No offense taken, but I don't think anyone has seriously thought through my explanation. oh well. I give up, not that I'm convinced that I'm wrong yet though
. Old rodbender theories range from simple head gasket failure, to chaotic combustion, to just plain weak rods. My favorite being the rock theory
. I'm personally not buying any of those since they don't explain the whole story (why just 1 and 6, why not the 2.9L, why didn't the new rods always solve the problem. etc). A head gasket that is ~.030" (correct me if I'm wrong, I don't know this measurement off hand) will not take up .013" thermal expansion especially considering the head bolts get tighter at temperature. But point taken, I'll drop it.
Quote:
I do not understand that concept at all....
If you have a main bearing between EACH inline bore.. that is the best of all possible worlds... that supports the crank the most number of times possible with 6 inline bores... X+1 is the formula.....
|
This is because in a 4 main bearing set up you have more cross sectional area away from the rotating axis making the design inherently more torsionally rigid. It's like how a hollow rod with the same cross sectional area is more torsionally rigid than a solid one. Basically the lever rule. I agree it seems sort of counterintuitive.