RPM's / Tach question
 

I had a problem late last year with the RPM's on my boat. Well, it
was not really the RPM's, just the reading on my tach.

Sometimes when first starting out for the day the tach would show 5500
to 6000 RPM's even though I know they were not that high. My boat
max's out at about 4600. I have a 26 foot Weekender with the 350/260
combination. I know by the sound of the motor too. Then after some
amount of minutes the tach reading drops back to what it should be,
around 3500, with no change in the sound of the motor.

So I have a bad tach. My question is is it usually the actual guage
that goes bad or is it the cable or whatever the cable attaches to on
the motor/outdrive side to pick up the RPM's. I guess I don't really
know where the cable attaches to read the RPM's.

many thanks

RPM's / Tach question
 

I've had false high RPM indications that were the result of a loose ground
wire. Check the wires at the connections to the indicator first - it's
probably easier to get to.

"Don" wrote in message
om...
I had a problem late last year with the RPM's on my boat. Well, it
was not really the RPM's, just the reading on my tach.

Sometimes when first starting out for the day the tach would show 5500
to 6000 RPM's even though I know they were not that high. My boat
max's out at about 4600. I have a 26 foot Weekender with the 350/260
combination. I know by the sound of the motor too. Then after some
amount of minutes the tach reading drops back to what it should be,
around 3500, with no change in the sound of the motor.

So I have a bad tach. My question is is it usually the actual guage
that goes bad or is it the cable or whatever the cable attaches to on
the motor/outdrive side to pick up the RPM's. I guess I don't really
know where the cable attaches to read the RPM's.

many thanks

RPM's / Tach question
 

RPM's / Tach question
 

I assume you are running a carburated Mercruiser with their Thunderbolt
solid state ignition. I had a similar problem with one of the 4.3L V6
motors in my 'Dancer. I found a clogged vent had caused some corrosion on
the trigger rotor inside the distributor that was intermittently causing
extra pulses, causing high readings on the tachometer. I cleaned up the
interior of the distributor and polished the rotor. That took care of my
tach problem and also smoothed out the idle on that motor.

Hope this helps. Good luck.

RPM's / Tach question
 

In article , (basskisser) wrote:

(Don) wrote in message
. com...
I had a problem late last year with the RPM's on my boat. Well, it
was not really the RPM's, just the reading on my tach.

Sometimes when first starting out for the day the tach would show 5500
to 6000 RPM's even though I know they were not that high. My boat
max's out at about 4600. I have a 26 foot Weekender with the 350/260
combination. I know by the sound of the motor too. Then after some
amount of minutes the tach reading drops back to what it should be,
around 3500, with no change in the sound of the motor.

So I have a bad tach. My question is is it usually the actual guage
that goes bad or is it the cable or whatever the cable attaches to on
the motor/outdrive side to pick up the RPM's. I guess I don't really
know where the cable attaches to read the RPM's.

many thanks

I would guess that it is the actual tach that is bad, seeing how you
are reading SOMETHING. I'd think if the wiring were bad, you would
read zero R.P.M.'s.

Ever hear of excessive resistance? One can have "bad" wiring and
still get a reading...(albeit usually much lower).

RPM's / Tach question
 

RPM's / Tach question
 

In article , (basskisser) wrote:

(Henry Blackmoore) wrote in message
hlink.net...
In article ,
(basskisser) wrote:

(Don) wrote in message
. com...
I had a problem late last year with the RPM's on my boat. Well, it
was not really the RPM's, just the reading on my tach.

Sometimes when first starting out for the day the tach would show 5500
to 6000 RPM's even though I know they were not that high. My boat
max's out at about 4600. I have a 26 foot Weekender with the 350/260
combination. I know by the sound of the motor too. Then after some
amount of minutes the tach reading drops back to what it should be,
around 3500, with no change in the sound of the motor.

So I have a bad tach. My question is is it usually the actual guage
that goes bad or is it the cable or whatever the cable attaches to on
the motor/outdrive side to pick up the RPM's. I guess I don't really
know where the cable attaches to read the RPM's.

many thanks

I would guess that it is the actual tach that is bad, seeing how you
are reading SOMETHING. I'd think if the wiring were bad, you would
read zero R.P.M.'s.

