| The Real Bev <bashley101@gmail.com>: Nov 05 03:53PM -0800 On 11/05/2017 03:31 PM, Xeno wrote: >> time you go back for a box or open end. > Especially useful where you are working on one of those bastard bits of > machinery where you have a mixture of metric and SAE bolts and nuts. Are metrinch wrenches still available? Did anyone ever buy them? -- Cheers, Bev Buckle Up. It makes it harder for the aliens to suck you out of your car. |
| "Steve W." <csr684@NOTyahoo.com>: Nov 05 07:53PM -0500 The Real Bev wrote: >> Especially useful where you are working on one of those bastard bits of >> machinery where you have a mixture of metric and SAE bolts and nuts. > Are metrinch wrenches still available? Did anyone ever buy them? They are still out there and new versions seem to pop up now and then. They can be handy in the rust belt if you're out on the road. -- Steve W. |
| "Steve W." <csr684@NOTyahoo.com>: Nov 05 07:58PM -0500 Xeno wrote: >>> I have Toyotas precisely because they have a chain. >> Some do, some don't. (perhaps today they all do - not sure) > The ones I buy sure do! ;-) Chains don't mean a lot when they drop them down to bicycle sizes with small pins. Things stretch like cheap rope. -- Steve W. |
| Frank <analogdial@mail.com>: Nov 06 01:12AM On Sun, 05 Nov 2017 14:11:23 +0000, RS Wood wrote: > I have to agree with you that if I knew a vehicle had a belt, and > especially if it was an interference engine, for me, that car would be > nearly worthless. Chains are hardly ideal. Chains wear. The wear changes the pitch between the links and the links no longer quite fit on the sprockets. It turns into a self reinforcing cycle. More wear = worse fit, worse fit = accelerated wear. Eventually the poorly fitting chain will jump one or more teeth on the crank gear or start breaking the teeth on the cam gear. The other effect of chain wear is retarded cam timing. The more worn links between the crank and cam, the more the camshaft timing gets retarded. I changed timing sets on conventional OHV engines and that usually advanced the ignition timing from 5 to 10 degrees, suggesting that chain wear had retarded the timing by that amount. It wasn't only the changes in point gap that was changing the ignition timing on these old cars. It's no surprise that fiberglass/rubber timing belts ended up being used on most OHC engines. Could be modern chains are better engineered than the old ones. I can't say. But I still prefer belts. Even on a tight package like a Dodge Neon with the 4 speed auto, the replacement isn't too bad, once you know the routine. > Just like FWD cars and tricked-out cars are, to me, nearly worthless. I love front wheel drive, especially in the snow. |
| Frank <analogdial@mail.com>: Nov 06 01:27AM On Sun, 05 Nov 2017 04:38:39 +0000, RS Wood wrote: > Interesting that it's not better design of engines. Alot of the old motors used to have hot spots, such as exhaust ports and the manifold heat riser on V type engines, which would coke up the oil quickly. This coked up oil would plug up oil passages and an old motor could be partially starved for oil even if it was full of clean, clear oil. The heat riser could be designed out of EFI engines. 10W 40 would coke up faster than 10W 30, for what it's worth. |
| Frank <analogdial@mail.com>: Nov 06 01:45AM On Sun, 05 Nov 2017 14:33:43 +0000, RS Wood wrote: > It's a non-maintenance part nowadays. > But we *all* had to deal with exhaust in the days of yore. > So kudos to the EPA for forcing stainless steel into the mix! Give the leaded gas ban credit for longer lasting exhaust systems, too. Leaded gas contained some nasty stuff to eat away lead and lead oxide deposits and that nasty stuff would also chew away at exhaust systems, spark plugs and engine components. |
