[v12-engine] XJS V12 5.3 and 6L Conrod lengths

Hi!

I searched through the archives and although there are posts
relating to the effects of conrod lengths, there doesnt seem
to be any information on the lengths themselves.

I was wondering if anyone who has knowledge of or has worked
on the 5.3 and 6.0 Litre XJS V12 engines can tell me what
the stock con-rod lengths are please? Crank diameter would
be useful too, but I guess that fewer people will know this.

The purpose of this knowledge is to accurately calculate and
plot piston position for a 360 degree cycle (half a 4 stroke
cycle). Obviously the piston velocity is not constant and
hence the need to use crank and slider formulae.

Thanks in advance for any help.–
Wheelbarra
–Posted using Jag-lovers JagFORUM [forums.jag-lovers.org]–

Visit the Jag Lovers homepage at http://www.jag-lovers.org for exciting services and resources including Photo Albums, Event Diary / Calendar, On Line Books and more !

In reply to a message from Wheelbarra sent Wed 15 Aug 2007:

These are the dimensions I recall for a V12. Sorry for the mismatch
of units.

Bore (5.3L and 6.0L): 90mm
Stroke (5.3L): 70mm
Stroke (6.0L): 78.5mm
Rod length (5.3L and I think 6.0L): 5.996’’
Rod jounral diameter (5.3L and I think 6.0L): 2.3’’

I believe that the 6.0L uses different pistons than the 5.3L, but
the same rods.

Hope this helps.–
-Ted – '92 XJS V12 5-speed
–Posted using Jag-lovers JagFORUM [forums.jag-lovers.org]–
–Support Jag-lovers - Donate at http://www.jag-lovers.org/donate04.php

Visit the Jag Lovers homepage at http://www.jag-lovers.org for exciting services and resources including Photo Albums, Event Diary / Calendar, On Line Books and more !

1 Like

In reply to a message from TedDuPuis sent Thu 16 Aug 2007:

Ted,

thanks for the reply. Im a bit mystified though, because
apparently, the only difference between the 5.3 and the 6.0
is stroke. In order for the stroke to increase, at least 2
components in the piston + rod + crank assembly has to
change to facilitate that increase in stroke. So, if the rod
is the same length in both models, it must be the piston and
crank that changed. Is this correct?

By the way, its been put to me that perhaps Im looking for
ways to ‘‘stroke’’ the xjs. This isnt the case. I like the
engine pretty much as it is, Im just trying to accurately
plot the piston position vs crank angle to determine
accuracy in the timing and fuel and ignition systems.

thanks again.–
The original message included these comments:

These are the dimensions I recall for a V12. Sorry for the mismatch
of units.
Bore (5.3L and 6.0L): 90mm
Stroke (5.3L): 70mm
Stroke (6.0L): 78.5mm
Rod length (5.3L and I think 6.0L): 5.996’’
Rod jounral diameter (5.3L and I think 6.0L): 2.3’’
I believe that the 6.0L uses different pistons than the 5.3L, but
the same rods.
Hope this helps.


Wheelbarra
–Posted using Jag-lovers JagFORUM [forums.jag-lovers.org]–
–Support Jag-lovers - Donate at http://www.jag-lovers.org/donate04.php

Visit the Jag Lovers homepage at http://www.jag-lovers.org for exciting services and resources including Photo Albums, Event Diary / Calendar, On Line Books and more !

In reply to a message from Wheelbarra sent Thu 16 Aug 2007:

The stroke change can ONLY happen by altering the crank. The
resultant change in piston position at TDC can be accommodated with
either the same pistons on shorter rod (if there is crank/skirt
clearance at BDC) or the same rod holding a piston with the gudgeon
pin nearer the piston crown.–
The original message included these comments:

thanks for the reply. Im a bit mystified though, because
apparently, the only difference between the 5.3 and the 6.0
is stroke. In order for the stroke to increase, at least 2
components in the piston + rod + crank assembly has to
change to facilitate that increase in stroke. So, if the rod
is the same length in both models, it must be the piston and
crank that changed. Is this correct?


66 2+2, 74 OTS, 76 DD6 Coup�, 84 DD6, 85 XJS 5sp convert
Cambridge, United Kingdom
–Posted using Jag-lovers JagFORUM [forums.jag-lovers.org]–
–Support Jag-lovers - Donate at http://www.jag-lovers.org/donate04.php

Visit the Jag Lovers homepage at http://www.jag-lovers.org for exciting services and resources including Photo Albums, Event Diary / Calendar, On Line Books and more !

In reply to a message from Wheelbarra sent Thu 16 Aug 2007:

If you note, I made no mention of piston dimensions because I don’t
know them. My understanding is that the stroke increased from the
5.3L to the 6.0L (different crankshaft), the connecting rods were
left the same, and the pistons were changed. There are a bunch of
little differences between the 5.3L and the 6.0L engines, Paul
Kobres and Chad Bolles documented a good sum of them I believe
about a year ago. However as far as the internal dimensions are
concerned, that’s all that I’m aware of.

My question, though, is what’s the point of you plotting these
things? Your ignition timing is going to give you a consistent
reference. That is, a given timing is going to give you a given
point of ignition at all times. Unless your rods bend or something
else, this won’t change. So, really all that matters is that it’s
consistent. You can program your fuel and ignition systems
accordingly. For fuel, the only time you care about crank angle is
if you’re using sequential injection (which has slight economy and
emissions benefits, but that’s about it), and in which case what
really matters there is your cam timing. Once again, though, it’s
going to be consistent. Just wondering your logic here.–
-Ted – '92 XJS V12 5-speed
–Posted using Jag-lovers JagFORUM [forums.jag-lovers.org]–
–Support Jag-lovers - Donate at http://www.jag-lovers.org/donate04.php

Visit the Jag Lovers homepage at http://www.jag-lovers.org for exciting services and resources including Photo Albums, Event Diary / Calendar, On Line Books and more !

In reply to a message from PeterCrespin sent Thu 16 Aug 2007:

Right…so you are saying that the crank is different
between the 5.3 and the 6.0 versions and either the piston
or rod has changed too. Which is what I said isnt it?! i.e 2
out of the three components has to change for there to be a
change in stroke without changing the pistons TDC position.

So if the crank is different, which one out of the rod or
piston also changed?

By the way, having looked into it, I’ve seen that some
manufacturers have changed stroke in their cars by changing
the rod length and the piston gudgeon pin position, without
changing the crank. So it doesnt necessarily follow that the
crank HAS to change…
However Im only interested in the stock differences, not the
modification possibilities.–
The original message included these comments:

The stroke change can ONLY happen by altering the crank. The
resultant change in piston position at TDC can be accommodated with
either the same pistons on shorter rod (if there is crank/skirt
clearance at BDC) or the same rod holding a piston with the gudgeon
pin nearer the piston crown.


Wheelbarra
–Posted using Jag-lovers JagFORUM [forums.jag-lovers.org]–
–Support Jag-lovers - Donate at http://www.jag-lovers.org/donate04.php

Visit the Jag Lovers homepage at http://www.jag-lovers.org for exciting services and resources including Photo Albums, Event Diary / Calendar, On Line Books and more !

In reply to a message from Wheelbarra sent Thu 16 Aug 2007:

I have no idea who told you this or where you got this information
from, but it is wrong and must be immediately removed from your
brain, and preferably also from wherever you found it. That is like
saying you can change the bore of an engine by changing the
crankshaft.

A rotating assembly is made up of three basic components:

  1. Pistons (bore)
  2. Crankshaft (stroke)
  3. Connecting rod (connects 1 and 2)

The connecting rods do nothing but connect the pistons to the
crankshaft. There are arguments for whether it’s better to have
tall rods vs. short rods, but it will NEVER change the stroke.
Displacement can be changed by changing only the bore or only the
stroke. The formula for displacement is found by getting the area
of the bore (pi*(bore/2)^2) and multiplying that by the stroke
(length).

The distance between the center of the rod journal on a crankshaft
at one point and the center of the rod journal on a crankshaft at
another point 180 degrees later in crankshaft rotation is the
stroke. It has nothing to do with connecting rod length.

I would like to ask, what is the end goal of this exercise?–
The original message included these comments:

By the way, having looked into it, I’ve seen that some
manufacturers have changed stroke in their cars by changing
the rod length and the piston gudgeon pin position, without
changing the crank. So it doesnt necessarily follow that the
crank HAS to change…


-Ted – '92 XJS V12 5-speed
–Posted using Jag-lovers JagFORUM [forums.jag-lovers.org]–
–Support Jag-lovers - Donate at http://www.jag-lovers.org/donate04.php

Visit the Jag Lovers homepage at http://www.jag-lovers.org for exciting services and resources including Photo Albums, Event Diary / Calendar, On Line Books and more !

