Granite 944

I don't know, maybe I'm just sorta screwed up here, but doesn't the word "rebuild" mean: bringing all major engine components back to within factory specs, and means using all new gaskets/seals/bearings? Doesn't it mean that all components are properly measured/mic'd/checked, and if not within spec. then they are brought back to spec. by machining, and/or part replacement? Doesn't anything that one would do, thats done less than above actually mean that the engine was overhauled?.....partially/kinda/sorta/maybe?

I hear a bunch of people say they are "rebuilding", or have "rebuilt" all or some of their engines. Some I hear seem to be really doing what I would call a real rebuild, while others........well........I don't think I'd call it that! Maybe a sorta/kinda/maybe overhaul............but sure as h**l not a rebuild.

It just seems to me the word "rebuild" is used awfully loosely, here on this board, and by a whole lot of people I've seen. When I go to purchase a car, and the PO tells me that all or part of the engine has been "rebuilt", well.........now ya know why my butt puckers up right about then............especially if he tells me he did it himself, and/or has no machine shop invoices to show me. It seems to me, that you either "rebuilt" it.........or you "overhauled" it, and they are two very different things........at least to me. I don't think its right for someone to call it a rebuild, when in fact it is only an overhaul of some sort/quality or another. What do you guys think? What does "rebuild" and "overhaul" mean to you? Mute point? I'm just curious what others think, I'm not pointing fingers, or trying to start a flame war here.

Techno Duck

Rebuild to me is take it apart and replace every single component (of course reusing the same main parts such as the head and block... running if they are within 'spec').

Overhaul to me is just replace what needs fixing to get it running right.

I do agree both have a very different meaning and agree with your defenition of what rebuild means.

macnewma

Ultimately, I think that without extensive documentation or an exceptionally reputable shop that will vouch for what was done. Call it what you want. If I show up to look at a car and they don't have that, it never happened. In fact, at that point, I will assume they cut corners on the "rebuild", "refresh", "overhaul", etc.

This winter, I plan to do a quick "overhaul" on my 951. It means I will do bearings, check for specs, replace bolts and all gaskets. I am basically bringing it up to shape for track duty. Hopefully it won't turn into a rebuild. My leakdown numbers were fine as of last year. I consider this a required service because I want an engine that is near new. BTW, my car was meticulously maintained with full receipts and 71k miles.

Max

epbrown01

One of the first debates I ever got into on the internet was this topic. Where I grew up, rebuilding was to strip down and rebuild to new using new or refurbished components.

Overhauling was what most of us did as teens when you bought some old junker you didn't trust because the PO was clueless and/or the car had been sitting: you replaced all the belts, gaskets, and hoses, any other rubber, wires, filters, fluids, tuned it up, and adjusted everything to factory specs. You got to know your engine, caught any issues early, and usually it ran like a top, as you were just catching up on all the deferred maintenance.

But moving to Chicago (from KY), I encountered people who considered this "rebuilding" simply because the engine was clean and shiny and the hoses looked nice - cosmetically similar to a rebuilt engine, but without any docs.

Emanuel

M758

I have done 2 rebuilds.

I really tend to call them reseals however.

In both cases Engine was torn down main & rod bearings replaced along with all seals since the engine came apart.

In first case I had my head welded (couple corrosion holes) and cleaned-up and one bent valve replaced. This time I did not do that since it had done it not that long ago. I most wanted to do the main & rod bearings as prevetion. I kept the original pistons rings in both cases. Some might replace them, but compression was good and bores were just perfect so there was no need.

Unlike other motors these bores wear not like iron or steel, but like diamonds. Not much at all. Hey you can't bore the easily anyway.

So. In my first "reseal" it worked great and ran strong. Second... we shall see as I just go the motor in the car yesterday.

joseph mitro

it's all semantics. i call mine a rebuild.

like max said, without documentation, it doesn't seem to matter anyway