Rebuilding of an XU5J

[Pierre_b 3]

Hello,

 

14 hours ago, DamirGTI said:

No that doesn't look good ... new shells , or modify/grind off the tabs and re-locate them by hand .

If the oil holes on the grooved shells don't line up 100% with the block oil feed holes - file them carefully with an small/thin round file till they line up .

 

Grooved shells always go into the block (ie. - up) .. they're grooved to provide oil feed from the block to the crank journals .

 

Plain/solid into the caps (ie. - down) .. plain/solid surface in order to increase load carrying capacity . 

 

What do you mean by it doesn't look good, because there is grooved bearing, or because despite the combination that I found it seems not ok to you?

 

14 hours ago, DamirGTI said:

 

The locating tabs on the bearing shells are not to secure the shells from moving/wandering off , also they do not secure the shells from spinning round the bore while in use .

There's many engines/blocks of other car brands/makes which do not even have them tabs on the bearings at all .. it's starting to be the "thing of the past" , was meant mainly for the factory facilities for ease of engine/block assembly on the production lines .

 

The "crush" is what keeps the shells securely in the housing bores , as an "press fit" , not the tabs ... need to note , it's very important , when installing the bearing shells in it's housings they must feel springy/snap into place/housing tightly , only then you'll know the "crush" on the shells will be good once the cap is on and torqued up . If they're loose fit in the housing - no good , need to investigate why , make some additional measurements etc.

 

https://www.championbrands.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/11/TB072015-1.pdf

 

Needles to says , surfaces must be spotlessly clean when doing engine rebuild , lint free cloth and lots and lots of brake cleaner fluid/spray .. also check/measure two or three times the same part to be double sure it's right and ready for the assembly .

 

 

D

 

 

Thank you for your return, I read a few years ago about bearing crush in blueprinting books that I just took out of the shelf to read again.

 

His morning I went back to check again the main 1, because of a "protusion" (?) on the picture. In fact it s way better with to grooved bearing.

The result is :

1 : 2 grooved

2 : 1 plain, 1 groove

3 : 2 plain

4 : 2 grooved

5 : 2 grooved.

 

So 7 grooved, 3 plain, like what is supposed to be in the older engine.

 

I also compared the old bearing and the new ones. The locating tab are in the same position, so the bearing end up in the same spot.

 

It seems that the difference between the sets are only the number of grooved and plain, and the caps and block are machined differently during the year, which seems a bit complex an unlikely.

 

For sure I want a grooved one in the block on number 3, for the good lubrification of rods 2 and 3.

 

I am still unsure of what I want for the other ones...

 

Pierre, 4 weeks into the build, and still on the main bearing. This engine is not running soon....

[Leslie green 111]

5 hours ago, Pierre_b said:

Hello,

 

 

 

 

The result is :

1 : 2 grooved

2 : 1 plain, 1 groove

3 : 2 plain

4 : 2 grooved

5 : 2 grooved.

 

So 7 grooved, 3 plain, like what is supposed to be in the older engine.

 

 

Hi Pierre just my opinion but if it was good enough for Peugeot id go with it , anything else is adding work and issues . Sure they changed it later and possibly several times but with the much better quality of modern oils I suspect it will be fine , the only other easy way is to use a later block . If it was for a track car getting thrashed then it might be an issue but for a pampered road car with modest power it should be ok . Removing tangs might allow sideways movement of the shell over time and makes fitting them right much more tricky,maybe if just one per journal it will be fine but  It seems Peugeot has error proofed the fitting of bearings so limiting your choices.

     Either file the tang off or widen the slot of it on that cap in the block  to accept the different bearing which is a bit drastic and can't be undone later.

Edited May 2, 2021 by Leslie green

[DamirGTI 342]

As said - overly obsessive compulsive with bearing types and variations of the same !!

 

They're been changing the main bearings orientation/grade on a monthly/yearly basis - insane . 

 

Anyhow , Citroen BX repair manual offers explanation to this dilemma , and hopefully solution :

 

 

 

 

 

 

D

Edited May 2, 2021 by DamirGTI

[DamirGTI 342]

Now need to find out the production year of that block you're working on , there should be year stamp on the edges of the block on the bottom flywheel side :

 

 

.. last two digits , like '85 in a circle , indicating it's 1985 year made .

