2.0 Long Rod X, A, or I beam rods

[kidtsi]

Hey guys i noticed there is not a whole lot of information on A beam and X beam rods in this forum, there is some I beam info though.
I don't wanna sound rude but please if you don't have experience with either rod or you don't have some useful information, then you know your information wont be taken into account and it will just be ignored.

2.0 LR huh? You might be thinking, you can rev the 2.0 really high already so why go the extra step, or why not 2.1? well here is the thing, for me 1/4 mile is not everything in fact one of the most boring ones, just my opinion here I'm involved in other motorsports too so that why.

Here is what was achieved before.

2.0 Long Rod H beam eagle rods 11.5:1, but final was 10.4:1.
Custom stage 4 transmission with longer 1st and 5th
GT3586r
Never dynoed ECMlink estimated 776 AWHP at 38 psi
Tilton Carbon clutch
and a bunch of custom parts blah blah blah, i'm just talking about button end here.

shifted at 10,250rpm, 201.3 MPH on the Texas mile last year and 5th gear went bye bye and also bent rod.


This year i'm doing some custom gear sets to the tranny, and starting again from scratch, since i'm not satisfied.

HTA GT4205r (proven to flow 115lbs/min+)
2.0 Long Rod 10.5:1
Do some custom work to the tranny
QM twin and Tilton Triple carbon to test.
shift point 10,700
Blah, blah, blah


The real problem is i can't decide what rods to run Eagle and Manley are out of the question as well as aluminum rod.

Here are the options ill accept.

Rod length needed 156mm

Pauter x beam
Carrillo A beam
Carrillo H beam (possibly with upgraded bolts, not sure yet)
R&R steel forged rods (a possibility)
Oliver?
Titanium( its not a N/A so i don't think ill benefit from anything in fact it might be worse.

Car will be downgraded to another transmission and a 3586 for road race use so that's why aluminum are not on my list, also the car will be ran on the street, very limited but will be ran. I ran all my cars on the street, i live in a place where the Police are not strict about Mods, slicks, Parachutes etc... as long as your not Racing, or putting to danger someone else life.

The lightest and the strongest on the the list that can take that power on the list is the right one for me, but also i would like a discussion about the benefit of X and A over the I and also weight advantages between them, as well as the Hp ratings (estimated) excluding some factors.

Sorry i don't really post a lot about my builds in here, i'm not really good at Build threads or taking the time to snap pictures of the process, but might as well start doing so, sorry for the long read.

Thank you,
Kevin

 

[kidtsi]

If you don't feel like reading the above here it is in a short way.

Rods that handle 10,700 (not maxed out).

Rods that can withstand at least 1100HP (I know that's not a accurate way of measuring strength of a rod but there is always an estimate, also not maxed out).

The lightest the better something 600gm or less would be nice.

Any info on A beam, X beam compared to I beam would be greatly appreciated, as there is almost no information on this.

 

[njclimber36]

Your numbers are very impressive with the set up you listed. I did a research paper in college about connecting rod length, and although it was almost 15 years ago now, the laws of physics haven't changed.

I know I have seen rod lengths of 162mm. I am not sure if it would work in a 63 block, but I am sure it would in a 64. Of course this would bump you up to 2.1 and the pistons would be slightly bigger / heavier. I understand your looking to spin the motor, and this might be an option worth looking into.

If you have already considered this rod length I would like to know what you feel are the pro's and con's.

 

[kidtsi]

Your numbers are very impressive with the set up you listed. I did a research paper in college about connecting rod length, and although it was almost 15 years ago now, the laws of physics haven't changed.

I know I have seen rod lengths of 162mm. I am not sure if it would work in a 63 block, but I am sure it would in a 64. Of course this would bump you up to 2.1 and the pistons would be slightly bigger / heavier. I understand your looking to spin the motor, and this might be an option worth looking into.

If you have already considered this rod length I would like to know what you feel are the pro's and con's.

I considered, but the 2.4 block is the problem for me, i don't really like it, thinner is one of the first things.
Don't think any transmission would let me shift at 11,500 to 12,000 so that's why I'm staying 2.0 or 2.0 LR.

 

[rr06rs]

I don't really have any supporting data other than that I love my olivers and I'll stick with them for every build from here on. May I ask why you're discounting Al rods? If its just for the maintenance/life of them, I wouldn't be too concerned at the level of a build that you're talking. With what you described, you're gonna be freshening up, or at least tearing down to inspect at LEAST every other, if not EVERY season... Also, why are you throwing the manleys out? Their billet 30 0m rods are right up your alley.

 

[kidtsi]

I don't really have any supporting data other than that I love my olivers and I'll stick with them for every build from here on. May I ask why you're discounting Al rods? If its just for the maintenance/life of them, I wouldn't be too concerned at the level of a build that you're talking. With what you described, you're gonna be freshening up, or at least tearing down to inspect at LEAST every other, if not EVERY season... Also, why are you throwing the manleys out? Their billet 30 0m rods are right up your alley.

