should i fit a big valve head?????

Status
Not open for further replies.
Joined
Dec 2, 2012
Messages
896
Country flag
My 850 mk2a needs a rebore and the cam an after market job fitted long before I got the bike has died an the radius followers are now scrap to. I found a complete stelite tip stuck on the sump plug magnet that is not radiused or damaged (apart from not being connected to a follower) and as not one of those running on the cam! Scary to think what it could do if it left the magnet with the flywheel about 3mm above it!!! Some iron filings have got into r/h big end slightly marking the crank but the sludge trap has saved the l/h big end but still a regrind is needed. New valve guides and valves (stems have galling) are also needed in short its a depressing mess an shows how strong these engines are the it could hold 70mph for an hour even in that state.
I have a PW3 and followers and intend it take the crank and barrels it Mick Hemmings I am toying with fitting a big valve head of either his or Steve Maney (I only live an hours drive from him) but wondered what the down sides are?? Should I have big exhaust as well as inlet or as this is a road bike will I not feel the benefits an just loose low an mid range pulling power an make the engine all top end an hard to use on the road???
I know the engine will feel stronger after the other work is done an the extra cost of a big valve head will slow down the rebuild so is it worth it or will I spoil the bike as a road bike???
Does anyone out there have one of these heads on a road bike and what do they think of it??
 
That thought has occurred to me to. I notice at the moment the next thread below this is the one about why do we need endless performance upgrades is this just an ironic coincidence or is there some great cosmic force tryin to tell me something ;-)
But then again its all in bits so now is as good a time as any to do it (its winter here to) an if we believed in being sensible or listening to some great cosmic force tryin to help us for our own good then we would all have Honda's wouldn't we :-)
 
Big heads will reduce the performance of the street bike. If you are making other suitable mods to take advantage of the increased breathing potential, you can certainly make more power at the upper end of the rev range and sacrifice some at the low/mid range. But that power is not of much use on the street.

As noted, there are a lot of other things on the bike that could use some improvement. IMO, engine mods aren't really necessary for normal street use.
 
:D Found This

should i fit a big valve head?????


Here : ( story Time :wink: ) http://southsiders-mc.blogspot.com.au/2 ... alive.html

should i fit a big valve head?????


" Damn... big valves inside, this head is a also a Production racer... good surprise ! "
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ran 1 5/8 in. in my 750 , RH5 head , I think . ( & the 55 Triumph 500 , JoMoCo Valves were 1 5/8 for these . 500 c.c. . The 650 Ran 1 9/16 750 valves )
the secret is intelligent port work. My feory is the induction pulse is paramount for performance . The head had standard chambers , cleaned up ports
where the radius after the guides flares to the cut on the valve seat . The guides tapered in the ports . Up stream the ports were tapered as a Mk III was said to be ,
:? the 30.5 tapered to 32 at the manifold face . Id made coustom smoothly curved port matched manifolds to the 32 mm Mk II Amals , which are equivilant in flow
to a 34 Concentric , but give refined operation . :D so they tell me . Or the tripe scribled in the day did .

With A STANDARD Cam , with a BSA Auto Advance - 15 Deg. giveing 30 Deg. retard to 1 btdc at idle , stronger springs holding that to 1100 fully advanced at 2500 .
You could let in the clutch at 800 , but wanted fully engaged at 1100 . as it ran 23 T Sprocket , unless lunacy ( or wheelspin ) prevailed even a 2500 launch would
pull the rpms down thereabouts ( maybe 1500 with a bit of slip ) HOWEVER , beside a excess 1100 in a hurry with a 4-1 Ex. likely engaged at 2000 .
Which was sufficent to hold position aft a wheel or fore a few , till 80 mph . Where red lights then traffic obstructions intervened both pilots integredy .

Power to weight this makes sense , the Xses 5000 Lbs & 800 Hp Vs the Nortons 400 & 60 .
===========================================================================

