[Fot] leakdown tester, follow-on question

[N197TR4 at cs.com]

In a message dated 9/26/2007 8:59:08 PM Central Daylight Time, 
rkramer3 at austin.rr.com writes:


> Joe,
> 
> Did this testing include the plate I sent you? Being as how it is around 2 
> inches thick I expected that it would work well. I like to know how it 
> compares to the Deere method and what I am losing.
> 
> 

Yes!   I think the plate I have is around 2" thick, too....from Mordy Dunst. 
I have not measured it yet for Glen.

You are not likely to be losing anything. Or very little. Or maybe it is even 
better when you get done.  

We had to try different torques and different settings on boring and honing 
equipment, including changing hone stones, to get the desired results. Very 
time consuming, to get it where we felt it was right.

The 'production fixture' was eventually made and we got the results and 
repeatability much faster.  At least all of the liners are pretty much the same. I 
use a standard head gasket, so I suspect there is not much crush on the rim 
and it may hold it's wall shape pretty well in assembly.

Not very technical, but when it is simple and it works, that's usually a good 
sign. Our clamping on the entire skirt seems to stabilize the liner very well 
during boring and honing.

Also, beats making a set up with an engine block and placing the torque plate 
on the liners with all of the fiddling with head bolts and nuts.  Fast set 
up. 

I would never go back to the old way...but that's me. I stood around these 
boring and honing machines for hours and hours as an industrial engineer. I dont 
have perfect knowledge on any of this stuff, but it seems right to me.

Joe Alexander   </HTML>