A big "IF" the cylinders are within spec of a simple rering do NOT hone the cylinders if they are clean without gouges and major scratrches.This is a very contrroversial issue,but,I rebuilt an engine just recently and decided that I was going to do the unthinkeable and try just one time to not hone the cylinders.
It works,I fired that engine up and it had the initial smoke of burning offd the oil and assembly lube and then it dried up,no smoke and has not used a drop of oil since.
I have spent a lot of time studying this and the " SAE "{Society of auto. engineers} had done an extensive study and rebuilt quite a few engines with 1/2 of them that had good cylinders and not honing those but honing the ones that would clean up and still be within specs. the ones that were honed used slightly more oil than the non honed engines anmd the non honed engines run farther before needing another rebuild than the honed engines.
An old machinist I had worked for kept telling Me,or asking "Why would anyone screw up a perfectly machined surface by honing" to which I was always real sceptic and would not think of assembling an engine without honing,after all how could the rings ever get broke in,and so with that last rebuild I just had to give it a try.
Now that intrigues me. Ive always felt that things get overstated for the sake of safety or engineers. Engines are no exception. Im not trained as a machinist and Im not a mechanical engineer, but Ive seen real-world examples of engines, whole vehicles, that continued to function, some very well, when they just shouldnt have. I have restored one 1943 jeep and had the engine professionally machined and polished, etc and it runs fine, but runs hotter than it should. I later took another jeep engine and simply replaced a few things like rings and bearings and it runs just fine. Ive also heard tales of engines completely gone through, owners swearing they had done the recondition by the book, spent big money, and it fails first or second time out.
But the minute you say anything about it, practiced mechanics and hobbyists call you a heretic. I think the things we all believe about what it takes to "properly" recondition an engine have been simply stated and parroted over the years, until its simply dogma. Im not saying I dont believe those things, but I think there is plenty of reason to be cynical and critically think about it.
I wonder just how little you'd have to do to a 20-30 year old engine, to make it continue to function well for another 15-20 yrs. Im not going to experiment with this engine that way, but it just makes me wonder....