In reply to a message from Wheelbarra sent Thu 16 Aug 2007:

Dear Wheel

Sorry if I misread you, but the reason I put the ONLY in upper case
was to emphasise the fact there’s no other way to change stroke -
not that there can ever be the slightest doubt, but still. I didn’t
mean to come across as shouting or being rude, of course. Sorry if
I did.

However, the fact you could even think of suggesting there would
be any other way to change the stroke has me wondering whether you
had better double check the basics of whatever scheme you have in
mind, in case you waste a lot of time and brain power on a wild
goose chase…–
66 2+2, 74 OTS, 76 DD6 Coup�, 84 DD6, 85 XJS 5sp convert
Cambridge, United Kingdom
–Posted using Jag-lovers JagFORUM [forums.jag-lovers.org]–
–Support Jag-lovers - Donate at http://www.jag-lovers.org/donate04.php

Visit the Jag Lovers homepage at http://www.jag-lovers.org for exciting services and resources including Photo Albums, Event Diary / Calendar, On Line Books and more !

In reply to a message from TedDuPuis sent Thu 16 Aug 2007:

Thanks for that Ted. Do you have any idea if or where Paul
and / or Chad posted their documentation?–
The original message included these comments:

In reply to a message from Wheelbarra sent Thu 16 Aug 2007:
If you note, I made no mention of piston dimensions because I don’t
know them. My understanding is that the stroke increased from the
5.3L to the 6.0L (different crankshaft), the connecting rods were
left the same, and the pistons were changed. There are a bunch of
little differences between the 5.3L and the 6.0L engines, Paul
Kobres and Chad Bolles documented a good sum of them I believe
about a year ago. However as far as the internal dimensions are
concerned, that’s all that I’m aware of.


Wheelbarra
–Posted using Jag-lovers JagFORUM [forums.jag-lovers.org]–
–Support Jag-lovers - Donate at http://www.jag-lovers.org/donate04.php

Visit the Jag Lovers homepage at http://www.jag-lovers.org for exciting services and resources including Photo Albums, Event Diary / Calendar, On Line Books and more !

In reply to a message from PeterCrespin sent Thu 16 Aug 2007:

Thankyou for your contribution Peter.–
Wheelbarra
–Posted using Jag-lovers JagFORUM [forums.jag-lovers.org]–
–Support Jag-lovers - Donate at http://www.jag-lovers.org/donate04.php

Visit the Jag Lovers homepage at http://www.jag-lovers.org for exciting services and resources including Photo Albums, Event Diary / Calendar, On Line Books and more !

TedDuPuis wrote:

Stroke (5.3L): 70mm
Stroke (6.0L): 78.5mm
Rod length (5.3L and I think 6.0L): 5.996’’

I believe that the 6.0L uses different pistons than the 5.3L, but the
same rods.

If the rods are the same length, the pistons had certainly better be
different! Otherwise the longer crank will push the pistons clean
through the head! The compression height of the pistons will need to
be (78.5-70)/2 = 4.25mm less on the 6.0.

– Kirbert

Visit the Jag Lovers homepage at http://www.jag-lovers.org for exciting services and resources including Photo Albums, Event Diary / Calendar, On Line Books and more !

In reply to a message from Wheelbarra sent Thu 16 Aug 2007:

Wheelbarra, The rods for the 5.3 and the 6.0 are exactly the same,
the pistons for the 6.0 are different and lighter. the crank is
different. The cyl heads are for the most part the same, the
difference is in the combustion chamber, the 6.0 being larger. I
have heard the cams were change just a bit, but not sure about
that. The valve tappets are different and much lighter. The 6.0
starting in 94 uses a one(1) piece rear seal. You can use any 5.3
one (1) piece rear seal block to build a 6.0 engine. There is a
difference in the 6.0 and 5.3 block, but only(if you use a one(1)
piece seal block),that being in the bellhousing area. The 6.0 is
drilled for the Jaguar only 4L80E Turbo trans.
Another thing, all the 6.0 USA cars came with the full flow oil
cooling system.
I have found that the rod and main bearing are the same.
In my race 95 XJ-S car, I use special cams and special rods, but
still use the stock Jag main bearings.–
Dr. Chadbourn Bolles, JaguarXJ_S@Yahoo.com
Leesville, SC, United States
–Posted using Jag-lovers JagFORUM [forums.jag-lovers.org]–
–Support Jag-lovers - Donate at http://www.jag-lovers.org/donate04.php

Visit the Jag Lovers homepage at http://www.jag-lovers.org for exciting services and resources including Photo Albums, Event Diary / Calendar, On Line Books and more !