Ever hear of excessive resistance? One can have "bad" wiring and
still get a reading...(albeit usually much lower).

Ever hear of reading the post before knee-jerking a reaction? It reads higher.

Well no sh*t Sherlock. Which is precisely why I posted that sentence in
parenthesis. However according to your ignorant statement above a tach
would never read anything if the wiring were "bad". I was responding to
YOUR (drug-influenced?) comment and NOT the whole post.

Sheesh. You really ought to clear your mind for awhile and leave that
weed alone.

RPM's / Tach question
 

RPM's / Tach question
 

In article , (basskisser) wrote:

(Henry Blackmoore) wrote in message
nk.net...
In article ,
(basskisser) wrote:

(Henry Blackmoore) wrote in message
hlink.net...
In article ,
(basskisser) wrote:

(Don) wrote in message
. com...
I had a problem late last year with the RPM's on my boat. Well, it
was not really the RPM's, just the reading on my tach.

Sometimes when first starting out for the day the tach would show 5500
to 6000 RPM's even though I know they were not that high. My boat
max's out at about 4600. I have a 26 foot Weekender with the 350/260
combination. I know by the sound of the motor too. Then after some
amount of minutes the tach reading drops back to what it should be,
around 3500, with no change in the sound of the motor.

So I have a bad tach. My question is is it usually the actual guage
that goes bad or is it the cable or whatever the cable attaches to on
the motor/outdrive side to pick up the RPM's. I guess I don't really
know where the cable attaches to read the RPM's.

many thanks

I would guess that it is the actual tach that is bad, seeing how you
are reading SOMETHING. I'd think if the wiring were bad, you would
read zero R.P.M.'s.

Ever hear of excessive resistance? One can have "bad" wiring and
still get a reading...(albeit usually much lower).

Ever hear of reading the post before knee-jerking a reaction? It reads
higher.

Well no sh*t Sherlock. Which is precisely why I posted that sentence in
parenthesis. However according to your ignorant statement above a tach
would never read anything if the wiring were "bad". I was responding to
YOUR (drug-influenced?) comment and NOT the whole post.

Sheesh. You really ought to clear your mind for awhile and leave that
weed alone.

Then why to hell did you POST it??? Drunk again?

The same reason that you are posting EVERYTHING again.

My goodness son, you really are mentally challenged eh?

RPM's / Tach question
 

RPM's / Tach question
 

On 9 Apr 2004 04:18:20 -0700, (basskisser) wrote:

My goodness son, you really are mentally challenged eh?

Let's recap, shall we? The poster said his tach read higher than it
should. I said that it PROBABLY would not be the wiring. YOU said that
it could be the wiring, excessive resistance. Okay, we have a tach
reading higher, I say that it probably isn't the wiring, because it
reads higher. You say it could be the wiring, which could give a false
reading, albeit lower. Now how damned stupid is THAT statement you
made? Are you too drunk to know the difference between a higher
reading than a lower one?


Ok, if we can suspend the insults for a moment, I'll try to address a
possible cause for his problem, as I have had the same issue. Most
tachs have a switch on the back to select between 4, 6 and 8
cylinders. What happened to mine is that the switch became somewhat
intermittent due to moisture condensation, and it caused the tach's
reading to vary by a few hundred RPM. The interesting thing was that
it was more prevalent when it was cool in the morning, and seemed to
stop once the boat had been baking in the sun for a few hours. I
temporarily fixed the problem by turning the switch back and forth
several times, to "clean" the contacts, but the problem eventually
came back. The real fix would be to hard wire the switch in the proper
position, but I haven't done it yet.


Dave

RPM's / Tach question
 

In article , (basskisser) wrote:

(Henry Blackmoore) wrote in message
ink.net...
In article ,
(basskisser) wrote:

(Henry Blackmoore) wrote in message
nk.net...
In article ,
(basskisser) wrote:

(Henry Blackmoore) wrote in message
hlink.net...
In article ,
(basskisser) wrote:

(Don) wrote in message
. com...
I had a problem late last year with the RPM's on my boat. Well, it
was not really the RPM's, just the reading on my tach.

Sometimes when first starting out for the day the tach would show
5500
to 6000 RPM's even though I know they were not that high. My boat
max's out at about 4600. I have a 26 foot Weekender with the
350/260
combination. I know by the sound of the motor too. Then after some
amount of minutes the tach reading drops back to what it should be,
around 3500, with no change in the sound of the motor.

So I have a bad tach. My question is is it usually the actual guage
that goes bad or is it the cable or whatever the cable attaches to
on
the motor/outdrive side to pick up the RPM's. I guess I don't
really
know where the cable attaches to read the RPM's.

many thanks

I would guess that it is the actual tach that is bad, seeing how you
are reading SOMETHING. I'd think if the wiring were bad, you would
read zero R.P.M.'s.

Ever hear of excessive resistance? One can have "bad" wiring and
still get a reading...(albeit usually much lower).

Ever hear of reading the post before knee-jerking a reaction? It reads
higher.

Well no sh*t Sherlock. Which is precisely why I posted that sentence in
parenthesis. However according to your ignorant statement above a tach
would never read anything if the wiring were "bad". I was responding to
YOUR (drug-influenced?) comment and NOT the whole post.

Sheesh. You really ought to clear your mind for awhile and leave that
weed alone.

Then why to hell did you POST it??? Drunk again?

The same reason that you are posting EVERYTHING again.

My goodness son, you really are mentally challenged eh?

Let's recap, shall we? The poster said his tach read higher than it
should. I said that it PROBABLY would not be the wiring. YOU said that
it could be the wiring, excessive resistance. Okay, we have a tach
reading higher, I say that it probably isn't the wiring, because it
reads higher. You say it could be the wiring, which could give a false
reading, albeit lower. Now how damned stupid is THAT statement you
made? Are you too drunk to know the difference between a higher
reading than a lower one?

No you said words that indicated that "if the wiring were bad, you would read
zero R.P.M's. And that is simply not true and an ignorant statement. Simple
as that. The wiring can be "bad" and still read something which is what my
statement was saying numb numb. As usual your brain is clouded by smoke.

"I would guess that it is the actual tach that is bad, seeing how you
are reading SOMETHING. I'd think if the wiring were bad, you would
read zero R.P.M.'s."

RPM's / Tach question
 

RPM's / Tach question
 

In article , (basskisser) wrote:

(Henry Blackmoore) wrote in message news:P4Udc.3649
No you said words that indicated that "if the wiring were bad, you would read
zero R.P.M's. And that is simply not true and an ignorant statement. Simple
as that. The wiring can be "bad" and still read something which is what my
statement was saying numb numb. As usual your brain is clouded by smoke.

Have any proof of that statement?

"I would guess that it is the actual tach that is bad, seeing how you
are reading SOMETHING. I'd think if the wiring were bad, you would
read zero R.P.M.'s."

Please show how, if the wiring were bad, that the tach would read
HIGHER. Can you? OR was that just drunken babble?

What is your IQ? About two below plant life?

RPM's / Tach question
 

RPM's / Tach question
 

In article , (basskisser) wrote:
Path:

(Henry Blackmoore) wrote in message
link.net...
In article ,
(basskisser) wrote:

(Henry Blackmoore) wrote in message news:P4Udc.3649
No you said words that indicated that "if the wiring were bad, you would
read
zero R.P.M's. And that is simply not true and an ignorant statement.
Simple
as that. The wiring can be "bad" and still read something which is what
my
statement was saying numb numb. As usual your brain is clouded by smoke.

Have any proof of that statement?

"I would guess that it is the actual tach that is bad, seeing how you
are reading SOMETHING. I'd think if the wiring were bad, you would
read zero R.P.M.'s."

Please show how, if the wiring were bad, that the tach would read
HIGHER. Can you? OR was that just drunken babble?

What is your IQ? About two below plant life?

Can't answer the question, can you, drunken idiot?

Look slow mind grok this:

[YOU SAID]
I would guess that it is the actual tach that is bad, seeing how you
are reading SOMETHING. I'd think if the wiring were bad, you would
read zero R.P.M.'s.

[I REPLIED]
Ever hear of excessive resistance? One can have "bad" wiring and
still get a reading...(albeit usually much lower).

--
I responded to JUST that paragraph of yours. Nothing else. Hello
McFly? Anybody home?

You stated that "I'd think if the wiring were bad, you would read zero
R.P.M.'s."

And since that simply is not true, the wiring can be "bad" and read
zero r.p.m.'s. Thus my response. I never said anything about
bad wiring being the cause of the original poster's problems.

I know it is hard for you. So I will stop being insensitive and saying
things like "dumb dumb" in reference to you. Better to use
"mentally challenged".

RPM's / Tach question
 

RPM's / Tach question
 

In article , (basskisser) wrote:

(Henry Blackmoore) wrote in message
ink.net...
In article ,
(basskisser) wrote:
Path:

(Henry Blackmoore) wrote in message
link.net...
In article ,
(basskisser) wrote:

(Henry Blackmoore) wrote in message news:P4Udc.3649
No you said words that indicated that "if the wiring were bad, you
would
read
zero R.P.M's. And that is simply not true and an ignorant statement.
Simple
as that. The wiring can be "bad" and still read something which is
what
my
statement was saying numb numb. As usual your brain is clouded by
smoke.

Have any proof of that statement?

"I would guess that it is the actual tach that is bad, seeing how you
are reading SOMETHING. I'd think if the wiring were bad, you would
read zero R.P.M.'s."

Please show how, if the wiring were bad, that the tach would read
HIGHER. Can you? OR was that just drunken babble?

What is your IQ? About two below plant life?

Can't answer the question, can you, drunken idiot?

Look slow mind grok this:

[YOU SAID]
I would guess that it is the actual tach that is bad, seeing how you
are reading SOMETHING. I'd think if the wiring were bad, you would
read zero R.P.M.'s.

[I REPLIED]
Ever hear of excessive resistance? One can have "bad" wiring and
still get a reading...(albeit usually much lower).

--
I responded to JUST that paragraph of yours. Nothing else. Hello
McFly? Anybody home?

You stated that "I'd think if the wiring were bad, you would read zero
R.P.M.'s."

And since that simply is not true, the wiring can be "bad" and read
zero r.p.m.'s. Thus my response. I never said anything about
bad wiring being the cause of the original poster's problems.

I know it is hard for you. So I will stop being insensitive and saying
things like "dumb dumb" in reference to you. Better to use
"mentally challenged".

So, I take it you simply didn't comprehend the part where the poster
stated that the tach read HIGHER????? Can you show my HOW it would
read higher?

That is irrelevant to the argument that we are having over your ignorant
statement.

Sorry no cigar 'asskisser. We need to drop the subject because it
is straining your brain.

RPM's / Tach question
 

RPM's / Tach question
 

In article , (basskisser) wrote:

(Henry Blackmoore) wrote in message
hlink.net...
In article ,
(basskisser) wrote:

(Henry Blackmoore) wrote in message
ink.net...
In article ,
(basskisser) wrote:
Path:

(Henry Blackmoore) wrote in message
link.net...
In article ,
(basskisser) wrote:

(Henry Blackmoore) wrote in message news:P4Udc.3649
No you said words that indicated that "if the wiring were bad, you
would
read
zero R.P.M's. And that is simply not true and an ignorant
statement.
Simple
as that. The wiring can be "bad" and still read something which is
what
my
statement was saying numb numb. As usual your brain is clouded by
smoke.

Have any proof of that statement?

"I would guess that it is the actual tach that is bad, seeing how
you
are reading SOMETHING. I'd think if the wiring were bad, you would
read zero R.P.M.'s."

