Engine running again, the good, bad and ugly

[Corky Scott]

I finally got my Ford V-6 going again after partially dismantling it
to repair a cracked timing chain cover. As I mentioned previously,
I'd noticed the crack in the timing chain cover the first time I
assembled the engine, but "repaired" it that time using some metalized
epoxy that was recommended. After running the engine for all told
about half an hour, I discovered oil sitting below the crack. Well we
can't have that, obviously the epoxy wasn't doing the job. Plus there
was oil leaking out past the vibration damper. I wasn't sure what was
causing the vibration damper leak, but surmised that it was likely a
torn oil pan gasket as I had pulled the timing chain cover to
troubleshoot the no start situation of several months ago and did not
drop the oil pan to do that. Since the oil pan is bolted to the
timing chain cover, when I removed those bolts to pull the chain
cover, the gasket tore. I reassembled using RTV to repair the torn
gasket but I it appeared that might not have worked.

Now I had to remove the cover again to repair the crack, again, so I
dropped the oil pan this time and removed the old gasket and cleaned
everything up. Bruce Frank recommended using RTV rather than another
gasket, which suited me fine. I had a tube of red RTV for use in high
temperature areas, but no replacement oil pan gasket.

The timing chain cover went to a shop to be TIG welded, they did a
good job. About the crack, this timing chain cover is also the mount
for the water pump. Some of the bolts that attach the timing chain
cover double as bolts for the water pump housing. But the TCC (timing
chain cover) also has two bitty tabs on each side of the top that have
holes in them for two short bolts to the block. The crack appears to
me to have occured when some ham handed mechanic once removed the
timing chain cover and neglected to remove the tab bolt on the right
side, then probably prised on the cover with a big screwdriver. The
crack sort of almost circles the tab. It's in a non structural place
and seemed emminantly weldable to me. At my request, the welder put a
bead on both sides of the crack.

I hadn't originally wanted to remove the oil pan for the no start
diagnosis because all the pan bolts were safety wired. Well, just had
to bite the bullet, snip the wires and redo them. I didn't have the
luxury of having the engine upside down on the engine stand this time
though, and it was hot and humid. This job took a long time and
wasn't as good as the first time because of clearance issues that
weren't there when things like the PSRU weren't installed.

Anyway, everything came together Sunday morning when I poured in the
$pecial Chevron straight 30 wt oil and spun the oil pump to pressurize
the oil gallaries and make sure the oil pump was primed. This was
easy, using a spare distributer drive chucked into a drill. The
distributer rotates counter clockwise so you spin the pump drive the
same way. I wasn't sure it was picking up, so I turned on the
ignition key and flicked on the instrument switch. I found I really
didn't have to do this (turn on the oil pressure guage) because once
the oil pump began pumping, the drill slowed down dramatically and ran
under a load. The oil pressure guage showed 75 psi. I let the drill
run for about 20 seconds or so, to make sure oil got everywhere.

Then I topped off the oil and filled the radiator, and installed the
distributer.

First try resulted in a couple of hopeful bangs out the exhaust, but
no extended running. A few more tries were less and less successful,
with backfires out the carburetor, so I hooked up the timing light and
checked. WAY OFF, in fact I couldn't even see the mark. I checked
the distributer and discovered that it was now very loose and had
obviously rotated from it's initial setting, unbeknownst to me. I
guess it had not seated properly when I first tightened it down. I
had to rotate the distributer at least 90 degrees before the timing
mark got close.

Now ready to try again, all switches on and the engine fired up
instantly with it's characteristic "ROW ROW ***BROOOOM***. It took a
couple of tries to get things settled down to a reasonable idle, then
I let it run for a minute or two before shutting down to check for
leaks.

There were none. Thankfully, the leaking at the vibration damper must
have been the result of the torn gasket after all because it's bone
dry now.

More topping off of fluids followed before I broke out the IVO prop
and installed it.

I'm skipping the part where I used the winch installed on the test
stand to winch the engine up into the truck. Suffice to say, it was
too scary by far to do that on a regular basis due to the odd sloping
of the ground outside my shop, and the very top heavy engine/test
stand. I'm going to have to fabricate some guide tracks in the truck
bed before I try that again.

But the climax of the day was to drag the engine outside after
installing the prop. The limited clearance of the sliding door
opening to the shop means that I have to rotate the prop till one
blade is pointing down (three bladed prop) so that there is enough
clearance to roll out without hitting the prop on the top of the door
opening.

The IVO installation is perhaps unique in that you do not adjust each
blade individually. Each blade has a lever imbedded in the blade and
the lever fits into a groove in a threaded cylinder which threads into
the hub. So you simply adjust the cylinder so that the levers fit
into the groove and crank the crush plate down to the specified
torque.

If you want to make an adjustment, you insert a LARGE rod into the
cylinder that sticks out in front of the cruch plate and crank it one
way or the other. The blades simply twist to the new adjustment
because they are deliberately fabricated to be relatively flexible.
All the blades move at the same time and you don't loosen anything,
you just crank the cylinder. There's really no need to take blade
angle measurements, you flight test or ground test and adjust the
angle until it's where it needs to be.

So once out beyond the car port overhang, I chained the test stand to
the test stand mounted winch to prevent the thing from rolling away
under power, and fired it up with the prop on for the first time.

The prop diameter is 74 inches, and I made sure that there was enough
ground clearance to run the engine without worrying about the prop
picking up gravel (about 20 inches). Well, that didn't mean that the
prop wasn't capable of blowing stuff all over the place when I revved
it up. I was standing at the instrument panel being sand blasted! I
had to shut down and go get my grinding face mask to protect myself.

It was extremely gratifying to see the prop disappear in a blur and
feel the pressure of the air being shoved back over the engine and me.

The engine is WAY too loud to do this kind of running for very long.
I'll either have to install some mufflers, or perfect the means for
getting it into the truck to haul into the woods next to us to run the
thing for extended periods.

Corky Scott

[Rich S.]

"Corky Scott" > wrote in message
...
> . . . I reassembled using RTV to repair the torn
> gasket but I it appeared that might not have worked. . .
>
> . . . Bruce Frank recommended using RTV rather than another
> gasket, which suited me fine. I had a tube of red RTV for use in high
> temperature areas, but no replacement oil pan gasket. . .

Corky..........

Just a comment, take it for what it's worth. The aircraft engine shop where
I have my work done has an excellent reputation. Not just good, or better,
but excellent! One thing they will *not* allow in their shop is RTV. Not
ever. If RTV is discovered on or in a customer's engine, work halts until a
complete inspection of the engine is completed and all traces of RTV are
removed. If this means a major teardown, so be it.

I think they are correct. RTV squeezes out of the joint both in and out.
Inside it will easily come free and circulate throughout the oil or cooling
system and may plug up passages. If you are lucky, it hits a filter first
and gets trapped. If not, you can lose an engine.

Rich S.

[Corky Scott]

On Mon, 27 Jun 2005 08:12:14 -0700, "Rich S."
> wrote:

>Corky..........
>
>Just a comment, take it for what it's worth. The aircraft engine shop where
>I have my work done has an excellent reputation. Not just good, or better,
>but excellent! One thing they will *not* allow in their shop is RTV. Not
>ever. If RTV is discovered on or in a customer's engine, work halts until a
>complete inspection of the engine is completed and all traces of RTV are
>removed. If this means a major teardown, so be it.
>
>I think they are correct. RTV squeezes out of the joint both in and out.
>Inside it will easily come free and circulate throughout the oil or cooling
>system and may plug up passages. If you are lucky, it hits a filter first
>and gets trapped. If not, you can lose an engine.
>
>Rich S.

Each to their own. RTV is designed specifically to not do that when
used properly. Some types are not supposed to be used where contact
with fuel may occur. Others are formulated for hot engine parts. Use
the wrong type for your application and I guess it might fail in this
use.

My information is that some homebuilders have assembled entire engines
using only RTV for such things as timing chain cover gaskets, water
pump gaskets and oil pan gaskets, without any problems.

Corky Scott

[[email protected]]

Rich S. wrote:
>
> Just a comment, take it for what it's worth. The aircraft engine shop where
> I have my work done has an excellent reputation. Not just good, or better,
> but excellent! One thing they will *not* allow in their shop is RTV. Not
> ever.
----------------------------------------------------

Apples vs oranges. Many car and truck engines REQUIRE the use of RTV
gasket compounds at one place or another. Specs for their use define
the bead diameter and location, open-cure time and final torqing
values. This has been the case for more than thirty years with some
manufacturers. Some gasket sets even include the required RTV.

-R.S.Hoover

[Bill Daniels]

Cool, really cool. Glad to hear it's running.

BTW, have you thought of installing a torque meter on your test stand?
Maybe something simple like a small hydraulic cylinder on an arm with a
pressure gauge. If you know the torque in foot pounds, just multiply it by
the RPM and divide by 5252 to get HP.

Bill Daniels

"Corky Scott" > wrote in message
...
> I finally got my Ford V-6 going again after partially dismantling it
> to repair a cracked timing chain cover. As I mentioned previously,
> I'd noticed the crack in the timing chain cover the first time I
> assembled the engine, but "repaired" it that time using some metalized
> epoxy that was recommended. After running the engine for all told
> about half an hour, I discovered oil sitting below the crack. Well we
> can't have that, obviously the epoxy wasn't doing the job. Plus there
> was oil leaking out past the vibration damper. I wasn't sure what was
> causing the vibration damper leak, but surmised that it was likely a
> torn oil pan gasket as I had pulled the timing chain cover to
> troubleshoot the no start situation of several months ago and did not
> drop the oil pan to do that. Since the oil pan is bolted to the
> timing chain cover, when I removed those bolts to pull the chain
> cover, the gasket tore. I reassembled using RTV to repair the torn
> gasket but I it appeared that might not have worked.
>
> Now I had to remove the cover again to repair the crack, again, so I
> dropped the oil pan this time and removed the old gasket and cleaned
> everything up. Bruce Frank recommended using RTV rather than another
> gasket, which suited me fine. I had a tube of red RTV for use in high
> temperature areas, but no replacement oil pan gasket.
>
> The timing chain cover went to a shop to be TIG welded, they did a
> good job. About the crack, this timing chain cover is also the mount
> for the water pump. Some of the bolts that attach the timing chain
> cover double as bolts for the water pump housing. But the TCC (timing
> chain cover) also has two bitty tabs on each side of the top that have
> holes in them for two short bolts to the block. The crack appears to
> me to have occured when some ham handed mechanic once removed the
> timing chain cover and neglected to remove the tab bolt on the right
> side, then probably prised on the cover with a big screwdriver. The
> crack sort of almost circles the tab. It's in a non structural place
> and seemed emminantly weldable to me. At my request, the welder put a
> bead on both sides of the crack.
>
> I hadn't originally wanted to remove the oil pan for the no start
> diagnosis because all the pan bolts were safety wired. Well, just had
> to bite the bullet, snip the wires and redo them. I didn't have the
> luxury of having the engine upside down on the engine stand this time
> though, and it was hot and humid. This job took a long time and
> wasn't as good as the first time because of clearance issues that
> weren't there when things like the PSRU weren't installed.
>
> Anyway, everything came together Sunday morning when I poured in the
> $pecial Chevron straight 30 wt oil and spun the oil pump to pressurize
> the oil gallaries and make sure the oil pump was primed. This was
> easy, using a spare distributer drive chucked into a drill. The
> distributer rotates counter clockwise so you spin the pump drive the
> same way. I wasn't sure it was picking up, so I turned on the
> ignition key and flicked on the instrument switch. I found I really
> didn't have to do this (turn on the oil pressure guage) because once
> the oil pump began pumping, the drill slowed down dramatically and ran
> under a load. The oil pressure guage showed 75 psi. I let the drill
> run for about 20 seconds or so, to make sure oil got everywhere.
>
> Then I topped off the oil and filled the radiator, and installed the
> distributer.
>
> First try resulted in a couple of hopeful bangs out the exhaust, but
> no extended running. A few more tries were less and less successful,
> with backfires out the carburetor, so I hooked up the timing light and
> checked. WAY OFF, in fact I couldn't even see the mark. I checked
> the distributer and discovered that it was now very loose and had
> obviously rotated from it's initial setting, unbeknownst to me. I
> guess it had not seated properly when I first tightened it down. I
> had to rotate the distributer at least 90 degrees before the timing
> mark got close.
>
> Now ready to try again, all switches on and the engine fired up
> instantly with it's characteristic "ROW ROW ***BROOOOM***. It took a
> couple of tries to get things settled down to a reasonable idle, then
> I let it run for a minute or two before shutting down to check for
> leaks.
>
> There were none. Thankfully, the leaking at the vibration damper must
> have been the result of the torn gasket after all because it's bone
> dry now.
>
> More topping off of fluids followed before I broke out the IVO prop
> and installed it.
>
> I'm skipping the part where I used the winch installed on the test
> stand to winch the engine up into the truck. Suffice to say, it was
> too scary by far to do that on a regular basis due to the odd sloping
> of the ground outside my shop, and the very top heavy engine/test
> stand. I'm going to have to fabricate some guide tracks in the truck
> bed before I try that again.
>
> But the climax of the day was to drag the engine outside after
> installing the prop. The limited clearance of the sliding door
> opening to the shop means that I have to rotate the prop till one
> blade is pointing down (three bladed prop) so that there is enough
> clearance to roll out without hitting the prop on the top of the door
> opening.
>
> The IVO installation is perhaps unique in that you do not adjust each
> blade individually. Each blade has a lever imbedded in the blade and
> the lever fits into a groove in a threaded cylinder which threads into
> the hub. So you simply adjust the cylinder so that the levers fit
> into the groove and crank the crush plate down to the specified
> torque.
>
> If you want to make an adjustment, you insert a LARGE rod into the
> cylinder that sticks out in front of the cruch plate and crank it one
> way or the other. The blades simply twist to the new adjustment
> because they are deliberately fabricated to be relatively flexible.
> All the blades move at the same time and you don't loosen anything,
> you just crank the cylinder. There's really no need to take blade
> angle measurements, you flight test or ground test and adjust the
> angle until it's where it needs to be.
>
> So once out beyond the car port overhang, I chained the test stand to
> the test stand mounted winch to prevent the thing from rolling away
> under power, and fired it up with the prop on for the first time.
>
> The prop diameter is 74 inches, and I made sure that there was enough
> ground clearance to run the engine without worrying about the prop
> picking up gravel (about 20 inches). Well, that didn't mean that the
> prop wasn't capable of blowing stuff all over the place when I revved
> it up. I was standing at the instrument panel being sand blasted! I
> had to shut down and go get my grinding face mask to protect myself.
>
> It was extremely gratifying to see the prop disappear in a blur and
> feel the pressure of the air being shoved back over the engine and me.
>
> The engine is WAY too loud to do this kind of running for very long.
> I'll either have to install some mufflers, or perfect the means for
> getting it into the truck to haul into the woods next to us to run the
> thing for extended periods.
>
> Corky Scott
>
>
>
>

[RST Engineering]

Did you notice that you quoted a HUNDRED AND FIFTY LINES to give a five line
reply? What don't you understand about conserving bandwidth?

Jim


"Bill Daniels" > wrote in message
...
> Cool, really cool. Glad to hear it's running.

[Jerry Springer]

RST Engineering wrote:
> Did you notice that you quoted a HUNDRED AND FIFTY LINES to give a five line
> reply? What don't you understand about conserving bandwidth?
>
> Jim
>
>
> "Bill Daniels" > wrote in message
> ...
>
>>Cool, really cool. Glad to hear it's running.
>
>
>



What's the matter afraid something you wrote might get pushed off?
Maybe you are afraid that someday somewhere a byte will be sent and it
will be the last one the internet will accept and that will be the end
of the internet as we know it.

[Morgans]

"Jerry Springer" > wrote
>
> What's the matter afraid something you wrote might get pushed off?
> Maybe you are afraid that someday somewhere a byte will be sent and it
> will be the last one the internet will accept and that will be the end
> of the internet as we know it.

What kind of bug has been up your ass, the last couple months? It's not
like you.

Seems like you are getting more and more like your namesake, everyday.
--
Jim in NC

[Jerry Springer]

Morgans wrote:
> "Jerry Springer" > wrote
>
>>What's the matter afraid something you wrote might get pushed off?
>>Maybe you are afraid that someday somewhere a byte will be sent and it
>>will be the last one the internet will accept and that will be the end
>>of the internet as we know it.
>
>
> What kind of bug has been up your ass, the last couple months? It's not
> like you.
>
> Seems like you are getting more and more like your namesake, everyday.

Maybe it is called old age or divorce or maybe it is just to "bug" you.
:-) I have not seen UNKA Bob on here lately so someone has to take his
place right? I was wondering the same thing about Jim he seems to have a
bug up his ass. What little bit on activity there is on RAH anymore I
don't think wasting band width is a problem.

[Morgans]

"Jerry Springer" > wrote

> Maybe it is called old age or divorce or maybe it is just to "bug" you.

Ahh, the "D" word. That explains a host of ills. Sorry.

> :-) I have not seen UNKA Bob on here lately so someone has to take his
> place right?

Really? Does anyone *have* to? <g> Seems like BoB used a mix of mostly
good natured jibes, mixed with a few serious "**** off" soapbox sessions.

>What little bit on activity there is on RAH anymore I don't think wasting
band width is a problem.

Two things come to mind. For those whom dial up is the only option, 9k for
a "me too" is a serious *time* waster, and a pain in the arse. The other is
that it shows a true laziness of the responder, and strikes me as though the
responder thinks his time (of not taking the time to trim) is more important
than your time. (the reader, trying to scroll down through a post, and see
if there is anything else new, through all the lines of repeated posting)

At any rate, it is rude, IMHO, and *should* occasionally be pointed out to
the worst offenders.

Interesting too, that these type of offenders are usually the same ones who
top post, but *that* is another soapbox I'm not going to get on! <g>
--
Jim in NC

[Jerry Springer]

Morgans wrote:

>
> Interesting too, that these type of offenders are usually the same ones who
> top post, but *that* is another soapbox I'm not going to get on! <g>

Ah you mean like the great Jim did as he was chastising someone for not
trimming their post? :-)

[Rich Ahrens]

Morgans wrote:
> Two things come to mind. For those whom dial up is the only option,
> 9k for a "me too" is a serious *time* waster, and a pain in the arse.

As are arguments like this, of course.

> The other is that it shows a true laziness of the responder, and
> strikes me as though the responder thinks his time (of not taking
> the time to trim) is more important than your time. (the reader,
> trying to scroll down through a post, and see if there is anything
> else new, through all the lines of repeated posting)

Kinda like being too lazy to change the subject line when you take a
technical topic off on a tangent about people's attitudes, divorce,
etc.? So that the reader has to download and scroll through posts to see
if they have the slightest connection to, oh, engines?

Physician, heal thyself...

[Corky Scott]

On Mon, 27 Jun 2005 19:06:10 -0600, "Bill Daniels"
> wrote:

>Cool, really cool. Glad to hear it's running.
>
>BTW, have you thought of installing a torque meter on your test stand?
>Maybe something simple like a small hydraulic cylinder on an arm with a
>pressure gauge. If you know the torque in foot pounds, just multiply it by
>the RPM and divide by 5252 to get HP.
>
>Bill Daniels

I'll be happy enough just being able to adjust the prop so that I can
bring the engine up to maximum rpm while sitting there. I need to be
able to do that so that I can test the engine at max power for 5
minutes or so.

I'm still working out how to safely get the engine/test stand into the
Tacoma. I need to build some tracks in the bed so that the test stand
doesn't run away to one side when it gets up into the bed, or run into
the bed and punch out the rear window with the exhaust collectors
because the truck tilts downhill while backed to the carport..

I will probably have to get a sheet of plywood and cut it to fit
around the wheel wells and have it lay out over the tailgate to keep
the tailgate down when the engine is at "full song". I worry about
the low pressure created in front of the engine lifting the tailgate
up into the prop.

I could always have the test stand sitting on the tailgate, but it's
really too heavy to be attempting to manhandle alone.

Alternately, I could find some mufflers to clamp to the collectors.
The hope is that it quiets the sonic rap of the engine to the point
where I don't have to haul it into the woods for testing.

Lots to do yet before extended testing.

Corky Scott

[Morgans]

"Jerry Springer" > wrote\

> Ah you mean like the great Jim did as he was chastising someone for not
> trimming their post? :-)

Touche' :-)

Actually, I don't mind a top post if it and the first post are small enough
to be seen without scrolling.
--
Jim in NC

[Morgans]

"Rich Ahrens" > wrote
>
> Kinda like being too lazy to change the subject line when you take a
> technical topic off on a tangent about people's attitudes, divorce,
> etc.? So that the reader has to download and scroll through posts to see
> if they have the slightest connection to, oh, engines?
>
> Physician, heal thyself...

I couldn't help but notice that you failed to change the subject line. ;-)
--
Jim in NC

[Rich Ahrens]

Morgans wrote:

> "Rich Ahrens" > wrote
>
>>Kinda like being too lazy to change the subject line when you take a
>>technical topic off on a tangent about people's attitudes, divorce,
>>etc.? So that the reader has to download and scroll through posts to see
>>if they have the slightest connection to, oh, engines?
>>
>>Physician, heal thyself...
>
>
> I couldn't help but notice that you failed to change the subject line. ;-)

Quite intentionally to make the point. And your excuse?

[Morgans]

"Rich Ahrens" > wrote
>
> Quite intentionally to make the point. And your excuse?

Just following your lead, since you made yourself the expert on the subject.
--
Jim in NC

[Blueskies]

Saw your pictures posted up on the BD4 group - you are a daring soul.

Maybe somehow capture the exhaust and pipe it out of the carport area; big diameter no pressure drop stuff but really
long. Should quiet down the noise.

Maybe hose down the area in front of the prop to hold down the sandblasting, or pave it ;-)

Looks very good!

[Blueskies]

"RST Engineering" > wrote in message ...
> Did you notice that you quoted a HUNDRED AND FIFTY LINES to give a five line reply? What don't you understand about
> conserving bandwidth?
>
> Jim
>
>
> "Bill Daniels" > wrote in message ...
>> Cool, really cool. Glad to hear it's running.
>
>

Bang, and just like that a great topic is blown off course by another interruption...

[Rich Ahrens]

Morgans wrote:
> "Rich Ahrens" > wrote
>
>>Quite intentionally to make the point. And your excuse?
>
>
> Just following your lead, since you made yourself the expert on the subject.

In other words, you have no excuse for your hypocrisy...

[Morgans]

"Rich Ahrens" > wrote
>
> In other words, you have no excuse for your hypocrisy...

Nothing so deep. I'm just helping you make a fool of yourself, for
complaining about SOP in this group.

See ya! Over and out'a here. ;-)
--
Jim in NC

[Corky Scott]

On Tue, 28 Jun 2005 23:34:36 GMT, "Blueskies"
> wrote:

>Saw your pictures posted up on the BD4 group - you are a daring soul.

I'll be darned, wonder how they got there because I didn't post them.

Corky Scott

[Rich Ahrens]

Morgans wrote:

> "Rich Ahrens" > wrote
>
>>In other words, you have no excuse for your hypocrisy...
>
>
> Nothing so deep. I'm just helping you make a fool of yourself, for
> complaining about SOP in this group.

Nope. I'm not complaining about it - I'm pointing out how ridiculous it
was for *you* to start netkopping way back in this thread. Thanks for
playing...

[Morgans]

"Rich Ahrens" > wrote
>
> Nope. I'm not complaining about it - I'm pointing out how ridiculous it
> was for *you* to start netkopping way back in this thread. Thanks for
> playing...

Ooops, your bad. Read back. I commented about a netcop practice AFTER
someone else brought it up. Anything else I can help you with?
--
Jim in NC

[Dylan Smith]

On 2005-06-28, Jerry Springer > wrote:
> What's the matter afraid something you wrote might get pushed off?

No, it's just netiquette. It's no different to holding a door open for
the person following instead of letting it slam in their face. Or saying
'thank you' instead of nothing at all when you get served at a shop.

Sometimes if I'm hanging around at an (airline) airport, I'll read
Usenet on my laptop over a GPRS (mobile phone) link. You pay per
kilobyte. An untrimmed top posted comment with 30 or 40K worth of
untrimmed comments with a 'Me too' response can get irritating.

--
Dylan Smith, Castletown, Isle of Man
Flying: http://www.dylansmith.net
Frontier Elite Universe: http://www.alioth.net
"Maintain thine airspeed, lest the ground come up and smite thee"

[Rich Ahrens]

Morgans wrote:

> "Rich Ahrens" > wrote
>
>>Nope. I'm not complaining about it - I'm pointing out how ridiculous it
>>was for *you* to start netkopping way back in this thread. Thanks for
>>playing...
>
> Ooops, your bad. Read back. I commented about a netcop practice AFTER
> someone else brought it up.

I didn't say you were the first, just that you began doing it yourself,
while practicing equally egregious behavior yourself. And you described
it with approval, adding your own condemnation and ditto of his remarks,
marking you a netkopp. You wrote:

> Two things come to mind. For those whom dial up is the only option, 9k for
> a "me too" is a serious *time* waster, and a pain in the arse. The other is
> that it shows a true laziness of the responder, and strikes me as though the
> responder thinks his time (of not taking the time to trim) is more important
> than your time. (the reader, trying to scroll down through a post, and see
> if there is anything else new, through all the lines of repeated posting)
>
> At any rate, it is rude, IMHO, and *should* occasionally be pointed out to
> the worst offenders.

Just giving you your own medicine...

> Anything else I can help you with?

Not very likely, given your lack of success so far.

[Blueskies]

"Corky Scott" > wrote in message ...
> On Tue, 28 Jun 2005 23:34:36 GMT, "Blueskies"
> > wrote:
>
>>Saw your pictures posted up on the BD4 group - you are a daring soul.
>
> I'll be darned, wonder how they got there because I didn't post them.
>
> Corky Scott
>

As they say...news gets around!

[Morgans]

"Rich Ahrens" > wrote

> Just giving you your own medicine...
>
> Not very likely, given your lack of success so far.

OK, I will give myself 13 lashes with a wet noodle, an promise to consider
not posting OT posts, or to netcop anymore. Note that I said "consider."

That is the best that I can do, right now. <g>

By the way, I did enjoy Corky's post on running his engine.

Corky, If you are still with us, have you considered putting your engine on
a johnboat, and making an airboat out of it? Of course it would help if you
had large bodies of water nearby. I see it as a way to test run the heck
out of it, and have fun doing it. The wave action could give you a real
chance to test the redrive's toughness.
--
Jim in NC

[Corky Scott]

On Thu, 30 Jun 2005 20:01:55 -0400, "Morgans"
> wrote:

>Corky, If you are still with us, have you considered putting your engine on
>a johnboat, and making an airboat out of it? Of course it would help if you
>had large bodies of water nearby. I see it as a way to test run the heck
>out of it, and have fun doing it. The wave action could give you a real
>chance to test the redrive's toughness.
>--
>Jim in NC

Still here. I was talking with Tom McNeilly who designed and
fabricates his leaning block in Arizona. He was telling me that he
rigged his engine up on some kind of rolling chassis he had, or found.
It had brakes and was steerable. He'd ride the thing around his yard.
His kids thought it was great fun and actually drove it back and forth
along the road in front of his house.

I just want to test the engine. I think I've wasted, er, spent plenty
enough time already just getting to the point where I can run it on
the test stand. ;-)

My wife is in favor of me putting effective mufflers on it so that I
don't have to haul it into the woods, I can just drag it outside the
shop and run it there.

One Ford STOL builder did use mufflers on his airplane and it sure
impressed his wife. Her remark was "how about that, a quiet float
plane!"