In reply to a message from Dr. Chadbourn Bolles sent Fri 17 Aug 2007:

So to confirm, the rods are 5.996 inches long (from the
centre points of each mounting) on both the 5.3 and the 6.0
(as stated by Ted).

Is there anywhere that this information is listed (to save
me asking these questions on the list)?

Regards

Edward–
The original message included these comments:

In reply to a message from Wheelbarra sent Thu 16 Aug 2007:
Wheelbarra, The rods for the 5.3 and the 6.0 are exactly the same,


Wheelbarra
–Posted using Jag-lovers JagFORUM [forums.jag-lovers.org]–
–Support Jag-lovers - Donate at http://www.jag-lovers.org/donate04.php

Visit the Jag Lovers homepage at http://www.jag-lovers.org for exciting services and resources including Photo Albums, Event Diary / Calendar, On Line Books and more !

In reply to a message from Wheelbarra sent Thu 16 Aug 2007:

Connecting Rod length for the 5.3 liter as given in Repair
Operation Manual is 5.96in. + or- .002 in. The listed Connecting
Rod big end bore is 2.441 in. + 0.0005 in -0.0001 in. The manual
only gives the main journal diameter, which is listed as 3.0007 to
3.0012 in. but does not give the rid journal diameter.–
The original message included these comments:

In reply to a message from TedDuPuis sent Thu 16 Aug 2007:

Rod length (5.3L and I think 6.0L): 5.996’’
Rod jounral diameter (5.3L and I think 6.0L): 2.3’’


1987 XJS Coupe
Fulshear/Texas, United States
–Posted using Jag-lovers JagFORUM [forums.jag-lovers.org]–
–Support Jag-lovers - Donate at http://www.jag-lovers.org/donate04.php

Visit the Jag Lovers homepage at http://www.jag-lovers.org for exciting services and resources including Photo Albums, Event Diary / Calendar, On Line Books and more !

In reply to a message from Don Franke sent Fri 17 Aug 2007:

Thanks for that Don. Thanks also to Ted and Chadbourne, I
appreciate the help.

EK–
Wheelbarra
–Posted using Jag-lovers JagFORUM [forums.jag-lovers.org]–
–Support Jag-lovers - Donate at http://www.jag-lovers.org/donate04.php

Visit the Jag Lovers homepage at http://www.jag-lovers.org for exciting services and resources including Photo Albums, Event Diary / Calendar, On Line Books and more !

In reply to a message from Wheelbarra sent Wed 15 Aug 2007:

Here you see a setup with a rod witch is 11.16mm longer than stock
and the piston then has to be 11.16mm shorter (+ the 4mm the std
piston is below the deck) This rod is then 162.56mm and the piston
is 32.51. This is for a 5.3 engine and the only ting that happens
with this setup is a little less conrod angle for decreased
friction and also a different pistonspeed on tdc and bdc. I can
then use a little less overlap on the cams…

http://www.jag-lovers.org/v.htm?1183500179--
The original message included these comments:

The purpose of this knowledge is to accurately calculate and
plot piston position for a 360 degree cycle (half a 4 stroke
cycle). Obviously the piston velocity is not constant and
hence the need to use crank and slider formulae.


Mobeck.com
–Posted using Jag-lovers JagFORUM [forums.jag-lovers.org]–
–Support Jag-lovers - Donate at http://www.jag-lovers.org/donate04.php

Visit the Jag Lovers homepage at http://www.jag-lovers.org for exciting services and resources including Photo Albums, Event Diary / Calendar, On Line Books and more !