Its more personal preference on the rods, and about aluminum rods, i had lots of lightweight rotational mass on my engine already and i don't really like the feel of a too light rotating assembly when i take the car out to the streets every other month hell with just a QM clutch or Tilton you start noticing a big difference.
I do have an aluminum motor for my other car, I'm just going a different route with this one.

What kind of power are you running on those Oliver? heard lots of good things about them, but no real info.

 

[rr06rs]

In my stroker in the evo its just above 550 so I'm not a good example but I know that Oliver stands behind their 1000+HP claim and I know they've been pushed well beyond that. AMS and JAM would be two good sources that have first hand experience with pushing them to the limits. What pistons are you using?

 

[kidtsi]

In my stroker in the evo its just above 550 so I'm not a good example but I know that Oliver stands behind their 1000+HP claim and I know they've been pushed well beyond that. AMS and JAM would be two good sources that have first hand experience with pushing them to the limits. What pistons are you using?

Custom Wiseco HD2s, still talking about it with a Vendor, if i stay 2.0 STD i would have more options, but still debating.

 

[kidtsi]

Anybody have weight specs on them, i don't have them all.

 

[spoolin ddub]

For the abuse you plan on putting your motor thru I would go with Puater Rods. I've seem Reichen up the boost for the mile event for years and thru several motor issues and everything those rods took all the abuse and afterwards were still is great shape. If you are going to shift past 10,500 rpm why aren't you going to a dogbox?

 

[kidtsi]

For the abuse you plan on putting your motor thru I would go with Puater Rods. I've seem Reichen up the boost for the mile event for years and thru several motor issues and everything those rods took all the abuse and afterwards were still is great shape. If you are going to shift past 10,500 rpm why aren't you going to a dogbox?

Thank you for the information, i'm still looking for motor info though, I'm going with a dog box, just some different thing added to it.

 

[spoolin ddub]

Thank you for the information, i'm still looking for motor info though, I'm going with a dog box, just some different thing added to it.

I was doing research and going to do a long rod 2.0 with Pauter rods. In the end I didnt.... but I should have. What motor info are you looking for?

 

[kidtsi]

I was doing research and going to do a long rod 2.0 with Pauter rods. In the end I didnt.... but I should have. What motor info are you looking for?

Specs on the rods posted above, i did call Pauter and Carrilo but they just leave me waiting.

Weight to be specific, i found weight on some in the 150mm rods but no 156mm.

 

[Archer Fabrications]

Have you thought about magnus custom rods? They can pretty much do anything and they have made 1400hp motors.

 

[kidtsi]

Have you thought about magnus custom rods? They can pretty much do anything and they have made 1400hp motors.

Yup, thanks for the reminder they are not in the list.

 

[spoolin ddub]

Have you thought about magnus custom rods? They can pretty much do anything and they have made 1400hp motors.

I thought about calling Magnus to. Cut out the middle man . Just call R&R since they make them anyway.

 

[Archer Fabrications]

I live sort of close to magnus, they are busy as hell right now, ive been waiting on just a quote for soe DG koni's and it's been a month with no call bak dispite a few reminders . They are a great shop just get busy.

 

[kidtsi]

I thought about calling Magnus to. Cut out the middle man . Just call R&R since they make them anyway.

Oh well never mind, that's why R&R is on my list instead of Magnus, I'll try to get more info and post here.

 

[bastarddsm]

H beams have the best stress flow into the big end. Any design is strong enough to prevent buckling if you do not let it detonate or use excessive advance.

Cross sectional area defines the fatigue strength of the rod, not the shape. The fatigue strength is most important, as loading it in cyclical stress at more than half the yield strength shortens the life exponentially, as stress increases.

Carrillo will tell you, that the A beams are for n/a motors, and you need the Pro H-beams.

Also stroker motors put less stress on the rod for a given torque.

Long rods are over-rated.

Finally, I think eagle's are more than capable of living at the 900hp they are rated for. I think they are a nicer rod than the Manley Turbo Tuff's I bought.

Also weight doesn't really matter. We have 3.5" of stroke, not 4.5" like a big block. Also, the acceleration is smallest at the big end, where all the weight is. Minimizing piston weight would be better for keeping the rod bearings alive.

But be honest, if your beating rod bearings out, your dong something wrong, or your making enough power your motor will be short lived anyway.

The X beams are the weakest in bending strength.

 

[kidtsi]

H beams have the best stress flow into the big end. Any design is strong enough to prevent buckling if you do not let it detonate or use excessive advance.

Cross sectional area defines the fatigue strength of the rod, not the shape. The fatigue strength is most important, as loading it in cyclical stress at more than half the yield strength shortens the life exponentially, as stress increases.