Corky Scott

[dwoolery]

Blueskies wrote:
> "Corky Scott" > wrote in message ...
> > On Tue, 28 Jun 2005 23:34:36 GMT, "Blueskies"
> > > wrote:
> >
> >>Saw your pictures posted up on the BD4 group - you are a daring soul.
> >
> > I'll be darned, wonder how they got there because I didn't post them.
> >
> > Corky Scott
> >
> As they say...news gets around!

Glad to hear you're running again. It is kind of fun testing. I
installed an exhaust gas temp. gauge this week. One gauge, one probe
and six cylinders so it will be a little slow. I am looking forward to
testing Bruce Frank's idea of the "golf ball diverter".

D Woolery

[Corky Scott]

On 1 Jul 2005 08:37:18 -0700, "dwoolery" > wrote:

>Glad to hear you're running again. It is kind of fun testing. I
>installed an exhaust gas temp. gauge this week. One gauge, one probe
>and six cylinders so it will be a little slow. I am looking forward to
>testing Bruce Frank's idea of the "golf ball diverter".
>
>D Woolery

What idea was that?

Thanks, Corky Scott

[dwoolery]

In one of Bruce's newsletters he talked about making a piece of
aluminum shaped like a sphere, cut in half and dimpled like a golf
ball. This piece was mounted in the intake under the carburetor. It's
purpose was to help direct the air/fuel mixture evenly to each
cylinder. Sounds good so I will try it if I find there is much
variance in temp. between the cylinders.

[Corky Scott]

On 1 Jul 2005 14:16:31 -0700, "dwoolery" > wrote:

>In one of Bruce's newsletters he talked about making a piece of
>aluminum shaped like a sphere, cut in half and dimpled like a golf
>ball. This piece was mounted in the intake under the carburetor. It's
>purpose was to help direct the air/fuel mixture evenly to each
>cylinder. Sounds good so I will try it if I find there is much
>variance in temp. between the cylinders.

Oh that. I don't recall it being called a "golfball diverter" but I
know what you mean. I've heard it referred to as a "turtle" or
"frog". Not sure it will be required in my case as the engine seems
to be pretty smooth so far.

I have not dared to rev the engine beyond 3,000 rpm so I don't know
how smoothly it will run at full throttle. It's a little intimidating
to be standing two feet from the prop while it's blasting air by you.

I'm also trying hard not to damage the prop with it picking up sand.
Nothing bad happens up to about 2,000 (engine) rpm, but above that,
even with 20 inches of ground clearance, it picks up sand from the
gravel driveway and hurls it around in a malestrom.

I've tried dragging it onto the lawn to minimize this effect, and now
that I have the plywood I happened across for free, I probably will
try that more often, but it means using the winch a lot more which is
hard on it and hard on the battery.

It may be that the best solution is to winch the engine into the
pickup after all, but getting it out of the pickup is still
intimidating.

Yet another solution that's been offered is to make a low trailer that
I can winch the engine onto. That's a good idea, possibly even the
best idea, but will require a lot of fabrication, not to mention the
cost of the axles, wheels, tires, bed support, hitch etc. etc., and a
place to put it when not in use.

In the meantime I've got some pavers to lay for the entrance to the
house. This project has been waiting for about 25 years.

Corky Scott

[Montblack]

("Corky Scott" wrote)
[snip]
> In the meantime I've got some pavers to lay for the entrance to the
> house. This project has been waiting for about 25 years.


Easiest do-it-yourself project in he world. However, the prep WILL kill you
:-)


Montblack

[Blueskies]

"Corky Scott" > wrote in message ...
> On 1 Jul 2005 14:16:31 -0700, "dwoolery" > wrote:
>
> ...
> Yet another solution that's been offered is to make a low trailer that
> I can winch the engine onto. That's a good idea, possibly even the
> best idea, but will require a lot of fabrication, not to mention the
> cost of the axles, wheels, tires, bed support, hitch etc. etc., and a
> place to put it when not in use.
>
>

Old boat trailers can be found for a little $$$ and will have most of what you need...