oil COnsumption until 1 qt low

-
Dang..... that is like a qt every 100 miles. Sorry... that's very bad oil use. Something is quite wrong. Can you find that exact SCAT crank kit number?

(The one time I used anything more than that at a new build I messed up the end butt of one oil ring expander; burned a qt in 20 miles! Replaced the ring expander and all was good.)
 
all i have is the printed page of part he sent,the item #i gave you,scat 360 stroker,cast steel crank,hyp dish pistons,i beam rods,chrysler 408 kit
 
jdsduster said:
item code=1-9811b1
hypereutectic pistons
Click to expand...
OK, I see your PN now.....that may be the problem... and at least IS a problem. Piston to bore clearance for hypers is around .0015", maybe .002". If it was really bored to .0045"-.005" clearance, that is for forged pistons, and that is a big mistake.
 
jdsduster said:
i have all this documented,new engine ,odometer reads19,035,at 19,252 used 2 quarts,19,352used another quart,19,392 used 1/2 quart.19,481 used 1 quart.19,537 used 1 quart.pulled engine,sent back to builder.builder said all he could find was lack of sealant on rocker arm studs.put it on the dyno smoked bad,pulled the pcv and smoking stopped.he told me to run a catch can.thats where i am at.it still uses oil and smokes,i am just trying to find out why.i dont want to pull the engine again if i dont have to. i said it uses 1 quart then stops,well i quess that is not quite accurate,it doesnt seem to use it as fast,maybe i just dont drive it as much.either way it smokes and uses oil.
Click to expand...
You're using a quart every 100 miles. Yes, you have a problem.
 
Dang. What I would do now is to double-check the data to verify that .0045-.005 piston-to-bore number and the kit. I just don't have the data in front of me and don't want to mistakenly mislead you into wrong and very discouraging conclusion.

If it really looks like hyper pistons in a .0045-.005 clearance was done, then I would pull a head and measure the bore diameters. That would tell you the story for sure. Then there is the question of why, with .003"-004" of extra clearance, the oil use is still so high. It may be that the piston rocking may have prevented the initial ring seal. And, if that bore size mistake was indeed made (a pretty incredible error to make), then the whole bore and honing finish situation is questionable in my mind.

And if the bores were too large to start with, then the only ways I see to to fix that are:
1) to see if a forged piston will fit properly in the existing bores, and check the bore finish and put in that new forged set of pistons with rings. But this probably won't work because you typically don't find forged pistons as light as hypers, and if the piston weights don't match, the engine will be out of balance.
2) Rebore to .040" for new pistons either hypers or forged.

Dang....
 
yea i hear ya,i dont have the skills to do what you are saying.i just dont.ive never rebuilt an engine,let alone a 500 hp small block stroker.i dont know what im going to. thanks
 
I'm gonna check your PN... I see a 1-98011BI for a 416 CID stroker, which I assume is the PN you meant. And it does show KB hyper pistons.

But I cannot figure out what those KB's would be, or the forged ICON pistons that come in the equivalent forged piston kit.

I'll be sure to let you know if I dig up anything.
 
BTW, OP, I thought about this some more, and one story I can relate: I put together an old truck engine once when young and could not afford a rebore and new pistons. The piston to bore clearance was all over the place and some bores clearances were big (like .005" and more for cast pistons which is big). The rings seated 'OK' (as good as you would expect), and it did not burn excess oil amounts, less than a qt in 1000 miles. So this may not be the full oil burning issue in your case.

If you pull the oil filler off the engine and idle it, and you put your hand over the opening, do you feel a lot of air puffing out of the valve cover hole? Just trying to figure up a quick few tests to see if the rings are sealed.

Does the oil smoke come out under all engine operating conditions?

Can you find someone local who can help you with troubleshooting?
 
Im no engine builder by any means, but all is good when its a qt low tells me there is too much oil (or crank) in the pan. Perhaps a different design of pan would solve this.
It seems the pcv is pulling the vapourized oil and the suggestion to use a catch can. Cal me dumb if you wish, but to me the qt low thing seems obvious to me.
 
