Double stamped: no idea. But I couldn't stop from having a little fun: assembled by Bob Bitchin? If I had to guess, original assembly November 1969? That [I think] meshes with 1970 broadcast codes. Another fine video, as always. I don't think sealant thickness is much concern? Should be enough flex in the girdle to take up that 0.001" or so.
Thanks Pete. Were the main and rod bearing measurements stock? Just curious as I found this on the web - "B = 0.010-in. undersized main and rod bearings"
Very cool
Never seen it done before👍
Informative as usual.
Double stamped: no idea. But I couldn't stop from having a little fun: assembled by Bob Bitchin? If I had to guess, original assembly November 1969? That [I think] meshes with 1970 broadcast codes.
Another fine video, as always. I don't think sealant thickness is much concern? Should be enough flex in the girdle to take up that 0.001" or so.
Thanks for playing Leeerttss make a dope deal. The thickness is only an issue if you put on too much and it squishes out all over the place
A girdle only does one thing and that is to keep the main caps from walking under higher rpm's
Thanks
Just sold my last 440 Mopar to a friend. It will be missed.
Thanks Pete. Were the main and rod bearing measurements stock? Just curious as I found this on the web - "B = 0.010-in. undersized main and rod bearings"
It was a new crank so the bearings were stock
2:10 back?
What if a stud is higher than the pan rail.... What then?
Machine down the bearing cap
Is the pan rail straight?
Yes
probably not, unless it was remachined. the factory machine work on the pan rails is rough & crude.
Better to stay below 650hp or get a aftermarket block.
Good point