Mike Lough has me using the basic stock replacement kings for stock 6.0 crank/pro ls hbeams. its what the 5.3 had the last 2 seasons and held up fine at 26lbs. Doing a 3.898 bore iron ls1 with 6.0 crank so no mallory was needed. Std polished crank mike had and balanced for me
I used the Calico coated ACL H-series on a 414 sbc na combo and they are great. With my last few boosted sbe 5.3s at 900hp I've used King XP only because I had some in a package deal I bought. I had good luck with them but was a little more concerned about this 5.3 at around 1100hp and planned to use the HPs. Thanks for the confirmation.
So, King HP for a stock crank?
And King XP for a forged crank?
I put King XP in mine, but I had switched to a Molnar forged crank.
Was looking for a bit more clearance. Zbrown suggested them for the extra clearance.
Sadly, left some shit in the oiling passages and it started making metal. Was obvious when I tore it down.
Was also obvious that even with .025-.027 on the mains things are moving around.
2 and 4 show that. As does 3.
This is an alum L33 block.
Ok so shit flexes. Forged heavier crank less than the stock cast crank? I'm thinking not. Unless it's a CCW crank.
FWIW, I bought both XP std and XP stdX but ended up with the std bearings in the engine. I can use the stdX and get more clearance.
Do the HP come in the slight oversize?
I’ve been using speed pro tri-Metal cs series on my 6.0l, molnar rods, and stock crank deal for about two years. 30 passes, and 2500 street miles at 1020rwhp. Tore it down a couple weeks ago. #1 rod is showing copper (probably from oil starvation at launch) and #3 main (probably from crank flex).
The King HP’s sound like they would be better.
I've used the King HP in my SBF over the last 10 years. When rebuilding the engine during the first 6 years, I could visibly see abnormal wear on the chamfered side of the rod bearings. I didn't know until later, but the rods that really weren't strong enough for the boost levels I ended up running. Finally after 720 runs I found some of the rods themselves had some funky damage during a rebuild. At this time I replaced them with some sturdier Oliver rods.
Here's the point. I never had a King HP rod bearing actually fail even though the rods were flexing under high boost levels enough to cause abnormal wear on the bearings.
Sensitive content, not recommended for those under 18Show Content
Calico coated bearings, stock LS3 style crank, Compstar rods spinning to 7000-7800rpm doing lots of street pulls, LS9 block, about 60-80 1/4 mile track passes and easily 150 1/2 mile passes if you include the street. 3000-4000 miles on it before I snapped the stock crank at 7/8 rod journal (where it is hollow and drilled through after doing a big 1st thru 4th gear burnout and hooking up after letting out of the throttle in gear (T56 Magnum).
This motor had a TC78 on it... then a Precision GTS76 that went 9.20'[email protected] (made just over 1000rwhp maxed out) and now a Precision 88 (T4) (made 1060rwhp at 14psi on e85) that has tons left and went [email protected] with a 1.59 60ft and no traction control and non aggressive boost ramp.
New motor going in with K1 stock stroke and Calico coated bearings again this fall after a 3 year hiatus (self employed and growing my business so no real time for cars).
I decided to try out the King MB5013XP bearings when I redid my 5.3. I installed them and found the clearance to be .0035 . A bit looser than Id like. I put a set of clevite 2199P bearings in and got .0025. I couldn't tell why the kings were looser; I micd the wall thickness of the 2 brands and they were identical to .0001. Its like the Clevites had more crush and were smaller ID when installed. Weird.
I went from a 84mm to 91mm S400 . Both turbos from Forced Induction .
Just put it on the brake for the first time with the track tune .
Only made 7psi @ 4200 rpm no matter what I put on the gate .
The 84 made 11psi very quickly , the 91 takes twice as long to make 7 psi .
So now I wonder...