Modificato
New member
What's the root cause mark?
The rod bolts stretch and/or the rod caps break. Said builder is of the opinion that the bolts and caps used are on the edge for a flat plane crank application with this rod ratio.What's the root cause mark?
I've now seen four engine failures. The incidents aren't known because of fear of the cars' value being affected. The (very) knowledge engine builder I deal with has direct experience: the big ends become oval and "It only takes a few 100's of a millimeter before it fails.".
I'm going to check mine at the 40k interval.
Having said that there is a dead 458 with significant engine damage that everyone is keeping quiet about.
458 rods are 3 mm longer meaning the engine has a better rod angle mid-stroke. They also have different rod bearings.
The F430 Challenge has stronger rods and bolts.
The rod angle/ratio would have been fully understood at design time. Either weight optimisation went too far, or the bean counters did...
Could be a GD&T stack-up issue which is Ferrari’s Achilles heel IMO.
Red card shown!....I’m sat a work looking at a tolerance stack issue ATM so please can we get back on topic [emoji3]
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
458 rods are 3 mm longer meaning the engine has a better rod angle mid-stroke. They also have different rod bearings.
The F430 Challenge has stronger rods and bolts.
The rod angle/ratio would have been fully understood at design time. Either weight optimisation went too far, or the bean counters did...
Sorry OP ....We’re so far off topic now we’ll soon be smack on again [emoji4]
This is the vid from one of the FChat posts.
Usually cylinder number 2 was what one of the techs said.
https://youtu.be/HL4K__MqlJY
It needed a new engine but the guy disappeared so there were no update after that....