I have a neighbor who owns a cryogenic freezing company and he's offering to freeze an Olds 455, F Heads, and assembly bolts. He says it will add significant strength to the metal composition.

In fact, he did this to his SBC 400 w/ infamous Siamese bore and vortec heads. He changed the head gaskets at 100k miles to check on the cylinder walls. He described the hone markings as perfect, like the day he put the heads on. He's confident that when it comes time to rebuild, he will not have to bore or hone the block.

Sounds tempting, and with the diminishing availability of BBO blocks, I'm thinking of doing it for security sake. Has anyone done this before, heard of it, or have suggestions?

YouTube Link: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vPURmV8LHEM
This is new to me, so I found a video that explains it somewhat.

 

It's good stuff but is usually done on cranks, rods, pushrods, lifters, and fasteners. Never heard of doing it to a set of heads...but it can't hurt.

 

I've never heard of lifters, ha ha. That's awesome. Crank and rods were the other things he wanted to freeze. Do cryo'ed rods even hold a candle to the strength of forged rods?

 

Read this:

http://www.oldsmobility.com/oldsmo/v...php?f=44&t=406

 

I read this article just moments before you posted it here. What an amazing process. So, now i need to find a shaker in Austin, TX. This is going to cost me so so much. This will be my divorce engine. LOL

 

I thank that the heads being temperature treated hot or cold, would have the same effect on the parts of the assembly, in that the metals shrink and expand at different rates. Therefore, I would treat the bare heads and parts separately to avoid undesirable affects on the heads and parts. I have not heard of cryogenicly treating a complete assembly without dire consequence. You would not cryogenicly freeze the entire engine as an assembly, would you?!?

 

Unless this is some sort of all out race motor you are just wasting your money. Spend the money on a good, precise machinist as proper clearances and machining is what will make the motor live a long life.

 

I completely agree with 70Post. Also, if you have the ability and inclination, spend the money for good parts and do the work yourself. Quality is the key.

 

I completely agree with me also.... What JamesPDX said...tell us what parts you were considering for the motor and then provide a price for the Shaken, Not Stirred and the Tastee Freeze processes.

Consider an upgrade to a lighter forged piston like the KB Forged pistons or CP, etc for even lighter weight. On a diet???.....look at some better and lighter rods (a potential, if not "the" "weak spot" in Olds motors according to Bill Travato...a guy that knows Olds motors).

Wala....you just took a load off the bearings and crank which they might appreciate. Still, with shoddy clearances and/or failure to mic the new parts instead of trusting what the company says they measure and you still could have problems.

Thus....find a great machinist that is very, very particular about his or her work.

I also suspect that if one looked WAY BACK into the development of the cryo process they might find that the true intent of it was to "pre season" NEWLY CAST/FORGED PARTS destined for hard, hard use. My suspicion (unproven I will admit) is that the aftermarket is doing part of what it does best....when you run out of customers find some more for your process whether or not they really need it.

There are plenty of top notch Olds engine builders out there putting together combinations that withstand plenty of abuse without ANY of these processes. It's been going on for decades. Save your money and/or spend it on better parts, etc.

 

X2

 

I believe that the metal composition (more nickel etc.) of the Olds is the main reason that the block is stronger, even without the freezing.

 

That's never been proven to my knowledge.

 

[quote=jonstringer;278598]
".........with the diminishing availability of BBO blocks, I'm thinking of doing it for security sake....."

Let me know if you ever need a BBO block. Thanks

 

The freezing will be free to me. The heads will be bare, the block will be bare, and the components will be frozen seperately. I wouldn't do it if I had to pay for it. Texas442, I will keep you in mind when I need a core. Thank you for the offer.

 

Below is quoted information that supports the comment that I made earlier concerning the metal composition being the reason for strength of Olds block.

307 Block Quality (From Tony Waldner)

There was a problem in 1987. I don't know if it is due to poor nickel quantity, but there was a cracking problem in the deck area. Engine rebuilders are aware of this and check the decks of 1987 307's very close.

