Tonyrodz
Resident Resident
Is the 5.3 crank different then a 6.0 crank?
Mild 6.0L Build Suggestions?
- Thread starter Matthew Jeschke
- Start date
Disclaimer: Links on this page pointing to Amazon, eBay and other sites may include affiliate code. If you click them and make a purchase, we may earn a small commission.
wjburken
Supporting Member
If you get it “Magnafluxed” I’d see if they can do it with Half-Wave DC current. I think it is the best current type to use on a crank shaft. When I designed equipment for Magnaflux, we built a lot of units for checking crank shafts.
Last edited:
OP
OP
Matthew Jeschke
Full Access Member
@Tonyrodz The 5.3L and 6.0L use the same crank so far as I know. Other than there is some wankey difference between the earlier model 5.3L cranks where the pressure plate bolts up. I think that was mentioned earlier in this tread. I have the newer style so I think is exactly the same crank.
@wjburken Thanks! I've been watching LOTS Of youtube on how to check cranks. I'm going to measure and observe what I can. Then if it's good I want to take into machine shop when I have heads rebuilt. I'll have them run that test you mention. I have also been half tempted to buy the Magnaflux paint stuff but it's SUPER expensive.
I'm thinking the failure mode on these cranks and rods isn't so much a bend, but rather a crack, or perhaps a deformed journal? I want to doubly ensure there's no damage to grain of metal such that it creates issues further down the road.
@wjburken Thanks! I've been watching LOTS Of youtube on how to check cranks. I'm going to measure and observe what I can. Then if it's good I want to take into machine shop when I have heads rebuilt. I'll have them run that test you mention. I have also been half tempted to buy the Magnaflux paint stuff but it's SUPER expensive.
I'm thinking the failure mode on these cranks and rods isn't so much a bend, but rather a crack, or perhaps a deformed journal? I want to doubly ensure there's no damage to grain of metal such that it creates issues further down the road.
OP
OP
Matthew Jeschke
Full Access Member
I am going to save a note here. Ordered my wideband for when to tune. It seems dual wideband is pointless... so got single sensor, AEM uego w/ 4.9 bosch sensor. Has a lambda face, as bit easier to tune with a direct ratio.
Don't get 4.2 style sensor isn't as accurate and requires periodic calibration. The 4.9 is self calibrating.
Here's what I want to save. They say cylinder #7 tends to be the leanest. You want to install the sensor closest to the #7 cylinder at the collector. Basically right after collector / manifold merges to downpipe on driver side.
Next bung needs to go on top half of exhaust pipe to avoid it capturing moisture / so it self drains. Best if is at top but not always possible.
Note, if reading lean but then heats up and reads richer... there is a gd chance there are pinhole leaks in welding for wideband bung.
Sent from my SM-A505U using Tapatalk
Don't get 4.2 style sensor isn't as accurate and requires periodic calibration. The 4.9 is self calibrating.
Here's what I want to save. They say cylinder #7 tends to be the leanest. You want to install the sensor closest to the #7 cylinder at the collector. Basically right after collector / manifold merges to downpipe on driver side.
Next bung needs to go on top half of exhaust pipe to avoid it capturing moisture / so it self drains. Best if is at top but not always possible.
Note, if reading lean but then heats up and reads richer... there is a gd chance there are pinhole leaks in welding for wideband bung.
Sent from my SM-A505U using Tapatalk
Tonyrodz
Resident Resident
Do you have a link to the one you bought?
OP
OP
Matthew Jeschke
Full Access Member
The gauge HERE is the one I bought 
It's AEM 30-4110 UEGO kit.
I'd have LOVED something that would simply sticky to the outside of the windshield then patched in through the EGR circuit to get the signal to HP tuners. However, I don't think they make anything like that
This one you have to figure out how to route cables into the cabin which is a royal PITA. You also have to have HP tuners Pro interface with the analog inputs on it (I do have that). However, it's not a very clean setup. Seems nobody makes one like I had hoped for.
To be honest, it crossed my mind... To design a circuit that would allow you to plug these into the existing O2 sensors. Split off a narrow band signal and wide band. Wide band would patch into the EGR, and narrow band would go to the PCM. Or better yet, if there's an unpopulated A2D ports on the PCM that could be used. If only I had more time haha
It's AEM 30-4110 UEGO kit.I'd have LOVED something that would simply sticky to the outside of the windshield then patched in through the EGR circuit to get the signal to HP tuners. However, I don't think they make anything like that
This one you have to figure out how to route cables into the cabin which is a royal PITA. You also have to have HP tuners Pro interface with the analog inputs on it (I do have that). However, it's not a very clean setup. Seems nobody makes one like I had hoped for.
