Re: Sonic check frustrations
[Re: Quicktree]
#1769733
03/03/15 09:13 PM
03/03/15 09:13 PM
|
Joined: Oct 2003
Posts: 11,702 W. Kentucky
justinp61
OP
I Live Here
|
OP
I Live Here
Joined: Oct 2003
Posts: 11,702
W. Kentucky
|
Quote:
none of the basic Chevy/ford shops around here have sonic checkers. guess they don't have that issue.
One of the shops told me that if they have suspect block they just buy another one. I asked him if he built many small block Mopars? I got the answer I expected, "no".
|
|
|
Re: Sonic check frustrations
[Re: mikesiron]
#1769736
03/03/15 10:25 PM
03/03/15 10:25 PM
|
Joined: Jul 2008
Posts: 30,632 Florida STAYcation
IcorkSOAK
Financed his waterbed
|
Financed his waterbed
Joined: Jul 2008
Posts: 30,632
Florida STAYcation
|
Quote:
I too have been thinking about one of those ones from Ebay but think the probe needs to be a ball shape or very small. How has it been working with that .375 probe?
I asked that eBay seller if they knew if a mucho smaller probe could be adapted to their machine ..... I have not heard an answer yet.
|
|
|
Re: Sonic check frustrations
[Re: IcorkSOAK]
#1769739
03/04/15 03:18 PM
03/04/15 03:18 PM
|
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 15,439 Val-haul-ass... eventually
BradH
Taking time off to work on my car
|
Taking time off to work on my car
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 15,439
Val-haul-ass... eventually
|
Quote:
... reads dead-on.. on flat stock but not on a curved piece.
^^^ THIS ^^^
Even the small flat-faced probes (mine is 6 mm) will not read a curved surface accurately unless re-profiled for the application.
It's one of the trade-offs of buying a budget import tester; they don't offer a probe designed for reading cylinders, so you have to adapt what you can get from the vendor to work.
|
|
|
Re: Sonic check frustrations
[Re: mopar dave]
#1769741
03/04/15 04:01 PM
03/04/15 04:01 PM
|
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 15,439 Val-haul-ass... eventually
BradH
Taking time off to work on my car
|
Taking time off to work on my car
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 15,439
Val-haul-ass... eventually
|
Quote:
I want to buy a tester as well. have 2 blocks to check. I read if you modify the probe/transducer it will read inaccurately. so whats the solution with this issue?
Not sure what causes the problem some people have after modifying the probe. ZIPPY told me he'd done the same thing I did and it worked fine (he actually bought his before I bought mine) when he cross-checked it against a more expensive tester from where he worked at the time.
I followed AndyF's advice to calibrate the tester against the distance between the top of two adjacent cylinder bores and that's been a consistent way for me to double-check the readings.
So, I don't know if the issues other people have had has to do w/ their technique for profiling the probe's face (gaps in the curved surface?), leaving too rough of a surface to get accurate readings, not using a proper medium (gel) between the bore surface and the probe, or what.
|
|
|
Re: Sonic check frustrations
[Re: mopar dave]
#1769744
03/04/15 04:46 PM
03/04/15 04:46 PM
|
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 15,439 Val-haul-ass... eventually
BradH
Taking time off to work on my car
|
Taking time off to work on my car
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 15,439
Val-haul-ass... eventually
|
I bought my tester from a company called Testing Equipment based out of Houston, TX. The same model is probably available for less from some of the China-direct vendors on eBay, but I wanted a USA point of contact to scream at should something go wrong w/ the deal.
They offer(ed?) two versions, the MT150 and MT160. I bought the 150 version because it was less expensive, but maybe should have bought the 160 in hind sight. The key functional differences are (a) the 160 gives readouts to .00x" accuracy (e.g., .157") and (b) has some PC download capability that I don't need. The 150 reads to .0x" accuracy, (e.g. .16"), which is fine except on the thinner readings such as .08", so I don't know if the wall thickness is closer to .076" or .084".
The vendor offers the same testers with different probes / transducers. I purchased mine w/ the N07 model, which has a 6mm diameter face and is the smallest they offer. I contacted them directly about buying a second N07 at the same time, because I suspected I was going to have to hand-fit one of them to read the curved surface of a cylinder bore properly... and I was right. I spent some time w/ 600-grit wet-or-dry profiling the face of the probe to have a convex surface that appeared to seat properly against the inside of my 4.375" tapered ring compressor.
Although the instructions give some different methods for calibration, especially considering I was working w/ curved surfaces, I think the best approach was the one that AndyF suggested: measure the thickness at the top of two adjacent cylinders w/ a caliper, then take a reading w/ the tester at the identical spot and calibrate the tester to match that.
I don't recall the cost of the individual components, but the invoice I found for the total transaction (sonic tester kit w/ probe) was just under $400. IIRC, the 160 model is $50-60 more, which I didn't feel was worth it at the time.
I hope this helps. I've used the tester to read a couple of different 440 blocks and have been able to get consistent readings after finding the best calibration approach and some hands-on experience to get the best "feel" for positioning the probe, etc.
|
|
|
Re: Sonic check frustrations
[Re: mopar dave]
#1769750
03/06/15 03:05 PM
03/06/15 03:05 PM
|
Joined: Feb 2003
Posts: 12,675 Columbia, CT
moper
I Live Here
|
I Live Here
Joined: Feb 2003
Posts: 12,675
Columbia, CT
|
I bought my Dakota tester years ago. To me, if it's not certifiable (none of the cheap ones are legal for testing when results really matter) it's not much better than visual and weight inspections. You can pay a couple hundred and still cost yourself a couple grand later. They also gave me a crash course on proper testing and have a file of what I bought, and have been great to talk to over the years when i had questions. Personally, not having any background in how they work or thier design, I would never modify the transducer. They tell me not to. I figure they should know...lol. Good companies offer a variety of them for ferrous and non-ferrous metals and various radii. Mine has paid for itself over time but it's also saved me from making an expensive mistake or two - so I'm way ahead.
Well, art is art, isn't it? Still, on the other hand, water is water! And east is east and west is west and if you take cranberries and stew them like applesauce they taste much more like prunes than rhubarb does. Now, uh... Now you tell me what you know.
|
|
|
|
|