update2: ring analysis back

hey everyone: got the results of the ring analysis over the phone. They seem to feel the rings looked seated and really feel the grease isn't my problem. They found no grease residue anywhere. (sent along a sample). They don't think the rings were spinning either. Side wear looked ok. Said they felt the drain back holes I questioned are adequate and shouldn't be an issue. Well I guess I can basically rule out the rings, pistons, etc.) Now the only thing left is the fuel pump. Got one ready to go. I know it can't be that, but what the heck, I'll change it out and see what happens. If it's not that, I am 100% out of idea's, maybe, until I decide to tear it down again-haven't got that far yet. I guess the analysis makes me feel a bit better knowing grease may not have been a good choice, but kinda sounds like it won't hurt the ring seal much, if all, or may delay it just a bit. Well I guess that's all for now. I'll keep ya all posted as usual when I find the problem. Again, thank you all for helping me with this! Later

I AM NOT REALLY SURE WHY YOU WOULD CHANGE OUT THE FUEL PUMP?

Quote:

---

Originally posted by tts
hey everyone: got the results of the ring analysis over the phone. They seem to feel the rings looked seated and really feel the grease isn't my problem. They found no grease residue anywhere. (sent along a sample). They don't think the rings were spinning either. Side wear looked ok. Said they felt the drain back holes I questioned are adequate and shouldn't be an issue. Well I guess I can basically rule out the rings, pistons, etc.) Now the only thing left is the fuel pump. Got one ready to go. I know it can't be that, but what the heck, I'll change it out and see what happens. If it's not that, I am 100% out of idea's, maybe, until I decide to tear it down again-haven't got that far yet. I guess the analysis makes me feel a bit better knowing grease may not have been a good choice, but kinda sounds like it won't hurt the ring seal much, if all, or may delay it just a bit. Well I guess that's all for now. I'll keep ya all posted as usual when I find the problem. Again, thank you all for helping me with this! Later

---

TELL US ABOUT THE HEADS YOU ARE RUNNING.I DID NOT SEE ANY ONE ASK ABOUT THE HEADS.

hey erik: It's the only thing we haven't tried yet. An attemp to eliminate the possability of oil in gas. The heads are stock power pack. They were rebuilt with new guides and uses both the o-ring and an umbrella seal. Between rebuilds, I had the heads off and rechecked. On the second rebuilt they were checked again. (motor doesn't smoke on start up, takes about 5 minutes to start smoking). They were crack tested too. If the rings can be eliminated, 30 miles per qt is a major leak into the cylinder where some mechanics feel that much oil couldn't go by the guides that fast on new-tight ones. Even if we had bad intake gaskets, that's alot of oil to get by. (and the motor wouldn't run as good as it does). I know it can't be the fuel pump, but again I have nothing to loose try it. To me this problem makes no sense. You would of thought we would of ran across the problem on first tear down or the tests we've done. Also multiple mechanics analysing this with me. One would think someone would of said, hey that's your problem, but it seems to baffle some on that kind of oil consumption. Later

What are your connecting rod side clearances, they determine how much oil is slung into the cylinders.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by tts
hey erik: It's the only thing we haven't tried yet. An attemp to eliminate the possability of oil in gas. The heads are stock power pack. They were rebuilt with new guides and uses both the o-ring and an umbrella seal. Between rebuilds, I had the heads off and rechecked. On the second rebuilt they were checked again. (motor doesn't smoke on start up, takes about 5 minutes to start smoking). They were crack tested too. If the rings can be eliminated, 30 miles per qt is a major leak into the cylinder where some mechanics feel that much oil couldn't go by the guides that fast on new-tight ones. Even if we had bad intake gaskets, that's alot of oil to get by. (and the motor wouldn't run as good as it does). I know it can't be the fuel pump, but again I have nothing to loose try it. To me this problem makes no sense. You would of thought we would of ran across the problem on first tear down or the tests we've done. Also multiple mechanics analysing this with me. One would think someone would of said, hey that's your problem, but it seems to baffle some on that kind of oil consumption. Later

---

I haven't been following the thread so I don't know if this will do you anygood. I had a fuel pump squirt oil out of it on high rev only. I couldn't figure out where my oil was going or coming from. With the hood open and the engine at low rpm nothing happened. Couldn't find my oil leak till I jumped someones battery off when I hooked up the cables and brought my rpm's up oil squirted out in two lil streams. The higher the rev the more oil. Get the R's low no oil.

