2012 Boss 302 Engine - Press Release
8/15/10, 03:58 PM
#61
Post *****
Join Date: December 14, 2007
Location: State of Jefferson Mountains USA
Posts: 19,993
Likes: 0
Received 4 Likes
on
4 Posts
if it were truly forged, then it would take at least the same HP as a true forged Manley Rod, correct?
I believe the advantage to "forged" powdered metal is less waste and less machining to achieve the finished product, and perhaps better inherent balance. The advantage is not strength as most people relate the word "forged" to.
Just trying to learn friend...
Last edited by cdynaco; 8/15/10 at 04:03 PM.
8/15/10, 04:50 PM
#62
FR500 Member
Join Date: July 1, 2008
Location: Oxford, UK
Posts: 3,291
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
8/15/10, 05:18 PM
#63
Cobra R Member
Join Date: September 21, 2004
Posts: 1,664
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
8/15/10, 05:59 PM
#64
Bullitt Member
Join Date: September 8, 2009
Location: San Antonio, TX
Posts: 350
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
Forging is the process of production, sintered steel is the material.
Nowhere in my post did I say they were forged solid steel.
Ford's calling them forged is absolutely correct.
And, if I recall correctly, the connecting rods in the 3.7 V6 are actually a solid steel forging, not sintered steel as in the 5.0.
Nowhere in my post did I say they were forged solid steel.
Ford's calling them forged is absolutely correct.
And, if I recall correctly, the connecting rods in the 3.7 V6 are actually a solid steel forging, not sintered steel as in the 5.0.
8/15/10, 06:14 PM
#65
GTR Member
I gotcha. I think the rub is that the message that is coming across in the literature, right or wrong, is that the rods are forged as in forged steel, or at least strengthened from the stock 5.0 rods. Maybe I'm just not that smart on metallurgy, but I'm still not capturing the advantage of sintering over the standard forging process for the non-Boss rods. Also, attached is the spec sheet for the 5.0and V6, it says the rods are forged steel, which of course is not correct, so I might hazard to guess this is some sort of misprint. Dunno. Thanks for all the info guys, enlightening thread, I like it.
In the description posted talking about the forging of sintered steel for connecting rods that was posted, it talked about the advantages, mostly less machining processes required to finish the production. Initial materials cost was slightly higher but much less machining was required for finishing making the whole cost of producing them less than a solid steel forging.
I would prefer that the rods were solid steel forgings but it is what it is, you either work with it as it comes or you change it afterwards.
8/15/10, 08:33 PM
#66
FR500 Member
Join Date: July 1, 2008
Location: Oxford, UK
Posts: 3,291
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
What you are looking at here is a difference in appearance based upon the way the designers chose to orient the beam. If you would consider the Ford rod to be an 'H' beam, then the Manley rod would be an 'I' beam (an H lying on its side).
If you want to build an engine to a given RPM cost effectively, then it would be important to not add too much weight to the rods, or else you will have to beef up the crank, and possibly the block as well. IT is unlikely that the Manley beam weighs any more than the stock beam.
What the Manley beam does is make better use of the material by making the 'I' larger, but with thinner material. That choice, along with the rotation of the beam, makes producing the part more expensive, because the forging process requires extra steps. The Ford rod can be shaped with two dies (top and bottom), the Manley rod needs dies to come from the sides as well in order to create the sides of the 'I'.
Last edited by PTRocks; 8/15/10 at 08:48 PM.
8/15/10, 09:26 PM
#68
GTR Member
Actually, the manley style rod is an "H" beam forging, while the stock rod is the "I" style forging. If you look at those two capital letters you will see that.
8/15/10, 09:29 PM
#69
GTR Member
Something interesting that is very apparent in this picture is the fractured parting line between the rod body and the cap. This makes for a more precise alignment when the cap is torqued down.
8/17/10, 10:46 AM
#71
GT Member
Join Date: September 8, 2009
Posts: 164
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
ONLY 30HP? That's pretty impressive from a factory engineered and warranted engine that keeps the same displacement. Again, people get so hung up on peak numbers. Maybe it has better power at all RPM's. You know, where 99.9% of your driving is. And a lightened valvetrain will rev a lot faster and be more useful.
http://findarticles.com/p/articles/m.../ai_101939306/
forged powdered metal rods engineering article
What about the mechanical properties of the forged PM rod versus the forged steel rod? "The mechanicals are equal to or better. They are in fact what you want them to be. Name it and we can match nearly any requirements. Powder metal parts always have to overcome this myth of inferiority, but it just isn't there," Letourneau explains.
"In this application the ultimate tensile strength is basically identical and the yield strength superior by some margin. Through the addition of manganese sulfide to the powder, we have a material that is machinable and still has a hardness in the Rockwell (C) 26-27 range. The microstructure is isotropic and lends itself to excellent machinability. We project that tool life is improved by a factor of four to one.
"But because this is a near net shape technology, there isn't that much machining anyway, the capital cost for machining equipment is less, and the dimensional control is much improved. We've completely eliminated weight pads on both ends of the rods and thus the subsequent machining and processing required to meet weight specifications."
The connecting rod for the 7.3L engine is quite different from that for the 6.0L diesel. The 7.3 rod has a straight split on the big end while the 6.0L rod features an angle split On the small end, the 6.0L rod features teepee geometry to provide a larger bearings surface to absorb the high pressures on the underside of the piston pin. The material is a cuprous iron alloy with high carbon and a manganese sulfide additive. Copper content is approximately 3 percent.
forged powdered metal rods engineering article
What about the mechanical properties of the forged PM rod versus the forged steel rod? "The mechanicals are equal to or better. They are in fact what you want them to be. Name it and we can match nearly any requirements. Powder metal parts always have to overcome this myth of inferiority, but it just isn't there," Letourneau explains.
"In this application the ultimate tensile strength is basically identical and the yield strength superior by some margin. Through the addition of manganese sulfide to the powder, we have a material that is machinable and still has a hardness in the Rockwell (C) 26-27 range. The microstructure is isotropic and lends itself to excellent machinability. We project that tool life is improved by a factor of four to one.
"But because this is a near net shape technology, there isn't that much machining anyway, the capital cost for machining equipment is less, and the dimensional control is much improved. We've completely eliminated weight pads on both ends of the rods and thus the subsequent machining and processing required to meet weight specifications."
The connecting rod for the 7.3L engine is quite different from that for the 6.0L diesel. The 7.3 rod has a straight split on the big end while the 6.0L rod features an angle split On the small end, the 6.0L rod features teepee geometry to provide a larger bearings surface to absorb the high pressures on the underside of the piston pin. The material is a cuprous iron alloy with high carbon and a manganese sulfide additive. Copper content is approximately 3 percent.
Mechanical Properties of typical rods. not a particular rod.
......................................Forged Steel......................... Powder Forged
Yield Strength Rp0.2 .........550 N/mm2 ..........................670 N/mm2
Tensile Strength Rm......... 1050 N/mm2.........................1030 N/mm2
Elongation A5 ....................10% ...................................11%
Density p ..........................7.82 g/cm3 min..................... 7.80 g/cm3 min.
Modulus of Elasticity E ........206 GPa ...............................207 GPa
Poisson's Ratio ...................0.294.......................... ......... 0.294
Core Hardness ......................28-34 Rc............................ 21-31 Rc
there are the numbers. those numbers are from the company who makes them. metaldyne
......................................Forged Steel......................... Powder Forged
Yield Strength Rp0.2 .........550 N/mm2 ..........................670 N/mm2
Tensile Strength Rm......... 1050 N/mm2.........................1030 N/mm2
Elongation A5 ....................10% ...................................11%
Density p ..........................7.82 g/cm3 min..................... 7.80 g/cm3 min.
Modulus of Elasticity E ........206 GPa ...............................207 GPa
Poisson's Ratio ...................0.294.......................... ......... 0.294
Core Hardness ......................28-34 Rc............................ 21-31 Rc
there are the numbers. those numbers are from the company who makes them. metaldyne
8/17/10, 10:54 AM
#72
GT Member
Join Date: September 8, 2009
Posts: 164
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
That stock rod photo isn't the 5.0 rod, but I haven't found a comparable shot of it yet. The 5.0 stock rod is beefier, the best shot I've seen so far is this one:
What you are looking at here is a difference in appearance based upon the way the designers chose to orient the beam. If you would consider the Ford rod to be an 'H' beam, then the Manley rod would be an 'I' beam (an H lying on its side).
If you want to build an engine to a given RPM cost effectively, then it would be important to not add too much weight to the rods, or else you will have to beef up the crank, and possibly the block as well. IT is unlikely that the Manley beam weighs any more than the stock beam.
What the Manley beam does is make better use of the material by making the 'I' larger, but with thinner material. That choice, along with the rotation of the beam, makes producing the part more expensive, because the forging process requires extra steps. The Ford rod can be shaped with two dies (top and bottom), the Manley rod needs dies to come from the sides as well in order to create the sides of the 'I'.
What you are looking at here is a difference in appearance based upon the way the designers chose to orient the beam. If you would consider the Ford rod to be an 'H' beam, then the Manley rod would be an 'I' beam (an H lying on its side).
If you want to build an engine to a given RPM cost effectively, then it would be important to not add too much weight to the rods, or else you will have to beef up the crank, and possibly the block as well. IT is unlikely that the Manley beam weighs any more than the stock beam.
What the Manley beam does is make better use of the material by making the 'I' larger, but with thinner material. That choice, along with the rotation of the beam, makes producing the part more expensive, because the forging process requires extra steps. The Ford rod can be shaped with two dies (top and bottom), the Manley rod needs dies to come from the sides as well in order to create the sides of the 'I'.
8/17/10, 11:18 AM
#73
Post *****
Join Date: December 14, 2007
Location: State of Jefferson Mountains USA
Posts: 19,993
Likes: 0
Received 4 Likes
on
4 Posts
Thanx.
So they have the science to be able to "dial in" shapes, balance, and strength. Yet because of plenty of stories of broken PM rods when the 4.6 is taken over 500HP, apparently they just aren't making them as strong as they could for 500+ HP.
So why don't I read where people upgrade to better PM rods rather than always going to forged steel?
So they have the science to be able to "dial in" shapes, balance, and strength. Yet because of plenty of stories of broken PM rods when the 4.6 is taken over 500HP, apparently they just aren't making them as strong as they could for 500+ HP.
So why don't I read where people upgrade to better PM rods rather than always going to forged steel?
Last edited by cdynaco; 8/17/10 at 11:20 AM.
8/17/10, 11:42 AM
#74
GT Member
Join Date: September 8, 2009
Posts: 164
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thanx.
So they have the science to be able to "dial in" shapes, balance, and strength. Yet because of plenty of stories of broken PM rods when the 4.6 is taken over 500HP, apparently they just aren't making them as strong as they could for 500+ HP.
So why don't I read where people upgrade to better PM rods rather than always going to forged steel?
So they have the science to be able to "dial in" shapes, balance, and strength. Yet because of plenty of stories of broken PM rods when the 4.6 is taken over 500HP, apparently they just aren't making them as strong as they could for 500+ HP.
So why don't I read where people upgrade to better PM rods rather than always going to forged steel?
I guess from an OE standpoint it's the better material; better for shaping (less waste), better for machining (refer quoted bit - "The microstructure is isotropic and lends itself to excellent machinability. We project that tool life is improved by a factor of four to one."), and in terms of strength it's not that bad and does the job. It's as good as forged steel from what I can gather. Remember, the GT350, which is blown and has over 550hp, has the same bits.
8/17/10, 08:53 PM
#75
FR500 Member
Join Date: July 1, 2008
Location: Oxford, UK
Posts: 3,291
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
With the complexity of tuning the newer ECU's I wonder how many of blown (up) motors could be attributed to tuner error, vs an inherent weakness of the rods themselves.
I would imagine that more of the relatively inexperienced 'tuners' are working with stock bottom-end 4.6's than with fully built forged rotating assemblies. If a motor lets go, it would be in the tuner's interest to blame the motor, rather than themselves. If this is indeed happening, it would go a way to explaining the rep that powder forged rods now have.
I would imagine that more of the relatively inexperienced 'tuners' are working with stock bottom-end 4.6's than with fully built forged rotating assemblies. If a motor lets go, it would be in the tuner's interest to blame the motor, rather than themselves. If this is indeed happening, it would go a way to explaining the rep that powder forged rods now have.
8/17/10, 08:55 PM
#76
FR500 Member
Join Date: July 1, 2008
Location: Oxford, UK
Posts: 3,291
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Now we can see the rod in the first picture isn't as big as the 5.0 rod.
Last edited by PTRocks; 8/17/10 at 08:56 PM.
8/17/10, 09:19 PM
#78
FR500 Member
Join Date: July 1, 2008
Location: Oxford, UK
Posts: 3,291
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
When you look through the Manley catalog, you will see that 'generally' the H-beam rods are comparable to their I-beam rods when looking at (HP rating / rod weight). There is a slight advantage to the H-beams, but it isn't by much.
11/12/10, 08:13 PM
#79
Member
Join Date: November 12, 2010
Posts: 2
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I was just wondering if anyone here has ever attempted or made a cabin filter or another filters out of a normal home furnace filter. I am looking into doing so, just wanted to know how well it works and if it's worth it.
11/13/10, 05:59 AM
#80
Mach 1 Member
Join Date: October 29, 2010
Location: Florida
Posts: 953
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
no i have not....
But that't about as OFF TOPIC as i have ever seen in ANY forum
and people say I have ADHD LOL!!