| clare@snyder.on.ca: Nov 05 09:08PM -0500 On Sun, 5 Nov 2017 14:19:28 +0000 (UTC), RS Wood <rswood@is.invalid> wrote: >The body last longer. >The exhaust lasts longer. >What doesn't last longer on a car nowadays? Sometimes things like power lock actuators and some electrical connections |
| clare@snyder.on.ca: Nov 05 09:09PM -0500 On Sun, 5 Nov 2017 14:21:22 +0000 (UTC), RS Wood <rswood@is.invalid> wrote: >b. Less contamination of the oil >So, fundamentally, people seem to be saying that carburetors contaminated >everything more than does EFI, which reduced the life of the engine. Correct |
| clare@snyder.on.ca: Nov 05 09:10PM -0500 On Sun, 5 Nov 2017 14:23:33 +0000 (UTC), RS Wood <rswood@is.invalid> wrote: ><https://www.consumerreports.org/cro/news/2015/02/pros-and-cons-of-direct-injection-engines/index.htm> >What's so great about gasoline direct injection anyway? ><https://www.cnet.com/roadshow/news/whats-so-great-about-direct-injection-abcs-of-car-tech/> The biggest advantage is the fuel is injected after initial compression, just before the spark - so the fuel is not "dwelling" in the combustion chamber under high heat and pressure, dissassociating and causing detonation. Can run much higher compression ratio on regular gas. |
| clare@snyder.on.ca: Nov 05 09:12PM -0500 On Sun, 5 Nov 2017 14:25:41 +0000 (UTC), RS Wood <rswood@is.invalid> wrote: >engine timing is retarded to eliminate the pinging). >I have never heard of that, but, it kind of sort of makes sense. >Is that what you're implying can happen? Might happen - but not by design. A properly running injected engine hardly builds any deposits at all under normal operation. |
| clare@snyder.on.ca: Nov 05 09:12PM -0500 On Sun, 5 Nov 2017 14:27:33 +0000 (UTC), RS Wood <rswood@is.invalid> wrote: >So it's a higher voltage zap for a longer period of time. >What's the old voltage? Something like 10K to 15K volts, right? >What is the new voltage zap? 60K plus |
| clare@snyder.on.ca: Nov 05 09:14PM -0500 On Sun, 5 Nov 2017 14:33:43 +0000 (UTC), RS Wood <rswood@is.invalid> wrote: >But we *all* had to deal with exhaust in the days of yore. >So kudos to the EPA for forcing stainless steel into the mix! >PS: I wonder how "Midas Muffler" stays afloat? They do brakes and suspension and tires now. |
| clare@snyder.on.ca: Nov 05 09:15PM -0500 On Sun, 5 Nov 2017 14:35:31 +0000 (UTC), RS Wood <rswood@is.invalid> wrote: >Woo hoo! Gotta love being able to change alignment to suit your needs! >I just wish I could have done that on my own, without paying $100 for >someone else to twist a bolt that I could have twisted myself. You paid $10 to twist the bolt and $90 to know how far to turn what bolt in what direction!! |
| clare@snyder.on.ca: Nov 05 09:16PM -0500 On Sun, 5 Nov 2017 14:36:18 +0000 (UTC), RS Wood <rswood@is.invalid> wrote: >> Toe is last. Adjustments to camber will alter toe. Adjustments to toe >> will not alter camber. >Thanks. The way I'll remember it is Caster -> Camber -> Toe. Caster and camber are pretty well inter-related - changing one changes the other on most non-strut suspensions. Struts are a whole lot simpler. |
| rbowman <bowman@montana.com>: Nov 05 07:18PM -0700 On 11/5/2017 8:13 AM, RS Wood wrote: > The only question is how much did the manufacturer save on FWD. > Someone mentioned it was only $50 but I would have guessed at $1000. > Anyone know how much cheaper it is for them to build FWD cars? There is more to it than that. FWD is more efficient than spinning a drive shaft and rear differential. Bending power 90 degrees costs. FWD also allows as much if not more passenger space in the cabin. If you ever dealt with the transmission hump from hell you know what I mean. Admittedly it's a moot point for me since I go for two bucket seats and a center console but I don't haul a family around. FWD designs tend to be lighter. When you're chasing the EPA fleet mileage, FWD looks good. |