In reply to a message from Mobeck sent Mon 20 Aug 2007:

Beautiful, but I guess you’re looking at 5000 dollars just in parts
right?–
66 2+2, 74 OTS, 76 DD6 Coup�, 84 DD6, 85 XJS 5sp convert
Cambridge, United Kingdom
–Posted using Jag-lovers JagFORUM [forums.jag-lovers.org]–
–Support Jag-lovers - Donate at http://www.jag-lovers.org/donate04.php

Visit the Jag Lovers homepage at http://www.jag-lovers.org for exciting services and resources including Photo Albums, Event Diary / Calendar, On Line Books and more !

In reply to a message from PeterCrespin sent Mon 20 Aug 2007:

It depends on how you’re doing it, and there are a couple of
options here. Last time I had a set of pistons made, it was $1400
for pistons with ceramic coating, rings, and wrist pins. In other
words, a complete setup.

Now for rods, you can purchase custom rods, or you could go out and
buy some 6’’ Chevy rods. You can find forged H-beam variants of
these, probably under $500. When you get your custom pistons made,
have them use a Chevy wrist pin (which won’t add to the cost since
they’re custom pistons anyway - if anything it’ll decrease the
cost). Only catch here is that you then have to grind the crank to
make the rods fit (2.1’’ Chevy rod journal vs. 2.3’’ Jaguar rod
journal). If you offset grind the crank, you get some extra
displacement out of the deal (just make sure to factor this into
your wrist pin position of the pistons). While you’re at it, you
can always have the liners bored out, Roger Bywater told me they’re
safe up to 94mm. Suddenly, you’ve got a larger V12, and the total
cost is probably more along the lines of $3000-3500, depending on
who you go to for all of this work.

In my case for my upcoming engine build, I think I am just going to
leave the rods and crank alone and stock, and just put in custom
pistons, leaving the bore stock. Since I’ll be boosting the thing I
want to keep as much strength in the materials as possible, and
plus it saves me that cost of doing all those extra little
things. :slight_smile:

From a power perspective, there’s nothing wrong with a stock set of
V12 rods. They’re quite strong. The issue comes in terms of weight,
as they are also very heavy. I would even say you don’t really need
forged pistons unless you’re running some really high power levels
and/or adding boost. Forged pistons have some disadvantages,
specifically that the pistons have a different coefficient of
thermal expansion than the rest of the engine, so they run higher
clearances when cold. This means your motor will rattle a bit when
it’s cold, and you’ll really want to let the pistons warm up some
before you drive the thing hard. I remember hearing Bradley Smith’s
car start up when it was cold. First off, hearing his car start up
was quite impressive in and of itself because of all the gizmos and
such that it had on it, but when it started up you definitely could
hear the forged pistons rattle a bit until they got warm.–
-Ted – '92 XJS V12 5-speed
–Posted using Jag-lovers JagFORUM [forums.jag-lovers.org]–
–Support Jag-lovers - Donate at http://www.jag-lovers.org/donate04.php

Visit the Jag Lovers homepage at http://www.jag-lovers.org for exciting services and resources including Photo Albums, Event Diary / Calendar, On Line Books and more !

In reply to a message from TedDuPuis sent Tue 21 Aug 2007:

I thought the rods were Carillos. I splashed out on just a pair of
those for a race bike once and still have the tear stains on my
wallet. the thought of buying 12 without a lottery win is what made
me green with envy :-)–
66 2+2, 74 OTS, 76 DD6 Coup�, 84 DD6, 85 XJS 5sp convert
Cambridge, United Kingdom
–Posted using Jag-lovers JagFORUM [forums.jag-lovers.org]–
–Support Jag-lovers - Donate at http://www.jag-lovers.org/donate04.php

Visit the Jag Lovers homepage at http://www.jag-lovers.org for exciting services and resources including Photo Albums, Event Diary / Calendar, On Line Books and more !

In reply to a message from Wheelbarra sent Fri 17 Aug 2007:

is the trans. for the 94 v12 reliable.am thinking of buying a 95
xj12 with 62000 kilometers.are there any troble spot with these
cars?[xj40 body]–
wesley64
–Posted using Jag-lovers JagFORUM [forums.jag-lovers.org]–
–Support Jag-lovers - Donate at http://www.jag-lovers.org/donate04.php

Visit the Jag Lovers homepage at http://www.jag-lovers.org for exciting services and resources including Photo Albums, Event Diary / Calendar, On Line Books and more !