gunk off the piston top in spots on the far driver's side and far passenger's side of the piston. So I have two clean aluminum spots to hit with the dial indicator. I carefully cleaned the block deck with steel wool. Cleaned the parallel with steel wool. Measured my parallel's thickness with my micrometer, getting 0.123" instead of the 0.125 spec'd on the parallel. So everything's clean. In measurements below I each time tested the parallel for arch by measuring, flipping the parallel over, and measuring again. No significant (0.001") difference so I'll take that as indicating a flat parallel. On cyl 1 I measured, then rocked the piston and measured again. I made the measurement on each side (Driver's, passenger's) of the piston. Then rocked. Here are the measurements:


Cyl #1
No rock: Driver 0.052" Passenger 0.049 Average 0.050
rock: Driver 0.058" Passenger 0.043 Average 0.050

So rocking the piston actually makes a significant change at either edge but not to the average. I'd like to measure at the center of the piston but it is dished and I don't know how to interpert the measurement I'd make. In fact, most of the piston top is dished so I'm not sure what the measurement that I'm actually making (from the machined flat at piston top) really means in terms of quench.

Ok, same measurement for cyl #6

Cyl #6 Driver 0.048 Passenger 0.052 Average 0.050


Rocking the piston side to side while observing the dial indicator shows as much as 0.010" variation. Yes the piston rocks in the cylinder, and I suggest that measuring on both edges, then finding the average is the best way to determine the correct value.

So I guess that the large variation that I originally measured results from measurement error, some of this from gunk (I cleaned about 0.009" off) and some from piston rock.

But I've still got the 'quench' question. At 0.050" with a 0.044" gasket I've got 0.094" quench. Beyond this the dish adds another about 0.093" over much of the piston top. A 'quench' considering the dish would be more like 0.183".

So is this Titan stroker built correctly?

I previously measured 55 (cc) cylinder head volume. Is this typical for a 4.6L stroker? What's the cylinder head volume for a stock motor? (58 CC from a table at this post: http://www.naxja.org/forum/showthread.php?t=940832)

Thanks for the clue about piston rock. I'd never have believed it could be that much.

Mike

 

[mhead]

Re: Stoker: Titan Engine: My Story

Lastly, I measured the volume of the recess in the top of the piston: 11 cc.

Pistons are marked 060, of course the crank is from a 4.2 and I guess the rods are as well. Using the factory bore and stroke, plus all that I've measured I get:

Bore: 3.935" (stock + 0.060 bore - piston marked)
Stroke: 3.895" (stock)
Gasket thickness: 0.044" (my measurement)
Deck height above piston top: 0.050" (my measurement)
Piston recess volume: 11 (cc) (my measurement)
Cylinder head volume: 55 (cc) (my measurement)

Using the calculator at

http://www.rbracing-rsr.com/compstaticcalc.html

I get compression of 10:1 and calculating the ratio of BDC volume / TDC volume I get the same number 10:1.

Now filling in the spread sheet at www.madxj.com (under engine section)

Actual head volume: 55 (cc) (my measurement)
Bored over: 0.060 (says on piston)
Stroke of crank: 3.895 (stock stroker crank)
Decking of block: 0.000 (my guess)
Plaining of head: 0.000 (my guess)
Custom piston (cc): 11 (my measurement)
Rod length: 5.875 (stock stroker rod)
Piston height: 1.581 (I guessd on this on and just used the spread sheet value)

Under the 0.045 head gasket thickness column I see the expected 0.0495 Deck Clearance and the correct 0.0945 quench. All good so far. But the compression given is 13.35:1! What gives? What compression is the spread sheet calculating? A mistake?

I guess something is sick with the calculator since if you put in the numbers for the stock motor the upper section columns all agree but the compression ratios are all very wrong. Maybe there's something I'm missing?


Thanks!

 

[Clean Racing]

Re: Stoker: Titan Engine: My Story

Lastly, I measured the volume of the recess in the top of the piston: 11 cc.