| rbowman <bowman@montana.com>: Nov 05 07:22PM -0700 On 11/5/2017 7:55 AM, RS Wood wrote: > All I needed was the feeler gauges at the top, plus some Suzuki shims: > <https://i.imgur.com/XSW3lhK.jpg> Shim over buckets? Yamaha had a tool that would hold the bucket down for some of their engines so you could get the shims out. Shims under the bucket means you pull the cams. |
| clare@snyder.on.ca: Nov 05 09:24PM -0500 On Sun, 5 Nov 2017 14:46:17 +0000 (UTC), RS Wood <rswood@is.invalid> wrote: >I have read too much practical stuff to believe in marketing bullshit. >Removing metal is not the best way to dissipate heat in a rotor. >I get the surface area stuff. I do. Both drilling and grooving INCREASE surface area exposed to air. >Let's not just talk. If you really think that removing mass is the way to >make rotors run cooler, then just show me a valid reference that agrees >with your point of view. (Not marketing bullshit please.) Mass just delays the inevitable. Mass does NOT cool. Mass absorbs (and holds) heat. Airflow and convection cool. Enough mass prevents the brake from overheating as quickly as a lower mass rotor - but also takes longer to cool. In racing applications RECOVERY is the aim - so they drill and groove the rotors to both let the outgassing from overheated pads escape, and the rotors to shed heat more quickly. Then they use carbon fibre - which absorbs LESS heat, and weighs less than steel, but can operate hotter and still stop. There is more than just mass involved with rotor thickness. There is also the fact a thicker rotor has more strength and wont - get this - WARP when it gets hot. |
| clare@snyder.on.ca: Nov 05 09:32PM -0500 On Sun, 5 Nov 2017 14:47:31 +0000 (UTC), RS Wood <rswood@is.invalid> wrote: >> for FWD was it can be built for $50 a car less. >There is one and only one reason the manufacturers put in FWD. >And it's not handling. Well, I'll half agree with both of you. Front drive is LIGHTER - which is the main arguement for front drive. It is more compact packaging - taking up less interior space - no driveshaft hump, no transmission hump, and no space taken up by the rear diff (and rear axles) With transverse engine mounting hypoid gears are eliminated, increasing the efficiency of the drivetrain. It MIGHT be less expensive to build - but that's a byproduct of the rest of it. As for handling - that depends what you want. Rallying competitively for 3 years with a front wheel drive Renault 12, and having owned and driven a "classic" mini as my first car, and driving a 204 Peugeot estate during my time in Africa - I LIKE front wheel drive handling. It's definitely DIFFERENT than rear drive - but the low powered Renault beat out a LOT of bigger and more powerful rear drive cars - Datsuns, Celicas, BMWs, MGs, "Yank Tanks", Beetles, and Porsches. |
| clare@snyder.on.ca: Nov 05 09:42PM -0500 On Sun, 5 Nov 2017 15:05:12 +0000 (UTC), RS Wood <rswood@is.invalid> wrote: >That doesn't mean I'm always (or even ever) right. >I'm just logical. >So the "better rings" has to be better ... somehow ... in some way. Better design, better metalurgy >Where a piston ring is a pretty simple thing (in practice). Actually a LOT of science involved in the base metalurgy, the torsion design, the surface finish - moly filled, chromed, etc, as well as the thickness and tension of the rings. >everything there is to know about designing piston rings, so I know >everything is complex at the design phase. >But a ring is a ring is a ring is a ring. AFAIK. The ring used in a dragster engine, truck engine, and standard street engine will all be significantly different. >Pray tell ... what on earth do you think is *better* about a ring of steel >today from that same ring of steel of yesteryear? You just do not understand the complexity of ring sealing - how they must twist - and bend to seal as both the rings and cyls change size and shape as they heat and cool. A simple cast iron flat-land ring with no taper or notches doesn't seal or last worth a crap. It can't twist (has no torsion) Oil ring design is every bit as complex. No way a 1855 Chevy ring would ever go 200,000 miles if installed in today's engines - just like it didn't back then - even WITH today's oils. |
