The message to which you are about to reply is shown first. GO TO REPLY FORM



 VIEW    REPLY TO THIS MESSAGE Replies to this message will be emailed.    PRINT   SAVE 

rod width? 140-160

found they were at least .050. wider than the Mitusbishi rods in question.

Well that’s a bit of a disappointment, although if you grind the crank to suit either of the 4G63 rods, the C shaped sides would still be ample to guide the rod, it’s just rather irksome looking.

There is a Mitsubishi rod that is a similar width, within a few thou, from a 2.6 L engine, but the rod length is all wrong.

I know the one I think, the 4G54. It’s a very common engine here, as it was Mitsubishi Australia’s biggest seller for two decades. The head on it is a rather good hemi design. The bad part of the engine is the balance shaft, the block cracks around it, but if you chuck away the shaft & destroke it down to a 90mm stroke with a crank from it’s 2 litre brother, you get an extremely good motor.


--
Looks like I picked the wrong week to quit sniffing glue. - Steve McCroskey






USERNAME
Use "claim to be" below if you don't want to log in.
PASSWORD
I don't have an account. Sign me up.
CLAIM TO BE
Use only if you don't want to login (post anonymously).
ENTER CAPTCHA CODE
This is required for posting anonymously.
OPTIONS notify by email
Available only to user accounts.
SUBJECT
MODEL/YEAR
MESSAGE

DICTIONARY
LABEL(S) +
IMAGE URL *
[IMAGE LIBRARY (UPLOAD/SELECT)]

* = Field is optional.

+ = Enter space delimited labels for this post. An example entry: 240 muffler


©Jarrod Stenberg 1997-2022. All material except where indicated.


All participants agree to these terms.

Brickboard.com is not affiliated with nor sponsored by AB Volvo, Volvo Car Corporation, Volvo Cars of North America, Inc. or Ford Motor Company. Brickboard.com is a Volvo owner/enthusiast site, similar to a club, and does not intend to pose as an official Volvo site. The official Volvo site can be found here.