Ok. When I've had V-8's rebuilt in the past, I just went with a new cam and lifters. ...but those were readily available.

I thought that I read that only the surface of the lobes were hardened. So I figured that grinding them down, would expose a non-hardened surface.

Thanks for the input!

Mark

Hi all,

I will be having a 288 and a 327 (both "H" engines) engine(s) rebuilt. I know that there was a thread somewhere from a man who was asking about casmshafts. ...I can't recall which engines. But I can't find the thread.

Anyway, the user was talking about re-using the cams, and asked if there were any alternatives. I talked to Max Merrit, and they only have regrinds, and that they would have to order. Are there any other sources out there for camshafts?

I'm a little unsure about how regrinds work. If they "regrind it" to smooth out the lobes, wouldn't you loose lift and duration? I think that I understand that they would grind the base circle, so would this would make the lobe the same lift/duration relative to the base circle.

I'm just wondering what my options are, and which is preferable. ...re-use, re-grind or are there any NOS cams out there?

Thanks,

Mark

Hi everyone,

I pulled the head off of an engine that I purchased. It has a "5" stamped on the top surface of the engine block. It is between the number 8 cylinder and the back edge.

Should I assume that this means that the top surface has been milled .005 by someone? I don't think that the previous owner has had the engine rebuild. I pulled the rod and main bearings out and there is no undersize stamped on the backside. They actually have a stamping of FM 49. (Federal Mogul 1949 perhaps?)

Thanks,

Mark

A vacuum leak perhaps?

Good luck!

Mark

Just an FYI... JC Whitney still carries the window channels. Fairchild brand.

Here are the rigid styles:

http://www.jcwhitney.com/steel-core-window-channels/p2008545.jcwx?filterid=d1776y1949g2

Here are the rubber styles:


http://www.jcwhitney.com/all-rubber-window-channels/p2009944.jcwx?filterid=d1776y1949g2u0j1

They used to carry the rigid belts too. I can't seem to find them tho.

I can't recall if Steele Rubber carried them also.

Mark

You could run a leak-down test on each cylinder to determine where the compressed air is going. You may find that the valves are just not seating --OR-- as you are seeing 0 psi in adjacent cylinders, the head gasket may be to blame.

Good luck.

...just a though on the soot... When I was dialing in my Carter carb on my 327 chevy, it would run rich. After about 5 miles, the plugs were sooty black and I lost performance. As it happened in a rather short trip, my mixture was waaaaay too rich. So see what the plugs tell you.

If you think that you are burning antifreeze, due to a head gasket, I would think that you will find a clean plug or two as they are being "washed" by the antifreeze. But I would think that you would see white smoke out of the pipe.

Check your oil too, but I can't believe that you've lost a gallon of antifreeze to the oil. It would look like chocolate milk, or thinner.

I may be wrong with the above, as I am only a backyard mechanic. Someone may correct me.


Good luck!

Mark

Yes, plastic. Yes, I do know that muratic acid is strong stuff. I have used it in the pool and to remove some rust at times. ...have always used protection, in a well ventilated area.

I was just asking about them using it to clean plastic lenses. I didn't think that there would be any effect, as I didn't think that it reacted to/with plastic.

...and if I'm not mistaken, the guy was pouring it straight onto the lenses, in a stainless steel sink (rinsing it down the drain), and rubbing it with his hands. I didn't think that was too smart.

Mark

I turned on "Graveyard Cars" on the Velocity station... For an hour show, there is about 5 minutes of "technical stuff", but I did see that they were washing tail light lenses in muratic acid. Is anyone familar with a benefit of this? Does it remove the oxidation?

Thanks,

Mark

Ok. This may give everyone a snicker... But I figured that I would confirm that I had pulled the engine the easiest way possible.

It's been a number of years since I removed the 288 from my grandfather's car. ...a non-running 23rd series. I recall that I spent a lot of time underneath the trans removing bolts, inspection plates, linkages and such. Some cursing went on too.

Flash to current day, and (I thought) a smarter me. So to check with anyone who has puleed one... After removing everything off of the front (radiator, gener, pullies) all fuel lines, wires, exhaust and linkage mounts to the engine... I come to my question...

Is it easiest to pull the engine off of the trans shaft, with clutch, fork and bearing remaining in the bellhousing? Or should I have removed the trans cross-member and pulled the trans with the engine?

I pulled the engine off of the trans as I was concerned about weight of the trans. I had the engine hoist on the side of the car.

I have yet to re-install an engine. But I figure to install the engine and trans as a whole.

I did read a motor manual on "engine removal". It really didn't help.

Thanks,

Mark

P.S. I pulled the engine as there is a six inch crack along the water jacket. So I need to find a replacement.