New Option for EJ Engines from King Engine Bearings - Page 3

juanmedina · 02-07-2013, 01:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by aboothman

Ya...whats +-.001" in your main clearances

I have the original king bearings and the following clearances where used on my engine:

* Registered users of the site do not see these ads.

Fir3Fighter · 02-07-2013, 02:37 PM

AWDtuning from flower mound Texas is using Kings new bearings in their Stage 5 engine for their Mexico STI. They use it in the Texas mile... I figure they will see how the bearings will do..

kakarot09 · 02-07-2013, 02:50 PM

Most people building these engines professionally use looser clearances on both the mains and rods. Specifically I'm asking has anyone used factory clearances on the new kings? Unless someone says they did it and they failed then I'm doing it.

Thanks Juan btw. I am pretty certain I will be doing it.

mboulton · 02-08-2013, 05:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ILikeBeans

^^^ beat me by THAT much! I'm also putting these in my current build.

MB5382XPG are the mains in standard size, #5 thrust.

CR4125XPG are the rods in standard size, 52mm

Both are available in STDX for .001 extra clearance.

How are the XPG rod bearings different from the original XP line? The mains I understand the differences.

gotsugg · 02-08-2013, 05:52 PM

^^ I have a set of both and they look no different really

jnorth85 · 02-08-2013, 06:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mboulton

How are the XPG rod bearings different from the original XP line? The mains I understand the differences.

I was told by king they are identical

ILikeBeans · 02-12-2013, 07:46 PM

I've not seen the previous line so I can't say. As far as stock clearances, what were you thinking of running? I ask because my XPG in standard give .0012 oil clearance - which is within stock range of .0007 - .0018 with a max limit of .0020.

kakarot09 · 02-12-2013, 08:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ILikeBeans

I've not seen the previous line so I can't say. As far as stock clearances, what were you thinking of running? I ask because my XPG in standard give .0125 oil clearance - which is within stock range of .0007 - .018 with a max limit of .020.

I think there are some decimal place discrepancies there but just for clarity, in inches
OEM rod clearance is .0008 to .0018
OEM main clearance is .0004 to .0012
In other words they would like .0008 mains and .0013 rods.
My xpg mains were .0007 on some. I would prefer they be .0012 to .0016 but I've also never seen a failed main bearing on these engines, only failed rod bearings. So I was curious if anyone had run these particular bearings that tight on the mains.

ILikeBeans · 02-12-2013, 08:39 PM

Discrepancies indeed, corrected.

If it weren't for the 11mm pump I plan on running, I wouldn't be scared of .0012 on the rods. I think I'll have the crank polished down to give .0016 - .0018 though.

kakarot09 · 02-12-2013, 09:07 PM

I ran .0011 to .0013 rods on a 2.0 last time. That was with .002 clearance for the #3 main and using acl bearings or maybe clevite I can't remember. They weren't 360 grooved but I think with these 360 grooves .0012 rods will be just fine unless you're revving it high. Pretty comfortable with that to 7500. Past that I'd open them.

ILikeBeans · 02-12-2013, 09:15 PM

It won't see more than that *most* of the time, but it should still have breath at 8200 and may see that on occasion if I need to stretch a gear.

kakarot09 · 02-12-2013, 10:43 PM

Yeah for that I'd run them looser like you already planned.

kakarot09 · 02-21-2013, 04:08 PM

Well, I was debating using the bearings that tight but the way the bores measured has put a hold on my personal engine. I had the mains align honed and cylinders honed, but the cylinders aren't round with my torque plate. Can't really do anything until the machine shop has a chance to verify that my torque plate has the same results as theirs on a different engine, (cheaper to ship a torque plate than a whole block and torque plate) and then also they will likely want to double check my findings on the block if the torque plate results are the same. I know I would if I were them. However, I have another engine that I'm building for someone else now. I measured the main clearances at .0022-.0024 with a used not align honed block and used crank. I ordered a set of the .026 tighter mains now. I haven't measured rods yet because they didn't get here until yesterday. I think the tighter mains will work out the way I wanted.

ILikeBeans · 02-22-2013, 08:59 PM

I ended up mixing STD and STDX halves to get .0017" on my rods. Machine shops weren't comfortable polishing that much and still keeping the journals flat. This way was cheaper anyway

So I ended up with mains at .0014-.0016 and rods at .0017. I'm happy with that.

Serkan · 02-23-2013, 09:08 PM

So anyone running the new King mains with some significant mileage ?

02-12-2013, 07:46 PM	#57
ILikeBeans Scooby Newbie Member#: 173053 Join Date: Feb 2008 Chapter/Region: MWSOC Location: St Paul, MN Vehicle: 06 WRB WRX NF Performance!	I've not seen the previous line so I can't say. As far as stock clearances, what were you thinking of running? I ask because my XPG in standard give .0012 oil clearance - which is within stock range of .0007 - .0018 with a max limit of .0020. Last edited by ILikeBeans; 02-12-2013 at 08:36 PM.

