One vehicle runs, another decides it needs a new motor

jeremy gast · **Posted:** Fri Dec 04, 2015 2:52 pm

They are decent guys. I dont deal with them a whole lot but when i do there have been no problems.

Chad Culbertson · **Posted:** Fri Dec 04, 2015 3:20 pm

jeremy gast wrote:

They are decent guys. I dont deal with them a whole lot but when i do there have been no problems.

I might call them about it, because for the money it'll be hard to beat. Ideally I need to do it cheap as possible to keep the misses happy, lol.

Chad Culbertson · **Posted:** Sun Dec 06, 2015 5:27 pm

Welp, here's the photo evidence that this motor is done for.

It's probably going to just be parked for awhile, I don't have the time or funds to replace the motor right now. I guess the Camaro is going to hang around for next season, lol.

Alec Moody · **Joined:** Fri Feb 15, 2013 9:02 am **Posts:** 299

I will be getting rid of my 1995 engine when I finally install my vvt engine. You are welcome to it for cheap or labor trade. The blocks are the same as the VVT engine but the 95 has the lowest compression pistons.

Chad Culbertson · **Posted:** Mon Dec 07, 2015 8:17 pm

Alec Moody wrote:

I will be getting rid of my 1995 engine when I finally install my vvt engine. You are welcome to it for cheap or labor trade. The blocks are the same as the VVT engine but the 95 has the lowest compression pistons.

PM Sent

Chad Culbertson · **Posted:** Mon Dec 07, 2015 8:28 pm

Out of curiosity looking at compression ratios, I found a calculator on the internet. According to it the power loss would be fairly minimal strictly from a reduced CR.

Your old Compression Ratio of 9.5 and HP of 140 is now calculated
as a Compression Ratio of 9.0 and 137.90 Horsepower.

FrancisChan · **Posted:** Mon Dec 07, 2015 8:34 pm

It'd be more suitable for a turbo setup down the road though....

Chad Culbertson · **Posted:** Mon Dec 07, 2015 9:22 pm

FrancisChan wrote:

It'd be more suitable for a turbo setup down the road though....

Bad Francis, quit putting thoughts in my head....

JamesMilko · **Posted:** Tue Dec 08, 2015 6:31 pm

Alec Moody wrote:

I will be getting rid of my 1995 engine when I finally install my vvt engine. You are welcome to it for cheap or labor trade. The blocks are the same as the VVT engine but the 95 has the lowest compression pistons.

This works, but it'll be an interference motor.

Chad Culbertson · **Posted:** Tue Dec 08, 2015 6:51 pm

JamesMilko wrote:

Alec Moody wrote:

I will be getting rid of my 1995 engine when I finally install my vvt engine. You are welcome to it for cheap or labor trade. The blocks are the same as the VVT engine but the 95 has the lowest compression pistons.

This works, but it'll be an interference motor.

Your saying a 2000 head on a 95 block would make it interference? Or a VVT head on a 95 block?

JamesMilko · **Posted:** Thu Dec 10, 2015 10:46 am

Missed a probably in there, I'm fairly sleep deprived.

A VVT head on a 95-97 block is interference. I built one. I'm not 100% sure on the 99 head, but Miata motors are just barely non-interference. The NB pistons are a very different shape than the NA pistons. I'm pretty sure 99+ has significantly more valve lift.

e:

Thinking now, that head had a few thousandths trimmed off.

Chad Culbertson · **Posted:** Thu Dec 31, 2015 10:57 am

And we have found the source of all the metal chunks. Rod bearings in 2, 3 and 4 were all toast.

The crank end play is well within spec according to my feeler gauge, less than .200mm and the thrust bearings were is good shape.

THSCC Forums

One vehicle runs, another decides it needs a new motor

Who is online