The absolute 'MINIMUM' cylinder wall thickness....

[BRENT in 10-uh-C]

Originally Posted by updraught

"Granted, no one wants to spend $500.00 to sleeve a block back to 3.875, ...but they also complain when their block was bored too thin causing heating issues."

Spend the 500 bucks.

Originally Posted by jeepguy1948

Brent, I’m not an expert by any means but would like to see if I can condense the comments. You seem to want an opinion and short of talking to the engineer that did the original blueprints anybody’s opinion is going to be biased based upon their own experience. If, theoretically, based upon sound engineering princeaples, a number (over bore/wall thickness) was put forward, there would be some that got a less than perfect original casting that would have failed. On the other hand, you could get get an exceptionally thick casting that would tolerate a much bigger overbore. If you are looking for a hypothetical number based upon original blueprints, that’s a commendable question for sure but there are very few (if any of us) qualified to answer the question in an unbiased opinion. Real life experience is all we have to go by. I’m not saying that your question is unreasonable or unanswerable but few if any of us are qualified to answer it.

Your points are valid. In society today, it seems most people need 'scapegoat' to pin the blame on when things go catastrophically sideways. If the newly rebuilt engine is overheating, the blame can easily be pinned onto the Rebuilder because they should have advised me before I spent this pile of money with them on a rebuild. This is why I am asking for a general consensus on where the line needs to be drawn on minimum cylinder wall thickness' so this never becomes something I need to deal with.