March 28, 2024, 10:24:50 AM

News:

For advertising inquiries or help with registration or other issues, you may contact us by email at help@harleytechtalk.com


Checking squish clearance

Started by D-1, August 30, 2017, 05:11:03 AM

Previous topic - Next topic

0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.

thumper 823

June 04, 2019, 05:23:55 PM #25 Last Edit: June 04, 2019, 10:29:23 PM by thumper 823
angle tops

The best pics I have as of right now-
In this pick I am fusing with the oil control spacer attempting to get less drag.
I made a special tool to get a nice slow push dwn through on an electric scale.
The tool is a snowmobile clutch tool, but seriously a couple of sticks of wood bolted to gather would do the same thing.
I got front piston dwn to 11 lbs and the rear to 10 lbs.!
She will either be an oi blower or a real goer.
The weird part after the cylinders was installed- pistons,  rings and all
it took less the 5lbs to spin the engine over .
I thought the drag would be cumulative  (times two)
That is a lot less than a stocker which can be as high as 30 and more!

[attach=0,msg1300805]

[attach=1,msg1300805]
D Troop 3/5, - C/16 ,162AHC, Mekong delta.
Rising from the Ashes  UHIH

thumper 823

D Troop 3/5, - C/16 ,162AHC, Mekong delta.
Rising from the Ashes  UHIH

thumper 823

I use dental plastic as it will it mar the ceramic coatings on the pistons and the top of the combustion chamber



[attach=0]  [attach=1]
D Troop 3/5, - C/16 ,162AHC, Mekong delta.
Rising from the Ashes  UHIH

Hillside Motorcycle

How is the helicopter coming along?
Otto Knowbetter sez, "Even a fish wouldn't get caught if he kept his mouth shut"

thumper 823

 [attach=0,msg1300867] .


It is all almost.
need one more roof built here (wood blades)
And its dwn to the valve train on the other engine.
It was all cockeyed and imposable   to get centered
the enginamaneer went with 1/2 longer rods
a redo in the oiling system so oil to the top main bng.
line bore
and a bunch of other boring things..
D Troop 3/5, - C/16 ,162AHC, Mekong delta.
Rising from the Ashes  UHIH

thumper 823

Finaly did the dyno !
1994 EVO, std stroke, 80 inch (20 over)
Hill side gets the thank you for the final volly and tune   [attach=0,msg1359921]
D Troop 3/5, - C/16 ,162AHC, Mekong delta.
Rising from the Ashes  UHIH

Adam76

September 07, 2020, 04:58:57 PM #31 Last Edit: September 07, 2020, 05:56:03 PM by Adam76
Quote from: thumper 823 on August 28, 2020, 04:57:05 PM
Finaly did the dyno !
1994 EVO, std stroke, 80 inch (20 over)
Hill side gets the thank you for the final volly and tune   [attach=0,msg1359921]

Wow, nice result thumper.  👍
What was done with the voes?

Adam76

September 07, 2020, 05:02:17 PM #32 Last Edit: September 07, 2020, 05:55:34 PM by Adam76
I'm currently aiming for .030" myself, with zero deck and .030 HG..... From everything everyone's told me so far, this is ideal for performance and burn efficiency as far as safe before running into possible detonation problems?? 
I've been aiming for .030 -  0.032 from the beginning.... Should have it all together soon -- but now I'm thinking I should be checking piston to valve clearance? I didn't think it would be a problem worth checking for with my build?
Thanks

kd

KD

RTMike

.030 is a little tight..035-.040 is what I shoot for

kd

KD

turboprop

Quote from: Adam76 on September 07, 2020, 05:02:17 PM
I'm currently aiming for .030" myself, with zero deck and .030 HG..... From everything everyone's told me so far, this is ideal for performance and burn efficiency as far as safe before running into possible detonation problems?? 
I've been aiming for .030 -  0.032 from the beginning.... Should have it all together soon -- but now I'm thinking I should be checking piston to valve clearance? I didn't think it would be a problem worth checking for with my build?
Thanks


If there is any doubt then there is no doubt. Unless you just enjoy not sleeping and having endless  online discussions based on conjecture and what others are simply repeating as fact. Check that piston to valve clearance. The other person that sleeps in you bed will thank you.
'We' like this' - Said by the one man operation.

kd

September 07, 2020, 08:19:04 PM #37 Last Edit: September 07, 2020, 08:31:04 PM by kd
 :agree:  You'll find it interesting to do and it will be a huge stress relief knowing as turboprop has pointed out.
KD

