[Shotimes] 3.2 Conversion worth it?

[Ian Fisher]

I agree. The 89 I had with near or more than 300K on
the clock had a stronger running motor than the one in
my 93. Stronger than most stock SHO motors I've
driven.

The 93 parts car became a parts car because of a spun
bearing at 126K. I've heard noises, tapping and
knocking from my 93 3.0 starting around 90K. It's a
good engine but it's not bullet proof. Maintenance
plays a big factor in the longevity of any engine.

FWIW, that 93 3.2 that spun a bearing that I finally
laid to rest at 126K; the cylinder walls were worn
past spec. That's the imfamous block that was in my
apartment bedroom a few years ago. It's currently
rusting away in my garage until I can scrap it. I
can't use it.

Ian
--- Justin Schick <jschick@aafp.org> wrote:
> Two words: compression test.
> 
> While I agree the Yamahammer is an excellently
> designed engine, there
> are just way too many variables to make blanket
> statements about how
> well they hold up to high mileage. The only way to
> know if ANY engine
> could use a rebuild or not is to be sure the
> combustion chambers hold
> enough pressure.
> 
> Justin
> parted 92 - need something?
> 
> >>> "George Fourchy" <krazgeo@comcast.net> 03/15
> 5:16 PM >>>
> On Tue, 15 Mar 2005 16:44:13 -0500, Leigh Smith
> wrote:
> 
> >Even the 3.2 probably has 90k+ miles by now. 
> 
> That's brand new in Yamaha terms.  My 'new' black
> car's block has 80k
> or so.  The
> cylinder walls don't look a bit different, hone
> wise, than a spanking
> new block. 
> Other than replacing the rod bearings, Mark said it
> couldn't be rebuilt
> by anyone
> into anything any better than it already was.
> 
> 
> 
> George
> _______________________________________________
> Shotimes mailing list
> Shotimes@autox.team.net
> http://www.team.net/mailman/listinfo/shotimes
> 


		
__________________________________ 
Do you Yahoo!? 
Make Yahoo! your home page 
http://www.yahoo.com/r/hs