Richard did well and gave some solid info. Being interviewed like this is not really a daily activity for any of us so it can take a little bit to get used to =) - Taz.
Also note that to get the best information from these guys with tech knowledge Andre speaks to them before the interview. Helps make sure we get all the information these guys have in their head out during the interview, sometimes when you have a light a camera and a huge mic shoved in your face it's a little off putting/uncomfortable. - Ben
A little short, but still some useful information :-) It was a bit like pulling teeth, but Andre did bring up and get some response to one of my bugbears - rating engine (and transmission) components by 'power' when the means of producing that 'power' will load the components in quite different ways - and the chap did actually make some address to those concerns. i was a little disappointed that the material selection wasn't mentioned, but I expect there were time constraints.
yea i agree...that Carrillo guy Was like a pair of vice grip pliers 😒 Andre is a good interviewer that guy was not enthused about answering questions...is inertia and tensile strength the same thing? if not, he didn't answer the last question.😒 good video HPA💪
@@PANTYEATR1 If you're asking, there are two primary loads on a connecting rod - inertial and compressive. The first loads the 'rod with compressive and tensile - squeezing and pulling, forces or stresses and the second is a purely compressive force. Different materials can have differing 'strengths' under each condition - for example, cast iron has excellent compressive strenght, but poor tensile strength. The other factor is the shape - under tensile loads the shape is relatively unimportant as the structure is being pulled in a line, it is really a factor of the minimum cross sectional area and the material's tensile strength - like a piece of string or wire. It is in compression and bending loads that the shape, and how resistant it is to buckling, becomes important, as I think I mentioned earlier in the comments, come to think of it?
Not sure why people are railing on the engineer. He directly answered the exact question posed to him without extraneous details. This is how an engineer would communicate to a team-member or a manager. On the job his peers want a specific bit of information so that they can move on and get to work; long narratives only slow things down. Great interview.
He wasn’t talking to engineers for the interview, it was a public showing and he sucked. The owner should be embarrassed for his company as it turned off a lot of people!
Not everyone is very relaxed in front of the HPA camera but Richard gives some solid information particularly towards the end and we always appreciate the time people take out for us at busy events like PRI =) If you want to stand out in the crowd at the next event you go to, grab your own HPA t-shirt here: bit.ly/MerchHPA - Taz.
Not everyone is very relaxed in front of the camera but Richard gives some solid information particularly towards the end and we always appreciate the time people take out for us at busy events like this =) - Taz.
i remember the day i mounted the carillo's connecting rods on my car....it's such a piece of the art...like a moment when you touch something very special for your engine and not the crapy diesel you are working on all the week.
It bizarre how i'm literally on the cusp of buying some 156mm Carillo H beam rods for my 4g63, 2.2L destroker build and you release this video. Love HPA. Andre's the man.
I did a set of forged I-beam rods on a Chrysler 318, with KB pistons & a forged 340 crankshaft. Had to shave weight off the crank due to the lighter weight of everything; it's not a super crazy HP engine, but it is very durable and helps with efficiency (the heads & exhaust are also set up)
Given the dimensional constraints of your typical V8 crankcase, which sort of force connecting rod beams into the cross-sectional dimensions we are accustomed to, an H-beam is usually slightly superior. While an I-beam's strength around its primary axis (parallel to the crankshaft) is higher than an H-beam of comparable weight, the H-beam is more "square" in its strength; i.e. it's strength around its secondary axis (perpendicular to the crankshaft) is usually identical to its primary axis number. Given that connecting rods primarily fail due to buckling, and not stretching, they will fail in the direction of their lowest strength. The H-beam's weakest axis is stronger than the I-beam's weakest axis. Why did the automotive industry almost exclusively choose the I-beam then? Because it can be forged in a single stroke. The H-beam is more complicated to forge. Simple economics masquerading as superior design.
Considering I beam rods are used in things like the crd record rb’s, spool I beams are in the worlds fastest rb, wise I’d boost line I beams are rated higher than h beams, ids probably say I beams are better; hence why they’re a few hundred more for the respective brands line vs h beam…
From machining point of view it's easier to produce I beam than H beam. In 2 set-up on a HMC you can already have a conrod, and then you still have the grinding etc. But, in term of design, if you want to get the same weight with a H or I section, you will have to work harder on the weight reduction for the H beam style. Indeed, design is the answer. Marketing play also a role, and H beam from Carillo are known because of their complexity. Cylinder pressure are higher in turbo engine and H beam are less impacted by compression constraint. If you have an H beam, the section in mm² is bigger -> Comp constraint = F/S , therefore, it will be lower with H style. Higher rev in dynamic, the inertia is the main parameters, you will maybe have to consider I beam. Less inertia, less constraint but less inertia means also less material and therefore design have to help to handle the load. There is no simple answer. Engine manufacturer will test (simulation or test bench) a lot of different I or H style before releasing the final production of an high perf engine. Only the test bench can give the truth.
Saw you walking around TX2K man and interviewing Titan Motorsports wanted to say what's up and thanks for the great content you put out but didn't want to ruin the interview. Keep the content coming. As an engineer, I love it!
Thanks man and cheers for the courtesy! Andre and Jono got a heap of great content, I hope you enjoyed the event as much as they did. You might catch them there for a chat next year ;) - Taz.
the rep should be a politician... didn't really give any answers... still dont know whether a i beam or h beam is better... saying that it depends on the design, doent help.. big can of worms, but was hoping he would of gone into more details when you asked him about the 4g... eg. a h beam of a i beam because....
He did give solid answers... He said the design of the rod plays a much bigger part that the style or shape. He also said that I beam rods generally require less machining of the raw forging, and that's why they are used in their cheaper rod sets and I would assume OEMs.
I want somebody to build the same exact motor with forged h-beam in forged I-beam rods and then keep feeding it boost until they explode and see which one makes more horsepower before the Kaboom
I heard a tale once long long ago (actually i saw it in fst4s and rotaries) of a certain SR20 that was circuit dirt racing over here in godzone that kept bending carrillo rods and opted to use a nizmo rod instead (with 0 faliures) Do you remember the car? What was up with that then?
The only real difference is an I-beam is a typical design for forging, and H-beam is typical for a billet machining. A H beam is probably also better at slinging oil on cylinder wall.
Да сделайте уже наконец стержень коробчатого сечения, и тогда все останутся довольны! Yes, finally make a rod of a box-shaped (rectangular with an empty middle) section, and then everyone will be satisfied! :) Carbon fiber is not difficult
My tuner from Poland told me Manley on 4G63 the H rods do brake, the I rod is stronger. Ad he tunes rally cars. Tuned my evo9 on H rods. Not what I wanted to hear from my tuner, lol.
in structural mechanics, i beam is the best design for the least weight. In practice some variables change so it has more do to with the specific design of rod and the application it is used
@@St0RM33 only true for static structures in one direction; i.e. buildings, bridges, etc. For structures of indeterminate load direction, a flag pole, etc. tubes are superior. While a tubular beam wouldn't be practical for your average V8 connecting rod, an H-beam is closer to it than an I-beam. I-beams are more practical because they're easier to forge, plain and simple.
Interesting - I also have an evo and was planning on getting a forged drop in - here Norris Designs state their I beam is stronger so that may back up what your tuner said. www.norrisdesigns.com/proddetail.asp?prod=Evo%2DLRDI001 at the bottom there can see the i beam uprated option
I’m a little bit confused. Near forged and machining 90% of it save cost ? Same 10% of machining? Can someone help me I’m in the market for rods and piston after my LS got damaged on the dyno with a novi 1500 at 8 psi
It really seems rod failure is at a right angle to the crank blowing a hole through the side of the block so you would want the beam to have the flats facing the sides of the motor as stress risers shouldn't be in the direction of load . But the history seems to not show that.
