Beat the clunker kill


#1

My auto class received a clunker carcass to play with. Pulled the engine and tore down found two rod bearings had failed causing scoring on crank. Three pistons scored the bores. Other wise the GM 350 was worn but ok. The silica had set up in the oil passages but none were plugged. Hot tanked the block and then using a pulsing ultrasonic transducer was able to clean the block. Bored to oversize cylinder bores, new pistons,rings. Ground crank to next undersized bearing insets fitted bearings. Bolted it up and ran it. Cost 300 in machining 245 in parts


#2

Nice. But most people are not willing to spend the approx. $1,200 to $2,000 labor to do this to a ‘clunker’. Only those that may have the talent and tools to do the work themselves.

Congrats.


#3

you know what this means? the government will figure out a more diabolical way to wreck engines.

way to go getting one of them engined going again! it shouldnt have been "clunker"ed in the first place. that’s $545 that could’ve been spent elsewhere.


#4

we wouldnt have to spend that, if it was just left alone in the first place.


#5

Some say CFC is a mistake.
So here’s to you boltstripper, for learning from our mistakes.


#6

Sincere congratulations. You’ve made the Cash for Clunkers program look almost as naive as it actually was. I wonder how many more of those engines will find their way back onto the streets.

Three cheers for Boltstripper!


#7

Add labor cost to that and you could probably have a low-cost used engine for less money, lots less.


#8

Well, this was for an automotive class, so the labor was part of the learning process for everyone, including us.


#9

My goal was not to prove the method of destruction was wrong but to inspire troubled kids that one can take the junk you are handed and do something positive. Lets face it the engine kill was not to reduce emissions but a way to shrink the supply of used cars. The students had great fun putting it to the man and now they have the skill set to bring new life to worn existing equipment. Why replace when we can renew?


#10

Boltstripper:
I remember years ago having the desire to throw countless hours at automotive problems just to see if I could “fix” or “rebuild” something. Looking back, those were the years when I learned a great deal, even though many of my laborious trials failed (and the importance of knowing how not to do something).

I can only imagine your students learned quite a bit. That’s got to be a great feeling.

Joe


#11

I agree that the idea was to shrink the supply of used cars rather than to reduce emissions. And that hurts those who can’t afford a new car. That hurts the working man.

Oddly, I just read that the sales results for August are “in”. Toyota, Honda, and Ford are up. GM is down 20%, Chrysler is down 15%.

$3 billion of our tax dollars spent…and for what?


#12

Stripper, Since the Public reads this Forum I think you should make it clear that the Public (not even a DIYer) should expect the same thing for the same money,it gives a honest shop quite a lot of explaining to do. Let them know that a lot of people gave you sweet deals and worked for little to nothing for this low ball V-8 “rework”


#13

Interesting article on the positive “after-life” effects on junkyards from the clunker bill: