There is actually a guage built for measuring just this sort of thing.
Kinda
looks like a dial guage mounted on a sled. You slide it into the bore
and can
rotate it about the cylinder axis to determine out-of-round and slide it
up/down
to measure the taper. Very cool.
rmb
Michael Sloane wrote:
>
> Absolutely! In fact, if it is cylinder bores you are talking about, bore
> shape is even more important than diameter. Internal combustion engines
> tend to wear more side-to-side than front-to-back, due to lateral forces
> imposed in the normal functioning of the Otto/Diesel cycle. One of the neat
> features of the old Triumphs (and many old tractors, to which Triumph owes
> some of its heritage) is the fact that you can turn the cylinder liners 90
> degrees and get even more life from them. I don't know if anyone bothers to
> do that kind of thing anymore, but that is what we used to do with them
> back in the '50s and early '60s. Any other kind of gauge except a "T" gauge
> will not give you as accurate picture of the shape of the cylinder. Also
> remember that you must measure not only the center of the cylinder but the
> top and botton.
>
> Mike Sloane (msloane@worldnet.att.net
>
> ----------
> > From: Phil Ethier <ethier@freenet.msp.mn.us>
> > To: Michael Sloane <msloane@worldnet.att.net>
> > Cc: John Loftin <john.loftin@ccmail.eo.ray.com>;
> shop-talk@autox.team.net; Jack I Brooks <jibrooks@JUNO.COM>
> > Subject: Re: Micrometer responses
> > Date: Monday, December 16, 1996 4:08 PM
> >
> > On Monday, 16 Dec 1996, Michael Sloane wrote:
> >
> > > I bought a set of bore gauges (the kind that are spring-loaded
> telescoping
> > > rods with locks for checking cylinder bores) from Harbour Freight for
> about
> > > $25. They seem to work fine for the handful of times/year that I need
> to
> > > check cylinder bores.
> >
> > T-gauges are neat, and a whole lot more accurate than one might think,
> > but they can be fooled. They only measure at two points, and you can
> > miss an out-of round condition.
> >
> > Phil
|