Callies Performance Compstar Sport Series Billet Crankshaft

So up until recently I thought the only way to get a cross drilled crank for the VAG was through JUN
http://www.callies.com/catalog/product/nissan/?
Coz lists this as a billet crank hence the title, but reading the catalogue the only reference I see to billet is the GTR cranks, could be miss interpretation on my part or Coz's
Still 2000hp capable, with very high rpm capabilities.
Never seen it on this site so here you go.

 

I did not know Callies was advertising a VG30 crank, but I do know Crower has been doing a custom billet crank for at least 5 years now.


Crower straight shot rod journal oiling (Chevrolet style)


Crower in front, stock in back


The Crower design requires custom wider rods on the big ends to allow for a 0.09375" (2.38mm) tangential (not undercut like stock) fillet radii on the rod journals so the stock width rod bearings can be used without the need to narrow or chamfer them for clearance. Doing this increases the journal overlap by a substantial amount to increase the strength at this critical area.

They also do a straight-shot oil drilling to the rod journals which intersects the main journal at a sharp angle so it doesn't cross the center line which reduces the pressure required to overcome centripetal forces and allow oil to flow to the rod journals. The crank pictured here is not cross-drilled on the mains, but I'm sure they would do that if requested.

One issue we found with the Crower is the the fillet radius on the snout where the timing gear presses on is much larger than stock and so the timing gear and the washer behind it needs to be pinned together and both are then chamfered on the ID for clearance (pics below).

It would be interesting to how, or if, Callies is addressing the rod journal radius vs bearing width.

 

Thanks for your input, didn't know there was another of the shelf crank very interesting.

If anyone is reading this thinking whats the point. My line of thinking is if your going to to have your stock crank balanced, crack tested , weights welded on and so on, then starting with a high balanced crank that was made with revs and smoothness in mind makes a lot more sense.

 

I see what your saying and it would cost those prices if you bring one in the hard way eg: 1 off import.
But its worth noting that many traditional speed shops in Australia stock these cranks and bring large quantaties for various american engines
http://vpw.com.au/Category/Index/445439?Brand=Callies whole sale quantities means better pricing
Armed with the part number #S25002 a large parts supplier could and would do a lot better than $5,000.

 

Speculation, but isn't that the whole point of GST on everything to shop local. You don't really expect me to find RGS the lowest prices do you. If you want me to be your parts interpreter we can discus salaries.
Think about it a large performance shop bringing in 40 cranks a month for other engines adding part number #S25002 to the order means nothing to them, tell them its for a Japanese import 300zx and expect a fair amount DHT.
Anyway this is the technical section, this forum is already filled with pointless drivel, broken links and lost images. Pm me if you want to troll on, I probably wont respond.

 

FWIW The Jun stroker crank still keeps factory x drilled oiling. Not great. For the value you merely get a billet offering and added stroke. Thats it. The Crower cranks are nice but a lot of detail is left out. They use the standard shelf Crower rod so theres nothing out of the norm for that crank. It does however have straight shot oiling which I've been for years stressing the importance of and modifying the factory cranks to mimic the straight shot oiling design, so that is a definite plus! Crower cranks are a tad heavy due to the overall width of counterweight design and non rifled rod journals for mass reduction. Knife edged on all ends but unfortunately not the best solution for windage dynamics.

Callies sent their first billet crank to me for input and QC. I've sent it back to further improve the design and ensure the offering is the best it can be for the value being sold at. Its a foreign billet blank thats pre-machined in China. It is then sent here for final dimension machining/case hardening/nitriding. The budget side of it is due to it being a quality Chinese billet blank. Great for those wanting a good step up from a stock crank.

The only other crank offered is the ones I offer. Its an EN4300 series crank, bull nosed counterweights, triple nitride processed then induction hardened at the end, full racing fillet radius. Has proper straight shot oiling standard, comes already balanced (nice bit of savings there /you supply bobweight) and weighs less than the Crower and has a significantly smaller footprint by way of counterweight dimension. This same crankshaft is offered in both my 3.2L and 3.3L stroker VG rotating assemblies. The crank pictured above by the OP is of the ultra billet for the GTR. The VG crank will look very basic in billet look/feel. The super finishing if one wants to opt for it to make it look like the ultra billet above is an additional $350. They retail for $2400. I will be offering this budget crank once Callies & I refine all the details that are needed.