Adam76

September 07, 2020, 11:09:41 PM #38 Last Edit: September 07, 2020, 11:17:55 PM by Adam76
Quote from: turboprop on September 07, 2020, 06:52:52 PM
Quote from: Adam76 on September 07, 2020, 05:02:17 PM
I'm currently aiming for .030" myself, with zero deck and .030 HG..... From everything everyone's told me so far, this is ideal for performance and burn efficiency as far as safe before running into possible detonation problems?? 
I've been aiming for .030 -  0.032 from the beginning.... Should have it all together soon -- but now I'm thinking I should be checking piston to valve clearance? I didn't think it would be a problem worth checking for with my build?
Thanks


If there is any doubt then there is no doubt. Unless you just enjoy not sleeping and having endless  online discussions based on conjecture and what others are simply repeating as fact. Check that piston to valve clearance.The other person that sleeps in you bed will thank you.
Ok, thanks. I guess I just made an assumption and I was wrong..  Never done any of this before, so everything is a learning curve. Appreciate the advice.
I don't  sleep at night much, but that's another story.

Adam76

Quote from: kd on September 07, 2020, 08:19:04 PM
:agree:  You'll find it interesting to do and it will be a huge stress relief knowing as turboprop has pointed out.
Yep,  will do. And it will be an interesting exercise to do and learn for this and future builds. 
Cheers

Adam76

Quote from: Ohio HD on August 30, 2017, 06:07:09 AM
Close, I use a known thickness flat bar across the cylinder bore. Mine happens to be 0.080" thick. I set the dial indicator to 0.080" while it rests on the bar stock. Then when the bar stock is removed, the virtual 0.000" depth is calculated from the actual piston height or depth. +/-
Ohio, is it still an ok method to set up the dial indicator and zero it out using the top of the barrel surface like D-1 mentioned?  I was going to use this method to check my deck height once my cylinders go back on. Kind of like the picture you posted.
Thanks.

Ohio HD

Quote from: Adam76 on September 07, 2020, 11:25:40 PM
Quote from: Ohio HD on August 30, 2017, 06:07:09 AM
Close, I use a known thickness flat bar across the cylinder bore. Mine happens to be 0.080" thick. I set the dial indicator to 0.080" while it rests on the bar stock. Then when the bar stock is removed, the virtual 0.000" depth is calculated from the actual piston height or depth. +/-
Ohio, is it still an ok method to set up the dial indicator and zero it out using the top of the barrel surface like D-1 mentioned?  I was going to use this method to check my deck height once my cylinders go back on. Kind of like the picture you posted.
Thanks.

The reason I do it as I mentioned is I have a fixed indicator bracket for use on HD motors. Once bolted to the cylinder I don't want to move it. This is why I do it as I explained. Moving the indicator base once zeroed might be accurate, it might not be. It's just not good machining practices to move your point of reference. 


Adam76

Quote from: Ohio HD on September 08, 2020, 02:32:40 AM
Quote from: Adam76 on September 07, 2020, 11:25:40 PM
Quote from: Ohio HD on August 30, 2017, 06:07:09 AM
Close, I use a known thickness flat bar across the cylinder bore. Mine happens to be 0.080" thick. I set the dial indicator to 0.080" while it rests on the bar stock. Then when the bar stock is removed, the virtual 0.000" depth is calculated from the actual piston height or depth. +/-
Ohio, is it still an ok method to set up the dial indicator and zero it out using the top of the barrel surface like D-1 mentioned?  I was going to use this method to check my deck height once my cylinders go back on. Kind of like the picture you posted.
Thanks.

The reason I do it as I mentioned is I have a fixed indicator bracket for use on HD motors. Once bolted to the cylinder I don't want to move it. This is why I do it as I explained. Moving the indicator base once zeroed might be accurate, it might not be. It's just not good machining practices to move your point of reference.
Ok thanks, that makes sense.

I was going to use a traditional deck bridge like this one.

thumper 823

September 08, 2020, 03:06:21 AM #43 Last Edit: September 08, 2020, 03:11:10 AM by thumper 823
A tight Squish is part of what is needed to combat spark knock with High comp, and low octain gas .
I am at an honest .026 and have about a 1000 miles on it.
(Plus Scott @ Hillside said it would work.)
This is Dual plugged-  225  front and 235 rear CCP, @ 65F -OAT,    1700 feet above seal level.   W8 Cam
Keep in mind most pistons will not give a constant number through the outside radius (Uness they have been chucked up)
I have measured the leak dwn @TDC (minus a couple of deg)  and it is near zero.
I am not exagerating.
Now keep in mind I have nodular cylinders and all the graphs I have read say Nodular does not have near the growth that AL jugs do.
You will have to do your own math to figure out what you get with al @ operating temps.
A std Evo head comes with a lot of area to be removed as a virgin head can have .050 to .070 to get it to pefomance area. AFAIK.

Yes STD  VOS hooked up.
D Troop 3/5, - C/16 ,162AHC, Mekong delta.
Rising from the Ashes  UHIH

Ohio HD

Quote from: Adam76 on September 08, 2020, 03:03:35 AM
Quote from: Ohio HD on September 08, 2020, 02:32:40 AM
Quote from: Adam76 on September 07, 2020, 11:25:40 PM
Quote from: Ohio HD on August 30, 2017, 06:07:09 AM
Close, I use a known thickness flat bar across the cylinder bore. Mine happens to be 0.080" thick. I set the dial indicator to 0.080" while it rests on the bar stock. Then when the bar stock is removed, the virtual 0.000" depth is calculated from the actual piston height or depth. +/-
Ohio, is it still an ok method to set up the dial indicator and zero it out using the top of the barrel surface like D-1 mentioned?  I was going to use this method to check my deck height once my cylinders go back on. Kind of like the picture you posted.
Thanks.

The reason I do it as I mentioned is I have a fixed indicator bracket for use on HD motors. Once bolted to the cylinder I don't want to move it. This is why I do it as I explained. Moving the indicator base once zeroed might be accurate, it might not be. It's just not good machining practices to move your point of reference.
Ok thanks, that makes sense.

I was going to use a traditional deck bridge like this one.

That's fine to use. Put it in place over the center of the piston, use a precision thickness flat stock, set the indicator to the flat stock thickness, not zero, Then when the flat stock is pulled out, you have a zeroed indicator for over the bore.

I prefer a bolted down or magnetic base indicator so I can slowly roll the motor back and forth to make sure I have a good reading as to what the piston measures at TDC.


kd

Quote from: Ohio HD on September 08, 2020, 03:38:08 AM
Quote from: Adam76 on September 08, 2020, 03:03:35 AM
Quote from: Ohio HD on September 08, 2020, 02:32:40 AM
Quote from: Adam76 on September 07, 2020, 11:25:40 PM
Quote from: Ohio HD on August 30, 2017, 06:07:09 AM
Close, I use a known thickness flat bar across the cylinder bore. Mine happens to be 0.080" thick. I set the dial indicator to 0.080" while it rests on the bar stock. Then when the bar stock is removed, the virtual 0.000" depth is calculated from the actual piston height or depth. +/-
Ohio, is it still an ok method to set up the dial indicator and zero it out using the top of the barrel surface like D-1 mentioned?  I was going to use this method to check my deck height once my cylinders go back on. Kind of like the picture you posted.
Thanks.

The reason I do it as I mentioned is I have a fixed indicator bracket for use on HD motors. Once bolted to the cylinder I don't want to move it. This is why I do it as I explained. Moving the indicator base once zeroed might be accurate, it might not be. It's just not good machining practices to move your point of reference.
Ok thanks, that makes sense.

I was going to use a traditional deck bridge like this one.

That's fine to use. Put it in place over the center of the piston, use a precision thickness flat stock, set the indicator to the flat stock thickness, not zero, Then when the flat stock is pulled out, you have a zeroed indicator for over the bore.

I prefer a bolted down or magnetic base indicator so I can slowly roll the motor back and forth to make sure I have a good reading as to what the piston measures at TDC.

Very important.  Measurements at each side and above the pin can vary when the piston rocks in the bore.
KD

Adam76

September 09, 2020, 01:39:41 AM #46 Last Edit: September 09, 2020, 01:43:52 AM by Adam76
Quote from: kd on September 08, 2020, 05:19:34 AM
Very important.  Measurements at each side and above the pin can vary when the piston rocks in the bore.

Thanks kd, my piston being a KB forged with a small dome (9.5 pistons) don't have many areas on the actual top surface of the piston to measure from? I'm only really able to use one section on the right hand side of the  piston top that isn't affected by the dome or the valve reliefs?

thumper 823

Your squish is the closest area to the head,   no matter where it is.
AFAIK you want it as tight as posable, and there is endless theory on it.
Even maching groves to the other side.
The importatnat part is close, but not so close they kiss each other.
D Troop 3/5, - C/16 ,162AHC, Mekong delta.
Rising from the Ashes  UHIH

kd

September 09, 2020, 04:49:47 AM #48 Last Edit: September 09, 2020, 05:01:15 AM by kd
What year and type cylinder head are you using?
KD

Adam76

Quote from: kd on September 09, 2020, 04:49:47 AM
What year and type cylinder head are you using?
If asking me?  I'm using 1996 softail motor with stock heads that now have 0.010" off them just back from the machine shop. Because it wasn't a high performance precision build, I didn't cc the heads, so I have no idea where they're at.... but they looked virgin to me when I pulled then off. Then again, how would I know?
Cheers