hipo crank

Tired of racKing your head? Tap in to someone else's experience, just asK for some advice.

hipo crank

Postby WARNER » Sun Oct 23, 2016 11:39 am

I just bought a 289 crank from a trustworthy shelby owner who said it is a hipo. I have 2 other cranks of which 1 is marked as these cranks are with the X and small triangles. What is different on this recent crank is that each rod bearing surface is grooved I presume for better oil flow. This crank doesn't have the hipo markings as the other but does have the hatchet balance. The hipo and standard cranks have smooth non grooved surfaces. Is it a performance shop upgrade or possibly a shelby modification? Can anyone chime in with a theory?
WARNER
AttraKted
 
Posts: 21
Joined: Sat Dec 03, 2011 10:19 am

Re: hipo crank

Postby C6ZZKGT » Sun Oct 23, 2016 12:13 pm

WARNER wrote:I just bought a 289 crank from a trustworthy shelby owner who said it is a hipo. I have 2 other cranks of which 1 is marked as these cranks are with the X and small triangles. What is different on this recent crank is that each rod bearing surface is grooved I presume for better oil flow. This crank doesn't have the hipo markings as the other but does have the hatchet balance. The hipo and standard cranks have smooth non grooved surfaces. Is it a performance shop upgrade or possibly a shelby modification? Can anyone chime in with a theory?


Are you sure that the grooves are not on the main bearing surfaces rather than the rod bearing surfaces as you are stating?

-Fred-
66 K GT Fastback Silver Frost / Black Pony Interior
66 K GT Fastback Signal Flare Red / Black Pony Interior
65 K Coupe Phoenician Yellow / Black Standard Interior
65 A Code 4 speed Ranchero
64 289 4 Speed Falcon Sedan Delivery
66 Corvette 427 Roadster
User avatar
C6ZZKGT
Klassic
 
Posts: 5829
Joined: Fri Nov 25, 2011 10:35 am
Location: Canyon Country, California

Re: hipo crank

Postby WARNER » Mon Oct 24, 2016 8:33 am

The grooves are cut into the main bearings, yes you're right, my bad. They are cut measurably deep.
WARNER
AttraKted
 
Posts: 21
Joined: Sat Dec 03, 2011 10:19 am

Re: hipo crank

Postby C6ZZKGT » Mon Oct 24, 2016 9:01 am

WARNER wrote:The grooves are cut into the main bearings, yes you're right, my bad. They are cut measurably deep.


The grooves in the main bearing surface is a race mod to promote more oil to the rod bearings.

-Fred-
66 K GT Fastback Silver Frost / Black Pony Interior
66 K GT Fastback Signal Flare Red / Black Pony Interior
65 K Coupe Phoenician Yellow / Black Standard Interior
65 A Code 4 speed Ranchero
64 289 4 Speed Falcon Sedan Delivery
66 Corvette 427 Roadster
User avatar
C6ZZKGT
Klassic
 
Posts: 5829
Joined: Fri Nov 25, 2011 10:35 am
Location: Canyon Country, California

Re: hipo crank

Postby WARNER » Mon Oct 24, 2016 10:54 am

So would this require higher oil pressure and a different oil pump?
WARNER
AttraKted
 
Posts: 21
Joined: Sat Dec 03, 2011 10:19 am

Re: hipo crank

Postby C6ZZKGT » Mon Oct 24, 2016 11:19 am

WARNER wrote:So would this require higher oil pressure and a different oil pump?


Maybe a higher volume version but not higher pressure. Here is an example of a high volume pump made by Ford:

http://www.jegs.com/i/Ford-Performance/ ... 2/10002/-1

-Fred-
66 K GT Fastback Silver Frost / Black Pony Interior
66 K GT Fastback Signal Flare Red / Black Pony Interior
65 K Coupe Phoenician Yellow / Black Standard Interior
65 A Code 4 speed Ranchero
64 289 4 Speed Falcon Sedan Delivery
66 Corvette 427 Roadster
User avatar
C6ZZKGT
Klassic
 
Posts: 5829
Joined: Fri Nov 25, 2011 10:35 am
Location: Canyon Country, California

Re: hipo crank

Postby WARNER » Mon Oct 24, 2016 12:01 pm

thanks for the link. Would all/any hipos benefit from this pump?
WARNER
AttraKted
 
Posts: 21
Joined: Sat Dec 03, 2011 10:19 am

Re: hipo crank

Postby WARNER » Mon Oct 24, 2016 12:03 pm

Also does this mod make it a better crank to use than a normal k crank?
WARNER
AttraKted
 
Posts: 21
Joined: Sat Dec 03, 2011 10:19 am

Re: hipo crank

Postby zray » Mon Oct 24, 2016 4:06 pm

HiPo cranks ar not made out of a special metal vs. the regular cranks. They have just been tested to be sure they meet a certain standard. I think HiPo owners would be surprised to know most of the regular Ford cranks will also meet the same standard.