 

I've never agreed with the logic of your VG crankshaft oiling modification, here's why:

Unless you are re-drilling factory cranks (you're merely plugging one side of the cross-drillings, correct?), a factory VG30 crankshaft cannot be modified to "mimic" straight shot oiling in any way, shape, or form. When you plug one side of the VG's cross-drilled main or rod journals, you do nothing to address the fact that the geometry of the drilling still goes to the crank's center to tee into the rod journal drilling... The flow path between entry and exit is exactly the same as before, and this does not mimic the straight-shot oiling design, purpose, or benefit. The good thing is you're not really hurting the crank either... other than the potential stress risers from the NPT threads I guess.

The first design aspect of straight-shot oiling is that the drilling is actually as straight as possible from the main to the rod journal. The second design aspect is the entry to this straight hole is drilled at a sharp angle to the main bearing surface so that it stays away from the center of the crankshaft as much as possible. The purpose of this design is to reduce the pressure differential (dP) between the oil supply at the main bearing surface and the oil within the drilled hole - the closer the drilling gets to the crank's rotational center, the higher dP.

I'm not saying the stock VG crank oiling is junk and everyone should be replaced immediately. The benefit of reducing a crankshaft's oiling dP is to allow an overall reduction of oil pressure to minimize parasitic losses - in the real world, most of us are not tempted to chase down every little bit of parasitic power loss and will simply use the stock oil pump without modification and never see this as a problem because in factory form the pump is capable of supplying an excess of oil pressure needed to prevent the real problem from ever occurring...

...The real problem of a high dP geometry and a reduced oil pressure strategy is the potential to create a low pressure situation within the oil drilling where volatile compounds dissolved in the oil can flash into vapor due to their low Vapor Pressure characteristics at operating temperatures... this will seriously interrupt the flow of oil to the rod bearings if this happens. This situation manifests at elevated RPMs because the centrifugal force at the main bearing increases with RPM squared and the oil pressure at the main journal must also increase to force oil to flow into the crank oil hole drilling. But, not only does there need to be enough oil pressure to initiate flow at the main bearing surface, there also needs to be an excess of oil pressure to offset the inherent dP of the crankshaft's oil drilling and keep the minimum pressure within the drilling high enough to prevent any volatiles from flashing to vapor... don't worry, the stock pump already does this for us.

One detail I do know that you do not mention about yours or Callies' is the Crower's rod bearing journals have a 3/32" (0.09375" ) fillet radius which is tangent to the bearing surface (not undercut like stock is) to maximize the journal overlap cross-section and the rod journals were widened accordingly so that narrowing or chamfering the arguably already narrow stock rod bearings for clearance is not required. This detail does require a custom rod which is wider on the big end to keep the side clearance within spec.

Can you "detail" a dimension on your full racing fillet radius?... and is it undercut or does it require narrowing or chamfering the bearings for clearance?

 

Doesn't matter what you agree with. What matters is what works. Your thought process on oil design is flawed and unfortunate that the system in place you're trying to depict doesn't account for overall path of least resistance in accordance to rotational direction and overall pressure/flow. The modification works extremely well that we put in place on the stock crank. The same process was done to older version of sbc cranks that shared the same x drilled oiling. The resolve...the samevexasa offering I do if ppl didn't want to invest into a billet crank. Just because you don't understand or agree absolutely does not mean it isn't proven nor works.

When anyone in the race industry refers to "race fillet radius" they refer to either a 3/32 or 5/32 radius at the fillet overlay. Your Crower inspired crank in fact does not require wider rods. If it did those that bought those cranks would of had a custom rod p# yet they all share a shelf stock p#. I know because I have one of these cranks in possession to include a Callie's and my own billet crank.

I'm not going to sit and type out my specs to my crank. I've done the design and follow through with my supplier to give the best crank on the market bar none.

You're coming out discussing crank design trying to convey an over the top approach but that Crower crank simply isn't. It's literally a stock replacement with straight shot oiling. Is what it is.

I'm not going to sit and debate with you what is and isn't. I've the manufacturers dealing with us to develope these items to ensure those that want to get a legitimate piece purchased that they get the best part with no frills. You can cut up all the terminology you want on all this but at the end of the day it's very straight forward and nothing really special in the grand scheme of things.

