Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

Hello about a year ago i had one of my big bearings go . I had them all replaced and a good condition second hand crank shaft installed . All was fine until a couple of weeks ago when my car started to have a miss when i really put my foot down but it would go back to normal about ten seconds after. But then i was just driving normally oneday and it suddenly started to miss permanantely . i changed spark plugs and it was still there i played with coil packs found out the noise of the engine would stay the same with number 6 plug . so changed front coil with back and it still stayed the same so it wasnt coilpack. At this stage i couldnt figure it out so i took it to a mechanic. He beleives that the piston has hit the spark plug and thinks its a big end bearing gone again. The cars oil pressure was fine and had no knock from the motor or flashing dash lights like last time . So im just wondering if anyone has had a similar problem. or has a better idea of what could be going on?

If it is another bearing there must be something wrong with my motor . im only running stock boost . Mechanicsaid i either get a second hand bottom end or just get new bearings. rb30 bottom end could be an idea too?

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/440753-piston-hit-number-6-spark-plug/
Share on other sites

Why not try unplugging number 6 injector? That would be the obvious next step for me.

I don't understand how the rod could stretch that much to hit the plug. Even if it did, the problem would not have been intermittent in the first place.

I have seen pistons hit the head, and it was making a fair noise by that stage. To hit the plug you would have to be running a longer plug than recommended. My suggestion, try another mechanic.

could be hundreds of things before that mate.

coil parck harness could be stuffed on no 6.

soark plug could be cross threaded

head gasket broken, rings gone, head cracked.

a missfire can pe a pita to diagnose.

but if the piston had hit the plug youd know about it....

Yes but BCPR6ES or BKR6EYA or XYZ123AB-C???

And funnily enough all the other letters mean something also. But no one cares....

http://www.ngk.de/fileadmin/templates/Dokumente/EN/downloads_not_used_in_download_area/ngk_zuendkerzen_code_en.pdf

Pull the plug, use a bore scope and have a look around inside.

IF you used the correct length plugs there is no way the piston would close the plug gap, the sides of the piston would hit the head first and you would hear that from a mile away.

Im wondering if you dropped a valve guide in there.....bore scope will soon find out....

Something hit your plug to close it and i highly doubt it was a piston.

There is always a possibility that the last person to fit the plug dropped it off the socket as they were fitting the plug down the hole and it closed the gap considerably, these things can happen when people are careless, ive seen this in the past on a number of engines where they didnt have the rubber sleeve to hold the plug into the socket in good condition and the plug just slides off and drops down into the head closing the gap.

Anyone who has this happen should get the plug out and recheck the gap before putting it back in.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


  • Similar Content

  • Latest Posts

    • Yeah, all the crude is used for fuels and petrochem feedstocks (pesticides, many other chemicals, etc etc). But increasingly over the last few decades, much of the petrochem synthessis has started with methane because NG has been cheaper than oil, cleaner and easier and more consistent to work with, etc etc etc. So it's really had to say what the fraction either way is. Suffice to say - the direct fuels fraction is not insigificant. Heavy transport uses excruciatingly large amounts. Diesel is wasted in jet heaters in North American garages and workshops, thrown down drill holes in quarries, pissed all over the wall to provide electricity to certain outback communities, etc etc. Obviously road transport, and our pet project, recreational consumption camouflaged as road transport, is a smaller fraction of the total liquid HC consumption again. If you're talking aboust Aussie cars' contribution to the absolute total CO2 production of the country, then of course our share of the cubic mile of coal that is used for power generation, metallurgy, etc adds up to a big chunk. Then there is the consumption of timber. Did you know that the production of silicon metal, for example, is done in Australia by using hardwood? And f**king lots and lots and lots of hardwood at that. Until recently, it was f**king jarrah! There are many such sneaky contributors to CO2 production in industry and farming. NG is used in massive quantities in Australia, for power gen, for running huge water pumps (like, 1-2MW sized caterpillar V16 engines running flat out pumping water) for places like mine sites and minerals/metals refineries. And there are just a huge number of those sort of things going on quietly in the background. So NG use is a big fraction of total CO2 production here. I mean, shit, I personally design burners that are used in furnaces here in Oz that use multiple MW of gas all day every day. The largest such that I've done (not here in Oz) was rated to 150MW. One. Single. Gas burner. In a cement clinker kiln. There are thousands of such things out there in the world. There are double digits of them just here in Oz. (OK< just barely double digits now that a lot of them have shut - and they are all <100MW). But it's all the same to me. People in the car world (like this forum's users) would like to think that you only have to create an industrial capability to replace the fuel that they will be using in 10 years time, and imagine that everyone else will be driving EVs. And while the latter part of that is largely true, the liquid HC fuel industry as a whole is so much more massive than the bit used for cars, that there will be no commercial pressure to produce "renewable" "synthetic" fuels just for cars, when 100x that much would still be being burnt straight from the well. You have to replace it all, or you're not doing what is required. And then you get back to my massive numbers. People don't handle massive numbers at all well. Once you get past about 7 or 8 zeros, it becomes meaningless for most people.
    • @GTSBoy out of the cubic mile of crude oil we burn each year, I wonder how much of that is actually used for providing petrol and diesel.   From memory the figure for cars in Australia, is that they only add up to about 2 to 3% of our CO2 production. Which means something else here is burning a shit tonne of stuff to make CO2, and we're not really straight up burning oil everywhere, so our CO2 production is coming from elsewhere too.   Also we should totally just run thermal energy from deep in the ground. That way we can start to cool the inside of the planet and reverse global warming (PS, this last paragraph is a total piss take)
    • As somebody who works in the energy sector and lives in a subzero climate, i'm convinced EV's will never be the bulk of our transport.  EV battery and vehicle companies over here have been going bankrupt on a weekly basis the last year. 
    • With all the rust on those R32s, how can it even support all the extra weight requirements. Probably end up handling as well as a 1990s Ford Falcon Taxi.
    • Yes...but look at the numbers. There is a tiny tiny fraction of the number of Joules available, compared to what is used/needed. Just because things are "possible" doesn't make them meaningful.
×
×
  • Create New...