hi 76gmc1500: Rod end play is .010 (book is .011). Crank end play is .003 (book is .004). I'm obviously .001 under on each, but that doesn't seem to bug anyone I've asked. (they say usually one has the opposite problem of too much clearance). Another thing that has come up to some is a high volume oil pump. Ours is "suppose" to be stock pressure and volume. (pressure is almost 40 at about 1700-2000 rpms. Ring clearance is .002. Pistion to wall is .0025. Ring gap top-.020, second-.022, oil .030. (283 bored .040 over). Oil clearance-mains .002 rods .002.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 76GMC1500
What are your connecting rod side clearances, they determine how much oil is slung into the cylinders.

---

IT WON'T REALLY MATTER.THINK ABOUT HOW MUCH CLEARANCE YOU RUN WITH ALUMINUM RODS.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by tts
hi 76gmc1500: Rod end play is .010 (book is .011). Crank end play is .003 (book is .004). I'm obviously .001 under on each, but that doesn't seem to bug anyone I've asked. (they say usually one has the opposite problem of too much clearance). Another thing that has come up to some is a high volume oil pump. Ours is "suppose" to be stock pressure and volume. (pressure is almost 40 at about 1700-2000 rpms. Ring clearance is .002. Pistion to wall is .0025. Ring gap top-.020, second-.022, oil .030. (283 bored .040 over). Oil clearance-mains .002 rods .002.

---

.010 IS VERY TIGHT FOR ROD SIDE TO SIDE CLEARENCE.I DID'NT SEE WHAT YOUR CAM SPECS WHERE BUT FOR ANY PERFORMANCE STREET ENGINE I WOULD HAVE AROUND .015 OR MAYBE EVEN A LITTLE MORE.STOCK RODS WILL GROW A LITTLE BIT.

hi camaro fever68: Thanks for the input. Hastings ring co. on their web site had a guy tearing his motor apart looking for an oil loss problem. (the car didn't smoke much if any). They claimed to have changed the fuel pump and the problem was fixed. The fuel pump is the only thing I haven't tried yet. We're 99% sure we have eliminated everything that seems logical.

Erik: I'm confused. The book(s) state .011. How would .010 be too tight? Please realize I understand if it is too tight, the spray of oil will be greater. (too loose and the spray would be less, too tight and the spray would be more. (like a garden hose with no nosel-less spray, with a nosel-more spray).

Quote:

---

Originally posted by tts
hi camaro fever68: Thanks for the input. Hastings ring co. on their web site had a guy tearing his motor apart looking for an oil loss problem. (the car didn't smoke much if any). They claimed to have changed the fuel pump and the problem was fixed. The fuel pump is the only thing I haven't tried yet. We're 99% sure we have eliminated everything that seems logical.

Erik: I'm confused. The book(s) state .011. How would .010 be too tight? Please realize I understand if it is too tight, the spray of oil will be greater. (too loose and the spray would be less, too tight and the spray would be more. (like a garden hose with no nosel-less spray, with a nosel-more spray).

---

TTS,WHEN THE ROD MOVES TO BDC IT IS FORCED TO THE (THRUST SIDE OF THE CRANK).YOU WILL NOTICE WHEN YOU INSTALL THE RODS ONE SIDE OF THE BIG END HAS MORE MATERIAL REMOVED FROM IT.IF YOU INSTALL THE ROD BACKWARDS IT WILL BE VERY HARD TO TURN THE ENGINE OVER.THIS IS THE THRUST SIDE, IF YOU LOOK AT THE MAIN BEARING JOURNAL IT HAS A (RADI) CUT IN TO THIS FIT WITH THE THRUST SIDE OF THE RODS.RODS WILL GROW (EXPAND) SIDE UNDER A LOAD,OR AT HIGH R.P.M.S.YOU REALLY HAVE TO HAVE A GOOD OIL CUSHION..010 MIGHT BE O.K. FOR A BONE STOCK RE-BUILD THAT WILL NEVER SEE MORE THAN 4,500 R.P.M.S..YOU NEVER DID SAY WHAT YOUR CAM SPEC'S WHERE.ANY PERFORMANCE ENGINE RUNNING STOCK RODS REALLY NEEDS MORE THAN THIS FOR CLEARANCE.YOU MIGHT LOOSE A LITTLE OIL PRESSURE BUT YOU CAN ALWAYS SHIM THE PUMP TO COMPENSATE FOR THIS.

