Unhappy 57 Fuelie

[Mike E.]

On Thursday evening,I took the 57 fuelie for a drive. After about 40 minutes on back roads, I hopped on the highway, and after taking it up to 3500 in first and second, I shifted into 3rd, heard a loud bang, saw some smoke, heard a terrible banging, and by the time I put in the clutch, the engine had died.
Long story short--holes on both sides of the oil pan--#6 rod broke and poked through. Lots of damage inside.
I'm still in the tear-down process, but have found the following in the pan:
remnants of one lifter. One valve pushrod, bent. TWO LOBES OF THE CAM.
Has anyone ever experienced that? Yes, it's two lobes of the cam, intact, but beaten up--evidntly they broke out of the cam, and the front of the cam and the back are still up in the block.
Any guess as to what happened inside? Sequence?
It wasn't the original block--seems to be a 548 block restamped some time in the early 80's.

[Dennis C.]

With the incredible good luck you've had...

...over the years, this is just a little burp of reality only we sinners experience. I'm sure someone will chime in with the news they've located the original engine in perfect condition for $5.00 for your '57...

[Mike M.]

Re: With the incredible good luck you've had...

dipstick: how did ya know i just happen to have the original 548 out of mikes 57. just need to know if it was a 250 or 283 hp to pack the stamps in the gang.will gladly ship to mike for 5 gallons of holy water(brewed in milwakee if ya please)mikie

[Mike M.]

Re: Unhappy 57 Fuelie

"sequence of what happened inside": Lucifer getting even. what cast date 548 ya need? mikie

[Mike E.]

Re: With the incredible good luck you've had...

What do you refer to--incredible luck? With my doing 6 church services a week, God knows how to take good care of me!

[Mike Cobine]

Re: Unhappy 57 Fuelie

Hey, deja vu! November, 1983! Dupo, IL, beautiful late fall day, about 60 degrees when I left, that rapidly turned to misty, half-rain and about 35 degrees right after the engine overheated and died in my brother's '69 El Camino SS.

I had to walk home 35 miles in the half-rain, and got ahold of him and another car to go back for it. We were prepared to tow it but it started and ran, so he drove it back.

When we hit East St. Louis, the rod seized, snapped, and went straight up into the camshaft. Broke the cam and thrashed around inside, knocking a chunk of the pan rail, and the piston skirts on both sides. Finally it hit something solid and seized the engine on the onramp to I-70, I-64, and I-55. By this time, it was about 25 degrees and we were having lots of fun.

When we got it home and out, the engine wasn't nearly as bad as we thought. Pan rail was damaged, but it would still seal and there was no oil galley in that area.

You might not have to worry. Lots of internal parts will have to be replaced, and a definite hot tank is in order to clear out everything, but you may get off lighter than you think.

[Mike M.]

Re: Unhappy 57 Fuelie

Mike,
The broken rod (or rods) hit the cam as they slap around and break it. Had a friend who blew a Pontiac 400 in a '67 GTO. That cam came out in 12 pieces and we never did find all of it. But he was taching above 6000 rpm when the first rod let go. A real mess.

Mike

[Clem Z.]

rods are only good for so many cycles

and you extended your limit.

[Mike E.]

Re: rods are only good for so many cycles

But the other 7 have just as many cycles!!! (just being a smart aleck)

[Clem Z.]

Re: rods are only good for so many cycles

then use the remaining 7 in the rebuild.this would be be a good test. let this be a lesson to all you owners with these old original rods,get them out and replace them with new after market ones. this could happen just backing out of the trailer. when the time is up the rod will break. any one out there with a rebuilt engine that did not have the rods magnafluxed and the bolts replaced are living on borrowed time.

[Mike M.]

Re: Unhappy 57 Fuelie

In '76 bought a '73 El Camino with bad engine. No holes in the pan or block, but had 3 pistons at TDC on right bank (the heads were off when I bought the car). Got it cheap. Owner never changed oil; at 75000 miles the built up sludge blocked the oil pump pick-up sufficiently to cause #6 rod to sieze on crank. Rod broke at the bolts leaving enough of it hanging down so that it the crank throw hit it and immediately stopped. When I took the pan off, all of the main bearing caps, except for #'s 1 & 5 were laying in the pan, bearing cap bolts snapped off because the crank bowed as it stopped. Block was OK, but everything else was trash. Sold the block to a roundy-round racer who align bored it and was still racing it in 1980 (two bolt main block). Still got the broken rod with the wrist pin in place. Kept it because it looks like one of those really twisted MoPar 4-speed shifters of the late 60's.