 

Failing that , look around the entire block carefully with good lighting and look for the same - two numbers in a circle stamp/embossed in the block .

 

D

Edited May 2, 2021 by DamirGTI

[Zetec7 4]

Interesting topic as I will soon need some parts including bearings.

Early Rover "K" engines had single tang rods and had a history of spinning the bearings. I would never in any circumstances remove a tang from a shell as someone else pointed out just hand file the slot in the crankcase or cap so the shells line up with the oil delivery oil. Word of warning re "King Racing Bearings"

Couple of years back Burtons

[Zetec7 4]

Just now, Zetec7 said:

Interesting topic as I will soon need some parts including bearings.

Early Rover "K" engines had single tang rods and had a history of spinning the bearings. I would never in any circumstances remove a tang from a shell as someone else pointed out just hand file the slot in the crankcase or cap so the shells line up with the oil delivery hole and each other.                      Word of warning re "King Racing Bearings"

Couple of years back Burtons( sorry wrong button) sent me some of these.

They had 003" more clearance than the old bearings that had done 60K miles in a Ford Zetec, Total Crap

 

[DamirGTI 342]

Disagree , and stand up for what i said as non error/dangerous advice .

 

 

D

[Pierre_b 3]

Hello,

 

I have received a second set of main bearings, and I am going to grind a least one of them because I am not happy with two plain on main n°3 (I spun a bearing on the rod number 2, fed but the main n°3, maybe partially for this reason). 

Here's a picture :

 

I will need to grind the whole tab I think. My dremel-like died few months ago, I think it's the right tool for this, I need to buy one to go further on this part of the build.

This morning I changed a bit, and check the ring gaps :

 

 

Cyl 1:

Top : 0,35+

2th : 0,35-

 

Cyl 2:

Top : 0,43/44

2th : 0,35-

 

Cyl 3:

Top : 0,35+

2th : 0,25/0,30

 

Cyl 4:

Top : 0,45

2th : 0,28/0,29

 

The precision of the "measure" increase as I practised. Have check yet the correct range in the haynes manuel. I have tried the top ring from cylinder 2 in cylinder 1, and the gap is still above 0,4, so I think the variation are in the ring, and not in the sleeve. I find that quite odd, I was expecting to be able to switch the ring in cylinder to correct the gap, but, it seems to be not  possible.

 

I have another question, the top ring has no top marking, and I wasn't able to see a side, is that normal?

 

Thank you,

 

Pierre

 

 

[DamirGTI 342]

Which combination of the shells is in this lats set of bearings ? 7 grooved and 3 plain ?

 

Is this block you're working on the same on which you had the spun bearing as well as using the same piston connecting rods ?

If so , need to investigate the reason why that happened ... is it the lubrication problem that caused it , incorrect bearing clearance , incorrect bearing housing/bore diameter/out-of-round , mixed up bearing cap location/position etc. ...

 

If you have all the needed measuring tools and know how to use them , can do that by yourself .. if not , you'll need to take the block to the machinist or preferably someone who rebuilds engines to measure/check it out for you before assembly (i'd strongly suggest you do that if that's the case) ... when and if he finds something wrong , the reason why , shouldn't be problem as mostly anything can be corrected by re-machining (for sure , you certainly wont be able to do that last part by yourself as it asks for special expensive tooling/equipment) .

 

Also , old bearing shells from that block (the spun one and others , preferably all of them) along with the block/connecting rods (still untouched/cleaned) would help finding the reason why that happened in the first place .

 

Other than that , please read these links :

https://www.enginebuildermag.com/2009/11/get-your-bearings/

https://www.enginebuildermag.com/2017/03/engine-bearing-technology-spin-spun-bearings/

https://www.mahle-aftermarket.com/media/local-media-north-america/pdfs-&-thumbnails/catalogs-and-literature/engine-bearings/ceb-2-1114-engine-bearing-failures-brochure.pdf

As for the piston rings , who made them and what does it says on the package of each individual ring or is there any fitting instructions written on paper supplied within the package ?