Regarding the oil pump, although it may have been not be absolutely necessary, but I have used a Melling High Volume pump in all my HiPo and Shelby's over the last 20+ years with zero ill effects.

I would reccomends the best Melling high volume pump, not saying the Ford pump is not a fine pump, I just have more experience with the Melling product.. I wonder who is making that Ford branded pump for Ford, ( possibly Melling......)


;)


Note: The Melling high volume pump come with a chrome moly drive shaft


https://www.summitracing.com/parts/mel-10688



Z
Last edited by zray on Mon Oct 24, 2016 6:00 pm, edited 1 time in total.
zray
LunatiK
 
Posts: 847
Joined: Fri Nov 25, 2011 2:07 pm

Re: hipo crank

Postby zray » Mon Oct 24, 2016 5:02 pm

Regarding a modified crankshaft, one that has been grooved on the main bearing journal, or the rod journal either. Non-factory grooves are a trade off to make the crank more suitable for racings need for additional lubrication. It absolutely does weaken the crank. But in a race situation, the cranks are changed often and long life is not a concern. The opposite of what you used want in a street car.

Not saying you couldn't use a grooved crank and not have any problems, but it's just more designed to be raced and not as durable as a non-grooved crank. There's a reason Ford didn't groove cranks that way for all their street cars.


Z
zray
LunatiK
 
Posts: 847
Joined: Fri Nov 25, 2011 2:07 pm

Re: hipo crank

Postby C6ZZKGT » Mon Oct 24, 2016 5:16 pm

Excellent observations, Z.

-Fred-
66 K GT Fastback Silver Frost / Black Pony Interior
66 K GT Fastback Signal Flare Red / Black Pony Interior
65 K Coupe Phoenician Yellow / Black Standard Interior
65 A Code 4 speed Ranchero
64 289 4 Speed Falcon Sedan Delivery
66 Corvette 427 Roadster
User avatar
C6ZZKGT
Klassic
 
Posts: 5829
Joined: Fri Nov 25, 2011 10:35 am
Location: Canyon Country, California

Re: hipo crank

Postby WARNER » Tue Oct 25, 2016 5:39 pm

ok thanks guys, makes sense to me.
WARNER
AttraKted
 
Posts: 21
Joined: Sat Dec 03, 2011 10:19 am

Re: hipo crank

Postby sg66gt » Wed Oct 26, 2016 9:35 am

zray wrote:HiPo cranks ar not made out of a special metal vs. the regular cranks. They have just been tested to be sure they meet a certain standard. I think HiPo owners would be surprised to know most of the regular Ford cranks will also meet the same standard.

Z

According to an e-mail exchange I had with Bob Mannel 10+ years ago and included in changes to his book, there is a difference in Hipo crank material. See comment dated 3-9 http://nebula.wsimg.com/20ebc131370850e ... oworigin=1

Here's a piece of the e-mail with Bob HiPo cranks used the same molds as standard 289 cranks. The difference was in the iron. More nickel and manganese were added. My source indicated that this was not precision work -- that the nickel and manganese were added rather crudely. Seems he mentioned just a shovel full of those metals were added to the molten iron.

The desired effect was to decrease grain size (higher nodularity). Sorta like galvanized metal, the boundary between the grains can be seen at high magnification. So, he said that an area on the counterweight was polished. This allowed a microscope to be rested against the crank and the grains were counted within a circle.


Bob also informed me that he tried to get Tony Gregory to update his book however Tony had no interest. My discussion with Bob took place about the time Tony sold the rights to his book to Marv. I don't know if version 4 reflected these changes or not but according to Bob, he was going to reach out to Marv and try.