Tooljunkie said:
Im no engine builder by any means, but all is good when its a qt low tells me there is too much oil (or crank) in the pan. Perhaps a different design of pan would solve this.
It seems the pcv is pulling the vapourized oil and the suggestion to use a catch can. Cal me dumb if you wish, but to me the qt low thing seems obvious to me.
Click to expand...


ITS THE SAME PAN THAT WAS ON A PERFECTLY running engine that i had for 10 years,used o oil
 
part
nm9stheham said:
I'm gonna check your PN... I see a 1-98011BI for a 416 CID stroker, which I assume is the PN you meant. And it does show KB hyper pistons.

But I cannot figure out what those KB's would be, or the forged ICON pistons that come in the equivalent forged piston kit.

I'll be sure to let you know if I dig up anything.
Click to expand...

part # 1-98111b1 is the # builder supplied me with
 
nm9stheham said:
BTW, OP, I thought about this some more, and one story I can relate: I put together an old truck engine once when young and could not afford a rebore and new pistons. The piston to bore clearance was all over the place and some bores clearances were big (like .005" and more for cast pistons which is big). The rings seated 'OK' (as good as you would expect), and it did not burn excess oil amounts, less than a qt in 1000 miles. So this may not be the full oil burning issue in your case.

If you pull the oil filler off the engine and idle it, and you put your hand over the opening, do you feel a lot of air puffing out of the valve cover hole? Just trying to figure up a quick few tests to see if the rings are sealed.

Does the oil smoke come out under all engine operating conditions?

Can you find someone local who can help you with troubleshooting?
Click to expand...


i will do oil filter check this weekend.smokes all the time
 
Same crank too? Same dipstick?

As i said, if it stops using oil at a qt low, then the crank has to be slinging oil.
How many quarts are left, when its a quart low?
 
jdsduster said:
part # 1-98111b1 is the # builder supplied me with
Click to expand...
OK... I shoulda known... that is for a 360 and since you have a Magnum, makes sense. Shows hypereutetctic pistons. 1-98112BI is for forged.

The BI at the end means internally balanced.

SCAT catalog page is here: Rotating Assembly Product Search - SCAT Crankshafts
Enter 'Chrysler' in the 'Make' box and it will show the list of Mopar kits.
 
nm9, I'm a late comer to the thread, but reading thru this: It sounds like he's got the proper bore clearance for the pistons that were used? The OP doesn't have a windage tray in it. It's not leaking it, it's burning it. Maybe improper final bore finish for the rings that were used? Thus not seated properly? As it burns off the oil, the level in the pan gets lower thus not as much is being whipped up by the crank onto the bores so he sees a decrease in the burn? Just tossing out some brain farts here from reading thru this.
 
If the pistons are indeed hypers, I'll bet that's a part of your oil use problem. Too much piston to wall, with a short compression height piston.
 
JDsduster, just so you know, a leakdown test doesn't tell you squat about how the oil rings are working. It only tells you that the compression rings are sealing and if their coated with oil from the oil rings not doing their job even the leakdown test is invalid (IMO). I also agree that the piston to wall clearance is too loose for hyper's
 
You know they make a blow-by tester right? I have one.
It's just a steel ball in a fitted pipe with a calibrated orifice on the bottom and vented at the top.You plumb it to the CC,usually a valve cover, unplug the PCV and then seal the CC. Then you just open the throttle to whatever load or rpm or operating condition you want to simulate, and the ball jumps up and tells you about what's going on in the CC.
Before I got that tester, I used a largeface Vacuum/ fuel-pump pressure tester. It wasn't as accurate cuz the psi divisions were quite close together, and the gauge was heavily damped.

As an FWI
I used to run my 7qt pan with just 5/6 qts in it as my DD. I went to the track once, and put the full 7 in it.Straightline it was fine. I ran a rally cross with it one time with 7 in it, Big mistake. It smoked for twenty minutes until it emptied the mufflers,lol. I went home and modded the breather system, and cut some drainback channels in my brand new Eddies. Problem solved.

More FWI
I used to see this problem all the time in the small engine world. People would overfill the CC and complain that the engine was smoking and under-powered. Hyup, you guessed it too much oil in it.
Up here Canada operates with the metric system. Most of our liquid gallon jugs are actually 3.78 liters, which is 3.3 Imp qts, or 4.14 qts Us. But oil-jugs are 4.4 liters, and starting to be 5 liters/4.4Imp/5.5qts US.
Our cars usually take 5 liters/4.4qts Imp/5.5Usqt.
Our measuring devices are mostly calibrated in metric/Imp. Are you starting to see a pattern here? Hyup, you have to be a scientist or a mathematician, to do an oil-change up here.
Anything that comes in a jug bigger than about a quart/Qt/liter,lol, up here, is now just called a "jug". And we never just pour a jug in until you bring out the calculator and figure out exactly whats what.It's absolute chaos. When gas goes up it's usually by 2,5 or 10 cents a liter which , you know, doesn't sound like much. But converted to Imp, it's a stinking rip-off; 9, 22.75, and 45.5cents a gallonImp. And oil jugs rise and fall by several dollars per jug.
Milk comes in 2-liter jugs and can be over 8 bucks, a 2-liter coke is usually 3.60 or 1.97per quart-Imp/40 ounces or 1.58-quartUS/32 ounces.
Yada Yada,Yada.
Point is, people make mistakes up here all the time. I used pull the cap off, tip the device over, dribble out an appropriate amount of oil and hand it back to the customer and say there go try it now. You can imagine the look on their faces.
 
Last edited:
nm9stheham said:
BTW, OP, I thought about this some more, and one story I can relate: I put together an old truck engine once when young and could not afford a rebore and new pistons. The piston to bore clearance was all over the place and some bores clearances were big (like .005" and more for cast pistons which is big). The rings seated 'OK' (as good as you would expect), and it did not burn excess oil amounts, less than a qt in 1000 miles. So this may not be the full oil burning issue in your case.

If you pull the oil filler off the engine and idle it, and you put your hand over the opening, do you feel a lot of air puffing out of the valve cover hole? Just trying to figure up a quick few tests to see if the rings are sealed.

Does the oil smoke come out under all engine operating conditions?

Can you find someone local who can help you with troubleshooting?
Click to expand...


sorry typo,pulled of oil filler cap,i dont know what you would call a lot of pressure,dont seem like a lot.misty fumes coming out of filler,i mean i can see it coming out

its not over filled with oil
if crank is whipping oil around and my stock windage didnt fit what are options?
 
Last edited:
lgjhn said:
nm9, I'm a late comer to the thread, but reading thru this: It sounds like he's got the proper bore clearance for the pistons that were used? The OP doesn't have a windage tray in it. It's not leaking it, it's burning it. Maybe improper final bore finish for the rings that were used? Thus not seated properly? As it burns off the oil, the level in the pan gets lower thus not as much is being whipped up by the crank onto the bores so he sees a decrease in the burn? Just tossing out some brain farts here from reading thru this.
Click to expand...
Actually it appears to be the opposite.... the bore clearance is significantly too large for the type of pistons used. Hypers will never expand at temp to proper operating clearance with the cold piston-to-bore clearance that was listed. It is just a bad basis for the engine to start with; if it hurt ring seal, I cannot say for sure just talking about it. But if the bore size is indeed wrong, that is a inauspicious sign for thing like bore finish, IMHO.

As for the oil burning dropping off with oil burning off, the detailed list of mileages and oil use posted by the OP do not show that. It does not prove it either way, but it is not at all clear from the oil use documented that the oil use is ceasing when oil had been consumed.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
-

Back
Top