Endfloat on Crankshaft

This site contains affiliate links for which LandyZone may be compensated if you make a purchase.

kyamon

Active Member
Posts
114
Location
Lausanne, Switzerland
Hello everybody - this is a question regarding a 6-cyl engine in a 1974 109. I had it with a mechanic recently, and when he started the engine he immediately said "oh!" and told me there was a noise that was not supposed to be there, apparently a low rumble when idling - this is the only 6-cylinder of this type I have ever heard, so I don't actually know what noise he is talking about...
Anyway, he said that the crankshaft needed servicing, the main bearings for sure and possibly more. I decided to have a look myself, at first without removing the engine. With the oil sump gone I measured the end floats between the connecting rods and the journal shoulder (all 6 within specs), and then the end float of the crankshaft itself. I obviously could not do this accurately, but using feeler gauges I found that it may have about 0.002 in over tolerance (0.008 in instead of a max of 0.006). Is this alarming, should I take it out and add the proper thrust washers? Or is it actually tolerable despite the specified tolerances?
All advice appreciated!
 
Hello everybody - this is a question regarding a 6-cyl engine in a 1974 109. I had it with a mechanic recently, and when he started the engine he immediately said "oh!" and told me there was a noise that was not supposed to be there, apparently a low rumble when idling - this is the only 6-cylinder of this type I have ever heard, so I don't actually know what noise he is talking about...
Anyway, he said that the crankshaft needed servicing, the main bearings for sure and possibly more. I decided to have a look myself, at first without removing the engine. With the oil sump gone I measured the end floats between the connecting rods and the journal shoulder (all 6 within specs), and then the end float of the crankshaft itself. I obviously could not do this accurately, but using feeler gauges I found that it may have about 0.002 in over tolerance (0.008 in instead of a max of 0.006). Is this alarming, should I take it out and add the proper thrust washers? Or is it actually tolerable despite the specified tolerances?
All advice appreciated!

The crankshaft endfloat can be measured with a feeler gauge, I've always done it that way, just make sure the crank is pushed as far as it will go one way and measure the clearance between thrust washer and crank on the other side with a feeler gauge ...
 
Thanks - that is precisely what I did. I pushed it all the way back and measured the gap at the rear of the crankshaft, then pushed it forward and measured again. I get a value that way, but it is not very accurate - either way, it clearly seems more than 0.006 in and I wonder how much of a problem that is...
 
Thanks - that is precisely what I did. I pushed it all the way back and measured the gap at the rear of the crankshaft, then pushed it forward and measured again. I get a value that way, but it is not very accurate - either way, it clearly seems more than 0.006 in and I wonder how much of a problem that is...

That I not sure a grown-up will wake up soon and come to help ...

@jamesmartin
 
Hello everybody - this is a question regarding a 6-cyl engine in a 1974 109. I had it with a mechanic recently, and when he started the engine he immediately said "oh!" and told me there was a noise that was not supposed to be there, apparently a low rumble when idling - this is the only 6-cylinder of this type I have ever heard, so I don't actually know what noise he is talking about...
Anyway, he said that the crankshaft needed servicing, the main bearings for sure and possibly more. I decided to have a look myself, at first without removing the engine. With the oil sump gone I measured the end floats between the connecting rods and the journal shoulder (all 6 within specs), and then the end float of the crankshaft itself. I obviously could not do this accurately, but using feeler gauges I found that it may have about 0.002 in over tolerance (0.008 in instead of a max of 0.006). Is this alarming, should I take it out and add the proper thrust washers? Or is it actually tolerable despite the specified tolerances?
All advice appreciated!

The .002 you're quoting is nothing to worry about, But main and/or big end bearings could be the cause of your noise.......as could many other things
 
The .002 you're quoting is nothing to worry about, But main and/or big end bearings could be the cause of your noise.......as could many other things

Thanks - that is a relief. I was planning to replace the big end bearings, and while it is open I might as well put in new ones for the big ends, I guess. I can't really further specify the noise since I don't know what it was... Hopefully I will hear an improvement after these replacements, but otherwise to me it just remains one of the many noises the car makes
 
Thanks - that is precisely what I did. I pushed it all the way back and measured the gap at the rear of the crankshaft, then pushed it forward and measured again. I get a value that way, but it is not very accurate - either way, it clearly seems more than 0.006 in and I wonder how much of a problem that is...
8 thou isnt an issue and whats oil pressure like
 
8 thou isnt an issue and whats oil pressure like

Oil pressure looks good. I had a period with excessive oil consumption but that seems resolved now (nevertheless, replacing the valve guides is high-ish on the list).
The bottom of the oil sump was covered in goo, but I guess that is to be expected after (presumably) 45 years. I did not see anything that worried me, no chunks of metal or anything ;)
 
Are RTC2993 (with appropriate oversize) the correct con rod bearings for this engine (for some reason that page is missing from my parts catalogue)?
I have RTC1720 for the main bearings
 
Oil pressure looks good. I had a period with excessive oil consumption but that seems resolved now (nevertheless, replacing the valve guides is high-ish on the list).
The bottom of the oil sump was covered in goo, but I guess that is to be expected after (presumably) 45 years. I did not see anything that worried me, no chunks of metal or anything ;)
you could allways remove a con rod cap and main cap to check bearing condition whilst sump is off
 
you could allways remove a con rod cap and main cap to check bearing condition whilst sump is off

Yes, that was my plan. That part seems rather easy, and if I remove them I can check if I need oversized bearings in case I order new ones.
My guess is that they are still the original ones (car has 36k on the odometer).
 
Yes, that was my plan. That part seems rather easy, and if I remove them I can check if I need oversized bearings in case I order new ones.
My guess is that they are still the original ones (car has 36k on the odometer).
you cant fit a plus size unless crank is ground to suit ,bearings will be stamped on the back if under size
 
yes,if you do remove any put a pic up if you wouldnt mind

I don't know, but my feeling is that these guys deserve to be sent to retirement ;)
The stamps say
G AX 530361 for the main and
G BX 272075 for the con rod
is there a site to look up these codes?
 

Attachments

  • main.jpg
    main.jpg
    63.9 KB · Views: 162
  • main2.jpg
    main2.jpg
    57.2 KB · Views: 179
original part numbers from the factory were often different to the part numbers used when buying the parts as service items later they will just be std shells,they are worn smooth so arent knocking id just fit a new set on both
 
original part numbers from the factory were often different to the part numbers used when buying the parts as service items later they will just be std shells,they are worn smooth so arent knocking id just fit a new set on both

OK, I will get standard sizes for both.
Another rookie question - the nuts on the bearing shells should also be replaced, I assume. Are they ERC1027?
 
Last edited:
Back
Top