Started by Rick Biarritz, May 05, 2009, 07:54:50 AM
Quote from: ottoskorzeny on May 09, 2009, 07:03:27 PMRick, please post some photos of your car that has generated such a long discussion.
Quote from: Rick Biarritz on May 09, 2009, 06:15:55 PMDumb question maybe, but what do you mean by the "bell housing"? The only BH I know of is not on the engine block. Am I being dense?
Quote from: ottoskorzeny on May 09, 2009, 05:49:10 PMI was just wondering if there is any drop in replacement engine that will work without cutting, welding, fabricating, etc?I don't own one of these cars nor do I ever intend to. I was just curious if you have to replace an HT400 anyway, is there a substitute that will easily fit and mate with the transmission - or another engine/transmission combo that will work?
Quote from: Chris Conklin #25055 on May 09, 2009, 06:59:19 PMA voice of dissension, and to just be controversial and play the devil's advocate : I haven't any personal ownership experience with this engine but have heard all the issues about them since they were only weeks old. But it seems to me that an engine that has lasted 26 years and traveled quite a few miles can't be too bad an engine. It may have cost a bit much or required more diligence to achieve this life span, but it's been achieved and in this case is in a car that is still very much in marketable condition. I don't know that I could complain about that very much.
Quote from: Mike Jones on May 10, 2009, 12:37:02 PM Not all of these engines were the same. The early engines no doubt were the ones that gave GM most of the headaches, but they got to it to correct the problems. The bigges problem was the migration of the cylinder head on the block that caused head gaskets to fail. Thos was caused by the use of split dowels in the bloc. A revision to solid dowles ans a change on head gasket material pretty much eliminated the problem. Also, there was a high incidence of intake manifold gasket failures. These were actually the most common, but had the effect of dumping coolant into the oil and most that did not really understan these engines quickly pointed to the head gaskets. Tjis was fixed with a change to revised bolts with spring washers, revise torq procedures and a change of material ti impacked graphite. Other problems were worn cams, caused bu coolant leak into the lifter valley from either leaking intake or head gaskets, and wearing distributor gears. An updated distributor drive gear was released to correct this problem. Main bearing knocks were also common. That was caused bu mostly the #1 and #5 bearings having larger than acceptable clearance afterwarm up. This was a function of the expansion rates in aluminum blocks, but was corrected by adding extra eccentricity in the bearings. Many problems were also created by a lack of maintenance. I have it on good authority that many of the returned engine that had 30-50,000 miles still had the original oil filters. Also, because of the aluminum content in the engines, bi-annual coolant changes were required without regard to mileage. I have seen several failed engines with coolant that is brown in colour and has a very high acidic content.Overheating this engine also pretty much spelled it's demise, as many engines were subjected to. One myth, however, is surrounding the porosity of the blocks. That simply was not so, and Mercury Marine had no involvement with this engine whatsoever. As a matter of fact, the identical block casting was used for all HT4100 engines. Some extra ribbing was added during the production of the 4.5 engines to strengthen the block in anticipation of higher outputs in the future, like the 4.9 saw. Mike
Quote from: ottoskorzeny on May 11, 2009, 03:54:15 PMHey Rick, how far do you live from the Great White North? If you're within 500 miles of Kitchener, Ontario, I'd drive on over to Mike's house and let him look over your car!
Quote from: Mike Jones on May 12, 2009, 09:10:35 AM Yeah, that would be fun. I have an HT4100 here that I am rebuilding that you could see the complete internals of. Mike
Quote from: Mike Jones on May 12, 2009, 05:27:12 PM BTW, I'm a homebody and don't travel much. And before you say it, it has absolutely nothing to do with HT4100's. Mike
Quote from: The Tassie Devil(le) (Bruce Reynolds) on May 12, 2009, 10:24:03 PMI can vouch for that.I had to twist both his arms, and legs to get him to take Bronwyn and myself, and our luggage down to Michigan last year.And to top it off, he stayed overnight, in a Foreign Country, and really enjoyed himself to boot.Bruce.
Quote from: Mike Jones on May 13, 2009, 07:45:13 AM....... But now starting in June we have to have passports to enter the US and I have no intention of getting one. Do US residents need one to enter Canada? Mike
Page created in 0.033 seconds with 28 queries.