Mail Archive Search: <+subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*leakdown\s+tester\s*$/>

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*leakdown\s+tester\s*$/: 4 ]

Total 4 documents matching your query.

1. leakdown tester (score: 1): Author: rex.burkheimer@chrysalis.org; Date: Mon, 25 May 98 15:16:35 -0500; So, with your report and several previous ones, it looks like: @ 100 psi, orifice size is .060 @ 60 psi, orifice size is .057 @ 35 psi, orifice size is .055 That looks pretty consistent to me. Could; /html/shop-talk/1998-05/msg00101.html (8,274 bytes)
2. Re: leakdown tester (score: 1): Author: "Tony Clark" <lotus.tony@airmail.net>; Date: Mon, 25 May 1998 18:12:03 -0500; Rex, the orifice size that my "home-brew" tester needed in order to "flow" the same percentage leak-down as the factory made leak-down tester was a number 57 drill size, not a .057" . The actual diam; /html/shop-talk/1998-05/msg00102.html (9,352 bytes)
3. Re: leakdown tester (score: 1): Author: "Michael Tanner" <Firesmith@voyager.net>; Date: Mon, 25 May 1998 22:47:53 -0400; Come on guys. Pick a small number size orifice that you like, make up your gauge (use two VERY EQUAL gauges as there is usually a large differential between actual pressure and reported pressures - o; /html/shop-talk/1998-05/msg00103.html (7,160 bytes)
4. Re: leakdown tester (score: 1): Author: "Tony Clark" <lotus.tony@airmail.net>; Date: Mon, 25 May 1998 23:44:10 -0500; Hey! We're a little past that! We don't want to just compare cylinders and listen to apertures for wind. We'd like to learn something about engine condition. We want the reading to mean something, no; /html/shop-talk/1998-05/msg00104.html (7,987 bytes)

Current List: 1 - 4
Page: [1]