Nevertheless , the previous SS Camshaft went like snot in comparison , that ign. giving ' Two stage ' effect , 3500 being the poimt where you no longer
put the throttle untinkingly on the stop . One Morning with the brain at half mast , on the gravel forcourt , g;oves etc maladjusted , the clutch take up shifted the machine foward
( Ive always got a foot on the Right Footrest ) . Thefore Id twisted left , the throttle rolling on as I dragged the left foot disengageing the clutch. thankfully .
As everyones noticed , the higher the RPMs the further out the engagement is . :) The sequence was the rpms went up so the clutch didnt engage till the rpms were up , which shifted
the thing forward , as I was adjusting the gloves , dragging a boot , wondering about breakfast , as I grabbed the front brake & skidded that , as i attempted to not fall over to the left as I disenguaged the cluch
again as It wheelspun as it shifted foward with my left foot still down hard , as the revs came up again as the clutch went out again at Higher rpms . Takeing stock at this point I let go of the throttle and got the clutch in , grabbed neutral , and got foot down level to start the job again with the mind on the Job.
The alternate sequence was the machine dissapearing into the yard opposite at 4000 me partly attached , likely twisted round on my back observeing the morning sky prone, whick isnt the best seating position, on your back . Notice I manadged to observe the rev counter throughout .Thankfully the engement was further out again at 3/4000 , as the left hand went to the same position . The Instant Shock of this was enough to make the well practised training 8) :lol: take hold. or was it self preservation .Observeing transiting vehicals simultaeneously . Pretty much like a Horse starting to Bolt . You wake up pretty smartly .
Thereafter I exhibited a degree of caution approaching the machine , staying clear till fully dressed & comfortable , carrying out a visuall inspection , and nodding aquaintance to it , somewhat on the lines of a pre flight 7 take off checks , for a Mk IX Spitfire .
All trims in correct position , controls operateing , and take off field clear of obstructions . Also attention being paid to the direction you intend to travel, as clutch out with that gearings a minimum of 15 mph , warm .

RIGHt . the Valve Springs were the W&S set up , set up as per the instructions . These are the Production Racer set up , W&S by JoMoCo . ( Those people again , developed for Triumph , back in the day of the 55 T100R , along with the 1 5/8 inlet valves ) So , theyre NOT oversize for a 750 , let alone a 828 . In fact theyre About RIGHT .If its going to haul ass & disgrace oriental misscreants .
The SS Combat Cam with this set up running interstate headers ( theyre longer ) & a inadvertant .016 clearance ( the Trple S clearance , and overlap at 3 Deg. btdc , occasionally had a stutter at 3200 .
pulled from 3500 as hard or harder than a standard 750 , rather harder from 4000 , and from 5000 was searing when WFO , on the street rideing minimum rpms , you only got it on the stop upright .
But at say 5000 in 2nd at 60 mph the throttle modulation was excelent if you were foolhardy enough to do the 45 mph sweeper thataways in a nicepower on drift with the pipes kissing the deck . With the 2 way damped gas girlings they scrape the chrome along the full length .

The 2-1 Ex worked well with the STANDARD cam , power ( full thrttle ) from stanstill to past 7.000 . You need to anticipte as theres 200 rpm + in the reaction time .This exhaust didnt suit the 2S cam .
But the XS11 wouldntve got near it , as long as id not flipped it in the first right angle take off from the kerb .

SO , if you always ride in the rain , and give right of way to Hondas , tweeking the thing so it goes properly may well be not to youre likeing , as it wont slow it down. In fact , it may pretty much require your Undevided Attention , in town . Or you may find youreself in unanticipated situations twice as quickly and twice as often . So it pays to check the way ahead is clear .
Mindboggling haveing the whole right hand lane of the motorway pull clear for a mile ahead as you accelerate on on the morning commute . Put it down to God being on his throne , that day . :D
The ways of God and the ways of Men , are two differant things . These modifications enable you to distance yourself from inferior beings ! . :P :lol: :wink:
 
" put the money to a cbr1000rr "

what are they like on the dirt roads ?
the Katana was fine for 25 mph . used both lanes , flat & level , at 60 . :shock:
Horses for corses . 23 T gives 112 in third . 24 T & a wideish ratio 5 speed'd be the trick . or 6 .

Whats a pair of valves and a carveing tool cost , when you need them anyway . And all these modern things look ugly . :P :lol:

should i fit a big valve head?????


FOUR speeds . HYDRAULIC Brakes . What More could a Man desire . well maybe steel centered wheels , but at least theyre organically correect . :)
1931 Chrysler 75 roadster . If you want 90 mph , you need the 90 . Coulda gotta 36 buick straight eight for $ 600 once . :( . bugger . i missed .

If you want to blow off a Good Bonneville , youll HAVE to fit the Bigger Valves . :lol: :lol: 8)

OR , if youre at all accident prone , perhaps youd better not .
 
Why does everybody equate performance to fast? I love my Commando because it has torque. My favorite riding is when I actually have to slow down enough and often enough to experience it. Its got a four speed with long gears and I love to come out of corners and listen to the pipes and feel the torque. You don't have to be going fast for this to be fun. So before I decided on the head I would be reading up on the RH10 modifications that Jim Comstock has been posting about and ask him how this will affect the torque. I think grunt where you want it is a good thing! It has been reported more than once that the Fullauto heads with their improved breathing offer a lot of mid range grunt without any other mods. So before you change the valve sizes, make sure the breathing is being addressed.

My two cents.

Russ
 
rvich said:
Why does everybody equate performance to fast? I love my Commando because it has torque. My favorite riding is when I actually have to slow down enough and often enough to experience it. Its got a four speed with long gears and I love to come out of corners and listen to the pipes and feel the torque. You don't have to be going fast for this to be fun. So before I decided on the head I would be reading up on the RH10 modifications that Jim Comstock has been posting about and ask him how this will affect the torque. I think grunt where you want it is a good thing! It has been reported more than once that the Fullauto heads with their improved breathing offer a lot of mid range grunt without any other mods. So before you change the valve sizes, make sure the breathing is being addressed.

My two cents.

Russ
+1 Particularly with an 850
Toppy, I think taking "full" advantage (for why else would you want one) of a big valve head will require substantial Carb and exhaust manipulation. This may not slow down the build but won't be evident till you ready run and could open up a whole other can of worm.
Again, the key here is being able to take full advantage. You're crossing lines that can be very fine.
 
Before even thinking about engine performance mods you should think about frame and transmission performance mods. I make sure the brakes aren't dragging, wheels are accurately balanced front and rear and inline with each other and the frame centre line, primary and final drive sprockets are inline for max. efficiency of power transmission and that the bike dosen't wobble or weave. Also no worn gears, bearings or bushes in gearbox.

Other performance mods after the above include making sure the cylinder and rings seal to maximum. i.e no more than 0.0002" cylinder ovality (CP pistons recommendation) after boring and plateau honing. For example, the photo of the cylinder head shows signs of oil contamination, possibly from poor ring sealing. This equates to power loss. The valves should seal completely to the seats. I check this in the dark with a torch shining on the combustion chamber, valve seated whilst looking up the port. Also flow benefits from three angle seats. PW3 cams are good, lovely rasp from the exhaust when revved through the gears. As previously mentioned with big valve head, power is probably shifted up the rev range, you don't get something for nothing. For a road bike I'd keep the valves as is - unless you go every where between 6 and 7 thou rpm. :D
 
mike996 said:
you can certainly make more power at the upper end of the rev range and sacrifice some at the low/mid range.

Not necessary to sacrifice. So much has to do with tuning and compression ratio. With a larger intake valve you are increasing the valve time-area which can be used effectively across the rpm range and you do not necessarily need an aggressive cam. When I hear a generalized statement about loosing mid range by pushing the power further up the rpm scale, that is not necessarily in every case. This is generally the case when you are chasing the gods of power but you can have your cake and eat it too.

So often we are drawn into or fixated on the technology yet we don't s give a good "statement of the problem" or "desired outcome". What I mean by this is it's best to restate the question in terms of desired outcome rather than should I use big valve head or a certain cam etc...... There may be more than one way to skin a cat here. On the other hand, if you want to experiment, that is also fine. Look at it as the journey and not necessarily the goal.

toppy, I suggest you have a visit with Mick or Steve to see what they recommend based on what you want to get out of it.
 
Yea , I winced at the picture of the disc grinder through the front guard . These young Blokes These Days . :x
Agree with Russ there , the whole intake set up needs addressing to gain any benefits .
But I always believed a Commando did 120 mph unless short geared . A enhanced one should improve on that .