Olds wasn't the only division to suffer in 1987. The small block Chevy cracked in the cam valley that year, and the 2.5 liter 4 cyl Pontiac suffered block and head cracking problems.

Block Metallurgy (From Chris Witt, Robert Schinkel, Joe Padavano, Mike Bloomer, and Dave Brode)

Yes the nickel content is what makes the early Old's blocks, and Olds blocks in general, so strong. This is readily apparent if you use a rotary file on the block or heads. Low nickel engines (cheby is prime example) are very easy to take metal off while high nickel engines (like Olds) will take twice as long to remove the same amount of material. Prime example is when you machine the main caps for the strap and stud kit mine came out looking like a mirror (you could literally see your reflection!).

At the rear of the block behind flexplate, in the right upper area (cast on the rear face, under the flexplate area,) for an "F" code such as F0, F1, F2, F3, F4, ect. If the block is an early one, the F code will be fairly low.

This numbering and selection of lower is better generally applies to 455 block only. This is open to speculation, because this is the most I've heard on the subject. And yes, conventional wisdom holds that the lower the F-number, the better the block quality for hi-po use - for 455s, which were cast in the late 60s-early 70s period when reduce performance and fuel economy concerns resulted in lower nickel content and thinner walls later in the production run. I doubt this applies to 425s, for example, which were obviously all cast in the early to mid 60s, and would have high nickle content.

The F5/F6 on a 67 425 block is consistent with them being 67 blocks (1967 was the last year of 425 production - presumably 65 425 blocks would be F1 and F2 blocks, for example). The reason why this is not significant on the 425s is that apparently all year 425 blocks are the same with reguard to wall thickness and nickel content, so the "look for a lower F-number" was never an issue. The 455s, however, do vary in desireability with production year, so that's why you've only heard about the F-number in relation to those blocks.
For those seeking to build a really heavy-duty engine, rumor has it that the blocks with a "F", "F1", etc, up to, "F5" or "F6", are higher in nickel, and stronger. Rumor has it those blocks up to the "F2" are the most desireable. These are commonly 1967 to 1970 or so 425 or 455 blocks.

This is not the "F" block ID code found on the timing shelf area. The "F" designation we are talking about here is a large (~1.5" tall) letter cast into the back face of the block, under the flywheel. You obviously need to have the motor out and the flywheel off to see this. This will either be just the letter "F" or "F" and a number up to 6. The 1968's should have the "F" with no number; later blocks have higher numbers. Conventional wisdom holds that the earlier blocks (up to "F2") are higher in nickel content and thus more desireable for performance applications.

Year . . . Model . . . CID . . . .Nickel Content Code
'66 . . . . . . . . . . . . 330 . . . . F4
'67 . . . . Non Toro . 425 . . . . F5
'67 . . . . Non Toro . 425 . . . . F6
'68 . . . . . . . . . . . . 455 . . . . F4
'68 . . . . 442 . . . . . 400 . . . . F2
'68 . . . . . . . . . . . . 455 . . . . F2
'68-'70 . . . . . . . . . 350 . . . . F4
'69 . . . 98 . . . . . . 455 . . . . F1
'69 . . . . Hi-comp . 455 . . . . F4
'70 . . . . 88 . . . . . . 455 . . . . F1
'73 . . . . . . . . . . . . 455 . . . . F3
'73 . . . . . . . . . . . . 455 . . . . F4
'76 . . . . 88 . . . . . . 350 . . . . F7
. . . . . . . Diesel . . . 350 . . . . F6

 

I’d like to enter additional info as part of a discussion on nodular components and the strength of metals. Below is a citation given that references the composition of metals used for crankshafts and engine blocks from Wiki. Notice in this citation that the tensile and yield strength can be increased by adding copper and tin, while corrosion resistance can be improved by replacing some of the iron with various combinations of nickel, copper, or chromium. It was pointed out by Tony Waldner (below) that cracking in the 1987 Olds blocks, Chevy cam valleys, and Pontiac blocks and heads was due to a poor quality nickel additive in their composition. I did not notice this in my 1987 307 olds as it just became very tired. Maybe that was one reason?!?

