Inliners International Forums General Discussion Engines 292 tear down results....

well i dissasembled my 1963 ( mfg code E 21 3) , 292 today. turns out its a jasper rebuilt engine... its been bored .040 and has a lip on the cylinders again. i dont know if it will come back in spec at .060 gotta measure it monday. it definatly does have the forged steel crank. man they sure are alot nicer looking than the cast crank. i forgot to check the bearings to see if the crank has been turned , also a monday to do. the cylinder head is a smog head and the exhaust ports all have the plugs in them on the top of the exhaust ports . the block has a nice even & wide flat ground spot behind the water pump on #1 cylinder so there is little or no core shift. guess if .060 wont bring it back to spec,s. i might sleeve all 6 holes back std. i can get it done for 65.00 per hole. this older block seems to weigh more then my cracked 1975 model block. think it will take a .080 over bore ? i dont have no access to sonic testing and its going in a work truck again so i dont want thin cyl. walls.
any thoughts guys
bob

.060 is max safe bore. sleeving all 6 is a waste of money. the block is too thin of a design to handle that, for street use. hope it cleans up at .060. tom

I don't think boring it .080 over is going to allow it to cool properly for street use.

It was to my understanding that if The front bore has been shaved It was to give clearance for the water Pump. That does not mean the block didn't have core shift. TO me That would tell me there was core shift and that is why the #1 wall was shaved to give clearance for the water pump.?

I'd suggest Sonic Test it, and then post the results here if you can, it would help the rest of us too.
The cost of a Sonic Test $10-$15 per hole) is pretty small compared to boring, pistons, bearings, etc - a whole rebuild.

80-over vs. 60-over is only 10 mils thinner cylinder walls - I can never see the logic of a firm yes or no in there until it is sonic tested.

Even then - what is the minimum thickness you will gamble on - depends on the use.

I've never regretted sonic checking, strongly suggest doing it before putting any $$$ into the buildup.

.080 WOULD DEFINATLY CLEAN IT UP BUT I HAVE NO WAY OF GETTING IT SONIC TESTED i dont think.... gonna check monday also gonna measure the cyly. tomarrow and post the measurements for you guy to give me thought on. sure would like to reuse this old block. be it is better made than the newer year blocks it being a 1963. wish you guys could see this crank man it sure look alot better made than the cast cranks and its still oily.....
thanks
bob

well measured the cyl.s. today
#1 hole 3.9250
2. 3.9100
3.3.9225
4.3.9110
5.3.9195
6.3.9135

i think #1 & #3 cyl,s. wont come into spec,s. at .060 over now. and my machine shop definatly dont have sonic testing.. also my machineist told me ALWAYS #1 hole wears the most as it runs the coolest and holds tighter specs because of it. says he,s bore over 100 of these blocks and the larger truck blocks are definatly heaveyer castings and higher nickle content blocks.i didnt have time to check the crank yet.

i am not a machinist, having said that. 3.875 is standard bore. 3.875 +.060 = 3.935. if your biggest hole is 3.925 then there is room to go to .060 . granted i do know it is hard to set up a boring bar for just .005 over like what is needed in # 1 cyl. i would not take it past 60 thou for street use. tom

Hey Bob,

It looks like we're middle Tennessee neighbors of sorts! If you wanted to have your block sonic tested, you may try calling Daniels Macine Shop in Murfreesboro. If they don't do it there they may be able to send it out for you. They do a great deal of well reputed Hi-Perf work. Good luck with your 292, hopefully we'll cross paths sometime! -Tim "Doc"