What to do with...

[5-90]

Thanks again RAPTORFAN!! its great.

I didnt see anything mentioned about Pressure testing .. why is that?

Because pressure testing is really something only done when: A) a leak is suspected, or B) when you're working with an unknown. If your engine ran well before you tore it down for an overhaul, then you can save a few bucks by not having a test done that you really don't need. Make sense?

[5-90]

I see alot of guys on here replacing fasteners (bolts) that they probably don't need to, they should be inspected closely! for stretching or if they are "torque to yield", these engines don't use torque to yield bolts, I haven't looked into the very latest of them, if they did the gasket sets would come with them! the vast majority of these engines are really nothing more than a "stock type" rebuild, fancy high $$ fasteners aren't needed. (rod bolts, the rod will break before a stock bolt will!)

I'll argue one small point here. While the AMC 199/232/258 used standard screws for the cylinder head, they seem to have changed course with the 242ci I6. I've got quite a few FSMs around here (they're deductible as "reference material" for me, and I'm trying to get as many as I can...) and I can't think of any that covered the 242ci and /didn't/ say that the cylinder head screws are a modification of the TTY style, and would only stand to /two/ torque cycles. Short form of the instructions? "If they're not painted when you take them out, mark the heads when paint when you put them back in. If they're marked with paint when you take them out, replace them."

This seems odd to me - as I recall, they have six hash marks on the heads (indicating standard SAE8 grade carbon steel.) 1) I'm not sure why they'd use a modified TTY. 2) I'm not sure how they'd modify them to make them the T2TY (Torque Twice To Yield) that they supposedly are. 3) Since they appear to be SAE8, do you think it possible that they could be replaced with standard SAE8 or SHCS (which are routinely H&T to SAE8 anyhow?)

I ask the latter because I just don't like non-standard parts on anything, to be honest. I like to 1) design things to not fail (I've dealt with equipment failures before - usually on stuff that I'd really rather not have failed...) and 2) Use standard parts in construction to make repairs easier. I know, I'm cranky.

But, you seem to be the person to ask, so I thought I'd put the question out there. What say you?

[Muad'Dib]

Thanks again RAPTORFAN!! its great.

I didnt see anything mentioned about Pressure testing .. why is that?

Because pressure testing is really something only done when: A) a leak is suspected, or B) when you're working with an unknown. If your engine ran well before you tore it down for an overhaul, then you can save a few bucks by not having a test done that you really don't need. Make sense?

Sure does .. thanks for that!