Unless I read this wrong, nickel content in the metal may not be the specific reason for the strength of the block as indicated below! Read on.

Basic Citation with very little editing

Ductile iron, also known as ductile cast iron, nodular cast iron, spheroidal graphite iron, spherulitic graphite cast iron and SG iron, is a type of cast iron invented in 1943 by Keith Millis. While most varieties of cast iron are brittle, ductile iron is much more flexible and elastic, due to its nodular graphite inclusions.

On October 25, 1949, Keith Dwight Millis, Albert Paul Gagnebin and Norman Boden Pilling received US patent 2,485,760 on a Cast Ferrous Alloy for ductile iron production via magnesium treatment.
Metallurgy

Ductile iron is not a single material but is part of a group of materials which can be produced to have a wide range of properties through control of the microstructure. The common defining characteristic of this group of materials is the morphological structure of the graphite. In ductile irons the graphite is in the form of spherical nodules rather than flakes (as in grey iron), thus inhibiting the creation of cracks and providing the enhanced ductility that gives the alloy its name. The formation of nodules is achieved by addition of nodulizing elements, most commonly magnesium and less often, cerium, into the melt. Yttrium has also been studied as a possible nodulizer.

Besides the requirement that the graphite be manipulated into the spheroidal shape, the ferrite and pearlite ratios can be controlled through alloying, shakeout temperature control or post-casting heat treatment to vary the relative amounts pearlite and ferrite from 0% pearlite and 100% ferrite, to 100% pearlite and 0% ferrite. The control of the pearlite and ferrite ratio manipulates the tensile, yield and elongation characteristics of the ductile iron to produce numerous standard grades of material.

" Austempered Ductile Iron" (ADI) was invented in the 1950s but was commercialized and achieved success only some years later. In ADI, the metallurgical structure is manipulated through a sophisticated heat treating process. The "aus" portion of the name refers to austenite.

Composition

A typical chemical analysis of this material:

• Iron
• Carbon 3.3 to 3.4%
• Silicon 2.2 to 2.8%
• Manganese 0.1 to 0.5%
• Magnesium 0.03 to 0.05%
• Phosphorus 0.005 to 0.04%
• Sulfur 0.005 to 0.02%

Other elements such as copper or tin may be added to increase tensile and yield strength while simultaneously reducing elongation. Improved corrosion resistance can be achieved by replacing 15% to 30% of the iron in the alloy with varying amounts of nickel, copper, or chromium.
Applications

Much of the annual production of ductile iron is in the form of ductile iron pipe, used for water and sewer lines. Ductile iron pipe is stronger and easier to tap, requires less support and provides greater flow area compared with pipe made from other materials. In difficult terrain it can be a better choice than PVC, concrete, polyethylene, or steel pipe.

Ductile iron is specifically useful in many automotive components, where strength needs surpass that of aluminum but do not necessarily require steel. Other major industrial applications include off-highway diesel trucks, class 8 trucks, agricultural tractors, and oil well pumps.

Reference: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ductile_iron

 

Now, after thinking about the above, I realize that the cracking supposedly due to poor nickel quality, may have little to do with the strength of the metal, as believed by several knowledgeable individuals. It seems that adding quantities of copper and/or tin are the factors that provide increased strength, and then only if treated properly. How might the copper or tin cause such a problem? Could the problem have been the low quality nickel acting as an impurity? It is not likely that the heat treatment or shaker would have been the problem such a long run by multiple manufacturers.

Heat has always been associated with treating metals for added strength, whereas high and low temperature treatments can cause changes in strength. Freezing is therefore included as well. I wonder if the shaker methodology is similar to the shot peen technique. I did not fully read those articles on the shaker.


Any takers?