Please show how, if the wiring were bad, that the tach would read
HIGHER. Can you? OR was that just drunken babble?

What is your IQ? About two below plant life?

Can't answer the question, can you, drunken idiot?

Look slow mind grok this:

[YOU SAID]
I would guess that it is the actual tach that is bad, seeing how you
are reading SOMETHING. I'd think if the wiring were bad, you would
read zero R.P.M.'s.

[I REPLIED]
Ever hear of excessive resistance? One can have "bad" wiring and
still get a reading...(albeit usually much lower).

--
I responded to JUST that paragraph of yours. Nothing else. Hello
McFly? Anybody home?

You stated that "I'd think if the wiring were bad, you would read zero
R.P.M.'s."

And since that simply is not true, the wiring can be "bad" and read
zero r.p.m.'s. Thus my response. I never said anything about
bad wiring being the cause of the original poster's problems.

I know it is hard for you. So I will stop being insensitive and saying
things like "dumb dumb" in reference to you. Better to use
"mentally challenged".

So, I take it you simply didn't comprehend the part where the poster
stated that the tach read HIGHER????? Can you show my HOW it would
read higher?

That is irrelevant to the argument that we are having over your ignorant
statement.

Sorry no cigar 'asskisser. We need to drop the subject because it
is straining your brain.

Idiot.

Wearing your blue-dress today Monica?

RPM's / Tach question
 

RPM's / Tach question
 

In article , (basskisser) wrote:

(Henry Blackmoore) wrote in message
ink.net...
In article ,
(basskisser) wrote:

(Henry Blackmoore) wrote in message
hlink.net...
In article ,
(basskisser) wrote:

(Henry Blackmoore) wrote in message
ink.net...
In article ,
(basskisser) wrote:
Path:

(Henry Blackmoore) wrote in message
link.net...
In article ,
(basskisser) wrote:

(Henry Blackmoore) wrote in message news:P4Udc.3649
No you said words that indicated that "if the wiring were bad,
you
would
read
zero R.P.M's. And that is simply not true and an ignorant
statement.
Simple
as that. The wiring can be "bad" and still read something which
is
what
my
statement was saying numb numb. As usual your brain is clouded
by
smoke.

Have any proof of that statement?

"I would guess that it is the actual tach that is bad, seeing how
you
are reading SOMETHING. I'd think if the wiring were bad, you
would
read zero R.P.M.'s."

Please show how, if the wiring were bad, that the tach would read
HIGHER. Can you? OR was that just drunken babble?

What is your IQ? About two below plant life?

Can't answer the question, can you, drunken idiot?

Look slow mind grok this:

[YOU SAID]
I would guess that it is the actual tach that is bad, seeing how you
are reading SOMETHING. I'd think if the wiring were bad, you would
read zero R.P.M.'s.

[I REPLIED]
Ever hear of excessive resistance? One can have "bad" wiring and
still get a reading...(albeit usually much lower).

--
I responded to JUST that paragraph of yours. Nothing else. Hello
McFly? Anybody home?

You stated that "I'd think if the wiring were bad, you would read zero
R.P.M.'s."

And since that simply is not true, the wiring can be "bad" and read
zero r.p.m.'s. Thus my response. I never said anything about
bad wiring being the cause of the original poster's problems.

I know it is hard for you. So I will stop being insensitive and saying
things like "dumb dumb" in reference to you. Better to use
"mentally challenged".

So, I take it you simply didn't comprehend the part where the poster
stated that the tach read HIGHER????? Can you show my HOW it would
read higher?

That is irrelevant to the argument that we are having over your ignorant
statement.

Sorry no cigar 'asskisser. We need to drop the subject because it
is straining your brain.

Idiot.

Wearing your blue-dress today Monica?

Put the liquor bottle down, Henry.

A little club-soda will get those stains off dearie...

RPM's / Tach question
 

"basskisser" wrote in message
om...

So, I take it you simply didn't comprehend the part where the poster
stated that the tach read HIGHER????? Can you show my HOW it would
read higher?

It *is* possible.

Think for a change.