Huge points gap necessary for proper dwell angle

I tried to adjust the ignition timing on my 1980 kz650 yesterday using a newly acquired dwell angle meter, an old sears model. The points are just about 800 miles old, BUT I have not had points cam grease on them that whole time.

1) I ended up with a huge points gap when adjusting to 180-185deg dwell angle on both sets of points. The resultant gaps were about 0.55mm, far outside spec (0.30-0.40mm).
2) I wasn't able to get the static timing right. With the points plate turned as clockwise as possible, the points still opened before before the F mark.

Can someone explain what's going on here? I think this means that the points block has worn down, correct? Could running it for 800 miles without lube do that?

A side note, I do believe the dwell angle meter is working properly and that I'm reading it correctly.

The dwell angle meter is for single points. Divide by 1/2 and see how that works.
Steve

Steve, I'm quite sure I'm reading it right. 180 dwell should mean that a given set of points, say 1-4, is closed half the time, which they are just about, and the reading i'm getting on the meter is halfway between what I get when the meter is disconnected (360, or 45deg for an 8cyl) and shorted (0deg), so 180deg.

I recommend set the dwell meter aside for now and do a static adjustment as I describe below. After that, take the bike for a ride and see how it runs. Assuming it runs fine, check the dwell using the dwell meter. If the meter reading is way off even though the bike runs fine there is either something wrong with the meter, it is set to the wrong setting, or you are reading it wrong. Ed

Here's the method I use for static timing. I turn OFF the ignition. I disconnect the green wire near one coil and the black wire near the other coil. (This is not in the book, but it makes checking continuity much easier for me.) After installing the new points or cleaning up the old ones, turn the 17 mm nut while watching the points. When points set 1&4 are at their widest gap adjust them (by loosening the 2 screws that hold the points to the backplate) so the gap equals 0.35 mm. Turn the 17 mm nut clockwise through a full revolution again and double check this gap. Then repeat this for points set 2&3. Now set your meter to test continuity and clip one wire to the leaf spring on points set 1&4 and clip the other wire to ground. Turn the 17 mm nut clockwise until the 1&4 "F" mark aligns with the pointer mentioned above. You want the continuity across point set 1&4 to just break when the F mark aligns with the pointer. The idea is that when the continuity just fails is when the points will fire their respective coil and cylinders. In order to adjust the point at which continuity fails you loosen the 3 screws that hold the backplate to the engine and slightly turn the backplate until the meter shows a break in continuity. Once you have the 1&4 set timed properly you can check the 2&3 set to make sure they break when the 2&3 F mark aligns with the pointer (they should or something is not right). Don't forget to plug in the green and black coil wires when you are done, and put a little grease on the rubbing block felt. Assuming you are using new points of the correct type this should enable you to get the timing very close. Trying this with old points may give poor results, especially if the points are pitted and/or the rubbing blocks are worn.

After you have set the gap (which in effect sets the dwell) and the timing using the method above you can use a dwell meter and timing light to fine tune dwell and timing. If you have followed the above procedure carefully, very little if any fine tuning will be needed.

Sears often sold Actron models.
Dwell angle reading, on typical dwell meters, from the classic car era, need the 8 cylinder scale reading multiplied by 8 when measuring an inline-4 Kz, or Kz twins with the points on the crank.

So if you have an Actron 7605, and the reading on the 8 cyl scale is 22.5 deg, the actual dwell angle is then 180 deg.

This is because the meter is calibrated to read dwell in distributor-degrees. This is the same as camshaft-degrees. The KZ fires the ignition from the crankshaft, so its dwell is specified in crankshaft-degrees. This results in needing a 2-to-1 correction factor. Also, whether the bike is a KZ twin or KZ 4-cyl, the signal coming from one coil fires only once per crank revolution. The coil on a classic v-8 motor fires 4 times per crank revolution. For every crank revolution on a KZ, the meter is only getting 1/4 of the signals a v-8 motor would give. This results in needing an additional 4-to-1 correction factor. Therefore, the reading must be multiplied by 2 then multiplied by 4, or in other words, the “8-cyl” reading must be multiplied by 8.

When the meter is disconnected, it should read zero.
When it's connected, and the points are open, it should read zero.
When it's connected, and the points are closed, it should read zero.
When it's connected, and the points are opening/closing, and you increase the dwell angle, it should approach, but never actually attain 45 on an 8cyl scale for classic cars. That is when the points just barely open for the briefest of moments. If it was actually a full 45 cam deg (on the 8cyl car scale), it would mean the points never open and the reading would fall slowly back to zero after approaching 45.