 

Usually there should be markings indicating top side , can be written TOP , can be an dot , an paint mark .
If there's no markings what so ever , that "should" mean the ring isn't sided meaning it can be fitted either side .. but take a good look at them to verify that's the case . If not by the outer side of the ring , then you need to check the inner side of it for location of the angle/chamfer edge which will indicate fitting position .

Are you using old used liners or new ones ?

 

Gaps :

Top compression ring - 0.2 to 0.4mm
Second - 0.15 to 0.35mm
Oil control ring - 0.3 to 0.5mm

 

When measuring gaps , rings must be square within the liner (use top of the piston , piston crown to line it square) , liner new or honed and lightly oiled , measure them positioned around 10-ish deg. . ATDC in the bore/liner . Measure side clearance on each individual piston/ring too .
When you find best clearance combination on each piston/liner , arrange and mark the rings pairs which you'll be fitting on them .

 

D

Edited May 8, 2021 by DamirGTI

[Apitiser 1 1 Cars]

7 hours ago, DamirGTI said:

 

Gaps :

Top compression ring - 0.2 to 0.4mm
Second - 0.15 to 0.35mm
Oil control ring - 0.3 to 0.5mm

 

Sorry to hijack but I'm doing the exact same thing right now. Just got done with the main bearings and crank fitting. I have a newer xu5 block so grooved side was all on the block side. Sorry your one is being annoying to get right. 

I'm measuring the rings and finding the second ring has a bigger gap than the top one. top on most is around .38-.4mm and the second rings are nearly all .45mm. New liners and not really any difference swapping between them. This is my first time rebuilding so when the numbers aren't right I get anxious. Any help would be appreciated.

 

[DamirGTI 342]

Little bit bigger gaps than specified , in the range of 0.5 to 0.8mm no problem , don't worry it'll be fine especially if rebuilding with new liners .

 

Having narrower gaps on the min. of the specified limit or lower however is dangerous and needs fixing (filing the rings) ... as once the engine is up and running heated up the ring gaps will close/narrow down to as high as 50% , thus once bigger gaps will then became narrower and narrower well , guess what !

 

D

 

 

[Pierre_b 3]

Hello,

On 5/8/2021 at 6:59 PM, DamirGTI said:

 

Which combination of the shells is in this lats set of bearings ? 7 grooved and 3 plain ?

 

In fact I bought a second set of the same, and I am going to use 7 grooved from both and 3 plain, and modify one groove to fit (not sure yet if I let all the groove on the cap side, of if I "converted" some in plain.

 

On 5/8/2021 at 6:59 PM, DamirGTI said:

Is this block you're working on the same on which you had the spun bearing as well as using the same piston connecting rods ?

 

Yes, it's the same block. I kept the rods, they have been check buy an engine machinist, that also change the rod bolts for ARP ones (on my demand, I thought that the engine will be more reliable).

I changed the crank, from a 115 that I bought (and the head, but it's not the subject).

On 5/8/2021 at 6:59 PM, DamirGTI said:

 

If so , need to investigate the reason why that happened ... is it the lubrication problem that caused it , incorrect bearing clearance , incorrect bearing housing/bore diameter/out-of-round , mixed up bearing cap location/position etc. ...

 

I don't really have an idea of why I spun a bearing. I made a top speed attempt after a 3 hours ride on the motorway. It was not long, just reaching almost top speed, and coast, the rod knot was there.

The engine was in the car for a few weeks, before that, I don't know what happened to it, and how long it sat non running.

The only weird think is marks on the oil pump.

 

On 5/8/2021 at 6:59 PM, DamirGTI said:

If you have all the needed measuring tools and know how to use them , can do that by yourself .. if not , you'll need to take the block to the machinist or preferably someone who rebuilds engines to measure/check it out for you before assembly (i'd strongly suggest you do that if that's the case) ... when and if he finds something wrong , the reason why , shouldn't be problem as mostly anything can be corrected by re-machining (for sure , you certainly wont be able to do that last part by yourself as it asks for special expensive tooling/equipment) .