Most can't afford aftermarket conrods because some stock rods can handle well over the stock limits. Most stock rod can handle about 400 to 500 depending on the engine
I will give Richard the benefit of the doubt and guess that it's camera shyness, since Carillo did choose him as their rep. Might be a great guy, just wasn't tested in front of a camera. Another possibility is that he is blazingly jealous of Andre's hair :)
H beam focused rod manufacturer says H beam rods are just as good. Basically an infomercial, the I beam is a superior structure. Take cast rods for example, where the choice of structure causes a negligible difference in cost, have you ever seen a cast H beam? No, what’s actually happened is that metallurgy has reached a point where a forged H beam is lighter than a cast I beam for a given stiffness.
Good grief , this guy isn't forthcoming on information . He didn't even mention anything about the forging process and metallurgy , how they test the rods in cycles vs time vs load pressure etc ........🤔
H beam, or I beam if you like! Hope that helps 😅 - Taz. PS: The key take away is at 0:40, I added some time stamps for you too. Essentially what he is saying is that alone, it doesn't matter if a rod it I or H beam, that is not what makes it a better rod for you given all the other deciding factors. If you're not sure, talk to your con rod supplier and give them ALL the details on your application, noting just saying you're building a 1000hp LS isn't actually much help, other engine components, boost, if the car is for circuit or drag racing etc and more should be considered. A good supplier will know all the questions to ask you though to help guide you through this as they also want to sell you the right part as well and not just make a sale on something they know will fail.
It still leaves the audience with no clear answer on H-beam vs I-Beam. IE clearly rates the rods based on the HP and RPM. On this interview you can't get a clear picture on what rod to use.
The conclusion is that it doesn't matter and that the application of the engine is what you need to talk to your rod supplier about as the choice between H and I beam alone is moot - Taz.
High Performance Academy I appreciate the open and candid interviews, but with an engineer type like this, you probably have to feed him more information on theoretical builds so that he has got more to chew on...
Listening to Richard is like a combination of reading a magazine and listening to a politician. You have a question that needs answering, so you listen intently ... and then when he's done you walk away excited before suddenly realizing he never answered anything. Lucky we still have Carillo all the same, one company with a great track record you can rely on to save us from all the Chinese junk.
haha yes that is the case sometimes as they are normally used to speaking to other engineers. We do our best to fill in the blanks in these interviews for everyone though 😎 - Taz.
💭...something must’ve happened to this guy early on in his life thats lead to his bizarre style of communication...gota give Andre credit cause if that was me I would’ve stopped the interview after the 2nd question and just asked him “ok seriously, do we have a fucking problem here big guy!?!” 😠😂🤣
I think he's just a bit more direct than people are used to, and having a camera in his face probably isn't something he deals with every day to be fair! Richard loosens up a little bit more towards the end but regardless his answers are short, sharp and accurate - Taz.
As Richard said, it doesn't matter. If there is no H beam available for your desired power goals and your specific engine, but there is an I beam, you are going to get an I beam or vice versa and the job they do will be the same - Taz.
I guess you are correct as you haven't uploaded this video, you got us there 😅 I think Richard did fine though once he found his feet halfway through the interview. Might have been about the time he cracked Andres accent or just relaxed a little, either way, still some solid knowledge in there from someone whose time and experience is volunteered 🤘- Taz.
What a lousy representative of Carillo; did his wife just leave him? CIA operatives are more forthcoming with information. Not sure I'd buy Carillo based on the evasive, minimum-info answers; sounds like they have something to hide.
He did fine towards the end =) To be fair not everyone is comfortable in front of the camera, it's not really a day to day occurrence and it is something people could say no to but luckily a few people are keen. Doesn't mean you have to like an interview, but it's good to keep in mind - Taz.
@@hpa101 I agree - some people freeze in front of a camera, zone out, feel dizzy, etc. But he is representing the company, and should have those presentation skills and answers well-rehearsed before going to a trade show. We even trained our engineers with the "key facts" before a show, and the rule was - if a question makes you uncomfortable to answer, escalate to a senior level presenter. They need a face man for interviews - either to take over, or to wing man for him.
I can't remember right now which one it was sorry, but we have discussed how you are right, it's the cylinder pressure and torque figures that matter, not HP, but HP is what the consumers demand the industry markets by so they can easily understand. Might be one of the Julian Godfrey chats, but I'm sure other sources talk about that too. Is what it is - Taz.