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

02-07-2013, 02:37 PM	#52
Fir3Fighter Scooby Newbie Member#: 316780 Join Date: Apr 2012 Chapter/Region: MAIC Location: Parkersburg, WV Vehicle: 2003 Impreza WRX Silver	AWDtuning from flower mound Texas is using Kings new bearings in their Stage 5 engine for their Mexico STI. They use it in the Texas mile... I figure they will see how the bearings will do..

02-07-2013, 02:50 PM	#53
kakarot09 Scooby Specialist Member#: 182375 Join Date: Jun 2008 Chapter/Region: SWIC Location: Northern Nevada Vehicle: 08 Sti Wrbm	Most people building these engines professionally use looser clearances on both the mains and rods. Specifically I'm asking has anyone used factory clearances on the new kings? Unless someone says they did it and they failed then I'm doing it. Thanks Juan btw. I am pretty certain I will be doing it.

02-08-2013, 05:52 PM	#55
gotsugg Scooby Specialist Member#: 204014 Join Date: Feb 2009 Chapter/Region: South East Location: Little Rock Vehicle: 02 Bugeye Rotated, HTA3582, E85	^^ I have a set of both and they look no different really

02-12-2013, 08:39 PM	#59
ILikeBeans Scooby Newbie Member#: 173053 Join Date: Feb 2008 Chapter/Region: MWSOC Location: St Paul, MN Vehicle: 06 WRB WRX NF Performance!	Discrepancies indeed, corrected. If it weren't for the 11mm pump I plan on running, I wouldn't be scared of .0012 on the rods. I think I'll have the crank polished down to give .0016 - .0018 though.

02-12-2013, 09:07 PM	#60
kakarot09 Scooby Specialist Member#: 182375 Join Date: Jun 2008 Chapter/Region: SWIC Location: Northern Nevada Vehicle: 08 Sti Wrbm	I ran .0011 to .0013 rods on a 2.0 last time. That was with .002 clearance for the #3 main and using acl bearings or maybe clevite I can't remember. They weren't 360 grooved but I think with these 360 grooves .0012 rods will be just fine unless you're revving it high. Pretty comfortable with that to 7500. Past that I'd open them.

02-12-2013, 09:15 PM	#61
ILikeBeans Scooby Newbie Member#: 173053 Join Date: Feb 2008 Chapter/Region: MWSOC Location: St Paul, MN Vehicle: 06 WRB WRX NF Performance!	It won't see more than that most of the time, but it should still have breath at 8200 and may see that on occasion if I need to stretch a gear.

02-12-2013, 10:43 PM	#62
kakarot09 Scooby Specialist Member#: 182375 Join Date: Jun 2008 Chapter/Region: SWIC Location: Northern Nevada Vehicle: 08 Sti Wrbm	Yeah for that I'd run them looser like you already planned.

02-21-2013, 04:08 PM	#63
kakarot09 Scooby Specialist Member#: 182375 Join Date: Jun 2008 Chapter/Region: SWIC Location: Northern Nevada Vehicle: 08 Sti Wrbm	Well, I was debating using the bearings that tight but the way the bores measured has put a hold on my personal engine. I had the mains align honed and cylinders honed, but the cylinders aren't round with my torque plate. Can't really do anything until the machine shop has a chance to verify that my torque plate has the same results as theirs on a different engine, (cheaper to ship a torque plate than a whole block and torque plate) and then also they will likely want to double check my findings on the block if the torque plate results are the same. I know I would if I were them. However, I have another engine that I'm building for someone else now. I measured the main clearances at .0022-.0024 with a used not align honed block and used crank. I ordered a set of the .026 tighter mains now. I haven't measured rods yet because they didn't get here until yesterday. I think the tighter mains will work out the way I wanted.

02-22-2013, 08:59 PM	#64
ILikeBeans Scooby Newbie Member#: 173053 Join Date: Feb 2008 Chapter/Region: MWSOC Location: St Paul, MN Vehicle: 06 WRB WRX NF Performance!	I ended up mixing STD and STDX halves to get .0017" on my rods. Machine shops weren't comfortable polishing that much and still keeping the journals flat. This way was cheaper anyway So I ended up with mains at .0014-.0016 and rods at .0017. I'm happy with that.

02-23-2013, 09:08 PM	#65
Serkan Scooby Specialist Member#: 180514 Join Date: May 2008 Chapter/Region: E. Canada Location: Windsor Vehicle: 2004 Sti White	So anyone running the new King mains with some significant mileage ?