The tweeked Rawlins Commando 850 ran 36s . Robbie Deans ran 32 Mk 2s for yearrrs , but went to 34s eventually
on his 850 . You may loose a bit down low , a PW3 isnt a trials cam anyway , if the systems are compatable it should
enhance the mid range too . In fact it should improve the performance / breathing ( EFFICENCY ) throughout .
WHEN its in the powerband . Just looked at the Rawlins type head drg . The ' radius ' we used was far more progressive .
Called ' Trumpeted ' or Tuliped , but its the mid section curve used . Presumeing the airs semi stalled at the rear of the valve
a progressive parrallel sided curve past the valve , per side , gives unobstructed egress . :D
Upstream ( Downstream from carb :wink: ) the gradual & progressive tightening , which is minmam - 5 % X Area ?
Condenses the Charge Without reduceing Velocity .
So they Say .
This is where the Exhaust System and Ex Valve Closeing timeing is important . Checking 2S / SS as Id run it this confirms with something fancy ,
as does the running of open clearances . As well as ensureing good seating & heat transferance - avoiding overheating burning and pre ignition
from incandescent valves . Which is where I agree that Raised C.R. gives improved effeciancy in general , it can obstruct other dynamic characteristics
to their and the overall detriment; thus thered be a optimum C.R. for any particu;\lar set up perhaps .
My impresion is that over say 9 1/4 : 1 you might start to have to run less than optimum ignition advance on pump petrol , recogniseing that it does vary
and considering reliability as paramount .
Which means youll have to fit a mainshaft support bearing behind the clutch . :twisted:
Punching a shift through / powershifting - where you ease the thrttle momentarilly as you semi clutch a shift through , when not mucking around - if
your attentions not otherways diverted , you might notice theres a bit of confusion at the clutch drum as to its exact location ( you can feel a kick & pull
down there - ) For other than relaxed rideing , as in giveing no quater - this will be essential for longivity . Hence the Std P.R. record in the IoM . D.N.F.
:( Mainshaft / Gear Failure . I had one snap ( its only breakdown . bump starting after a oil change . wouldnt start / trying to tell me something ) tho
cause was in part earlyer misuse - no clutch cable in town - smashed 2nd gear & layshaft . A new mainshaft was only $80 then .

The thing got up to supersonic speeds quite quickly . :twisted: :mrgreen:
 
I have seen the results of taking a torquey low rpm engine and trying to turn it into a screaming race engine, but for road use. It can be a pretty big disappointment for the guy who spends all his savings on the modifications only to see a more heavily loaded stock bike roll past climbing some big mountain grade. However, Jim Comstock knows all about this and here is what he had to say about his particular big valve conversion done to an RH10 or Fullauto head- those done by others are likely quite different.

"I really don't like raising the powerband of a Norton motor. It is really about as high as practical on a longstroke motor as it is.
The big valve conversion will be felt throughout the same powerband that you had before if it has a stock or mild cam.
The cam and exhaust system do more to influence the rpm range than the valve size does, as long as the inlet port dia. Is not changed"

I will guess that in the past most big valve conversions came with a big port conversion as well, and ther goes the midrange. So not all big valve conversions are equal.

Glen
 
These three things mainly affect the operating RPM range of the engine. Since raising the RPM range has the largest effect on the horsepower, increasing these will show the largest horsepower gains on a dyno but will usually reduce the peak torque.

1. Intake port diameter
2. Exhaust pipe diameter
3. Cam timing

These things mainly effect the torque. They do not change the RPM range of the engine and will not show big gains in peak horsepower. They will however be felt in how hard the bike pulls through it's original RPM range.

1. compression ratio
2. intake valve size [as long as port diameter is not changed when the valve size is changed]

A larger intake valve would best be used along with a carb that flows better than a concentric. Jim
 
To summarize to hobot level, [quizzing commoz, Canaga and others] bigger valves will help power sense from off idle to top end in all combos, ie: power band character still mainly depends on the ports size/shape, cam installed and CR and exhaust/carb tuning plus octane enough to set full spark adv. combustion pressure up. Bigger valves weigh more so to control them to red line may need stronger springs, which has some effort on valve train friction and wear life. If my 920 Peel don't behave with the crappy Combat heat with stock valves, bigger valves would be my next spend step to try for more.
 
hobot said:
To summarize to hobot level, [quizzing commoz, Canaga and others] bigger valves will help power sense from off idle to top end in all combos, ie: power band character still mainly depends on the ports size/shape, cam installed and CR and exhaust/carb tuning plus octane enough to set full spark adv. combustion pressure up. Bigger valves weigh more so to control them to red line may need stronger springs, which has some effort on valve train friction and wear life. If my 920 Peel don't behave with the crappy Combat heat with stock valves, bigger valves would be my next spend step to try for more.


You can look at installing big valves just like increasing valve lift, without increasing duration.

Of course appreciably increasing valve lift without increasing duration is not possible without exceeding the maximum acceleration rate of the valve train. But you can achieve the same effect by increasing valve size.
 
If you are looking towards a dependable road bike, I would not spend big fat money on a big valve head. The rebuild you are looking at will already cost plenty and if you were happy with the power before, a fresh engine with a proven combination of parts will get you a stronger engine anyway. When the riding season comes around again you'll be able, with a minimum of sorting, to ride rather than spend more time, cash, and head scratching on parts and tuning to make 'the big valve head' work well.
Please note in my post that I said " I would ", and not " you should ". :wink:
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top