Re: [Amc-list] Compression time

[Wrambler242@xxxxxxxxxxx]

Like others have said, run it!
It'll probably smooth out and even out.
Uh, I'd go for a set of valve seals, pretty easy to do in one of those.
Should cut down on the startup smoke and the little puff out the tailpipe when you gas it.
Just cheap old umbrella seals or the fancy sprung one they came with if you can find them.

--
Mark Price
Morgantown, WV
1969 AMC Rambler, 4.0L, EFI, T-5
2004 Grand Cherokee Laredo, 4.7L, Quadratrac II
" I realize that death is inevitable.
I just don't want to be around when it happens! "

 -------------- Original message ----------------------
From: Wayne E LaMothe <superglider@xxxxxxxx>
> 
> Spent some time on the 66 Ambo yesterday and this morning.  I finished a
> complete brake overhaul and can't wait to see how they work.  I have not
> had brakes in the car since 2004 when I bought it.  I put a kit in the
> MC, replaced all the flex ines, new shoes, hardware and wheel cylinders
> in the rear and bled the whole system with a vacuum bleeder.  All that is
> left is to adjust the rear shoes up till they contact the drums and see
> how it goes.  I am also putting in a fresh set of plugs and decided to
> check the compression on the 327.  I do notice some blowby from the oil
> filler tube when it is running.  So, I pulled all the plugs and started
> the compression check.  I got 3 cylinders done before the battery got too
> weak so I hooked up the charger and let it trickle overnight.  I started
> over and was surprised to see that the 3 cylinders I checked last night
> jumped 20lbs with the higher cranking speed of the fresh battery.  I am
> wondering what you all think of the compression readings.  Shooting oil
> in a few of the cylinders did nothing to the readings so I quit that
> part.  The manual says the compression ratio is 9.7 to 1 but I am not
> sure what that means in lbs of pressure.  I think the readings are pretty
> good for a 109k (or 209k) engine with the exception of cylinder 5.  I
> think the high reading on #6 may be carbon deposits?  Anyway here they
> are:
> 
> #1  140lbs
> #2  140lbs
> #3  140lbs
> #4  140lbs
> #5  120lbs
> #6  170lbs
> #7  155lbs
> #8  145lbs
> 
> There might be a variation of a couple of lbs in those reading since
> these old eyes can't see the fine marking on the dial anymore but it
> can't be too far off.
> 
> What do you all think?
> 
> Wayne
> Wayne & Lisa (Skeezix), Bolton Landing, NY,
> http://www.superglider.thinkhost.com/
> AMO#8454,  82 SX/4, 258 auto
> 69 Ambo coupe, 401, M12, 66 Ambo 990 Wagon, 327,PW,PB,PS,posi,AM/FM,AC
> 2003 FLHTCI, 2000 WJ Limited
> 2001 Cherokee, 2002 STS Northstar
> ____________________________________________________________
> Want fast fitness results? Click for free info, revolutionary products.
> http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL2141/fc/Ioyw6i3nD5ID1gPOvuvdri7BqpzZZ21bSqUc
> dT09uyA0S1WCtEgoge/
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: 
> http://splatter.wps.com/pipermail/amc-list/attachments/20081106/e1104f0c/attachm
> ent.htm 
> _______________________________________________
> Amc-list mailing list
> Amc-list@xxxxxxxxxxxx
> http://splatter.wps.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/amc-list

_______________________________________________
Amc-list mailing list
Amc-list@xxxxxxxxxxxx
http://splatter.wps.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/amc-list