Audizine - An Automotive Enthusiast Community

Results 1 to 15 of 15
  1. #1
    Established Member Two Rings
    Join Date
    May 22 2017
    AZ Member #
    399844
    Location
    New Jersey

    Tell Me Why this WONT work...

    Guest-only advertisement. Register or Log In now!
    Alright everyone. After reading about 25627 threads about this... I have finally made some advancement on this. Heres the story.

    2.0 AUTO motor going in a maunal car. Ive removed the thrust bearing (not easily) from the auto crank, and have pressed in the pilot bearing. (easy) Heres the pictures of the pilot bearing pressed into the auto crank. Tell me why this wont work. Yes I know it doesn't sit flush, but the metal area around the crank is different. I have mached up my RA4 flywheel and clutch setup and it all bolts up fine. Will send more pictures of it set up when I have it. Someone please shed some light on this because I think it works and im going to send it.

    image1 (1).jpgimage1 (2).jpg

  2. #2
    Established Member Two Rings SlvrArrw's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 05 2016
    AZ Member #
    384687
    Location
    Richmond, Texas, USA

    Let me chime in,
    Not an engineer, how eva, physics dictates a bearing design. If a bearing is designed to sit flush and it doesn't, there will be a risk of premature failure. So it's your call.
    Consider the forces involved.

    Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G935A using Tapatalk

  3. #3
    Veteran Member Four Rings canadianA4B7's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 10 2012
    AZ Member #
    87997
    My Garage
    parts
    Location
    Napanee, ON

    Not sure your auto crankshaft is correct to fit to a manual transmission...... this has been covered a number of times.

  4. #4
    Established Member Two Rings
    Join Date
    May 22 2017
    AZ Member #
    399844
    Location
    New Jersey

    Quote Originally Posted by SlvrArrw View Post
    Let me chime in,
    Not an engineer, how eva, physics dictates a bearing design. If a bearing is designed to sit flush and it doesn't, there will be a risk of premature failure. So it's your call.
    Consider the forces involved.

    Understood. I think they are physically at the same spot it just looks different because of the end of the crank being a different shape. (maybe to accept a torque converter instead of flywheel?) But the bearings are the same size and it pressed in just like it should.

    Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G935A using Tapatalk
    Quote Originally Posted by canadianA4B7 View Post
    Not sure your auto crankshaft is correct to fit to a manual transmission...... this has been covered a number of times.
    Understood and i have read all of them as stated in the inital post. But WHY. The boss around the crank is different. The pilot bearing fits. Its obviously not going to sit flush because of the different ends around the crank. My questions is why wouldnt this work? There isn't anything I can see other than the 1/32 protrusion of the pilot bearing out of the crank. So as far as I see, if the trans bolts up, and the input shaft sits nice, itll work. I truly don't think it will be an issue. Maybe I am wrong? I see no reason that Audi would make two different length crankshafts for the same motor. I get it that the end is slighty different shaped which would make the pilot bearing look to be sitting flush to the end of it, but i think it is physically at the same spot sitting in my auto crank. Have you done this swap or seen the 2 motors side by side before?

  5. #5
    Established Member Two Rings SlvrArrw's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 05 2016
    AZ Member #
    384687
    Location
    Richmond, Texas, USA

    Haven't seen cranks side by side but I've built motors in the past and ended up doing it twice. Your call though.

    Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G935A using Tapatalk

  6. #6
    Active Member Two Rings
    Join Date
    Oct 14 2018
    AZ Member #
    428847
    Location
    melville, NY

    do you think it will cause extra strain on the transmission or cause more vibrations in the cabin. do you think any parts will go premature due to the irregularities?

  7. #7
    Established Member Two Rings
    Join Date
    May 22 2017
    AZ Member #
    399844
    Location
    New Jersey

    Quote Originally Posted by SlvrArrw View Post
    Haven't seen cranks side by side but I've built motors in the past and ended up doing it twice. Your call though.

    When i pull the other motor Ill have them side by side and ill make a comparison and make the call from there.

    Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G935A using Tapatalk
    Quote Originally Posted by joepickems View Post
    do you think it will cause extra strain on the transmission or cause more vibrations in the cabin. do you think any parts will go premature due to the irregularities?
    I dont THINK so. But we wont know until i put it in? It seems like the bearings are physically sitting in the at the same spot off the crank. But I wont know until i have both motors out.

