IDI "What if..." Durability and build question

[WisdomWarlord]

Thanks for the links 88 Ford.

 

[freebird01]

Im not counting the hypermax build because it seems like vaporware and horse tales to me.

not in the slightest.... it was done...and documented. most pullers and drag racers and not going to just publish everything they did to make something work better/go faster/ make power. just because hypermax never released every little detail on the motor doesn't mean it didn't happen....

that engine was outlawed in truck pulling so they sold it to a local who put it in a drag racing truck. last that was known....straight from hypermax... is the guy tore it down and thats where is ended....apart in some guys barn...

 

[WisdomWarlord]

Actually wood, the number of head bolts can be a very big deal. Very much like the number of lug nuts does. If one head bolt can give 100lbs of clamping force before you rip threads out of the block or snap the bolt or stud, then the only way to get more clamping force is more bolts. That means that, assuming the 6.0 psd and our IDIs have the same clamping force per head bolt, we have 50% more clamping force to hold our heads down.

 

[WisdomWarlord]

Thanks for the history lesson freebird. It still would have been nice for hypermax to help the community. Maybe they could have even made a few bucks along the way.
And as for the guy who tore it down and never ran it again, shame one him! May his diesel always gel and his egt's never run cool!

 

[freebird01]

Actually wood, the number of head bolts can be a very big deal. Very much like the number of lug nuts does. If one head bolt can give 100lbs of clamping force before you rip threads out of the block or snap the bolt or stud, then the only way to get more clamping force is more bolts. That means that, assuming the 6.0 psd and our IDIs have the same clamping force per head bolt, we have 50% more clamping force to hold our heads down.

This is true to a point... it also has a lot to do with the structure of the head and where internal ribs and supports are located as well as cross sectional thickness in parts of the head. keep in mind the 6.9/7.3's were designed with calculators and sliderules. the newer stuff was probably designed with FEA analysis and computer generated heat maps where they can more accurately distribute the clamping pressure and have a better idea what the parts are doing. so even though you may get more clamping pressure on a 6.9/7.3 you get higher point loads and may not be as well distributed (castings move and flex more)...their answer could have been just throw more bolts at it where with the newer engines they are getting the same force but more evenly distributed.,

 

[freebird01]

Thanks for the history lesson freebird. It still would have been nice for hypermax to help the community. Maybe they could have even made a few bucks along the way.
And as for the guy who tore it down and never ran it again, shame one him! May his diesel always gel and his egt's never run cool!

well...they are in the game to make winning motors and sell products and services. charity is a poor business to be in when it comes to the diesel world. and i agree on the new owner....shame on him? maybe... but its hard to say that without knowing his side of things.... plenty of other builds looked promising but went south over the years and guys have given up on them. everyone has their spending/frustration limit lol

 

[WisdomWarlord]

No, I'm sorry. I reject your reality and substitute my own. I can't agree that the newer designs could be better, no matter how true it is. No, my sliderule designed smoker is better. Unless we want to talk emissions. But if thats the case, I'll just stomp the throttle and drown you out with noise and smoke! Lol

 

[freebird01]

well all i can say what i wrote is my personal opinion and not 100% known fact of what international actually did, I can say that I am definitely qualified to comment. I have been involved in engineering and design going on 8+ years and have used FEA for failure analysis and understand that it works. companies such as ford,gm,international, etc have a much larger bankroll for engineering then the companies that I've worked for and are able to be a bit more accurate with their design then they did even 10 years ago. These engines are going on what? 25 years old? the idea most of the time back then is calculate the **** out of a problem then hold your thumb to the wind and if it fails make it heavier rather then fix the problem.

where the biggest difference in today vs yesteryear is the bean counters (accounts) have much more pull when it comes to engineering. So most products today end up being built not for longevity but for a specific life with little to no margin for error. when it comes to engines... alot of times (as seen with the 6.0) they are already designed to a limit. When you exceed that limit you have more issues then you used to with older stuff because of cost cutting measures. Some are worse then others...

but to just blindly turn and say i reject engineering and numbers is well....

long story short is 100% the design COULD be better... the issue where they are not are $$ driven not engineering driven. in the past it was easier to convince upper management that we need to beef something up...now a days when that's said the engineers get lambasted for costing the shareholders more money. only when both engineering and accounting are satisfied is when you have a winner in this day and age...

 

[riotwarrior]

Ok this is super simple if you stop, think, do some math, think some more.....

TO THE OP....lets go with yer assumption of all fuel taken care of, and now your question of durability.

I've not done this nor will I however I've seen what I've seen both BB gassers SB gassers and some diesels and our IDI engines!

So here we go, BOTTOM to TOP!

Take a look at the bottom end,

- Four full length main bolts per main bearing on all 5 main bearings!
- grooved upper mains, non grooved lower main bearings...very important! If you don't know why, research and learn why I'm not hear to explain, just providing some facts and information to digest
- Forged steel crank IIRC with approximately 3" main journals and 2.5" rod journals, nearly 3/4" thick web between those! Well counter weighted and cross drilled for oiling!
- Incredible oiling system with hi flow pump and cooling system integrated into it from factory!
- oil cooling jets to cool underside of piston domes, and provide some lube for wrist pins
- Forged I beam connecting rods, not sintered metal rods...
- either 28mm or 33mm wrist pins, depends on NA or Turbo engine!

That about sums up the lower end, compare that to a BBF or BBD or BBC gasser what horse power can those hold and sustain?

Pistons,

Not much here, but can have the pin placed higher in pitson to lower compression, can machine some off top to lessen comp more if needed, or cut some small valve reliefs, I'd suggest ceramic coating of top of piston if any work is done!

Now for top end, the

- Heads do outflow a 6.0, there is data on it, research it, I won't post it!
- Heads having the 6 bolts do clamp more evenly and with better retention than a 6.0 so Studs make a big difference
- BLOCK Deck has counter sunk head bolt threads to counter act pulling threads!
- Iconel exhaust valves to reduce heat related problems
- precups are also Iconel, super hard! difficult to machine thus, the problem with O ringing head. May want to consider O ring block deck instead!

So as it stands the block is really well built with little to no known issues other than cavitation from poor coolant or the ubiquitous core plugs.

Good cooling system

Thus IMHO and I'm not genius here but may have some clue, these engines bottom end can handle 5-600 HP reliably and more if some subtle mods done!

So, fuel yer ass away and show us the money honey, we are waiting with baited breath on this new fandangled injection setup you theorizing about!

BTW, peak power is rarely sustained as in a 500 mile race say like Daytona, usually you only run peak for short bursts hills, pulling etc and rarely at full power then.

JM2CW

Al

 

[idiabuse]

A Banks turbo kit will not make 250hp. They are too inefficient at those boost levels. You will want to look for a bigger turbo for sure. The only replacements that I know of thus far are the turbos that Mel is producing and the A3k that R&D Performance has to replace the ATS turbo kits.

You mean remove my Sidewinder and bolt in a A3K or Mel spec unit?
Those will fit the BANKS turbine mount?


Javier

 

[Wood]

Ok this is super simple if you stop, think, do some math, think some more.....

TO THE OP....lets go with yer assumption of all fuel taken care of, and now your question of durability.

I've not done this nor will I however I've seen what I've seen both BB gassers SB gassers and some diesels and our IDI engines!

So here we go, BOTTOM to TOP!

Take a look at the bottom end,

- Four full length main bolts per main bearing on all 5 main bearings!
- grooved upper mains, non grooved lower main bearings...very important! If you don't know why, research and learn why I'm not hear to explain, just providing some facts and information to digest
- Forged steel crank IIRC with approximately 3" main journals and 2.5" rod journals, nearly 3/4" thick web between those! Well counter weighted and cross drilled for oiling!
- Incredible oiling system with hi flow pump and cooling system integrated into it from factory!
- oil cooling jets to cool underside of piston domes, and provide some lube for wrist pins
- Forged I beam connecting rods, not sintered metal rods...
- either 28mm or 33mm wrist pins, depends on NA or Turbo engine!

That about sums up the lower end, compare that to a BBF or BBD or BBC gasser what horse power can those hold and sustain?

Pistons,

Not much here, but can have the pin placed higher in pitson to lower compression, can machine some off top to lessen comp more if needed, or cut some small valve reliefs, I'd suggest ceramic coating of top of piston if any work is done!

Now for top end, the

- Heads do outflow a 6.0, there is data on it, research it, I won't post it!
- Heads having the 6 bolts do clamp more evenly and with better retention than a 6.0 so Studs make a big difference
- BLOCK Deck has counter sunk head bolt threads to counter act pulling threads!
- Iconel exhaust valves to reduce heat related problems
- precups are also Iconel, super hard! difficult to machine thus, the problem with O ringing head. May want to consider O ring block deck instead!

So as it stands the block is really well built with little to no known issues other than cavitation from poor coolant or the ubiquitous core plugs.

Good cooling system

Thus IMHO and I'm not genius here but may have some clue, these engines bottom end can handle 5-600 HP reliably and more if some subtle mods done!

So, fuel yer ass away and show us the money honey, we are waiting with baited breath on this new fandangled injection setup you theorizing about!

BTW, peak power is rarely sustained as in a 500 mile race say like Daytona, usually you only run peak for short bursts hills, pulling etc and rarely at full power then.

JM2CW

Al

look at this guy... nice info.

 

[WisdomWarlord]

Wow riotwarrior, that's the best breakdown and explanation an engine I have ever seen! Thank you.

Based on that, its pretty clear to me that of I can build a 600hp IDI, it will still be a very reliable engine.
Its pretty clear that this engine has not been asked by many to live up to its potential.

So I guess its time to get serious about this fuel system idea of mine!

Based on what I have learned, amd my theories, I'm thinking 500whp is very doable just on the fuel, and an additional 100-200 with a chemical power adder.

 

[88 Ford]

You mean remove my Sidewinder and bolt in a A3K or Mel spec unit?
Those will fit the BANKS turbine mount?


Javier

Yeah the Banks will need to be replaced for more power. From what I have read, the Moose Turbo will be able to replace the Banks with an adapter and I believe he is working on a full kit as well. The R&D A3k is a replacement for the Ats kit and will bolt right on.

 

[88 Ford]

Wow riotwarrior, that's the best breakdown and explanation an engine I have ever seen! Thank you.

Based on that, its pretty clear to me that of I can build a 600hp IDI, it will still be a very reliable engine.
Its pretty clear that this engine has not been asked by many to live up to its potential.

So I guess its time to get serious about this fuel system idea of mine!

Based on what I have learned, amd my theories, I'm thinking 500whp is very doable just on the fuel, and an additional 100-200 with a chemical power adder.

For the fuel for that much power look into an inline IP. The Bosch 8 cylinder p-pump or something similar will work well. Also The V Style pump off a Cat 3208 or a Mach E9 could work as well. Both of those pump styles would give you enough fuel to make 500hp easily.

 

[justinray]

Problem with inline pumps; it's like putting an engine on top of your engine. They're huge.

The Cat 3208 is a hassle because the timing advance is taken care of in the gear instead of in the pump. So you would have to find a way to advance the timing some other way, or somehow adapt the Cat gear.

The Mack E9 pump would likely be tooooooo much. Pumps do have a minimum possible output and this may still be too much for our idi's. even given their relatively large size (7.3 vs 5.9 vs 6.6) they don't hold candle light to an E9.