 

Also , old bearing shells from that block (the spun one and others , preferably all of them) along with the block/connecting rods (still untouched/cleaned) would help finding the reason why that happened in the first place .

 

I first disassembled the engine in 2003/2004, and the last time the parts where in the engine machinist shop was in 2012, so it's a bit confused in my memory, but the machinist didn't find anything wrong.

 

On 5/8/2021 at 6:59 PM, DamirGTI said:

Other than that , please read these links :

https://www.enginebuildermag.com/2009/11/get-your-bearings/

https://www.enginebuildermag.com/2017/03/engine-bearing-technology-spin-spun-bearings/

https://www.mahle-aftermarket.com/media/local-media-north-america/pdfs-&-thumbnails/catalogs-and-literature/engine-bearings/ceb-2-1114-engine-bearing-failures-brochure.pdf

As for the piston rings , who made them and what does it says on the package of each individual ring or is there any fitting instructions written on paper supplied within the package ?

 

They were provided with the piston I guess, the pistons are Mahle. No instructions provided by the engine shop.

 

On 5/8/2021 at 6:59 PM, DamirGTI said:

 

Usually there should be markings indicating top side , can be written TOP , can be an dot , an paint mark .
If there's no markings what so ever , that "should" mean the ring isn't sided meaning it can be fitted either side .. but take a good look at them to verify that's the case . If not by the outer side of the ring , then you need to check the inner side of it for location of the angle/chamfer edge which will indicate fitting position .

 

I can't see any diffence on the top ring on the inner or outer side. The second, the difference is obvious, and there is a top marking.

On 5/8/2021 at 6:59 PM, DamirGTI said:

 

Are you using old used liners or new ones ?

 

Old used liners, check and honed by the machinist.

 

On 5/8/2021 at 6:59 PM, DamirGTI said:

Gaps :

Top compression ring - 0.2 to 0.4mm
Second - 0.15 to 0.35mm
Oil control ring - 0.3 to 0.5mm

 

When measuring gaps , rings must be square within the liner (use top of the piston , piston crown to line it square) , liner new or honed and lightly oiled , measure them positioned around 10-ish deg. . ATDC in the bore/liner . Measure side clearance on each individual piston/ring too .
When you find best clearance combination on each piston/liner , arrange and mark the rings pairs which you'll be fitting on them .

 

D

 

I didn't check the oil control ring, but for the other ones, I am in the ballpark.

 

Thank you again for all the info you provide, the 3 links are really interesting.

 

Pierre

 

[DamirGTI 342]

Top compression ring is then likely "barrel face" type .

 

Just check the inside edge of the top compression rings , if there's chamfered edge present (i marked it with three black dots) :

 

 

 

... if so , then need to fit the rings with that chamfered edge facing up .

 

 

D

[Pierre_b 3]

Ok, I'll check next time. This week end is going to be a break I think, so probably in two weeks.

 

Pierre

 

 

[Pierre_b 3]

Hello,

 

Finally, I went this morning, I wanted to be sure.

 

 

On the left is the top ring, on the right is the second ring

 

 

 

On this picture, I turn them upside down.

 

On the first ring, there is a symmetrical notch on the cylinder side. And they are dirty, there is some cleaning to be done.

 

Just for fun, I also tried 2 tools that I received this week :

 

 

 

They both work really well !

 

Next

 

[Pierre_b 3]

Hello,

After a bit of a break, I went back to the shed this morning, and lapped, 4 of the valves :

`

 

It was freshly grinded by the machinist, but because it sat so many years, it was dirty, maybe beginning of rust, so I decided to lap them. The exhaust valves and seats looks ok, the admission valves also, but the admission seat have some spots where the grey is lighter, I don't know if it can be seen on the following picture :

 

I don't know if I will insist or if it's not a concern.

 

I also received my second set of main bearing, and I tried to grind the tab of a grooved shell. It looked uglier in picture (but it's not pretty for sure). I don't have time to tried them in the block yet :

 

 

Some more lapping to do, the protusion of the liner to check, and then I will bring the block and head to the car wash for a cleanup.

