SparrowV12 wrote:
First off that wasn't my point at all. My point was, in regards to the rods anyhow, was that the "60 year old junk" couldn't be improved upon. In regards to better material, unless you could find unobtainiam, the material that the G6 rod was made of was as good as the best modern material they could find in regards to grain structure etc,etc. The cost to have the parts made was quite reasonable I thought. My next question is this, have you ever seen a sleeve for a Bristol Centaurus radial to know what it is like and be able to understand the tolerances that are required of it? As with a lot of this old aviation engine stuff, believe me, it's not as easy to make as one would think and product liability is a big part to consider as well.
4130 and 4140 steels have existed since the 1930s, so those are nothing new and they are still widely used in similar applications as an example. There are different materials now, not necessarily better, that have been developed for different applications that are of far higher strength. Metallic materials are all compromises of strength vs. ductility. That is just a fact of metallurgy.
Yes I've seen a Centaurus sleeve and I've flown an a few different Sea Furies all with the Centaurus engine. I don't know offhand what the tolerances are on the sleeve, but if there is a drawing it can be built. Complexity factors just add to cost/scrap rate. The number of tools, the number of setups, and the number of opportunities to introduce error into the process all add up. Never said it was easy, only that it could be done if someone was willing to spend the money. I'm sure there were a few tricks of the trade used on these components. The question is are you willing to be the Guinea Pig on the learning curve (which was conquered years ago but has now been forgetten as tribal knowledge)?