  8. #8
    Established Member Two Rings
    Join Date
    May 22 2017
    AZ Member #
    399844
    Location
    New Jersey

    Before everyone thats posts on this just blasts me away asking if ive thought this out... Yes i have. I wont put it in unless im sure it will work. When I have both motors out I will do a side by side comparison. We'll see then exactly what the differences are. Im looking for anyone with experience doing this if they have ran into trouble or if anyone knows FOR SURE this wont work. Nothing is leading me to say that it wont based on what I have found so far. I understand the risk I will be taking and still have a spare motor incase all else fails.

  9. #9
    Senior Member Four Rings b7_Andy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 18 2015
    AZ Member #
    343342
    Location
    Denver, CO

    Is your concern the pilot bearing? Or the flywheel sitting offset depth-wise on the crankshaft? I donít know if the 2.0 uses a bellhousing spacer on their manuals, but if youíre concerned about the pilot bearing depth try this... get a long flat edge of some sort that you can line up against the back of the engine so to have a reference point of the location where the transmission is going to mate. Measure from the bar or whatever you use to the inside of the pilot bearing (like the bottom of the pilot bearing where the input shaft of the transmission would bottom out). It might take a couple measurements plus some calculations. The idea here is to try and gauge the distance from the engine-transmission mating surface, to the deepest point of the pilot bearing. If this distance is less than 8.7mm and greater than I donít know, letís say 6mm, you shouldnít have to worry about any issues with the pilot bearing. You can measure the distance from the edge of the bellhousing to the end of the input shaft too and I think itís about 8.7-8.75mm on all Audi manual transmissions (thatís how I came up with those numbers). Does that make sense?

  10. #10
    Established Member Two Rings ApostolSauce's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 28 2010
    AZ Member #
    66315
    My Garage
    3.0T A6 Avant, STG3 B5 S4
    Location
    North Jersey

    I think itíll work.

  11. #11
    Veteran Member Four Rings canadianA4B7's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 10 2012
    AZ Member #
    87997
    My Garage
    parts
    Location
    Napanee, ON

    https://www.audizine.com/forum/showt...manual-engines

    I think thread #9 is a good explanation. It really depends on what exactly you have. Thereís some pics there too which show the differences in shape to the material around bearing.

  12. #12
    Established Member Two Rings Joshlc1988's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 19 2017
    AZ Member #
    401374
    My Garage
    06 a4 s line 6mt, 95 s10 zr2
    Location
    Clifton forge virginia

    I wouldnít think a 1/32 depth difference on the pilot bearing would matter as long as it supports the input shaft and the bearing face doesnít ride against the input shaft. I believe it has a ridge near the end. Iíd be more conserned about the flywheel being pushed back to far from the protrusion on the crank flange differences. But You say the flywheel bolts up flush so what id do is measure both cranks flange thickness then measure the flange end to block distance. If itís the same distance from the block it should work, but if not It would still bolt up but youíd have clutch engagement issues.

    In the end if the pilot bearing fits and input shaft spins freely when installed, and the flywheel face to block distance is the same, it should work fine.

  13. #13
    Active Member Two Rings
    Join Date
    Oct 14 2018
    AZ Member #
    428847
    Location
    melville, NY

    so what's the verdict?

  14. #14
    Established Member Two Rings
    Join Date
    May 22 2017
    AZ Member #
    399844
    Location
    New Jersey

    Quote Originally Posted by joepickems View Post
    so what's the verdict?
    We'll know pretty soon. Still have to pull the other motor and do some measurements. Ill let everyone know when it works

  15. #15
    Established Member Two Rings
    Join Date
    May 22 2017
    AZ Member #
    399844
    Location
    New Jersey

    Quote Originally Posted by Joshlc1988 View Post
    I wouldnít think a 1/32 depth difference on the pilot bearing would matter as long as it supports the input shaft and the bearing face doesnít ride against the input shaft. I believe it has a ridge near the end. Iíd be more conserned about the flywheel being pushed back to far from the protrusion on the crank flange differences. But You say the flywheel bolts up flush so what id do is measure both cranks flange thickness then measure the flange end to block distance. If itís the same distance from the block it should work, but if not It would still bolt up but youíd have clutch engagement issues.

    In the end if the pilot bearing fits and input shaft spins freely when installed, and the flywheel face to block distance is the same, it should work fine.
    Great info. Ill do this. I honestly think it will work. Everything should line up. Will report back with the findings!



Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  


    © 2001-2018 Audizine, Audizine.com, and Driverzines.com
    Audizine is an independently owned and operated automotive enthusiast community and news website.
    Audi and the Audi logo(s) are copyright/trademark Audi AG. Audizine is not endorsed by or affiliated with Audi AG.