[eschaider]

Ed, do you have a link to that Mod?

You can find it in the TToC, Herb. 4vFoxx's link is right on. It is the Crank Tech I write up. Besure to also read the CrankTech II write up right after it in the TToC. The whole story is in the Crank Tech I and Crank Tech II write ups under the Engine section.

Ed

 

[eschaider]

... if james could measure the distance from the pump mounting flange to the front of the #1 crank journal on both the coyote and mod crank, it can make the offsets of the crank snout dimensions absolute( or close to it) then measure the distance from pump mount flange to back side of gear on both his pumps that would help. when i am done with this damd unexpected tranny deal i can measure my pumps (3v and f150 coyote

Actually you already have the exact dimensions right from Ford, in the Ford prints I published in post #37 above, Ashford. Whenever possible it is always more desirable to take dimensions directly off a production print. The challenge in using a part for the dimensions is that we are never sure of the part's history since manufacture and that history can impact measured dimensions.

Ed

 

[showme cobra]

Hello Winberg?yes i will take one of your billet modular cranks, thank you very much

 

[eschaider]

Winberg does make a very nice crank Jim and it is very competitively priced. As you know, I finally went the Winberg route and asked for a fair amount of custom work. The finished crank was a very high quality part with all the custom work just as I had requested.

I could not be happier with them or the crank.


Ed

 

[4vFoxx]

http://www.mustangandfords.com/parts/m5lp-1003-2011-ford-mustang-gt-50-coyote-engine/photo-22.html

 

[ashford]

Actually you already have the exact dimensions right from Ford, in the Ford prints I published in post #37 above, Ashford. Whenever possible it is always more desirable to take dimensions directly off a production print. The challenge in using a part for the dimensions is that we are never sure of the part's history since manufacture and that history can impact measured dimensions.

Ed

the pic post 37 does not include distances needed for what i am after, judging by the print the measurements are from the end of the crankshaft, which are differnt from mod to coyote. the measurement that would be most helpful is from either thrust bearing surface to one of the snout measurement. then another from block thrust(bearing included) to oil pump mounting flange so that i can tell where the crank is relative to the block so i can figure where the pump gears will be riding on the crank with different pumps/cranks.

 

[showme cobra]

Winberg does make a very nice crank Jim and it is very competitively priced. As you know, I finally went the Winberg route and asked for a fair amount of custom work. The finished crank was a very high quality part with all the custom work just as I had requested.

I could not be happier with them or the crank.

Ed

I was kinda hoping Mrs Claus would get me one for Xmas, if there isnt one under the tree im kicking her out, lol

 

[eschaider]

the pic post 37 does not include distances needed for what i am after, judging by the print the measurements are from the end of the crankshaft, which are differnt from mod to coyote. the measurement that would be most helpful is from either thrust bearing surface to one of the snout measurement. then another from block thrust(bearing included) to oil pump mounting flange so that i can tell where the crank is relative to the block so i can figure where the pump gears will be riding on the crank with different pumps/cranks.

Without a corresponding block print the dimension from the block thrust surface would be at best an educated guess and at worst wrong.

The reason I chose the rear of #1 main as the reference point was to allow the comparisons you are attempting to make. Try using the the backside of #1 main and you will be able to find virtually any longitudinal dimension on the front of the crank as an offset from the #1 main. FWIW I already did the math for you in post # 37.

Ed

 

[dhenderson]

Thanks to James for purchasing these items to chase down definitively what will work. I planned to machine my crank next week but now will hold off until a conclusion is reached. Ed I was looking over the Ford snout drawings and your comments in post #37. I remeasured my 2 cranks and the numbers came up the same again. BTW the coyote crank measured within .000 -.001 of the Ford Drawing dimensions whereas the 4.6 measurements are .002 to .006 of the Ford dimensions. The front face to the rear of the coyote #1 main is .115 longer than the 4.6 dimension on the Ford drawings. Confusing as the crank in block pic on page 1 doesn't seem to show that. Anyway if the 3v pump gears and housing can be modded for the coyote crank that would be better than having the flats re-machined on the crank. The concern I have with machining back the timing gear locating face on the crank is that it will leave the factory undercut as a groove on the snout. Maybe a non issue but I don't like it. Machining the timing gear itself would be my preference. That would leave drilling and tapping for a 9/16 stud the only crank mod needed. The snout bore on the 5.0 crank is already .570 so just drill and tap deeper for the 9/16. Not cross drilled so no problem with the oil hole.

I also noted the crank key way appears to be aligned with the #1 rod journal on the coyote crank just as on the 4.6 However it is approx .20 farther from the crank gear locating face. May have to recut as Ed suggested for a real key.

 

[ashford]

my concern is that the flats are too far forward. judging from the witness marks on the used f150 pump the front face of the gear is roughly .050 forward of the larger diameter of where the flat is cut. the f150 pump is .510 in width. judging by previous pictures the flats are futher forward of the #1main front face and the face is further forward as well. i doublt the clearance back of the flat will be sufficient, no dimensions have shown up on that yet. i can measure the distance of the pump mounting surface to gear back face directly as i have both a f150 and 3v pump but is not usefull without knowing where the pump sits relative to the crank

 

[JamesHell]

The number 1 main face of the crank is roughly the same as the mounting face of the pump.
Im sure its in some but for the sake of safety I would just assume this.

 

[sparky1562]

Took some dimensions of my components and drew them up on both cranks. In addition to opening up the front dimension of the pump housing by .056, and the rear by just a little bit, the front of the housing looks like it gets into the larger diameter at the actual pump gear, making is a little more difficult I presume. I assume the slots in housing would also be enlarged by the same amount. Easy to see that the gear would need to be machined an additional .079 to fix the alignment issue. Does that weaken the gear appreciably? At the snout, I would assume the spacer James is talking about would be about .377 to get back to the .094 clearance?

View attachment 4.6 Versus 5.0.pdf

 

[sparky1562]

View attachment 141097
I have a Teksid build in the garage so here's the "stock" mod pump with the guide installed.
This showed me that the bosses are different heights.

James, can you confirm for me that this is 3V pump on the Romeo block in your picture? Attached is my 96 MK VIII before tear down. The guide does not bolt to the pump like in your picture. Also, my block did not have the pins for the other guide, it was a bolt. Are all Teksid blocks like mine? Or did some have the pins?

 

[JamesHell]

That is a pic of a regular 2V/4V oil pump on a Teksid. It is upside down.
Yes all the Teksids have bolt in pins. That is where the upgraded pins come in.

 

[sparky1562]

I understand that your picture is upside down. The pump and the block do not look like my 96 Teksid with a 4V pump, which led to my question about which block and pump are in your picture? The guide on mine did not bolt up to the pump, which also is confusing me?

What blocks came with pins to begin with?

Thanks!

 

[eschaider]

Until I saw your pics Herb I had not seen a bolt being used instead of a pivot for the upper of the two chain guides. That does not mean Ford could not have done that, your pic certainly shows what appears to be an OEM assembly but with the bolts.

Whether you have bolts or OEM pivots you should upgrade to the HD versions that James offers. The original thread was a 6mm if my memory serves me correctly. The upgraded dowels use an 8 mm thread on the dowel. There is not only no benefit to using the OEM bolts as you engine does but, considerable risk if something breaks. If you are going to be using the engine for a performance platform you should just go to the HD pivots with the 8mm thread on the anchoring end.


Ed

 

[dhenderson]

I measured the coyote crank from the front of the #1 rod journal to the front of the #1 main journal face and likewise on the 4.6 crank. The #1 main journal does indeed protrude .115 farther forward on the coyote crank as per Ed's Ford drawings. On my previous measurement drawings (referenced from the front face of the #1 main journal) you will have to machine .115 more off the coyote crank dimensions to make it equal to the 4.6 locations. The 422.0mm/422.08mm mean dimension on the rear of the #1 main journal is where to reference as Ed has stated.

 

[sparky1562]

I measured the coyote crank from the front of the #1 rod journal to the front of the #1 main journal face and likewise on the 4.6 crank. The #1 main journal does indeed protrude .115 farther forward on the coyote crank as per Ed's Ford drawings. On my previous measurement drawings (referenced from the front face of the #1 main journal) you will have to machine .115 more off the coyote crank dimensions to make it equal to the 4.6 locations. The 422.0mm/422.08mm mean dimension on the rear of the #1 main journal is where to reference as Ed has stated.

If I add that .115" (2.92 MM) (which is not the worst case possible based on the ford drawing tolerance) It starts to suggest to me that you have to machine the crank to get to the gears to register in the correct plane. Not doing so would mean you are machining the gear about .194" (4.92MM) deeper than it is (1.5MM), which seems way to deep to me. Here is my drawing showing removing the .115 from the #1 main journal.
View attachment 141817

 

[eschaider]

I am suspecting that Ford went to a thicker main webbing in the Coyote to accommodate the larger 11mm main studs. When they did this they may have also widened the corresponding journals on the crank to take advantage of the increased bearing surface the thicker web material could provide. I am going to check a couple bearing supply catalogs for the journal dimensions. If I am correct and they did modify both the main webbing and the crank journals then the correct place to be taking measurements from would be the middle of the journal width. Both blocks use 100mm bore centers so additional material on the webbing and crank could make edge measurements unreliable. Measurements form the center of the bearing width would have to be the same, however.

More shortly ...


Ed

 

[sparky1562]

Ed, what does that mean relative to bearings and using the Coyote in the Teksid block with the smaller mains?
Also wondering how much tolerance there is in the cam drive gears and their alignment? Even if the dimension is from the center of the journal, that is still another 1.5 MM +/- additional offset.