 

Pierre

 

[Zetec7 4]

You do know that tab is the only thing stopping the shell from spinning in the housing? If those are the only shells available it would be better to remove a small amount from the block/ cap to allow the bearing to sit in the housing.

The tang you have removed always should line up with a flat surface on the other side of the housing. You can often see signs where those tangs have  made slight marks on the housings where they have put load on the faces if the housings have not provided the pinch required to hold them tight enough.

[ArthurH 7]

I have found this thread very useful, particularly the Haynes BX excerpt and Pierre's detailed analysis.

 

I too am building a XU5 engine and now realise the significance of the engine manufacture date relating to which set of mains shells it should be fitted with.

 

I haven't yet found any circled two-digit code on the engine, although it does have many circled single-digit and single-letter stamps in the two areas circled by Damir above

 

The tag riveted to the top of the block says "B6D", but I don't know which date range that is indicating*.  When I stripped it for its end-of-season rebuild, it had 5+5 and they look in good condition - however, it was me that fitted them, so I don't know if they were correct then!  From the date, should I fit 5+5, 6+4 or 7+3?

 

*I'm sure the answer to that is already on this forum - but it is eluding my searches...

[Pierre_b 3]

Hello, it's been a while, but if I remember correctly, the plain and grooved bearing locating tabs are offset. So you can't put a plain in place of a grooved bearing, that why I had to grind a tab to put a grooved in place of a plain bearing. You can check my theory by trying another combination. The 5+5 should be the good one.

I am interested to see if my theory is right, and thank you for the post, I am going to go in my shed, and see where I left my engine 3 years ago...

 

Pierre

[ArthurH 7]

I did go for the 5 + 5,

 

I now have another issue.  As I fit the caps (Main and Big end) even prior to final torquing - I continually rotate the crank to ensure it continues to rotate freely.  It does; and they are now fully tightened, but there is a huge amount of 'stiction' that I have never noticed on any previous rebuild.  It takes a LOT of effort to start the crank turning (via a socket on the pulley bolt, but once turning, only minimal effort is needed to keep it turning.  It doesn't matter where I stop the crank, the pistons could be at TDC or halfway along the bores, the huge stiction is always there.  I both liberally lubricated the shells with oil and squirted more into the crankshaft drillings for it to seep into the shells.  The only thing I can think of is that it is very cold in the garage.  But I thought I'd ask the question before continuing with the build.

 

On a related note,  when I strip an engine, I'm quite particular about maintaining the orientation of the caps, but this time had a small mishap that may have mixed them.  The mains are easy enough, not only numbered but have the 'darts' that face the distributor end of the engine.  The BE caps are numbered, can I assume that for both mains and BE, the correct fitment is so the shells are tang to tang?

 

[welshpug 1,661]

Loosen one cap at a time until the sticktion goes away.

[ArthurH 7]

Thanks Mei, I thought I'd start with Mains no2.  Loosening it made no difference.  But removing it significantly reduced the stiction - pointing at the thrust washers.  I managed to slide out the other two upper thrust washers and found the problem.  The correct thickness is (I believe) 2.329mm.  I had measured these new Mahl washers at a few points on each washer before fitting them - all looked ok.  A more thorough measuring found areas on each washer near the chamfers that were up to 2.370 thick!  It looks like some form of manufacturing defect.  Only one of the original washers had any measurable wear so I swapped that one for the best of the new ones.

 

There is some stiction, but I would describe it as 'what you would expect'.

 

What is particularly galling, is I wasn't originally going to replace the thrust washers, but was so annoyed at having to pay the high Autodoc postage on the clutch arm bushes that I decided to go for them as well.  Turns out everything in that order was faulty!

 

[petert 588]

Hang on a minute. You can’t test the crank with rods/pistons attached. You need to make sure everything is hunky dory with just the mains & thrust bearings before moving forward.

Edited January 28 by petert

[ArthurH 7]

Thanks Peter, this wasn't a full rebuild; the pistons and rods were left in the (clamped) liners.  Is it possible to spin the crank above the BE studs?

[Leslie green 111]

If you have taken the crank out id probably have replaced the rings and liner seals at the same time.

Edited January 28 by Leslie green