 

5k for an aftermarket crank? Hell, even at $1000, I'd still just prep a std crank without a second thought..... Unless you're running an all out time attack car or 1000hp drag car......in which case money is no barrier to you anyway, I think this a complete waste of money.
I wonder what the heck they were thinking designing such a thing. It's not like our cars are the most popular circuit and drag racing platform out there, and there are plenty of stock motor....not just crank, but stock motors from heads to sump, sitting in many a 9 and 10 sec 300zx. And its not as if theres vg30 crankshafts spat out on every street corner to justify the expense of needing one.

This brings me to a slight off topic point. Having owned a GC8 with a stock, factory EJ207(OEM forged pistons) that ran a 10.22 @ 138 and was daily driven....for over a decade. Still is actually
I really wonder how much of the hyped aftermarket forged this and billet that....is neccessary for 99% of us driving street cars. Bad tuning or poorly thought out modifications to the OEM are the culprit the majority of stock bottom end failures in my experience. Except for the odd factory SNAFU.....7mgte factory head bolt torques being one that comes to mind.
A well built forged motor will disguise a bad tuner to some extent as the margins for error resulting in catastrophic failure are greatly increased.



I'm currently building a single turbo, unopened factory NA VG30DE in my 2 seater, and a using a bone stock VG30DETT in my TT 2+2 with high flowed factory turbos. Both will be running factory ECU with nistune. I did however replace the NA oil pump with a TT unit. But that is the only modification to the motor.


Both motors done well over 150k kms. Tired, old and probably only serviced whenever the oil light came on in their previous lives. Both setups will cost well under 10k each, one is actually closer to 7k.......including the cost of purchasing the cars too might I add, and if they dont both make well into the high 400s whp and run 115 to 120mph down the strip, and can reliable be driven daily.....then I'll be very, very surprised.

Would they be more reliable, faster and more powerful with billet cranks, forged pistons and every aftermarket part in the catalogue. Of course. But at literally, probably 5 times the cost of a well thought out setup using mostly factory parts, not sure the cost to benefit is justified for my purpose anyway.

 

with regards to the callies stuff though. I used to work for an engine builder over here who used callies cranks ( as mentioned by tech@epr compstar is the cheaper " chinese" callies line.....chinese billet, chinese inital machining and final finishing done in the US) in all the big hp big cubed big boost LS builds. Im talking daily driven 1000+ rwhp small block V8s. They are a great bit of kit at the price u pay for V8 cranks anyway. The compstar line is miles ahead of other "Chinese" forged and machined brands like eagle and scat with regards to things like.....tolerances. some eagle journals being out of spec straight out of the box occasionally :/

Nowadays they stuff coming out of China is pretty decent. I've personally had a brand new crank from a former big name australian manufacturer spin a bearing on its first dyno run after being built due to a soft journal. I was surprised to find out those in the industry were aware that quality of said brands components had basically turned into a hit and miss affair. After all they built the damn things.
Yet in the forums and message boards.....they were the hottest items u could get for your car. It's hard to sift through the advertising bullshit and forum chatter
And misinformation at times about brands and quality with all the vested interest people have in pushing their own agendas.
The track doesnt lie though. The people with the shops building cars that are smashing records week in week out are the ones I'd be listening too. They didnt get there by building hand grenade motors full of cheap unreliable junk.

 

I completely agree that your crank oil mod "works" in that it still has an entry and exit that supplies oil to the rod bearing, but your claim that it's an improvement because "what matters is what works" does nothing to prove that it is an improvement.

There are people smarter than both of us who have actually done experiments to test their hypothesis of how oil flows within a crankshaft oil drilling. I attached a PDF research paper which compares the effect of cross-drilling the mains - this paper changed my view on cross-drilling. It may help you to reconsider blocking off one side of a cross-drilled main... if it doesn't, it will definitely give more information to any of your customers who might have been considering going with your mod. It also studies the effect of reduced oil pressure and the formation of air pockets within both types of drillings at elevated RPMs.

Don't get upset because I called BS on your stock crank oiling mod. Unlike you, I'm not trying to sell something to anyone in my posts - I am simply providing information on a product I have bought and I have nothing to gain from it. Why you would choose to defy what I have stated about the Crower crankshaft when I can easily prove my point just makes you appear stubborn for no reason and referencing PNs to prove your point is laughable.

