the new 2.2 combo didnt work pics inside - Performance Forum

Forum Post / Reply
You must log in before you can post or reply to messages.
the new 2.2 combo didnt work pics inside
Sunday, September 14, 2008 12:15 PM
so we tried a new combo this week for an open competition race, had 2200 pistons on old 1986 super lightweight rods we had machined with a hugely agressive race cam and had about .130 shaved off the head, the end result was way to much compression combined with a overrev/valve float and all heck broke loose, here are pics of teh aftermath number one piston was gone number two was in pieces and three or four valves were bent out
front of block

back of block, should you be able to see my hood through it?

some pieces that stayed in the oil pan

Inside #1

inside #2

head

front of oil pan

inside oil pan


Re: the new 2.2 combo didnt work pics inside
Sunday, September 14, 2008 2:00 PM
I think saying "it didn't work" is putting it lightly. lol



Re: the new 2.2 combo didnt work pics inside
Sunday, September 14, 2008 2:48 PM
WOW, now THATS destruction!



Fall 08 Omaha/western Iowa area meet...CLICK ME!
Re: the new 2.2 combo didnt work pics inside
Sunday, September 14, 2008 3:38 PM
And yet the crank survived, right? I mean... It didn't break or crack, did it?


Go beyond the "bolt-on".
Re: the new 2.2 combo didnt work pics inside
Sunday, September 14, 2008 3:42 PM
if your going to destroy it thats the way to do it... wow thats massive...



Re: the new 2.2 combo didnt work pics inside
Sunday, September 14, 2008 4:03 PM
I just remembered a friend's 5.3-pwrd 3/4-ton 4WD crew-cab that he ran NOx on (dry)... It was doing fine until one night it started to stutter. A compression check reveled #4 had no pressure (A hole in the piston?) and it clattered (Dropped valve?). He drove it home & later on as he pulled the heads to replace it with a aluminum 5.7L ls out of a T/A with a cam & low miles, he found the piston was gone! There was nothing left in the hole but a rod-end sticking-up with a piston-pin through it! Apparently the dry-system made so much heat & pressure that the hypereutectic piston couldn't handle it,so it cracked (parallel to the pin, I guess) and then shattered causing all the fragments to fall right into the oil pan (Man, good thing he was replacing the engine!).


Go beyond the "bolt-on".
Re: the new 2.2 combo didnt work pics inside
Sunday, September 14, 2008 4:13 PM
Uh, Bob... Just for reference sake, what all did you do to the engine (In build-up) and what was it doing (RPM's & what-not) when it let go?


Go beyond the "bolt-on".
Re: the new 2.2 combo didnt work pics inside
Sunday, September 14, 2008 5:44 PM
Yeah, at 20:1 or so I'm not sure it would be possible to have enough cam to allow a resonable dynamic compression ratio. How long did it run?




11 speaker JL Audio stereo setup for sale:
http://www.j-body.org/classifieds/audio/52021/

Re: the new 2.2 combo didnt work pics inside
Sunday, September 14, 2008 6:42 PM
this was a bone stock 2.2 block and crank, from a gm crate motor that we have ran all year, we used the old rods from a 88 2.0 and milled them on the little end and blanced them all. we put on new standard bore sealed power 2200 pistons. the cam was a normal race cam for us which is like 106 lobe seperation .450 lift and like 290+ duration if i remeber right, it is as agressive as the stock cam core would let us go. the head had over .100 shaved off of it. we started at .050 at the beginning of the season and overheated it a few times causing us to sahve .015-.020 off each time. sbc rocker studs with mercruiser 3.0 rocker balls and stock 1.5 rockers. stock valves and no porting. had a weber 32/36 carb, was running a decent air fuel ratio, not overly rich but not lean by any means. we were just trying to break it in when it let go it was at about 3500 in 3rd gear just riding down the front straight... the first thing i noticed when i started taking it apart is the #1 exhaust rocker stud had been pulled out of the head dont know if that was the cause of it yet or not, also noticed today the pin on the cam is sheard off but that probably happened in the aftermath
Re: the new 2.2 combo didnt work pics inside
Sunday, September 14, 2008 6:43 PM
oh yeah crank is fine hell i think we can still have it turned to get the scores out of it haha
Re: the new 2.2 combo didnt work pics inside
Sunday, September 14, 2008 8:27 PM
2.2 power!!!!!

those are some awesome carnage pics Bob, good job.




