Sale ends todayGet 30% off any course (excluding packages)
Ends in --- --- ---
Forum Posts
Courses
Blog
Tech Articles
Hi
what did you mean by that sentence?
"For example, the machinist wouldn't grind one single big end journal under size, but leave the remainder at a standard size.
While technically possible, this would be inviting disaster."
"Inviting disaster" may be putting it a bit strong, but it's a bad practice - not least because the shells are normally sold as a set. I guess there' s a potential risk of using a "std" shell, or set, on the undersized journal*.
It's akin to reboring a single cylinder while leaving the others un-bored.
*Many, many years ago I sold a Valiant with a 225 slant six, in bits - I'd bought sets of std mains and big ends before stripping it down (yeah, stupid, but I was just starting my 'prenticeship), but turned out the mains needed to be re-ground. One thing and another, I abandoned the job and the guy that bought it had his "mechanic" friend assemble the engine... Yes, you guessed it - despite having the crank clearly displaying the tag stating the B/Es were 30 thou' under he used the STD bearings - the owner came after me for 'compensation' but I just pointed out that info' and his "mechanic" should have seen the tag and that the shells were std - and actually checked, anyway.
This may also be related to the likelihood that if one was damaged, the others are not 100% ok, and machining all of them would offer a more complete repair.