[Joe L.]

Re: Unhappy 57 Fuelie

Mike-----

Very often, when a rod goes, the original "culprit" was a rod bearing failure. That may or may not have been the case here. It doesn't really matter too much at this point, though.

As clem mentions, rods do have a service life. Plus, the 1955-65 Chevy rods were not really all that strong to begin with. They do have the advantage of being forged steel (many rods for other engines of the period were actually cast iron), but they are not particularly strong rods. Chevrolet did not really start making really strong rods for small blocks until about 1969 for 350 cid applications.

If I were rebuilding a 55-67 small block, I would not even consider using the original rods. Aftermarket rods with capscrew cap attachment would be the best. Otherwise, high quality aftermarket rods with ARP WaveLok bolts will be fine. Also, just in case you're so-advised and inclined, ABSOLUTELY DO NOT even consider going to aluminum rods. These are fine for certain classes of racing, but I wouldn't even consider using them on the street. They're expensive, too.

[John H.]

Re: Unhappy 57 Fuelie

This thing happened to me 100 years ago with a '57 fuel injected Belair. I think the root of the problem is the fuel injection siphoning action which deposited fuel into the culprit cylinder. Over time the rod bent a little at a time since it couldn't compress the raw fuel until it went into the failure mode. The rod in my engine broke the cam and punched a few holes in the oil pan - also took a chunk out of the bottom of a cylinder. If you rebuild with the fuel unit - suggest you get one of those electrical shut-off valves that is made for the Rochester injection to prevent similar failure in the future.
John.

[Duke W.]

Re: Unhappy 57 Fuelie

You may be a victim of the early small bearing rod. Many SBs let go because they are weak at the bolt seats. Beginning in '66 a better rod went into production that has a hump of metal near the seat that really improves durability, and this rod is a satisfactory replacement for a medium performance engine.

For SHP, especially mechanical lifter versions, I highly recommend Crower Sportsman rods.

I have a side by side photo of the early and late small bearing rods showing the difference, but don't know how to post them, so if anyone does, e-mail me and I will send you the photo to post.

Failure analysis is a tricky businees as consequential damage can shroud the root cause. If the journal is not in to bad a shape, the rod probably just broke, and the most likely location of the initial failure is near the bolt seat. If the journal or rod big end indicates that the bearing began to seize/spin, the original cause could be oil starvation. Once a bearing begins to sieze/spin it can create enough bending load to break the rod, and the break can either be in the rod beam or at the bolt seat, which is the weak link of the early small bearing rods.

Duke

[Joe L.]

Re: Unhappy 57 Fuelie

John-----

Yes, what you describe is another "phenomenon" associated with these early Rochester mechanical FI engines. It's one of many unpopular "phemomena" associated with these things.

For the life of me, I could never understand what fascinates folks with these contraptions. Once upon a time, the term "fuel injection" had a certain cachet about it. I can understand that part; I was around in the 50s and 60s and I recall it well. However, in today's world, virtually all cars and light trucks have fuel injection so all are "fuel cars" to use a term that 57-65 Corvette FI afficionados are wont to use. Toyota Corollas are "fuel cars", Honda Civics are "fuel cars", Chevrolet Cavaliers are "fuel cars", Nissan Sentras are "fuel cars" and on-and-on. Not only that, but the fuel injection systems of today are infinitely superior to the old Rochester mechanical FI which are completely obsolete relics by comparison.

Even in their heyday they often didn't last long on the car on which they were originally installed. They were just too much trouble for most owners. I took one off of a 1964 Corvette that my brother purchased in 1967 and replaced it with a Holley carb. He was about to get rid of the car when I came up with this solution, but he was a VERY "happy camper" afterward. He ended up keeping the car for a few more years. There were a WHOLE LOT of other folks that did the same thing. Several years ago I purchased a complete 1958 "900R" unit. It looked to be brand new when I got it; it had been sitting in someone's garage since, apprently, just a little while after they purchased new the car that it was originally installed on (by the way, shortly after purchasing it, this was the ONLY Corvette part that I ever sold in my life).

Of course, the Rochester FIs definitely are a curiosity and they certainly have a hallowed place in automotive and Corvette history. But, from just about every FUNCTIONAL perspective, I think that one is much better off with a carburetor.

In my book, I don't put 57-65 Rochester FI in the same category as side exhaust and "3 twos", but it's close.