The Kz dwell is specified in crank degrees.
On the 8cyl scale, for a classic car dwell meter, you should look for 22.5 deg when using it on an inline-four Kz.

Ed's advice is a good starting point.

aenikolopov wrote: 1) I ended up with a huge points gap when adjusting to 180-185deg dwell angle on both sets of points. The resultant gaps were about 0.55mm, far outside spec (0.30-0.40mm).

That dwell would be ok if your bike had only 1 cylinder, but that is not the case. I HIGHLY recommend you buy a Kawasaki Service Manual as it contains MUCH valuable information including how to adjust the points. Working on or maintaining these bikes without the proper manual is not smart. The manual is worth its weight in gold. Ed

Ed,
Thanks very much for your thorough response. That is approximately how I had carried things out when I worked on the bike, but I will redo the whole operation this weekend when I have time. Your're right about disconnecting the condenser connection to make continuity testing easier. A quick workaround is to jam open the set of points you're NOT working on w/ something nonconductive, preventing your signal from going back through both coils and into ground through the other set of points.
You're right that I don't have a factory service manual for exactly my model, though I do have one for a b2 kz650, and a clymer manual. The logic I was using was exactly that provided by loudhvx. my meter read as 22.5 on the 8 cyl scale. Was I aiming for the wrong value here?As it is, each point/contact breaker is open almost exactly half of a crankshaft rotation (i.e., about 180deg)

loudhvx wrote: Sears often sold Actron models.
Dwell angle reading, on typical dwell meters, from the classic car era, need the 8 cylinder scale reading multiplied by 8 when measuring an inline-4 Kz, or Kz twins with the points on the crank.
...

this is a very good explanation of things. It's the conclusion that I came to as well. This helps solidify my thinking, thank you.

Ed, the actual number of crank degrees of dwell is 185 to 195 degrees. The instructions for using the Kawasaki tester is misleading or maybe wrong. The confusing part is where is shows the chart with different numbers of "cyls". It should say "lobes" to be relevant to the systems using wasted park. Notice the text actually uses the term "lobes", not "cyls". The selector should be set to 1 lobe, but unfortunately, it is likely labeled "1 cyl", so "1 cyl" is where the knob should be set, in which case the reading should be 185 to 195 when the dwell is set properly.

The tester is based on the idea that each lobe fires a single cylinder, but in the case of the Kz, it fires two cylinders. But because the points cam only has one lobe, the setting should be set to "1 cyl". Under that setting the dwell should read 185 to 195.

If the points actually had less than 100 degrees of dwell, it would be far too little for such slow coils. Even the much faster electronic ignitions have about 120 degrees of dwell.

But all of this confusion could be avoided if the readings and specs were done in duty cycle percentage. Then we would not care about cylinders etc. For that, the FSM specifies 51% to 54%.

51% of 360deg is 183.6deg. They rounded to 185 since the scale probably does not show 1 deg precision.
54% of 360deg is 194.4 deg. Likewise rounded to 195.

I'm going to follow Ed's clear and detailed instructions this weekend. In the meantime, seeing as I have, according to Loudhvx's description, set the dwell angle correctly, which gives me an excessively large gap, and also I am unable to set the timing when the dwell angle is correct, can someone please tell me: is it even feasible that an unoiled points block could be worn down by the cam in less than 1000 miles enough to have it be that way?

So you have a really large gap, and the points are open about 50% of the crank rotation?

Then something is wrong, although, actually, the dwell should be a little longer than half of a rotation.

My friend bought some points from an online supplier and they were complete junk. The pivot hole wasn't even round. It was oval. He could not set them, and had to toss them.

Are you working with new points? Could they be Chinese made?

Yes, what you said is right. the dwell is soemthing like 183-185 now. I guess I could move it a couple degrees, yes.
As for quality, I don't really know how to compare, because the only points I've ever seen are the ones on my bike now, and the ones I replaced. I got these from Z1. It's worthwhile mentioning that when I received them the contact points were not parallel and I had to bend the points a bit to get them parallel. I bent the chunk of metal that holds the actual contact elements. the non-sprung side. Not very much. I don't think that would have affected the gap thing I'm talking about, but it may well be a sign that they were of less-than-stellar quality. I think they were supposed to be made in japan though.