Pistons are marked 060, of course the crank is from a 4.2 and I guess the rods are as well. Using the factory bore and stroke, plus all that I've measured I get:

Bore: 3.935" (stock + 0.060 bore - piston marked)
Stroke: 3.895" (stock)
Gasket thickness: 0.044" (my measurement)
Deck height above piston top: 0.050" (my measurement)
Piston recess volume: 11 (cc) (my measurement)
Cylinder head volume: 55 (cc) (my measurement)

Using the calculator at

http://www.rbracing-rsr.com/compstaticcalc.html

I get compression of 10:1 and calculating the ratio of BDC volume / TDC volume I get the same number 10:1.

Now filling in the spread sheet at www.madxj.com (under engine section)

Actual head volume: 55 (cc) (my measurement)
Bored over: 0.060 (says on piston)
Stroke of crank: 3.895 (stock stroker crank)
Decking of block: 0.000 (my guess)
Plaining of head: 0.000 (my guess)
Custom piston (cc): 11 (my measurement)
Rod length: 5.875 (stock stroker rod)
Piston height: 1.581 (I guessd on this on and just used the spread sheet value)

Under the 0.045 head gasket thickness column I see the expected 0.0495 Deck Clearance and the correct 0.0945 quench. All good so far. But the compression given is 13.35:1! What gives? What compression is the spread sheet calculating? A mistake?

I guess something is sick with the calculator since if you put in the numbers for the stock motor the upper section columns all agree but the compression ratios are all very wrong. Maybe there's something I'm missing?


Thanks!

Mike.

The stroker calculator is giving you the higher compression ratio due to the cc volume of the dish on the piston. You need to put a -11 in the cc area of the dish.. Also the piston pin height would be the stock 4.0L one 1.602". I am ordering two more sets of pistons next week for another stroker I am doing.. Not from JE this time, going to either CP or Ross.. Just have titan pay to get it fixed the right way.. Also check out the Hesco forums for more answers to your stroker questions..

 

[mhead]

Re: Stoker: Titan Engine: My Story

Here's the next edition of my story. Titan is really trying to help correct this engine. I'm getting a new head from them (for $300) to replace my cracked one. But simply putting a new head on will just get the engine back to the way it was prior to the valve bending. I requested a stock cam in the original engine since posts mentioned cam problems. But a stock cam gives the engine higher -dynamic- compression, hence the 200 PSI compression test result. Titan's experience with this engine comes from 'hotter' cams. So Titan is sending a

Clevite 229-2174 cam

for me to install. Anyone know anything about this particular cam?

 

[Gojeep]

Re: Stoker: Titan Engine: My Story

Here's the next edition of my story. Titan is really trying to help correct this engine. I'm getting a new head from them (for $300) to replace my cracked one. But simply putting a new head on will just get the engine back to the way it was prior to the valve bending. I requested a stock cam in the original engine since posts mentioned cam problems. But a stock cam gives the engine higher -dynamic- compression, hence the 200 PSI compression test result. Titan's experience with this engine comes from 'hotter' cams. So Titan is sending a

Clevite 229-2174 cam

for me to install. Anyone know anything about this particular cam?

Pretty sure that is the one that was fitted to the install I did. It was the brand and I asked for a grind that was for a daily driver.

 

[mhead]

Re: Stoker: Titan Engine: My Story

Pretty sure that is the one that was fitted to the install I did. It was the brand and I asked for a grind that was for a daily driver.

Great! It is going in today. I have the original out and am comparing. Of course it's hard to tell the grind. Oddly the new Clevite, while it seems to have cams in the correct spots, also has one extra. The lobes on Clevite are more narrow.

Here's a question: I drove the Titan 2500 miles prior to this. So the lifters that were new now have 2500 miles. I've inspected and they don't seem scored. Can I reuse them or should I purchase new (about USD$70 for a set)?

Thanks!
Mike

 

[Gojeep]

Re: Stoker: Titan Engine: My Story

Personally I think those lifters will be fine myself but let others give their opinion too.
Also remember that now that you have a aftermarket cam you cannot just drop the dizzy in and lock it down like with a stock cam. Follow how I show in my install write up.
http://www.go.jeep-xj.info/HowtoEngineInstall1.htm

 

[corbinafly]

Re: Stoker: Titan Engine: My Story

Great! It is going in today. I have the original out and am comparing. Of course it's hard to tell the grind. Oddly the new Clevite, while it seems to have cams in the correct spots, also has one extra. The lobes on Clevite are more narrow.