Re: the new 2.2 combo didnt work pics inside
Sunday, September 14, 2008 8:51 PM
Well Bob, the short time I've seen you post on here, I don't believe you half-@$$ed anything with this motor, to include these results!





Re: the new 2.2 combo didnt work pics inside
Sunday, September 14, 2008 8:52 PM
Not to thread jack, but i just had similar work done to my 95 2.2 and i'm getting some over rev any one got a suggestion as to why for sure?


Today we plan for the future, tomorrow we make history.
Re: the new 2.2 combo didnt work pics inside
Sunday, September 14, 2008 9:31 PM
20:1 static compression?! Geez, not even most modern diesels seen by non-commercial operators go that high! What were you running that thing on, methanol?

And I take it you used stock valve-springs, judging by your build-up description.

And that cam... If what I just read recently about GM engines with design that relates to the Double-Deuce (Namely the Stove-bolt I-6 & Big-block Chevy) a wide lobe separation is prefered by it, not a tight lil' narrow one. True, the lobe profile is the same as found in a in a "K" 8th-character VIN code on '87-'95 GM G-series vans (Stock), which means it'll respond well to any small-block Chevy lobe (Roller, of course), but that Lobe Separation/Displacement Angle (LSA/LDA) just seems all wrong.


Go beyond the "bolt-on".
Re: the new 2.2 combo didnt work pics inside
Sunday, September 14, 2008 9:37 PM
Those threads pullin out may have been the cause of a valve hitting a piston, but i don't think that would cause the rods to go through the block. What kind of rods where they? stock rods? Maybe they bend, then broke the block. I had the EXACT same thing happen to my sunfire, 2.2 . I had a rocker stud pull out of the head, and that caused my exhaust valve to open too much, at least my theory goes, cause I found the rocker angled, off the pushrod, and off the valve. So, i'm thinking when it poped off the pushrod, mid way off, the pushrod came up to open, it caught the rocker at the right angle, and opened the valve too much.

Here are some pics. but other than the piston that needed replaced, and the head, I still have the same block, same rods, and everything. My new head, I cryotreated though, to prevent against the thread problem. I'm convinced it was that old metal from that reman'ed head I had on there. If you guys do racing, i would HIGHLY recommend you get the components cryo treated. Cheap insurance against damage. go to www.300below.com to get it done.

Anyways, here are pics of my damage.
Valve in piston, it got wedged in there, so there was NO damage to the cylinder walls. AMAZINGLY!!



Head, snapped the valve right off. These were the SS 1 mm oversized valves.



notice the cylidner walls, Clean as glass. I was so happy.




I should mention this happen also at cruising on the highway. I didn't even know it happen till i stared to notice i had to apply more gas to go up the hills. Then when i put the car in nuetral, it stalled out, and I was like Crap, since I was going 70 mph.

I popped the clutch to start it again, and limped the car to work. I had to keep it revved at 4k rpm when I stopped at a light to keep it from stalling. but made it the remaining 15 minutes to work, all the while not knowing i broke a valve off!





Re: the new 2.2 combo didnt work pics inside
Sunday, September 14, 2008 10:11 PM
I've had a valve drop once while racing down the highway just after I just got a new clutch installed (This was before I got my first LN2, so...). I suddenly heard "Clink!" followed by a "GRRRRrrrrrrrr..." as I pulled off at an exit just a 1/8mi ahead of me. As I came to a stop, the engine wouldn't settle-down into it's usual idle-speed. I called my dad to tell him what happened, and he was p'd! Two days of work it took to install that clutch, and instead of just driving straight home I went out to see what my top-end would be with the "new" carb a friend snagged for me that supposedly flowed a lil' more. I drove it home on the street all those miles, discovering that if I left the clutch in a bit as I braked it'd bring the idle down. When I pulled the spark-plugs the next day to try to determine what happened I found all but the number three (Outta four) was coated in oil. Not sure which valve it was (Intake or exhaust) as I never got the head off. Just called a wrecker to come haul it away to a yard.