Carrillo will tell you, that the A beams are or n/a motors, and you need the Pro H-beams.

Also stroker motors put less stress on the rod for a given torque.

Finally, I think eagle's are more than capable of living at the 900hp they are rated for. I think they are a nicer rod than the Manley Turbo Tuff's I bought.

Well, i know for a fact, Eagle H beam wont live on 1100AWHP+ tried it before in 2012 to 982awhp on a conservative tune 0 detonation and to say the lest i did a test with 3 sets of this for a shop and didn't end up very well, hence the exclusion of them is this thread.

Thank you for the lesson on "Rods 101" is good information I'm sure very useful to anyone looking for information on rods, but i wanna stay more on topic, and Eagle H beam rods, Stroker rods, how rods fatigue and how non important the shape is. There is Threads specifying that, what we are talking here is specific rod designs and specifications on them.
Thank you for the info on the A beam design, somehow i didn't found anything about them being designed for N/A builds, hopefully you know what i mean i don't wanna sound rude just trying to clarify what the topic is about.


EDIT:
Just saw you edit it.
Any proof on the X beam being the weakest regarding bending? Thank you

 

[nitrouskris]

Oh well never mind, that's why R&R is on my list instead of Magnus, I'll try to get more info and post here.

R&R does make rods for Magnus but the R&R rods from Magnus are made to there specs

 

[bastarddsm]

Thank you for the lesson on "Rods 101" is good information I'm sure very useful to anyone looking for information on rods, but i wanna stay more on topic, and Eagle H beam rods, Stroker rods, how rods fatigue and how non important the shape is. There is Threads specifying that, what we are talking here is specific rod designs and specifications on them.
Thank you for the info on the A beam design, somehow i didn't found anything about them being designed for N/A builds, hopefully you know what i mean i don't wanna sound rude just trying to clarify what the topic is about.


EDIT:
Just saw you edit it.
Any proof on the X beam being the weakest regarding bending? Thank you

Yeah, machine design 1.

Asking on here is worthless. If you really want to know pick up a book and do some basic calculations, or pay an engineer to do it for you. Otherwise all you'll get is opinions with no factual basis.

Figure out what your bmep is going to be, your peak cyl pressure will be about 3 times that.

Then look at your bore, and calculate force on the rod. Peak cylinder pressure will occur close enough to TDC that it will all be placed on the rod. Now calculate the cross sectional area of the rod. Find the stress put on the rod. You'll find that it is much less than the 170,000psi 4340 rods of any design are made of.

 

[kidtsi]

Yeah, machine design 1.

Asking on here is worthless. If you really want to know pick up a book and do some basic calculations, or pay an engineer to do it for you. Otherwise all you'll get is opinions with no factual basis.

Figure out what your bmep is going to be, your peak cyl pressure will be about 3 times that.

Then look at your bore, and calculate force on the rod. Peak cylinder pressure will occur close enough to TDC that it will all be placed on the rod. Now calculate the cross sectional area of the rod. Find the stress put on the rod. You'll find that it is much less than the 170,000psi 4340 rods of any design are made of.

Oh, i already have my calculations and everything, i just wanna hear some other people's calculations, you know what i mean, even some shops chiming in and laying some "Knowledge" on the boards would be good.
Regarding to the above post, you are not taking into account lots of other factors, other than cross sectional and tensile strength. I have read more books than you can ever think of, and i used to work for a company, rods and crankshaft manufacturing, Europe to be exact. You would be surprise brands like BMWs uses Chinese steel to manufacture their rods... Anyways on topic.

This is not a typical questions of what rod i can use?, I'm looking for a discussion for every to have more information here instead of being like you and me reading books and so on, its not practical for everyone. I have almost every factor taken into account, i just overlook stuff until perfection so let me add here that "cross sectional area" is slightly important so let me start, hope i don't bore anyone.

Our forced inducted motors rod failure is more often compression than tension, however most people believe that there is only tensile and compressive loads on rods, but no. If that was the case here "shape will matter very little, flexural forces are the often ignore, and that's when shape or "design" comes into play.
Saying long rods are over-rated is not very smart to say without proof, as crank angle is one of the flexural forces applied to the rod.

Here is some data i found 2 years ago "Y" bending stress "X" crank angle.

You must be logged in to view this image or video.

Yes, H beam rod "assuming same material" has less strength on the power stroke but does have more strength in flexural load, but take a look at what i said above about our motors... Now why I beam? The I beam is stronger in "compression" and can therefore transfer a greater load to the crankshaft during the power stroke, we can't say the same about tension though, This is assuming both weight and construction similarities.

If you build a 2.3 Stroker motor that makes "lots" of power and i mean lots, use I beam. why? The H beam will fail first if the rod is overpowered on the power stroke.
Engineers recommend H beam for high RPM, but... that's only if the weight of the piston and pin assembly is too great for the rpm, that's when the "longer rod" comes in play, when using it on our motor, the piston and pin weight would be decreased. You might be thinking why go over the extra step when you have that advantage with the H beam rod in the first place???
Well now you have more compression strength compared to the H beam since the first place (very critical in our motor), and same tension strength and less flexural load due to the 156mm rod to compensate for the "weaker I beam with less flexural force" and plus now good for Higher RPM due to less weight of the piston and pin as mentioned above.

There is no such thing as "the better rod design" everything is based on application, the rod manufacturer don't know what our set up will be, so the rod design is comprised and often "criticize".
I'm talking about my application here 2.0 long rod. 2.3 stroker is also mentioned just to be used as an example, let me just brake it out even more if i loose someone.

I beam pros:
more compression strength than H beam.

I beam cons:
slightly less tensional strength than H beam.
slightly less flexural strength than H beam.

H beam pros:
More tensional strength I beam.
More flexural strength than I beam.

H beam cons:
Less compression strength than I beam.

By increasing the rod length and using lighter pistons and pin, the I beam flexural strength becomes greater based on crank angle and you have the stronger compression strength of the I beam rod, leaving you just to deal with tensional/ torsional strength.
Keep in mind the advantage of the H beam torsional rigid design in the direction of crankshaft rotation will only be applied during compression, oppose to the tensile loading, the curvature of the two main supporting pieces of an I-beam rod is essential in its excellent tensile strength/weight, leaving me with a better I beam option.

Here is another one regarding the advantage of flexural load on a H beam. (Sorry i have to find the H beam file in my computer) this is the I Beam.

You must be logged in to view this image or video.

[/IMG]

This is what scares me almost every shop that i see now a days they cant even understand what i'm saying with this so i'm a little skeptical, and most of the time i get access to a machine shop that let me do what i want with my motor.

Sorry I'm a perfectionist so i tend to have every piece of information of everything i use even on an everyday basis i quadruple check everything.

I would hate to see this thread "DEAD" so if anyone can chime ill really appreciate it.

 

[bastarddsm]

I wonder if those pictures came from this paper I was given a bit ago. There is a paper on rod design that a few people cite from time to time, that has some very bad science in it.

The connecting rod is a pinned connection, it should not have any bending moment on it. Bending moment comes from rod bearing friction, so if you have very much, you have other problems.

That plot of bending stresses and compressive stresses, doesn't really apply to us. For my setup, I figure I will have about 10 times the compressive stress at peak cylinder pressure, than tensile stress from the RPM. Besides that, that data looks sketchy at best.

As I said before, If you want any kind of decent life out of your motor, you will keep your maximum compressive stresses less than half of yield strength, and you will be golden.

In compressive stress, all that matters is cross sectional area of the beam. You can see it in the fea picture above, the peak stresses are in the beam where it meets the pin. By the way the rod in the fea picture is an I-Beam.

Oem's use I beams because they are produced more easily.

I stated long rods are over-rated because at the length differences we can accommodate, there is hardly any gain in mechanical efficiency, and little loss in piston acceleration. Don't belive me? Plot that shit. I have.

An H-Beam will have smoother stress flow into the pin bores (big and small) and an overall smoother stress flow, meaning it can withstand higher loads before failure.

For 1100hp you best be running a rugged ass piston pin. Ever wonder why diesel's have huge pins with thick walls? You'll have as much or more cylinder pressure than they do.

By the way, a stroker motor places less compressive stress on the rod for a given amount of torque. You will side load the piston more, and your mechanical efficiency goes down.

I just went through all this in January, with my rod choice. I have had eagle's and put them through way more than many others that have blown them apart lately. Then a guy who's opinion I take very seriously bent one. So I got nervous, and did a bunch of calculations, and consulted my colleges who, are some of the top minds in mechanical engineering, specifically machine design, FEA, and Non-Destructive Evaluation. My calculations were correct, and barring a material flaw, my eagle's were more than adequate for the level I was using them at. And would have been good for plenty more, if I kept the tune a bit more conservative.

I was set to buy Olivers, but I got a deal on Manley Turbo Tuffs. I will be running JE pistons with .210" wall 9310 pins.

FYI when your nearing MBT, a 1* advance can create 33% more cylinder pressure, while only making about 1-5% more torque. Keep that in mind when dialing it in.

 

[Black95TSIawd]

FYI when your nearing MBT, a 1* advance can create 33% more cylinder pressure, while only making about 1-5% more torque. Keep that in mind when dialing it in.

This thread has some amazing information in it. I wanted to quote this as most people don't really understand. This is even more important when tuning E85. Just because you aren't knocking does mean the motor won't pop. to both of you.