Here's a question: I drove the Titan 2500 miles prior to this. So the lifters that were new now have 2500 miles. I've inspected and they don't seem scored. Can I reuse them or should I purchase new (about USD$70 for a set)?

Thanks!
Mike

Not a good idea to use used lifters with new cam. The other way around is usually okay though.

 

[mhead]

Re: Stoker: Titan Engine: My Story

Personally I think those lifters will be fine myself but let others give their opinion too.
Also remember that now that you have a aftermarket cam you cannot just drop the dizzy in and lock it down like with a stock cam. Follow how I show in my install write up.
http://www.go.jeep-xj.info/HowtoEngineInstall1.htm

Unfortunately I came across your write-up after the swap. There are several helpful points that I would have benefitted from. I missed the spring and cylinder on the end of the cam and realized this from your write-up. Had to get a replacement from the dealer.


You've got a statement:

Some after market cams I have been told will not allow the ears or the fork of the to line up over the hole so they need to be filed or removed to fit. See the Hesco diagram provided by Kyung Kim.

which has a typo. I'm a little unsure of what filing I might have to do... suggest you add a little more description. The diagram doesn't add much to the statement as far as I could see. Just a suggestion to improve a very valuable write-up.

The Titan guy recognizes your name and I'm surprised he didn't point me to the write-up. Titan is not very organized. The engine arrived with no written instructions.

 

[Gojeep]

Re: Stoker: Titan Engine: My Story

Best thing to do is just cut the ears on the distributor right off like all pre EFI ones and go from there.
Titan are aware of my write up as I was talking to the stroker list while doing it and they lurk on there. Sent him the link so they could send the write up with future installs which they thought was a good idea along with the adjustable MAP sensor, but doesn't seem like they are doing it.

 

[mhead]

Re: Stoker: Titan Engine: My Story

Best thing to do is just cut the ears on the distributor right off like all pre EFI ones and go from there.
Titan are aware of my write up as I was talking to the stroker list while doing it and they lurk on there. Sent him the link so they could send the write up with future installs which they thought was a good idea along with the adjustable MAP sensor, but doesn't seem like they are doing it.

Hi Marcus,

?? I guess I'm not understanding the problem I'll face with the cam. I figured that there would be some interference of the distributer shaft with the cam gear and that the 'ears' are the point where the distributer engages the oil pump. But I see I was wrong. So here's my second guess:

'Ears' refer to the points where the retaining bolt goes thru the distributer housing. This bolt arrangement does not allow much rotation of the distributer.

The problem you expect is that the rotation of the distributer gearing on the non-factory cam, relative to the cam lobes (the phase of the gears if you will) is not the same as the stock cam and therefore the distributer must be rotated to compensate. But the rotation is limited by the retaining bolt and so I must cut the distributer until I can gain adequate rotation.

Am I correct?

Thanks!
Mike

 

[Clean Racing]

Re: Stoker: Titan Engine: My Story

Great! It is going in today. I have the original out and am comparing. Of course it's hard to tell the grind. Oddly the new Clevite, while it seems to have cams in the correct spots, also has one extra. The lobes on Clevite are more narrow.

1. The Clevite cam sounds like the 4.2L version, since the extra lobe is for the mechanical fuel pump.

2. Please do yourself the favor and spend the money and replace all the lifters even tho they have 2500 on them. cheap insurance.

 

[mhead]

Re: Stoker: Titan Engine: My Story

1. The Clevite cam sounds like the 4.2L version, since the extra lobe is for the mechanical fuel pump.

2. Please do yourself the favor and spend the money and replace all the lifters even tho they have 2500 on them. cheap insurance.

New lifters are in the box and awaiting installation. What's another $75? I've spent soooo much money on this engine so far!

But for the few miles it ran the power was really addictive. Can't live without it now....

 

[Clean Racing]

Re: Stoker: Titan Engine: My Story

New lifters are in the box and awaiting installation. What's another $75? I've spent soooo much money on this engine so far!

But for the few miles it ran the power was really addictive. Can't live without it now....

I know the feeling.. I wish I would have done this years ago when I was still working at the engine shop... When I could have done all the machine work myself..