From all the genuine Hipo cranks I've seen (not many) and what Bob has seen, they all have a polished area on the rear counterweight. I think I saw a picture of the OP's crank on another forum and didn't see this polished area but as I recall the picture wasn't focused on the rear counterweight either.
sg66gt
AttraKted
 
Posts: 35
Joined: Mon Mar 02, 2015 10:14 am

Re: hipo crank

Postby zray » Wed Oct 26, 2016 12:35 pm

The only point I was trying to make, however inarticulately, was that you can take a regular 289 crankshaft and give it the same brinnell test, as any good manpchine shop, is capable of doing, and it will very likely pass the same test as a HiPo crank. Having had several regular cranks tested in this fashion, I finally gave up on having it done because every crank was testing to the HiPo standard, or better. So it looked like a continual waste of money to get one to "fail" the ONLY special test that Ford gave their crankshafts.


Without trying to disparage any of the experts mentioned, I find it totally incredulous to think they were using a microscope at Ford to determine the grain #'s in the material in the crank. That explanation is non-sensical in that it has nothing to do with the Brinell test that Ford used. This is the specific Brinell test that has been acknowledged by Ford, & universally accepted as the reason for the polished area on the crank along with its "Brinell" identifying indentation.

Quote: "....
Brinell testing is a method of hardness testing using a tungsten carbide ball as the indenter. The indenter is brought into contact with the planar surface of a test specimen and held with a test force for a specified dwell time. The magnitude of the force and the diameter of the ball can vary depending on the material being tested. A typical test (on low alloy steel, for example) uses a 3000kgf force with a 10mm ball.

The Brinell hardness of the material is determined by the diameter of the resulting indentation, measured in at least two perpendicular directions and taken as an average. Harder materials yield smaller indentations.

Brinell hardness can provide useful information about the mechanical properties of the material, such as approximate tensile strength, wear resistance, and ductility.

Source: http://www.msitesting.com/astm-e10-brin ... aQodqywP5g

But there are many such descriptions of Brinell testing that all say the same thing. All of them use ONLY the diameter, and depth of the indentation as the determining factors in interpreting the results of the test.

No microscope, and no counting "the grains within the circle". That just doesn't have anything to do with the Brinell testing that Ford was doing.

Z
zray
LunatiK
 
Posts: 847
Joined: Fri Nov 25, 2011 2:07 pm

Re: hipo crank

Postby sg66gt » Wed Oct 26, 2016 2:45 pm

Full discussion I had with Bob regarding testing is below. Bob was informed that no Brinell or Rockwell test was performed on Hipo cranks which would make sense if they took the time to polish a counterweight. I agree with you that counting grains would be inefficient. Sometime in the past I was speaking with a person familiar with metallurgy and he informed me they likely didn't count grains but instead used a chart comparison see link, second image down: http://www.olympus-ims.com/en/applicati ... -analysis/

Bob's full mail:

Yes, my info comes from a conversation I had with an engineer who worked in the foundry back when 289 HiPos were built.

HiPo cranks used the same molds as standard 289 cranks. The difference was in the iron. More nickel and manganese were added. My source indicated that this was not precision work -- that the nickel and manganese were added rather crudely. Seems he mentioned just a shovel full of those metals were added to the molten iron.

The desired effect was to decrease grain size (higher nodularity). Sorta like galvanized metal, the boundary between the grains can be seen at high magnification. So, he said that an area on the counterweight was polished. This allowed a microscope to be rested against the crank and the grains were counted within a circle. The grain count had to exceed a certain number. If so, the crank could be used in the 289 HiPo. If not, it was used in a standard 289. He could not remember what the grain count had to be or size of the circle. He did specifically say that the cranks were not hardness tested with impact depressions (Rockwell or Brinnell hardness testing).

I could not verify his information, so it should be taken at face value. However, it does explain why every genuine HiPo crank I have seen has the polished counterweight and there are no indentations in this area.

All this information was learned after I published my book and is included in the List of Changes maintained on my website at www.fordsmallblock.com.


A couple other worthwhile points from other e-mails with Bob

- As to the main cap hardness marks, these are for the prototype. None exist on production caps. But, considering the protoype nature of the engine, if hardness marks were to be on a HiPo crank, I would have expected this crank to have them. It did not, but the polished area was there, just like my production HiPo crank.

One more

- I have in my possession two 289 HiPo cranks. One came from my 1963 Fairlane 289 HiPo. The other came from a prototype 289 HiPo engine at Ford (cir. 1964). Both were identifcal in terms of the smooth area on the last counterweight and no evidence of hardness testing. This agreed with what the foundry engineer told me.

