Finally got the machine work done and began re-assembly. I have two rods that are copper colored. I did not notice this during disassembly. Do they represent the first and last piston on the crank or just evidence that work was done on this engine in its history? Also, is there a proper orientation on the rods themselves? I did see a reference to the part numbers facing the oil rails but these rods have numbers on both sides.
it is a ‘62 (January build) F100 with the 292.
Also, the copper color rods do not the same tiny weep hole on housing on the crank end.

 

During disassembly, if you want it to be original it would help to stamp the parts. For the most part, rods don't care where they are. All the parts need to be the same within grams of each other.

 

Thanks, I did have the engine externally balanced and I did finally find a reference to the rod bearing lock slots go to the outside of the ‘V’. Still unsure about the two rods that are different. Maybe each side if the thrust bearing?

 

The machine shop that balanced the rotating assembly should have labeled sets of Rods, wrist pins, and pistons cyl #1-8. They weigh the entire piston, rod, bearings, pins, rings, and clips to determine the Bob Weight. Bob weight is clamped to the journals and with your flex plate and harmonic balancer the assembly is spun. The counterweights or flywheel and flex plate are drilled to balance the assembly. If you had a heavy piston/rod and flipped it to the journal opposite you can see how this could cause an imbalance. If it's a hone and rebuild it can be reassembled in the order it was torn down. Or, if all of the big ends and small ends of rods and pistons weighed the same you could mix and match. You can use a kitchen scale to check the weight in grams. If the shop tells you it doesn't matter I would suggest doing your best to match heavy pistons with light rods to get best balance possible...then use a different machinist next time.

As for the rods being flipped a certain direction...Yes. check on the big end of the rod for a chamfer where the bearing sits. It may be larger on one side. That side faces the crank counterweight. I'm not familiar with the 292 in particular, so it's possible the chamfers are identical. I got a smokin deal on a freshly assembled 393 stoker Windsor. They had assembled it with 1 rod cap flipped with the small chamfer to the counterweight...seized it up tight and they gave up.

Good luck with the build,

Neil

 

I think if you don't have a shop manual this would be a real good time to buy one. It was common practice for the factory to copper plate the small end of rods with press fit pistons to salvage rods that had been honed a little oversize.

 

The ones I have seen the entire rod has been copper plated, probably easier than just plating the small end and there were probably instances where the big end was out of tolerance as well. My machinist told me that it is a lot more common on Chevy's than Fords, but he gave the same explanation.