Knoxes
Veteran Member
One looks fine, but the other is pretty significantly scored. Are these garbage now? And what happened here?
The cylinders look similar to each other, but both are showing some wear on the front and rear:
The engine probably has only a couple hundred miles on it. And I don't know how well you can see the cylinders, but the cross hatching is still pretty visible.
I tore it down because of shifting problems, but I've been concerned about the compression since I did the latest rebuild. I checked and came in pretty consistently around 135 on both sides, but don't have a lot of confidence in the gauge. My concern was that it seemed far too easy to turn over manually (like when doing timing and lash sets). However, it ran pretty well until I had the shifting issues.
Also, during this rebuild (thread "Sigh..."), I had to buy a new set of rings and it really wasn't clear at all which side was up on the compression rings. They didn't have a marking and if there was a bevel, it was impossible to see with a magnifying glass.
The cylinders look similar to each other, but both are showing some wear on the front and rear:
The engine probably has only a couple hundred miles on it. And I don't know how well you can see the cylinders, but the cross hatching is still pretty visible.
I tore it down because of shifting problems, but I've been concerned about the compression since I did the latest rebuild. I checked and came in pretty consistently around 135 on both sides, but don't have a lot of confidence in the gauge. My concern was that it seemed far too easy to turn over manually (like when doing timing and lash sets). However, it ran pretty well until I had the shifting issues.
Also, during this rebuild (thread "Sigh..."), I had to buy a new set of rings and it really wasn't clear at all which side was up on the compression rings. They didn't have a marking and if there was a bevel, it was impossible to see with a magnifying glass.