| clare@snyder.on.ca: Nov 05 09:48PM -0500 On Sun, 5 Nov 2017 15:13:57 +0000 (UTC), RS Wood <rswood@is.invalid> wrote: >The only question is how much did the manufacturer save on FWD. >Someone mentioned it was only $50 but I would have guessed at $1000. >Anyone know how much cheaper it is for them to build FWD cars? Well, there was a LOT of design work to ammortize. GM never made a penny on the Olds Toronado and Caddy El Dorado because of the significantly higher cost of the powertrain (which was also used in the GMC Motorhomes) The Citation was also an expensive proposition for GM - cost more to build than the old nova/ventura/ etc. Volume has brought the price down. Chrysler is still building RWD ( 300, charger, challenger, etc) - GM still builds the Camaro and Corvette and Ford the 'Stang. They are still competetive (well, not the Corvette). Manufacturers can cheapen up any design if they can design to use existing parts. |
| clare@snyder.on.ca: Nov 05 09:50PM -0500 >Solvent paint is gone in favor of water based. Now your car is >accurately covered by a robot rather than a guy with a hangover. Up to >about 1923 cars were painted with a brush. They were first actually VARNISHED, then Laquered a few years later. |
| clare@snyder.on.ca: Nov 05 10:09PM -0500 On Sun, 5 Nov 2017 18:13:49 +0000 (UTC), RS Wood <rswood@is.invalid> wrote: >1. Look up the friction rating for OEM pads (e.g., FF). >2. Buy *any* pad (that fits) that meets or exceeds *that* rating. >Pretty simple huh. Not as simple as you would make it sound. They might only last 5000 miles, or they might last 50,000 miles. Same friction ratingf. They might squal like a banshee - they might be totally quiet - same friction rating. The linings might fall off the backing plates il less than a yeat. They might wear brake rotors like a grind-stone. They might promote uneven material transfer - making brakes "thump" >in each. >E is about as good as steel on steel for friction coefficient. >F and G are common. Actually GG is pretty UNCOMMON. - and many OEM pad sets have different frictiom material on the inner and outer pads.. The FG Thermoquiets on my Ranger work pretty good - - - and they are different inside to outside. |
| clare@snyder.on.ca: Nov 05 10:20PM -0500 On Mon, 6 Nov 2017 10:09:25 +1100, Xeno <xenolith@optusnet.com.au> wrote: >specs and gain the effect of a hotter cam. >A set of pre-measured, marked and sorted shims is a handy thing to have >around. I ran the 170 Valiant clearances at half the spec'd clearance - which was responsible for it's unique exhaust note and helped produce that 206 HP at the rear wheels through the pushbutton Torqueflight. |
| clare@snyder.on.ca: Nov 05 10:20PM -0500 On Mon, 6 Nov 2017 10:10:02 +1100, Xeno <xenolith@optusnet.com.au> wrote: >> Which was my point. >Look up the process for providing UV protection for tyres. The concept >is essentially the same. Carbon black is a major player - - - |
| clare@snyder.on.ca: Nov 05 10:21PM -0500 On Mon, 6 Nov 2017 10:12:00 +1100, Xeno <xenolith@optusnet.com.au> wrote: >The slots provide a means by which the gases can quickly escape. >In a road going car, slotted rotors are probably overkill. Not so on >high performance vehicles. 100% correct - on both counts. |
| You received this digest because you're subscribed to updates for this group. You can change your settings on the group membership page. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it send an email to sci.electronics.repair+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com. |
No Response to "Digest for sci.electronics.repair@googlegroups.com - 25 updates in 1 topic"
Post a Comment