I have examined many standard cranks. Many have had the triangle with numbers inside. I was told this was a hardness test and took the info at face value. However, when I asked the foundry engineer about these marks (which were already published in my book), he knew nothing about them.

By-the-way, I weighed the cransk, both standard and 289 HiPo. The HiPo cranks were within the weight variation of the standard 289 cranks. In short, 289 HiPos don't necessarily weigh more -- could be a little more or a little less than standards.

The new info prompted my addition of this info to the list of changes.

Tony Gregory's book was incorrect in regards to there being no difference in the cranks. I talked to Tony about the problems of edition 1 in regards to his book, but he was not interested in what I had to say and repeated the errors in edition 2. ---- Later, edition 3 came out with the same errors as the first two. I had done what I could, but it can be very hard to get someone to correct their mistakes.

P.S. The block main bearing caps in the prototype engine did have hardness test indentations -- small dimples in the face of the cap (two total per cap) about 1/8" in diameter.
sg66gt
AttraKted
 
Posts: 35
Joined: Mon Mar 02, 2015 10:14 am

Re: hipo crank

Postby zray » Wed Oct 26, 2016 4:28 pm

sg66gt wrote:Full discussion I had with Bob regarding testing is below. Bob was informed that no Brinell or Rockwell test was performed on Hipo cranks which would make sense if they took the time to polish a counterweight......"



Again, with all due respect to the authors of these books, this statement flies in the face of all other history of these cars.

Have I seen every HiPo crank ? No, only 10-20 of them over the years. They all had polished end weights and the Brinell divot within the polished area. If that's not Brinell testing , I'd like a reasonable explanation of what I was looking at ?

The polishing is a typical procedure to level the test area, and make the indentation more visible.

Do I think every HiPo crank was Brinel tested, no I don't. Probably a given number from every group set aside to be used in the HiPo engines. But to assert 50 years later that no Brinell testing was done, seems to fly in the face of the prima facie evidence and established history, for no good reason.

Given the preponderance of evidence to the contrary, I have to heavily discount the truthfulness of these remarks by the person who claimed to have been there in the day.


Z
Last edited by zray on Wed Oct 26, 2016 7:47 pm, edited 1 time in total.
zray
LunatiK
 
Posts: 847
Joined: Fri Nov 25, 2011 2:07 pm

Re: hipo crank

Postby sg66gt » Wed Oct 26, 2016 5:33 pm

I see Bob weighed in on this in 2012
viewtopic.php?f=11&t=352
sg66gt
AttraKted
 
Posts: 35
Joined: Mon Mar 02, 2015 10:14 am

Re: hipo crank

Postby SixT5HiPo » Thu Oct 27, 2016 6:31 pm

After all these years, it seems the HiPo crank is still just as controversial as ever!
User avatar
SixT5HiPo
Enforcer!
 
Posts: 6255
Joined: Fri Nov 25, 2011 10:17 pm
Location: Philadelphia, PA

Re: hipo crank

Postby livetoride60 » Sun Dec 25, 2016 3:55 pm

First I'd heard of a Brinell indentation on hipo cranks. I've only read of or seen the polished throw. Mine has the polished throw with no indentation. I know the Brinell mark was common on the hipo flywheels, and is on a couple I have as well as one's I've seen.

From Bob's discussion posted above (http://www.hipomustang.com/hpmx/viewtopic.php?f=11&t=352), seems the change in metallurgy with the cranks had to do with arresting crack development and elasticity...

"To increase nodularity, nickel and magnesium were added. These made the graphite more spherical. This acts as crack arrestors by reducing stress risers. (Flaky graphite has sharp edges that more easily produce cracks.) The spherical graphite also makes the metal more ductile (malleable). It can take more shock loading and twisting without fracturing. (HiPos encounter more shock loads and twists!) These characteristics make the HiPo crank more durable in the harsh environment of high rpm."

...and from below looks like there are standards to measure grain size in metals visually with a special microscope. (ASTM E112 is the one they list as the current dominant one) They could insert comparison grain patterns right into the visual path to the metal, so they could be compared. Interesting. Looks like they do it with image software now for more consistent results.

http://www.olympus-ims.com/en/applications/grain-size-analysis/
'65 K code Fastback, 4sp, San Jose
'66 C code Coupe, C4, Dearborn
'67 Fairlane Convertible, 3sp, 200 I6
User avatar
livetoride60
RidiKulous
 
Posts: 282
Joined: Sun Nov 11, 2012 11:52 am


Return to Koncerns & Troubleshooting

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest