A aviation & planes forum. AviationBanter

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » AviationBanter forum » rec.aviation newsgroups » Home Built
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Ford V-6 engine work



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #11  
Old August 13th 03, 01:45 PM
Corky Scott
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

On Wed, 13 Aug 2003 01:58:48 GMT, "Ernesto Sanchez"
wrote:

Do you have any photos yet?
Ernesto
http://home1.gte.net/res0391z/index.html


There are a few photos in the Christavia Yahoo group. I have a few I
took of cog and flywheel I'll upload today if I can find the time.

Corky Scott
  #12  
Old August 13th 03, 02:01 PM
Larry Smith
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"Corky Scott" wrote in message
...
On 13 Aug 2003 07:38:50 -0400, Gregg Germain
wrote:

Hey Croky,

What airplane is this for?


--


--- Gregg
"Improvise, adapt, overcome."

Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics
Phone: (617) 496-1558


A Christavia Mk4. It's a largish four place high wing monoplane with
STOL


Ahhhh. Swope Farm and Mile Hi Fields beckon.

I'm envious, Corky.




performance. Empty weight is 1350 and gross wt is 2150.

Corky Scott



  #13  
Old August 13th 03, 02:07 PM
Gregg Germain
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Corky Scott wrote:
: On 13 Aug 2003 07:38:50 -0400, Gregg Germain
: wrote:

:Hey Croky,
:
: What airplane is this for?
:
:
:--
:
:
:--- Gregg
: "Improvise, adapt, overcome."

:Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics
:Phone: (617) 496-1558
:

: A Christavia Mk4. It's a largish four place high wing monoplane with
: STOL performance. Empty weight is 1350 and gross wt is 2150.

: Corky Scott

Corky,

Did a goggle search, saw your web page. Very cool. Good luck with
it.



--- Gregg
"Improvise, adapt, overcome."

Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics
Phone: (617) 496-1558

------------ And now a word from our sponsor ----------------------
For a quality mail server, try SurgeMail, easy to install,
fast, efficient and reliable. Run a million users on a standard
PC running NT or Unix without running out of power, use the best!
---- See
http://netwinsite.com/sponsor/sponsor_surgemail.htm ----
  #14  
Old August 13th 03, 03:27 PM
Barnyard BOb --
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


Barnyard BOb -- wrote:

600 ten thousandths
60 thousandths
6 hundredths
.6 tenths....

All the same thing.


When talking about inches, all that stuff you wrote equals 60 mils
which is a heck of a lot easier to say than "60 thousandths of an
inch". Heck, I can't even say the word "thousandths" with any degree
of clarity unless I say it really really slow. There ought to be a
law against such words.

For the record, one mil = 1/1000 of an inch.

And yes, Bob, you are surely correct about the 30 mil overbore and 6
mil piston/cylinder clearance.

David O -- http://www.AirplaneZone.com

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Indubitably, Dave, indubitably. 8-)


Barnyard BOb -- Peter Piper picked a peck of pickled peppers
  #15  
Old August 14th 03, 04:03 AM
Peter Dohm
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Larry Smith wrote:

----snip----

Ahhhh. Swope Farm and Mile Hi Fields beckon.

I'm envious, Corky.


You're a better man than me. I took a look at the pictures and prose earlier in
the thread. Swope farm didn't look too bad since the 134 foot elevation change
is worth a little more than 50 knots, by my calculation, that the engine need
not contribute; although you'd better be ready when you're ready. On the other
hand, I'd rather just watch mile high from a safe distance; or better yet, not
in "real time".

Peter
  #16  
Old August 19th 03, 05:10 AM
Bruce A. Frank
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Though "thousandths" is the correct word most of the machinists I've
worked with just say "thousands"

--
Bruce A. Frank



David O wrote:

Barnyard BOb -- wrote:

600 ten thousandths
60 thousandths
6 hundredths
.6 tenths....

All the same thing.


When talking about inches, all that stuff you wrote equals 60 mils
which is a heck of a lot easier to say than "60 thousandths of an
inch". Heck, I can't even say the word "thousandths" with any degree
of clarity unless I say it really really slow. There ought to be a
law against such words.

For the record, one mil = 1/1000 of an inch.

And yes, Bob, you are surely correct about the 30 mil overbore and 6
mil piston/cylinder clearance.

David O -- http://www.AirplaneZone.com

  #17  
Old August 19th 03, 03:06 PM
Model Flyer
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"Bruce A. Frank" wrote in message
...
Though "thousandths" is the correct word most of the machinists

I've
worked with just say "thousands"


Oddly I always said, "thow" ie. "30 thow"
--

..
--
Cheers,
Jonathan Lowe
modelflyer at antispam dot net

Antispam trap in place


--
Bruce A. Frank



David O wrote:

Barnyard BOb -- wrote:

600 ten thousandths
60 thousandths
6 hundredths
.6 tenths....

All the same thing.


When talking about inches, all that stuff you wrote equals 60

mils
which is a heck of a lot easier to say than "60 thousandths of an
inch". Heck, I can't even say the word "thousandths" with any

degree
of clarity unless I say it really really slow. There ought to be

a
law against such words.

For the record, one mil = 1/1000 of an inch.

And yes, Bob, you are surely correct about the 30 mil overbore

and 6
mil piston/cylinder clearance.

David O -- http://www.AirplaneZone.com



  #18  
Old August 21st 03, 02:29 AM
clare @ snyder.on .ca
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

On Wed, 13 Aug 2003 05:33:03 -0500, Barnyard BOb --
wrote:


Could you possibly mean...

.028
.030

28 thousandths
30 thousandths


Barnyard BOb --


My apologies. I don't use a micrometer much and every time I do I
have to study and learn it over and over again.


I sympathize, since I did use a micrometer for many years. g
[Got that... big mouth Latchless Larry?]

I meant to say that the cylinders were rough bored to twenty eight
thousandths over, then honed to the final size which incorporated the
sixty thousandths piston clearance.

If that's .060" clearance, then that's what I meant to say.


To throw you another curve....
I'm thinking your piston clearance is really .006 or 6 thousandths.
Clare or Bruce may be chiming in on this one. g

Standard "rule of thumb" for engines you had no specs for was 2 thou
plus 2 thou per inch diameter. Which would be roughly 8 thou.
Camground pistons were usually fitted a bit tighter. Like about half
or less.
Factory spec for a 3.8 is 0.0014 to 0.0028
  #19  
Old August 21st 03, 02:30 AM
clare @ snyder.on .ca
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

On Tue, 19 Aug 2003 07:23:47 -0400, David O
wrote:

"Bruce A. Frank" wrote:

Though "thousandths" is the correct word most of the machinists I've
worked with just say "thousands"


Yes, in the right context "thousands" sounds like a lazy "thousandths"
anyway. Given my trouble saying "thousandths", I'll have to remember
that.

David O -- http://www.AirplaneZone.com

Every machinist or mechanic I've ever met just calls them Thous.
  #20  
Old August 21st 03, 12:04 PM
David O
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

clare @ snyder.on .ca wrote:

Yes, in the right context "thousands" sounds like a lazy "thousandths"
anyway. Given my trouble saying "thousandths", I'll have to remember
that.

David O -- http://www.AirplaneZone.com



Every machinist or mechanic I've ever met just calls them Thous.


I've heard both used in my somewhat limited exposure to that world.
Now if I started saying "thousandths" or "thous" instead of "mils" in
my professional work (EE, pc board fab, etc), I'd get strange looks
indeed. "Mil" has "of an inch" in the definition which pleases my
engineering sensibilities.

Along similar lines, before "Hertz" was adopted by SI in the late
'60s, most folks just said "kilocycles" instead of "kilocycles per
second". Hertz has "per second" as part of its definition which also
pleases my engineering sensibilities. A lot of hams, however, were
miffed when their beloved "kay cee" was supplanted through a tribute
to a dead German physicist.

David O -- http://www.AirplaneZone.com


 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Corky's engine choice Corky Scott Home Built 39 August 8th 03 04:29 AM
Homebuilt Aircraft Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ) Ron Wanttaja Home Built 4 August 7th 03 05:12 AM
Painting is still tough work Orval Fairbairn Home Built 8 July 23rd 03 04:02 AM
Gasflow of VW engine Veeduber Home Built 4 July 14th 03 08:06 AM
Homebuilt Aircraft Frequently-Asked Questions (FAQ) Ron Wanttaja Home Built 0 July 4th 03 04:50 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 11:01 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 AviationBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.