Page 16 of 20 FirstFirst 1234567891011121314151617181920 LastLast
Results 151 to 160 of 192

Thread: Announcing the Merc 888

  1. #151
    Team Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Horseshoe Bend, ID
    Posts
    657
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default BRF won't behave

    Quote Originally Posted by Tim Kurcz View Post
    Several attempts to update failed. This one is by iPhone in hopes of getting through. Thanks all for your interest and patience. Master and link rods are complete. Crank train fitting begins this week. If this update gets through, images will follow. Tim

    Tried again with upload failure, both from computer and iPhone. Will attempt to start another thread next week, or ask one of you to post for me. Any volunteers? Email nav27k at Comcast.net
    Thanks!

  2. #152
    Team Member R Austin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    ludington Michigan
    Posts
    248
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Tim

    Email to me and I will try. I have found lately, past month after the site went down, that it very size critical. I have to convert the size of all my pic now.

  3. #153
    Team Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Finland
    Posts
    45
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    This forum softaware needs fixing and updating. I see errors everytime when posting or uploading.

  4. #154
    Team Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Quincy Calif
    Posts
    17
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Another forum I visit does not allow pictures to be posted. Instead we put our pictures on web hosting site and post a link to the picture. Would that work here? In fact I will give it a try.



    There it is.
    kk

  5. #155
    Administrator Ron Hill's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    Tustin, California
    Posts
    3,407
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default Try Posting One Picture at A Time

    Quote Originally Posted by Jippe View Post
    This forum soft ware needs fixing and updating. I see errors every time when posting or uploading.
    Try posting one picture, then go to edit and try again. That's how I post. I wish I knew of better soft ware for sale, but I don't.

    AU, 1957, test picture.
    Attached Images Attached Images  

  6. #156
    Team Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Lake Lanier (North of Atlanta, Georgia)
    Posts
    54
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    The only way my last four pictures would post was after I used Microsoft "Paint" program to reduce the width & height to 25% of the original picture, which put my pictures just under 100 kilobytes... Then it worked.

    Tom

  7. #157
    Team Member R Austin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    ludington Michigan
    Posts
    248
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    I will now try to uoad Tims narrative.

    Many thanks to all readers for your kind input. It's a great demonstration of the power of this forum! As a result, the links will be grounded carefully for tack welding to protect the little B65 pivot pin roller bearing (.375" pin dia.). Also, as you'll see in the images below, a B97 roller bearing (.562" pin dia.) is used for the wrist pin end of the link. As noted, this eliminates the need to heat treat, and guarantees a hardened roller surface.

    The pivot bearing selected is large as possible given space constraints. The wrist pin bearing is .437" wide pressed into in a .446" rod (same width as factory). Factory thrust washers are retained; they are the top-guided rod bearing surfaces. Unless the cylinder bore spacing is off (unlikely),


    From a weight and balance perspective, the factory rods selected were all 164.5 grams (+/- 0.5 g). The 888 modified rods with tab and bearing are 182.0 (+/- .5 g). The first link is 111.0 with wrist pin bearing, and the pin is 18.0 g. So, the combined weight of the tab, link, and pin is 146.5 g (+/-). This is 18 grams less than the factory rod. The question is: Should it be lightened?

    Attachment 60978

    Attachment 60979

    Attachment 60980

  8. #158
    Team Member R Austin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    ludington Michigan
    Posts
    248
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    The balance of the 2nd paragraph. These are uploads for Tim.

    the plan is to support the rod from each end such as not to induce diagonal loading through the journal bearings, and to maintain alignment between the counterweight cheeks. 888 fork rod width is .575", and the space between cheeks is .640", which leaves only .032" clearance per side (crank end play is .010").

    There are serious issues with uploading. Seems to be size issues of text or pics.

  9. #159
    Team Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Finland
    Posts
    45
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Ron Hill View Post
    Try posting one picture, then go to edit and try again. That's how I post. I wish I knew of better soft ware for sale, but I don't.

    AU, 1957, test picture.
    PhpBB or Simple machines forum (SMF). Both free.

  10. #160
    Team Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Indianapolis
    Posts
    90
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Your biggest issue is going to bucking of the new rod. The good thing is that the rod is shorter, and bucking failure is a square of the length so you won't require as much of a section as the OE rods. In looking at the pictures a few pages back you've got a lot more meat in this rod than you will likely need. Remember that bucking is a function of moment of inertia and modulus and not strength. That is the strength isn't an issue for bucking, it's modulus and steel is steel. You could calculate the bucking force necessary for the stock rod and then do the same calculation for your rod and that should tell you the story. If you maintain the same bucking capability you should be fine. If you've still got the rod that is in the picture you can clearly make it into an I beam on one direction or the other. Be careful though, the stock rod increases section near the bottom and that changes the section in the areas where the bending stress is the highest, so that's an issue too.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 6 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 6 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. 75hp merc triple carbs on 40 merc
    By BRzuki in forum Technical Discussion
    Replies: 12
    Last Post: 02-04-2013, 02:18 PM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •