Go Back  Offshoreonly.com > Technical > General Q & A
Rod ratio vs reversion >

Rod ratio vs reversion

Notices

Rod ratio vs reversion

Thread Tools
 
Old 04-07-2017, 10:29 PM
  #1  
Registered
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Location: sw michigan
Posts: 77
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default Rod ratio vs reversion

I have been doing a lot of reading on rod ratios and to be honest its enough to make you dizzy. my machinist suggested I use a longer rod on my build to help with piston side loading. In my reading I found it changes the torque curve and piston speeds and dwells at different points in the cycle, unless I'm not reading things correctly a longer rod might help fend off water reversion?.
Nova Rob is offline  
Old 04-08-2017, 11:12 AM
  #2  
Platinum Member
Platinum Member
 
adk61's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Toronto, Canada
Posts: 2,399
Received 15 Likes on 11 Posts
Default

longer rod, slower in changing direction (at top at bottom) and faster in the middle.. but overlap is still overlap and that pulse in the exhaust wave (similar to intake wave) is where the risk of reversion comes from... closing the exhaust valve a bit sooner will help with reversion but will hurt the HP IMO PUT A BLOWER ON IT!!! cause ya can't suck and blow at the same time!!!
adk61 is offline  
Old 04-08-2017, 11:19 AM
  #3  
Registered
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: St. Pete Beach, FL
Posts: 3,604
Received 598 Likes on 358 Posts
Default

Don't worry about it. Total cubes, CR, heads, cam, exhaust and induction are what affect your power and where you make it.
hogie roll is offline  
Old 04-08-2017, 12:49 PM
  #4  
Registered
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: SF Bay Area
Posts: 2,886
Received 144 Likes on 96 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by adk61
longer rod, slower in changing direction (at top at bottom) and faster in the middle.. but overlap is still overlap and that pulse in the exhaust wave (similar to intake wave) is where the risk of reversion comes from... closing the exhaust valve a bit sooner will help with reversion but will hurt the HP IMO PUT A BLOWER ON IT!!! cause ya can't suck and blow at the same time!!!
I had a girlfriend that can prove you wrong on that one.

OP - it sounds like you're just purging your brain of info overload, but I've never heard an engine builder bother to take stroke into consideration about reversion as of all of the components to consider on that issue that aspect is minimal.
Baja Rooster is offline  
Old 04-08-2017, 02:54 PM
  #5  
Registered
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 1,174
Received 113 Likes on 85 Posts
Default

The longer rod will increase dwell time at TDC and BDC, and will reduce reversion affects. Cam intake and exhaust overlap will indicate the potential for reversion but without piston movement the flow just doesn't reverse on its own accord. The longer dwell allows the exhaust to flow a bit further down the exit before piston movement on the down stroke begins to reverse the flow on the exhaust valve closing event.

In a nut shell a longer rod/stroke ration can dampen reversion.
Trash is offline  
Old 04-08-2017, 04:33 PM
  #6  
Platinum Member
Platinum Member
 
articfriends's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: frankenmuth michigan
Posts: 7,205
Received 882 Likes on 410 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by Trash
The longer rod will increase dwell time at TDC and BDC, and will reduce reversion affects. Cam intake and exhaust overlap will indicate the potential for reversion but without piston movement the flow just doesn't reverse on its own accord. The longer dwell allows the exhaust to flow a bit further down the exit before piston movement on the down stroke begins to reverse the flow on the exhaust valve closing event.

In a nut shell a longer rod/stroke ration can dampen reversion.
Would you agree though within the usable stroke/cylinder length like in a 9.8 deck block that a 6.385 rod with a piston pin height of lets say 1.270 would be better for longevity, ie ring seal than any benefits of running like a 6.535 rod with 1.120 pin height? I see in drag racing guys will use these 1.080 to 1.120 pin heights but I assume they are going in motor thats ran 100th the time for re-ring vs a offshore boat? Thanks, Smitty
articfriends is offline  
Old 04-09-2017, 10:56 AM
  #7  
Platinum Member
Platinum Member
 
adk61's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Toronto, Canada
Posts: 2,399
Received 15 Likes on 11 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by articfriends
Would you agree though within the usable stroke/cylinder length like in a 9.8 deck block that a 6.385 rod with a piston pin height of lets say 1.270 would be better for longevity, ie ring seal than any benefits of running like a 6.535 rod with 1.120 pin height? I see in drag racing guys will use these 1.080 to 1.120 pin heights but I assume they are going in motor thats ran 100th the time for re-ring vs a offshore boat? Thanks, Smitty
a drag car only lives is spurts never really put to the endurance test like the life of a marine engine... 1.270 is ok but 1.120 NEVER... at least you'd never see my name attached to it... I'm sure others will also speak to this as well
adk61 is offline  
Old 04-09-2017, 11:08 AM
  #8  
Platinum Member
Platinum Member
 
adk61's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Toronto, Canada
Posts: 2,399
Received 15 Likes on 11 Posts
Default

if you wanted to build a killer and reliable 522... 4.560 bore w a 6.535 rod and a 4.0" stroke will give you a good compression ht of 1.255 putting it .010 in the hole if all is std

would be higher RPM friendly
adk61 is offline  
Old 04-09-2017, 12:03 PM
  #9  
Platinum Member
Platinum Member
 
14 apache's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Northport N.Y.
Posts: 2,139
Received 10 Likes on 10 Posts
Default

The longer rod will increase piston dwell time at TDC and will shorten dwell at BDC..

Short-rod should have the shortest dwell at TDC and the longest dwell at BDC.
14 apache is offline  
Old 04-09-2017, 12:32 PM
  #10  
Platinum Member
Platinum Member
 
articfriends's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: frankenmuth michigan
Posts: 7,205
Received 882 Likes on 410 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by adk61
a drag car only lives is spurts never really put to the endurance test like the life of a marine engine... 1.270 is ok but 1.120 NEVER... at least you'd never see my name attached to it... I'm sure others will also speak to this as well
Exactly I would never use that short compression height to try to get a even longer rod in
articfriends is offline  


Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.