Ex-500.com - The home of the Kawasaki EX500 / Ninja 500R banner

1 - 13 of 13 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
46 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
In progress for 6000 mile service.
When serviced at 600 miles(first service) valves were spot on.
Valves have not tightened up (expected) at 6000.
Would this be considered normal.
Thanks Alan
'06 Ex500 Green
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
150 Posts
Are you doing the adjustment or did the dealer tell you they were spot on?

My exhaust valves tighten 1 to 2 thou every 5K miles. Intakes change very little. Currently at 23K miles on my 2006.

I think your lack of adjustment is unique.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,073 Posts
commuter said:
Are you doing the adjustment or did the dealer tell you they were spot on?

My exhaust valves tighten 1 to 2 thou every 5K miles. Intakes change very little. Currently at 23K miles on my 2006.

I think your lack of adjustment is unique.
No I think his lack of adjustment is normal.
I think YOU have a problem if you are continuously adjusting the exhaust valve lash. Four thou over 23k is alright but eight would be alot.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
150 Posts
bitzz said:
commuter said:
Are you doing the adjustment or did the dealer tell you they were spot on?

My exhaust valves tighten 1 to 2 thou every 5K miles. Intakes change very little. Currently at 23K miles on my 2006.

I think your lack of adjustment is unique.
No I think his lack of adjustment is normal.
I think YOU have a problem if you are continuously adjusting the exhaust valve lash. Four thou over 23k is alright but eight would be alot.
I check mine every 5K to 6K miles. The exhaust valves tend to tighten a little between adjustments, intakes rarely need adjustment. My bikes gets 110 freeway miles 6 days a week, so its spends two hours a day at 6K to 7K rpm. Maybe thats why mine require more service than normal. :-\
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
31 Posts
When adjusting, are you running them to the loose side of spec? you should.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
150 Posts
cstem said:
When adjusting, are you running them to the loose side of spec? you should.
Yeah, exhaust at 8 thou, intakes at 7 thou. I'd rather have them looser than tighter. Don't read too much into that last comment... ;D
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
19,363 Posts
commuter said:
cstem said:
When adjusting, are you running them to the loose side of spec? you should.
Yeah, exhaust at 8 thou, intakes at 7 thou. I'd rather have them looser than tighter. Don't read too much into that last comment... ;D
Why?

FOG
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,073 Posts
cstem said:
When adjusting, are you running them to the loose side of spec? you should.
Ok I'll bite.
Why do you want loose valve clearances?
i have ALWAYS set mine at the tight end...dead on the tight end. Never had a problem.
What do you expect to gain by running the valve lash loose?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,567 Posts
One arguement for setting them to the loose end would be when the maintenance interval won't be as recommended. Loose valves won't ever be hung off the seat, which is how they cool. And if they do hang other than tight on the seat they WILL burn, almost immediately.

The arguement for setting them to the tight end is to maximize the duration/timing and therefore performance. How much is the gain? Hmmm, probably hard to measure, but I set them to the tight end, too. I know I'll not let them go too long and anything gained at this point is essentially free power. No parts to buy, no extra exhaust noise. ;) And it could be argued that it is slightly easier on the valve train although I suspect that's another one that would be hard to prove.

In summary, my opinion would be whatever you feel comfortable with after weighing honestly if you will do good maintenance. If not, run them loose. If yes, set them to the tight end. Either way, don't expect to feel any performance difference in the seat of your pants. ;D
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
19,363 Posts
I measured 3 degrees of crankshaft rotation for a .001 of valve lift. So with tight clearances you get 6 degree more cam overlap. whatever that's worth I used to do it on all my race engines.

FOG
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,567 Posts
FOG said:
I measured 3 degrees of crankshaft rotation for a .001 of valve lift. So with tight clearances you get 6 degree more cam overlap. whatever that's worth I used to do it on all my race engines.

FOG
To put a reasonableness test to it I just did a quick sketch and found it only takes a 4.35 degree slope on a 1" base diameter cam lobe to accomplish what you described. That was on one side only so would double when considering duration. That slope appears totally reasonable at a glance.

For anyone who wants to sketch the same, remember that the cam turns at half crank speed so the cam rotation will only be 1.5 degrees for three degrees at the crank.

Fog, did you ever go tighter than spec? I would assume that the spec probably has at least a couple of thousandths reserve in it at the tightest point, maybe more, so if you were to check them more often you should be able to use that additional tolerance. Just curious.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
19,363 Posts
No I never did but always set to .005 on the intakes the exhaust dosen't matter much. And advised customers of that fact and instructed them to check every race weekend and maintain the .005 setting for best preformance. Never got and negative feedback, and never found a change in that setting.

I also cut the valve contact ring at the absolute top edge of the valve face and reduced the width to half of the book valve. this increases the flow through the valve at the very beginung of the valve stroke.

Your right though there probably is a 100% safty margin and they ( the design engineers) chose .006 nominal as the loosest that would not produce a tappet noise.

I wouldn't recomend any of the STM's on this list to deviate from the standard settings .

FOG
 
1 - 13 of 13 Posts
Top