Case in point:

Crower VG30 crank with 0.860" wide rod journal

Stock VG30 crank with 0.835" wide rod journal

Crower VG30 rod with 0.850" wide big end

Stock VG30 rod with 0.821" wide big end


You see, the Crower VG30 crank is a custom piece which they are willing to modify if the customer knows what they want... so, either you don't know that the rod journal can be made wider to allow a stock width bearing to work with the 3/32" fillet radius, or you stubbornly refuse to admit the benefit of doing this with a VG crankshaft.

Fine by me... I've offered more information on the Crower, which I don't sell or even care if it sells, than you have on your own product.

See proof offered above... or don't see it, I don't care.

All that I asked you to do was to specify your crankshaft's fillet radii dimensions and whether the bearings will require chamfering or narrowing for clearance to said radii, which you refuse to answer. You're the one trying to sell something here, how about doing so with concrete dimensions rather than using vague snake-oil salesman nonsense such as "full racing fillet radius" and "The Crower cranks are nice but a lot of detail is left out." I'm curious what these details are, because you've also left out a lot of details on your own offerings.

 

7 years, no rod bearing failures, reports given back show more consistent oil pressure and reduction in crank case windage. I'd say that's more than plenty of proof.

Its a shame you amongst so many others look for all this proof when the modification to a cross drilled crank has been done for YEARS prior to me offering the service. Why is it you or no one else in this community figured any of this out? I wrote a full article on it and ppl spoke negativily towards it and my work yet the alterations are sound and perform extremely well.

I've spoken to many reputable engine builders from across the US and all stipulated the same info I've been reiterating for years. You like to throw about a lot of clout in regards to what is and isn't but the fact boils down to you aren't machining or doing this type of work day in and day out like we do. We see an exceeding amount of failures that come into our shop from other builds and so forth. We work harder than anyone in machinibg/development for this platform. I've invested years of my time and thousands of dollars to set up systems and put them into place. If things didn't work they wouldn't be readily available.

To that it's a bit ridiculous you'd refer to me as "poor guy" in speaking with ppl stating I don't know what the issues are with a VG30 and or how to solve them. You have your views and that's fine but I've been doing this a very long time and I see exactly what's needed to keep a VG alive. It was never just about Fasteners like you pitched to many ppl. If that were so you'd of not spent all that time putting together a bedplate of sorts. So you recognize my efforts and know very well I'm correct in the direction and implementation of a Billet cap system. Someone had to have the way. We are happy to continue it as well.

The Crower crank I have came with shelf stock rods. Don't know what to tell you. It's a 100% shelf stock part number. Really shouldn't matter any way you look at it because the larger radius is just there to aid in only 2 things. Surface area for durability and oil leak to return oil out past the crank. That's it. Your personal crank may be running a wider setup but the unit set I have here is all stock setup which is nothing extravagant but a far leap in the correct direction in what a proper race crank needs to be.

 

What exactly is there to figure out? You're copying something that has been done for years by other people... correct? That still does not prove it is an IMPROVEMENT.

The tech paper I uploaded is clear-cut scientific proof that a cross-drilled main provides full oil pressure to the rod bearing for nearly 100% of crank rotation, while no cross-drill only pressurizes the rod for 50% of crank rotation... it is hypothesis proven by experiment. It also proves that oil flow is indeed higher with a cross-drilled main and one would expect drag from the additional oil flinging around the crankcase. It doesn't matter to me which side of the fence you want to play on these facts... I personally am willing to give up some parasitic losses to ensure the rods are pressurized more.

Agreed, I do not currently build or machine engines. But I did spend the better part of 6 years doing so... That combined with an engineering background of 17 years, I think I'm qualified to give an opinion on practically any of your "what is and isn't" practices. [/QUOTE]

Where did I say "poor guy"? The only thing I've ever said to anyone about you directly, is that I've never had a deal work out with you... you always have some sort of excuse, issue, or simply can't deliver on any dealing that I've had with you. So, if someone asks me about you or your work, all I say is I would never have any business deal with you again. If there's a "poor guy" in this scenario, it's your customers who know exactly what I'm talking about.

Focus, this is a crankshaft discussion - why go off on tangents about fasteners and bedplates? If you want to discuss those topics, start a new thread and I'll be happy to tell you what I do and do not recognize about your "efforts".

But, but, it's missing a lot of details... right? Oh yeah, we shouldn't worry, your cranks will have all of the "race" details and it's silly of anyone to ask you for radius dimensions or whether the bearings need to be narrowed/chamfered for clearance... you'll just take care of all those insignificant details there in your shop. right?