what actually allows the 5.9 to live at 6k rpm?

joefarmer

joefarmer

MR. Supreme Overlord
Joined
Jul 31, 2006
Messages
6,137
Spill what you know. Bearing failures, damper failures and flexplate failures all point to a harmonics issue. I doubt the answer is more weight to better handle the harmonics since that's just masking the problem. Convince me there is a solution before I throw a dmax at this rail...
 
Subscribed even tho 4k is the Max my engine will see


---
- Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk while pulling a 36ft gooseneck and not paying attention to the road.
 
P1USMint3.JPG
 
You is sorta on to something Brandon.... Ye should look at crankshafts that have more heavy things in spots other than stock.
 
How about a crossplane crankshaft? I know that the idea of changing up firing order was being considered to make duramaxes live at high rpm too....


---
- Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk...... That is why my replies are short and my spelling sucks.
 
I know about full counter weighted cranks. I know I can have a shop in the midwest make me a fully weighted crank for $3200. There's gotta be a better way. I want it light and quick. Is there anything else that would make it hold the RPM besides masking the problem with full circle counter weights?

What about removing ~120g from each piston and running aluminum rods? Then I could take more off the counterweights and gain teh quick?
 
All I can think is special crank. And like you mentioned make up the weight difference with the rods and such.
 
joefarmer said:
Spill what you know. Bearing failures, damper failures and flexplate failures all point to a harmonics issue. I doubt the answer is more weight to better handle the harmonics since that's just masking the problem. Convince me there is a solution before I throw a dmax at this rail...
Click to expand...


Zeus running the show when it goes south? Just a note but seen a while back Bean was having the same issues also running that ECM.

I'd be interested in the cylinder/cylinder timing and make sure that was perfection. Not so easy to do other than taking their word for it, or data logging on a 8 channel scope.

I have not made power pulls at 6000, but lots at 5500. I had a few run-offs when I was tuning the rev limiter on the log to 6000-6200 but was already out of the fuel and load by then.

Seems like that is the magic barrier. Lots of P-pump pullers hitting that 5500 with regular cranks. Again with verified cylinder-cylinder timing.

I thought running the steel pistons I would have seen some horrible bearing wear this last time apart, and the mains and rods were in excellent shape, the rod bearings on the compressive side had some wear like I have always seen. The otherside looked like new, no measurable wear on the pin bushing either.
Fluid-damper + Billet flex.

Lowering the compression considerably and spreading out the peaks has to help as well.
 
Recently, Zeus. Otherwise, ppump. 5500 is easy. 6k seems to be magic like you say. I'm happy hearing the monotherms are happy. I wasn't sure if that's what was causing the latest round of failure.

In timing, you're talking specifically about the injection events starting exactly 120.000 degrees from each other?
 
WUnderwood said:
DSCF092402.jpg
Click to expand...
"I doubt the [true] answer is more weight to better handle the harmonics since that's just masking the problem."

I'm interested in the crossplane crank. Could make it out of 5x14x36 billet instead of 14x14x36 billet. The injectors will fire when they're told.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top