Parts were supposed to arrive today but look like they will be delayed. That's ok because I have yet to clean the gasket scuzz off the engine. I don't want to damage anything or get any particulate into the engine while I clean. I was thinking of using brake cleaner, a razor and a vacuum. A little apprehensive on using a metal razor on that mating surface tho. Other thoughts?
Got the shims in. I installed them. Don't have a torque wrench the proper size so picking that up tonight then reinstalling the cams, checking the clearances to verify they are now in spec then reinstalling the valve cover, hoses and rectifiers (I hope). Then we'll see if that fixed the tap tap tap-a-roo.
On of the rubber camshaft plugs fell out during my inspection. The rest are solidly in place. Can I reinstall it with Permatex High Tac or a gasket maker? High Tac seems like it's better for this application.
Tvag06 wrote: Checked all Intake and Exhaust valve clearances using .05, .10, .17 and .20 mm gauges(I didn't have a .15 so I used a .17mm gauge).
Exhaust(mm) .10 .17 .17 .10
Intake(mm) .10 .05 .05 .10
I was able to swap the Intake and Exhaust shims from #2 (2.45 and 2.50 respectively) to get them both in spec. I ordered a 2.50mm for exhaust #3 (2.55) and 2.50mm for intake #3 (2.45) along with the new valve cover gasket. Cleaned the old gasket mtrl off the cover last night will clean the up the other surface tonight.
After installing new shims, reinstalling the cams and torquing them down I got new numbers that do not compute.
HERE ARE THE ORIGINAL MEASUREMENTS AGAIN
HERE ARE THE MEASUREMENTS AFTER ADJUSTING SHIMS
I torqued it all down according to spec. The only difference is I had purchased a new feeler gauge to measure more accurately this time. I didn't think to measure using the original feeler gauge before I pulled the cams again. Assuming the gauge is accurate and comparable to the original gauge, am I missing something? How can I see no change in the #2 and #3 intake and an increase in gap in the #2 and #3 exhaust?
I've never done what Scirocco suggests but I do believe in positioning the cams so you have two adjacent valves on the base circle at the same time though when checking the clearance. Suzuki GS bikes spec the cam positions this way and it does make a difference and is the most accurate method. By positioning the cams with adjacent valves on the base circle it keeps one of the valves from pushing up on the cam and skewing it all the way against the cam cap in the journal clearance. I've posted this method here half a dozen times before and most people just roll their eye's.
The FSM specifies checking while cold. This would be after the oil has drained away. The FSM also specifies a precise sequence for measuring. That is the expected position for measuring and for which the lash spec is given. So basically just follow the FSM precisely.
loudhvx wrote: The FSM specifies checking while cold. This would be after the oil has drained away. The FSM also specifies a precise sequence for measuring. That is the expected position for measuring and for which the lash spec is given. So basically just follow the FSM precisely.
No disrespect, but I disagree. If you look at the 1981 KZ1000/1100 manual they call for positioning the cams as I describe. This manual represents the latest thinking within the KZ world and the same methodology applies throughout all KZ bikes in my view.
Aren't we talking about a 750? I recall it being the same as on the 550 instructions. The 550 instructions are the same for pre 1981 and post 1981. We went through it at length on that other thread and your method did not agree with the manual exactly from what I recall, though it was similar. The larger engines 900/1000/1100? have cam caps in different locations relative to the smaller engines 550/650/750, so I would expect the procedure for the big blocks could possibly be different than the smaller motors.
The 550 instructions (and presumably 750) have the pushing lobes adjacent to the ones being measured. This should stabilize the camshaft position and make it repeatable.
You can usually fish things out of the cam-chain tunnel as long as you know for sure it went down the tunnel. Things I've seen drop down there often come to rest on top of the crank sprocket, so hopefully you can get it one way or another.
Sorry, don't mean to dredge up old news but I simply don't agree. The cam cap style has nothing to do with it. The factory cam positioning sequence for the 550/650750 position the cams in a way that on at least some of the checking points (not all as I recall) the adjacent valve will be depressed, thus skewing the cam in the journal clearance. Follow the late 1000/1100 manual and this is not the case. And for what it's worth, the early 1000 manual positions the cams like the smaller bikes. I take this to mean Kawasaki learned the error of their ways and corrected it. I'll admit though, regardless of the method used the important thing is to check the valves. I've done it both ways and found with the small bike factory method the clearance will be greater than with the later 1000/1100 method by about .0015". Not much, but every little bit matters.
It does matter where the caps are if I follow what you're saying about having two adjacent pushing lobes. On the 550/650/750, there will only be one cap between the pushing lobes which would then allow the camshaft to rock about that single cap depending on which lobe was pushing harder. The 1000 has two caps between the two pushing lobes which would be far more stable in the same position.
I realize my responses are not very verbose, but I want to make sure you know I don't take any offense at the disagreement. And I actually enjoy the conversation, I learned a lot on that other long thread, even though no one else on KZR seems to care as much.
I agree with your logic about Kawasaki changing the method, but I just don't agree that it extends to the smaller motors. With the setup on a 550/750 if 1 and 2 are pushing, the camshaft can rock about the cam cap between 1 and 2 if you lift on the far end, whereas on a 1000 there are two cam caps between 1 and 2.
Well, as I mentioned previously, positioning the cams as the later 1000/1100 manual (and Suzuki) suggests results in the clearance measurements being smaller. I know because I tested this on my own (750) bike as part of our previous discussion. Again, it's only .001-.0015" so some wouldn't sweat it. In truth, the easiest thing to do would be to simply point the cam lobe away from the bucket and then target the top end of the allowable target clearance range. The actual measurements would be smaller if the cams were positioned properly but that method is good enough as long as you allow for the error.
Nessism wrote: I'd try a flexible extension magnet and then go fishing.
I was really concerned I would have to open up the engine to get that shim back, but I was able to fish it out with a telescoping magnet. Actually it only took 3 attempts and under 5 minutes so I consider myself extremely fortunate and very grateful.
edit: Not sure why the picture came in upside down after I resized it and reoriented it, but you get the idea.
So I reinstalled all the shims and got compatible measurements with both feeler gauges. Not sure quite how I may have mis-measured the first time but I'm confident now that I have the right figures. Anyone have a couple shims they could send/sell me? I don't want to purchase a whole shim kit and dealers have been of little help.
I'm thinking I need:
235 for #2 Exhaust
260 for #2 Intake
240 for #3 Exhaust
260 for #3 Intake.