SO..... It is now back together and running, starting in just a couple of pulls! But...instead of peening the seat back in place, which certainly sounds like the correct repair, I opted for now to try the green loctite to secure it in place. I applied the compound, let it dry, and then lapped both valves. The reason I opted to not peen the seat at this point is that in reading about the process it sounded like there was a fairly good chance that I might slightly move the seat, which then would require re-cutting the seat for its now position. If my repair doesn't hold I will use the peening method with the valve in place to hold the seat from moving, and then lap the valves again. I checked around to see if someone locally would do the peening repair at a shop, and one shop said sure, but it would be about $70, and another said they wouldn't do it because they haven't had good luck with the repair holding. I also may want to open the head up again in the near future anyways. In doing my repair, I ground more off the intake valve stem than I wanted (first it was too little, and the second time, I pressed on the valve as I did and...well..OOPs). So I probably should try to buy an intake valve and replace it, and when I do I will inspect the seat to see how it is doing. In hindsight, it appears that almost all of my problems were compression related. I should have paid more attention to the fact it didn't catch even with starter fluid, nor when I poured a little gas in the carb. The fact I had to lean out the mixture to less than 1/2 turn out also should have suggested that the mixture was off for the cylinder (which it did, but I thought it was a supply issue when in fact it was a low compression issue). Now that the intake valve is closing properly, the engine starts right up at 1 1/2 turns and required just a little adjustment to 1 1/4 turn for optimum response. The maintenance I did on the carb certainly didn't hurt, but it does show the limits of an amateur such as myself in having to find out things the hard way. On the other hand, I learned alot in the process. Thank you to everyone for their advice. I will keep that peening diagram for the future since I suspect I will need it! Robert

I tried to battle the aphids with a dish soap/alcohol spray (1.5 teasp soap/3/4 cup alcohol per 1 quart water) Where did you get that idea? That alone would cause blossoms to drop. Although I never used dish soap, it is my understanding that the recommended procedure is to spray 1 tbs/gal, wait 2 hours, and then wash the leaves off with a forceful spray of water. You should turn the plant upside down to get thorough coverage of leaf undersides. Personally, I would use Cygon 2E. I have a bottle that is labeled for food crops but I don't know whether it is still being sold with that labeling.

Heres a Link: http://www.greenbuildingadvisor.com/blogs/dept/musings/saving-energy-manual-j-and-manual-d Even when they do the calculations, the results are usually wrong In his posted comment, Bailes raised an interesting point: the problem of “garbage in, garbage out” (GIGO) Manual J calculations. Several energy experts have commented on the GIGO problem, including John Proctor, Hank Rutkowski, and Allison Bailes. Hank Rutkowski, the mechanical engineer who wrote the original Manual J document, was recently interviewed for a profile posted on the Green Building Talk Web site. The piece notes, “Rutkowski estimates that only 10% of heating and cooling equipment sizing decisions are based on some type of Manual J calculation and that less than 1% of the jobs are based on an aggressive implementation of the recommended design procedures.” Rutkowski explains the GIGO problem this way: “Manual J is a good tool if you use it aggressively. Follow the rules and it will give you a reasonable margin of safety. But the average contractor says, ‘Better safe than sorry,’ so he fudges here and there. He adds 5 to 10 degrees to the summer and winter design temperatures, calls the building ‘average’ instead of ‘tight’ and doesn't take credit for shading by interior blinds and drapes. Then when he finally comes up with a load number for sizing, he throws in an extra half-ton of AC just for the heck of it.” For a high-performance home, sizing by Manual J may still result in oversizing Several years ago, I had a conversation with building scientist Joe Lstiburek about air conditioners installed in Building America homes in Las Vegas. “HVAC designers are committed to the institutional oversizing of air conditioning equipment,” Lstiburek told me. “The average system is sized at 150% to 200% of the requirements of Manual J. They oversize because they don’t know what they will get for a building envelope, and to compensate for duct leakage and inappropriate refrigerant charge. If you size according to Manual J, there is already a fudge factor built in. But most designers then add another fudge factor.” According to Lstiburek, their experience proved the high-performance Building America homes in Las Vegas could have had HVAC systems sized at about 60% of Manual J. To be conservative, his team recommended installing systems sized at 80% of Manual J. Does oversizing matter? There are strong arguments against routine oversizing of HVAC equipment. The best argument is simple: oversized equipment usually costs more than right-sized equipment. Oversized equipment suffers from short cycling. For example, an oversized furnace brings a home up to temperature quickly, and then shuts off. A few minutes later, it comes on again, only to shut off quickly. Many homeowners find the see-saw sound of a short-cycling furnace to be annoying. When air conditioners short cycle, the units don't run long enough to achieve much dehumidification ��" at least in theory. (During the first few minutes of operation, an air conditioner cools a house. But not enough moisture has collected on the cold coil or on the pan below for any water to have actually gone down the drain. When the air conditioner turns off, all of the moisture in the pan and on the coil just re-evaporates.) The conventional wisdom may be wrong, however Increasing evidence shows that energy experts have exaggerated the negative effects of equipment oversizing, however. Studies have confirmed that oversized furnaces don't use any more energy than right-sized furnaces. Moreover, newer modulating or two-speed furnaces operate efficiently under part-load conditions, solving any possible problems from furnace oversizing. Although there are ample reasons to believe that oversized air conditioners are less effective than right-sized equipment at dehumidification, at least one field study was unable to measure any performance improvements or energy savings after replacing an existing oversized air conditioner with a new right-sized unit. The bottom line The main reason to choose right-sized equipment is to avoid paying too much money for equipment you don't need. A Manual J calculation will ensure you don't spend more than necessary for your furnace, boiler, or air conditioner. Moreover, a Manual J calculation will provide room-by-room heat loss and heat-gain information that is essential to good duct design. Without good duct design, you're running the risk of comfort complaints.

Does seem a little steep for just an air handler, especially if just a fixed speed. For a top of the line variable speed and nice stat, could be close. But only another bid or 2 will tell.