hey erik: Forgot cam info, it's a stock replacement for a 283 power pack. (since this was a stock rebuild we went with a kit from federal mogul to keep it simple). On our other '57 we had a replica 270 hp dual four barrel 283. Went alot fancier with this one and it would pull 6000 rpm all day long. Our rod clearance on that one was .012. From other builders, it seems most feel .010-.012 for a bone stock motor is fine. I do agree with you that when you get into heavy hot rodding that you may want to change clearances around to suit that particular build up. I've heard of alot of crazy clearances that seem to work for people. By the way the crank and rods were checked by two different machinists. I'm not a professional builder so I asked for alot of help on the second rebuild. That's why this problem is so frustrating. (I'm not the sole person rebuilding it, and it still smokes!). this problem has begun to stump our best mechanics and machinists in our town. I didn't have the guage to do a correct leak down test, so today mike lent me his guage for the test because he's dying to know what it is too. (Mike and the shop he works at are excellent on figuring out the wierd problems people have with cars). Not a problem, but Mike told me years ago a lady had an idler arm replaced on her car and came back mad because her engine wouldn't idle right! The shop I guess had a heck of a time explaining it to the lady. Later

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DennyW

Do you have a good picture of the spark plugs from that motor ?

Also, any oily places on the externals of the engine, engine compartment ?

Did you actually check the valve to guide clearance ?

Was protectors used when installing the guide seals ?

oil sender ok ?

oil pan ok ?

---

Denny,did you see the date on this post??

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by erik erikson

Denny,did you see the date on this post??

---

Anyone know what ever happened?

Yeah, so many beggars and no recall or back up as to the solution. over and over again it happens. Oh well, wait, can you say repribate?

High ya all. Sorry I haven't been on the site for a long time. ALL of you were very nice and helpful! The problem is fixed, but we will never know what it was. Let me recap as simple as possible. Rebuilt motor, totally stock, 3 times. Multiple machinists and mechanics looked at it before the motor went back together, all three times. All 3 times the motor did the same thing, burn
massive amount of oil. Every person on this site covered every possibility that might cause this, so we did listen to every one of you and went through everything to make sure it was right. (and things that don't sound like it would be the cause. On the 4th rebuild, we took it to a shop that has some of the best equipment in our area, such as the honing machine used diamond cutting stones. This company even asked each other why this guy needs this engine rebuilt, everything checks out! So they rebuilt it for us and guess what, it did the same thing for about 5-10 minutes, maybe 15, and out of the blue it stopped smoking and using oil! 4500 miles later it is still totally fine! They even used the same make of piston and rings we used! I'll never understand this one. Things happen, but this one is for my book of wierd one's that happen to us now and then. Again, thanks to all of you for the help. It is appreciated. Don't have no current projects going on right now. I'll check the site more and see if I can throw my two cents worth in on something others may be dealing with. All for now

Rings never seated?? And plugs looked ok.

the plugs were oil fouled real bad, and yes oil was getting into cylinders, all 8 of them! it wasn't just one or two. everytime we redid the engine we used new rings of course, and even tryed a different brand once. we had one set of rings sent to hasting ring co. and they said they looked to be "ok" for wear characteristics of ring wear. (mind you it used approx. 1 quart of oil per 100-130 miles!). the first two hone jobs were done the same. the third job was done a "pinch" rougher. the fourth one was done like the first two, but as stated, done with diamond stones. Again, multiple people checked the cylinders after boring, and after honing them. as several machinist's said, you could almost leave the rings off the pistons and it wouldn't burn as much oil as our motor did. valve to guide clearance ok. rod side clearance ok. there is one vaccum hose to the wipers. no pcv valve. etc. we went through everything imaginable and non-imaginable to explain it, we just can't. Again, we spoke to a mix of mechanics, machinists, you guys, etc. no one can give a difinitive answer to why. obviously we are glad it stopped. people say the block is not a "hard casting" as some where the rings may take longer to seat due to the hardness of the cylinders. we used iron rings to which most feel these seat fairly quick. I've used crome rings before with no problem of seating them. in my early days I honed cylinders wrong and the rings seated. (piston to cylinder clearance ok too). all for now Later