|
Thanks for the advice, Zane. This actually leads me to wonder aloud about a different but related issue, which is how far I should plan to take this, or in which specific directions. In reading about compression tests, I learned that if I do a dry test and then compare the results to a wet test I should be able to tell whether my problem is primarily in a piston or pistons, or in a valve or valves. That sounds like a good diagnostic thing to do. BUT, on the other hand (as I was thinking this through), then I was wondering what the results will mean in terms of what I do. For instance, if two pistons side-by-side show loss of compression that can apparently mean there could be a crack in the head between them. Or I could find out one piston has a problem and the others are fine. Or that there is no piston or ring problem, but something going on with the valves, etc. And it made me think about the balance between "if it's working, don't fool with it" and "as long as things are off, might as well refurbish them." So I've been reading those parts of my books, too, chewing it over. Because obviously ANY of those problems is (I think?) going to require that I take off the head. On the one hand, I don't want to mess up anything that's working well. Given that I'm such a novice, I figure the chances of my doing that are high and that I should only fool with things that are broken or messed up. On the other hand, I know as a bottom-line "gimme" that I'm going to have to split Arthur. His clutch is rusted into non-functionality. There's no question about that at all. There's even a real good chance I'm going to have to fix rust damage or stuckness on the shift forks and so on. He simply sat out in the rain and snow way too long, and there's no boot on his shift lever. So if I have to split him anyway, and if I have to undo things enough to fix a valve, or to redo one piston, or to remove and repair one connecting rod bearing . . . then it seems like it would make sense to do the whole job "while I'm in there." But that takes me right back to the "if it works, don't fool with it" thing and my just-learning status. I'd like to know what I'm getting into, regardless, simply because the closest thing I've ever done to this kind of work is my research, and this methodical approach is what I know. When I put my work on Arthur in that context, then I feel more confident. But as I look ahead, I realize that the "flow chart" of my potential future actions depends on variables I'm just unsure of. So although I feel like I want to know these test results, I'm also aware that I don't know exactly how I want to act on the results. How do YOU see the balance between "while you're in there, fix it" versus "if it works, don't fool with it", especially in a situation like mine where the person is a novice? I'd really appreciate your advice on that. (And anyone else's too!!!!) Dawn
|