I was surprised that my car would run with such low compression values. In
a way, I was encouraged. If it ran this well on two and two thirds
cylinders, it should run like crazy on four cylinders.
I have accumulated doubts about this garage and I don't have a good
alternative locally. I think it is time for me to try this myself.
Hey, I'm old, but not stupid.
I think my best plan is to do as Bill J suggests. Get a manual and figure
it out for myself.
Thanks everyone for the help. I'll let you know how the novice engine
rebuilder fares.
At 10:08 AM 9/7/00 -0400, Mitchell, Doug (D.B.) wrote:
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Jeff Gruber [mailto:jgruber@demainsoft.com]
> > Sent: Wednesday, September 06, 2000 7:39 PM
> > To: spitfires@autox.team.net
> > Subject: Low compression in number 2
> >
> >
> >
> > My mechanic says that I have the following compression readings
> >
> > 1 - 75
> > 2 - 20
> > 3 - 50
> > 4 - 75
> >
> > Needs a ring job? Yes?
> >
> >
> > Is that something a dumb-as-dirt mechanic like myself could try? Be
> > honest, brutal if necessary.
> >
> > Thanks.
> >
> >
>
>As Joe said, not necessarily. Who tested the compression?
>
>Are you sure that they are 75,20,50,75? That almost isn't enough
>to run. You may need just a valve job, but...
>
>I am surprised that no one has suggested the old mechanics trick
>of squirting a little oil in each cylinder and then re-checking
>the compression. (Maybe I am too old a mechanic). If the numbers
>rise, it points to rings, if they stay the same, it indicates
>valves. The other thing that should be done is a leak down test.
>This can confirm the valves/rings.
>
>With the proper manuals, you shouldn't have any problem replacing
>the rings, but if you are going that far, you might as well as
>rebuild the engine at the same time. If your compression readings
>are as low as you say, there are undoubtedly other problems as
>well.
>
>--
>Doug Mitchell
>mailto:dbmitch@peoplepc.com
>'73 Spitfire 1500
|