I miss that car now, especially with fuel costs being how they are. Oh well, 200,000+mi is a good run for a 'Stang killer with rally heritage.

Anyways, given the compresion you ran Bill (Static or dynamic) that's an awful lot for those rods to try to handle. You shouda put aluminum rods in... They would have cushioned the punch of that compression a lil' and still survived & given you the same level of power-output. Not to mention lightened-up the recipocating-assembly a lil', helping it rev quicker!


Go beyond the "bolt-on".
Re: the new 2.2 combo didnt work pics inside
Monday, September 15, 2008 4:42 AM
it wasnt 20:1 probably like 14:1 or 15:1 max
Re: the new 2.2 combo didnt work pics inside
Monday, September 15, 2008 4:46 AM
i probably shoulve bought a set of eagle rods but if i was going to put that much money in this thing i wouldve bought some new forged pistons as well, this was just a cheap lets see if we can get more power experience, its not like i dont have enough parts i have about 16 2nd gen cavs and 3 third gens down behind my garage
Re: the new 2.2 combo didnt work pics inside
Monday, September 15, 2008 5:29 AM
I love carnage shots.

You have a very good attitude towards your destruction.

Looks like it would have been a monster had it held together.





Re: the new 2.2 combo didnt work pics inside
Monday, September 15, 2008 7:32 AM
Bob Guptill wrote:it wasnt 20:1 probably like 14:1 or 15:1 max
2200 pistons + 2.2L head ~ 14:1. Add in the massively shaved head, I'm approximating 20:1. Or, are the rods you used shorter than those used in the newer motors?




11 speaker JL Audio stereo setup for sale:
http://www.j-body.org/classifieds/audio/52021/

Re: the new 2.2 combo didnt work pics inside
Monday, September 15, 2008 10:26 AM
OHV notec wrote:
2200 pistons + 2.2L head ~ 14:1.

Just curious, I am reading as much as I can on using 2200 pistons in the 2.2l block and head. I have seen everything from 10:1 to 14.5:1. Bob Guptill posted that someone he races w/ runs this set up in a stock class like its nothing. If it is in fact 14:1 how could you run this w/ a stock cam or even pump gas?

I guess I just looking for some accurate info on running this set up.

Re: the new 2.2 combo didnt work pics inside
Monday, September 15, 2008 10:47 AM
i can certify that a guy who has a 1996 cavalier we built into a race car, he has a bone stock 1996 cavalier 2.2 with the 2200 pistons in it, the head was only cleaned up like .004 total shaved and he is racing it. he is running 110 octane sunoco but it runs good and has decent power, we have never calculated or had his motor on a whistler to check actual compression ratio
Re: the new 2.2 combo didnt work pics inside
Monday, September 15, 2008 11:32 AM
Bob Guptill wrote:he is running 110 octane sunoco


Bob, is he running the stock cam or a regrind? Also what about the oxygen sensor? How is that handling the leaded race gas?

I want to do this set up, but still not 100% decided Thanks
Re: the new 2.2 combo didnt work pics inside
Monday, September 15, 2008 8:40 PM
o2 sensor is still reading to the computer, he has a stock cam
Re: the new 2.2 combo didnt work pics inside
Tuesday, September 16, 2008 1:34 AM
I've seen up to 108-octane unleaded, and the only problem with runnin' lead is it makes need for you to change your EGOS sooner (No cat, obviously!).

The rods used in the 2.0L engine are no shorter than the ones in the newer engine, it's just a matter of piston-pin height between '89 & '90 (IIRC).

Well Bob, you certainly set an example: What not to try & how to take it well. And that crank is a testament as to how durable the LN2 crank is. Who needs a forged crank?


Go beyond the "bolt-on".
Forum Post / Reply
You must log in before you can post or reply to messages.

 

Start New Topic Advanced Search