To be honest, it crossed my mind... To design a circuit that would allow you to plug these into the existing O2 sensors. Split off a narrow band signal and wide band. Wide band would patch into the EGR, and narrow band would go to the PCM. Or better yet, if there's an unpopulated A2D ports on the PCM that could be used. If only I had more time haha
OP
OP
Matthew Jeschke
Full Access Member
I ran into a minor hurdle. I'm tearing down and inspecting the used connecting rods I bought. I found a flat surface, the granite in my kitchen. It's flat to within 0.003". I put the connecting rods on it.
Are rods flat enough? Trying to make sure they aren't bent...
One side has no play at all as I push down on the various corners of the rod. The other side has enough play to notice when pushing on the rod. It appears to be less than 0.003" off. Not sure if that is spec or not? It appears that way on two rods I tested. It is also on the same surface of the two rods.
All this aside, when I look closer and feel with my finger, there's some "boogers" on those sides. I attemted cleaning those with B12 chemtool, starter fluid, and even gumout. None had any effect. I almost wonder if is a slight bit of rust. The guy I bought the rods from didn't have them exactly protected / stored well. I've been cleaning everything up, then putting a light coat of WD40 and placing them in ziploc bags.
Maybe it's a none issue, especially if is side that is next to crank as I don't think there's as much contact surface there no? Either way I watched some machine shop videos and they polish with down to 320 grit sandpaper. My thought was to get a piece of scrap granite from work, test to make sure it's flat. Then attach a piece of 400 or higher grit sandpaper to it. Then gently pass the rod over that surface to polish out the bogger.
Changing connecting rod bolts?
I read that the connecting rod bolts can be reused 3 times. This is designed as such so you can check bearing clearances with plasti gauge. I have no clue how many time these bolts have been used. My guess is they've been used once as bearings still have GM markings on them (original bearings). Either way, I think I'd rest better changing them. However, I cannot figure out how to get them out of the cap. They appear pressed in with some sort of sleeve. There must be a way as they sell the bolts.
Are rods flat enough? Trying to make sure they aren't bent...
One side has no play at all as I push down on the various corners of the rod. The other side has enough play to notice when pushing on the rod. It appears to be less than 0.003" off. Not sure if that is spec or not? It appears that way on two rods I tested. It is also on the same surface of the two rods.
All this aside, when I look closer and feel with my finger, there's some "boogers" on those sides. I attemted cleaning those with B12 chemtool, starter fluid, and even gumout. None had any effect. I almost wonder if is a slight bit of rust. The guy I bought the rods from didn't have them exactly protected / stored well. I've been cleaning everything up, then putting a light coat of WD40 and placing them in ziploc bags.
Maybe it's a none issue, especially if is side that is next to crank as I don't think there's as much contact surface there no? Either way I watched some machine shop videos and they polish with down to 320 grit sandpaper. My thought was to get a piece of scrap granite from work, test to make sure it's flat. Then attach a piece of 400 or higher grit sandpaper to it. Then gently pass the rod over that surface to polish out the bogger.
Changing connecting rod bolts?
I read that the connecting rod bolts can be reused 3 times. This is designed as such so you can check bearing clearances with plasti gauge. I have no clue how many time these bolts have been used. My guess is they've been used once as bearings still have GM markings on them (original bearings). Either way, I think I'd rest better changing them. However, I cannot figure out how to get them out of the cap. They appear pressed in with some sort of sleeve. There must be a way as they sell the bolts.
OP
OP
Matthew Jeschke
Full Access Member
Getten r dun. This should be easy tobbn pull!
Sent from my SM-A505U using Tapatalk
Sent from my SM-A505U using Tapatalk
OP
OP
Matthew Jeschke
Full Access Member
Did some more work tearing it down today. Only 2 bell housing bots and the motor mounts holding it in now.
I also ordered the harmonic balancer puller. I think it would be prudent to get a new harmonic balancer? I assume mine has 240,000 miles on it. Looking at these ATI ones, Summit Racing makes a knock off one like them. Otherwise, I'm thinking the stock balancer does a good enough job, just get another GM balancer?
I also ordered the harmonic balancer puller. I think it would be prudent to get a new harmonic balancer? I assume mine has 240,000 miles on it. Looking at these ATI ones, Summit Racing makes a knock off one like them. Otherwise, I'm thinking the stock balancer does a good enough job, just get another GM balancer?
Similar threads
