----- Original Message -----
From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: V-MAX TECH LIST <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Saturday, October 21, 2000 3:03 PM
Subject: Re: Max's True Compression Ratio
> Rey I assume you mean .085", .065" and .040" when you
stated your measurements.
> You are right about squish being more effective with the piston up higher.
> You are right about squish being more effective with the piston up higher.
Yes, my mistake. But
> you also have to verify that you have plenty of valve to piston clearance to
> enable decking of block or surfacing heads to up the compression. I've never had
> a V-Max engine apart so I can't comment on the stock engines clearance here and
> the potential to raise comp. ratio.
> you also have to verify that you have plenty of valve to piston clearance to
> enable decking of block or surfacing heads to up the compression. I've never had
> a V-Max engine apart so I can't comment on the stock engines clearance here and
> the potential to raise comp. ratio.
I wanted to be sure there was valve to piston
clearance, so I measured clearance with modeling clay. There is plenty,
but don't remember the number. However, were one to mill the cylinder deck
on a Max, then measurement of clearance is critcal, and it may mean cutting the
valve reliefs in the pistons a bit deeper. Anyone considering a
long-rod motor would also have to measure valve to piston
clearance.
> There is another factor, that is valve timing change after surfacing heads. You
> will alter this just by cutting the heads so if doing so I assume one would have
> to make the timing gears adjustable to return valve timing to where it should
> be. Furthermore, does the stock timing chain tensioner have sufficient room to
> take up the looser chain following these mods?
There is a lot of slack in the timing chain, and I
also think there is probably sufficient room to take up the looser chain.
If not, seems to me that it is not that difficult to cut a link out of the
timing chains.
>
>
Rey
>
>
