TheSamba.com :: View topic

Thu Jan 09, 2020 6:36 pm

Never seen these before, seems like a new product release?

Lighter and stronger than H beam? That’s quite a claim, but could be an awesome rod to use if so!

Thoughts?

https://www.thesamba.com/vw/classifieds/detail.php?id=2342801

Thu Jan 09, 2020 6:46 pm

As a rule of thumb an I beam rod is generally stronger than an H beam (not looking at bolts and caps) A strong I beam that is ligther than an average H beam,,,,,, interesting. Now we just need to get around the QC and the fact that maybe, just maybe that company has made a product that we dare put inside a high power engine.
Lightweight parts are always intriguing.

Thu Jan 09, 2020 7:26 pm

5/16 bolts, thet should have did them with 3/8 and tried to compete with scat

Thu Jan 09, 2020 8:16 pm

You go first..

Thu Jan 09, 2020 8:27 pm

That doesn't look like it'll even be 50g lighter than their standard. I guess every bit helps, but this isn't groundbreaking.

We should be talking about Pauter's newer lightweight steel rods that weigh about 500g. Strength and comparable weight to a lot of titanium rods.

Thu Jan 09, 2020 8:49 pm

bugguy1967 wrote:
We should be talking about Pauter's newer lightweight steel rods that weigh about 500g. Strength and comparable weight to a lot of titanium rods.

Link?

Cost?

Thu Jan 09, 2020 8:59 pm

I won't even look at them for two years until they prove themselves. Somebody else can spend the money and be the crash test dummy.

I've never needed a 5.5" rod with VW journals.

Thu Jan 09, 2020 9:52 pm

bugguy1967 wrote: That doesn't look like it'll even be 50g lighter than their standard. I guess every bit helps, but this isn't groundbreaking.

We should be talking about Pauter's newer lightweight steel rods that weigh about 500g. Strength and comparable weight to a lot of titanium rods.

That rod looks a lot lighter. I've always found empi rods to be right on spec as far as machining and weights. I had to hone the small end on a set of scat rods I had in my first big engine, 2 were small.

We can talk about Pauters new rods but not many guys are going to stop up to the plate for a thousand dollar set of rods. I'm more interested in the 3D printed rods Nissan tuners are working with, will support 1100hp and weight 75grams each.

brad

Thu Jan 09, 2020 10:28 pm

The piston pin oiling route is abit different. If thats not a issue, I wanna try some fo show

Fri Jan 10, 2020 7:52 am

sled wrote: Never seen these before, seems like a new product release?

Lighter and stronger than H beam? That’s quite a claim, but could be an awesome rod to use if so!

Thoughts?

https://www.thesamba.com/vw/classifieds/detail.php?id=2342801

I have been using these exact same rods but stock length for many years. Never had one problem. Dead on weight, and dead on measurements.

I've used a few of the 5.5 sets so far without any problems. I only use the 5.5's in 1914's because it makes setting the deck height and C/R much easier.

These rods from EMPI are very good. Again, I am building NA street motors under 200hp so that is all I can testify to for how they hold up.

I like them much better than the Kuhltech rods. The Kultech rods are also very good EXCEPT the tang grove for the bearing is too narrow and you have to grind and file on each rod bearing half or the rods will be tight.

Fri Jan 10, 2020 8:00 am

bugguy1967 wrote: That doesn't look like it'll even be 50g lighter than their standard. I guess every bit helps, but this isn't groundbreaking.

We should be talking about Pauter's newer lightweight steel rods that weigh about 500g. Strength and comparable weight to a lot of titanium rods.

$1000 set of connecting rods? That's almost as funny as people using $400 tool steel lifters in their 1776 street engine.

I will build an engine that will last longer with stock German connecting rods and Brazil lifters....

Fri Jan 10, 2020 8:05 am

I think this release a way for empi trying to prove that they really are improving their quality in products? If they keep going down this route we may not have to fear their products. But still, 1000 bucks isn’t worth it for me at least.

Fri Jan 10, 2020 8:09 am

[email protected] wrote:
I have been using these exact same rods but stock length for many years. Never had one problem. Dead on weight, and dead on measurements.

I've used a few of the 5.5 sets so far without any problems. I only use the 5.5's in 1914's because it makes setting the deck height and C/R much easier.

These rods from EMPI are very good. Again, I am building NA street motors under 200hp so that is all I can testify to for how they hold up.

I like them much better than the Kuhltech rods. The Kultech rods are also very good EXCEPT the tang grove for the bearing is too narrow and you have to grind and file on each rod bearing half or the rods will be tight.

Ive never seen these rods before, but the doesn't mean they haven't been around. You sure you don't mean the regular I-beams everyone has been making for a while, like CB unitech, etc? I searched for Kuhltek rods that look like these, and all I found was regular I-beams on their website.

and yeah...I don't see how comparing pauter rods to these is fair, or even has a point? Tabari, do you have pauter rods in your engines?

I am not an empi advocate particularly, but I do find new products interesting.

Fri Jan 10, 2020 8:09 am

Chickensoup wrote: I think this release a way for empi trying to prove that they really are improving their quality in products? If they keep going down this route we may not have to fear their products. But still, 1000 bucks isn’t worth it for me at least.
These aren't $1,000 they're $260

Fri Jan 10, 2020 8:11 am

Well, I/we must have been really unlucky then, since we have seen cracked rods (at the small end) after only 1500 miles, three times, and funny enough all engines from the same builder, oval big ends, too small big ends, too large big ends and wonky bolt seat areas. But yes, the weights were almost always good.

Fri Jan 10, 2020 8:12 am

Should of clicked on the link.

Fri Jan 10, 2020 9:07 am

Chickensoup wrote: Should of clicked on the link.

AAAAAAAHHHHHHH FFS it's should HAVE.....HAVE NOT OF....HAVE clicked on the link

There, I finally said it, now I feel better, carry on...sorry :)

brad

Fri Jan 10, 2020 10:04 am

sled wrote: [email protected] wrote:
I have been using these exact same rods but stock length for many years. Never had one problem. Dead on weight, and dead on measurements.

I've used a few of the 5.5 sets so far without any problems. I only use the 5.5's in 1914's because it makes setting the deck height and C/R much easier.

These rods from EMPI are very good. Again, I am building NA street motors under 200hp so that is all I can testify to for how they hold up.

I like them much better than the Kuhltech rods. The Kultech rods are also very good EXCEPT the tang grove for the bearing is too narrow and you have to grind and file on each rod bearing half or the rods will be tight.

Ive never seen these rods before, but the doesn't mean they haven't been around. You sure you don't mean the regular I-beams everyone has been making for a while, like CB unitech, etc? I searched for Kuhltek rods that look like these, and all I found was regular I-beams on their website.

and yeah...I don't see how comparing pauter rods to these is fair, or even has a point? Tabari, do you have pauter rods in your engines?

I am not an empi advocate particularly, but I do find new products interesting.

Ha, ha......apparently I should have clicked on the link too :oops:

I will amend my statements. I have used the standard I-Beam 5.4 and 5.5 rods from EMPI but not these new ones. All my statements and experience are with the standard I-Beam chromoly rods.

That being said, with my success using those rods, I wouldn't hesitate to try these as well.

Fri Jan 10, 2020 10:34 am

slalombuggy wrote: Chickensoup wrote: Should of clicked on the link.

AAAAAAAHHHHHHH FFS it's should HAVE.....HAVE NOT OF....HAVE clicked on the link

There, I finally said it, now I feel better, carry on...sorry :)

brad 8)

Fri Jan 10, 2020 1:59 pm

Clatter wrote: You go first..

:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: