|
SuzukiSavage.com
/cgi-bin/YaBB.pl General Category >> Rubber Side Down! >> Do we need a better cam chain? /cgi-bin/YaBB.pl?num=1182745367 Message started by Oldfeller2 on 06/24/07 at 21:22:47 |
|
Title: Do we need a better cam chain? Post by Oldfeller2 on 06/24/07 at 21:22:47 Having read lots of stuff about cam chain tensioner this and that and ways to get around the tensioner falling out too early -- I have me a question. Do we need a better cam chain? First, I found out what it is called (hy-vo cam chain) and I found out who invented it and why they invented it. http://www.morsetec.com/Hy-vo.pdf There are different grades of the stuff and it is made by different vendors for lots of different uses. My thought was this -- maybe it used to be better stuff than it is currently -- maybe it got cost reduced by Suzuki (or by whoever actually builds the chain for them, you pick). We don't have to invent some mystical oil additive changes to explain why we have crappy chain -- it may just be the chain itself changed. Next, I realized it comes in many functional thicknesses (you just add an additional stacked plate or two) for a stronger chain. So, here are my current thoughts -- you keep buying the same old stuff from Suzuki and keep fighting the same basic problem of short 15,000-20,000 wear out life spans or you go and do something significantly different. Your thoughts? Oldfeller |
|
Title: Re: Do we need a better cam chain? Post by justin_o_guy on 06/25/07 at 10:00:55 I agree fully with your thinking & thanks for the research. If you can locate a vendor offering a superior( less inferior?) chain, I would certainly be interested. I do intend to have the next one cryogenically treated, tho. I still think it would be possible to put an electrical contact in the spring loaded tensioner to let us know when it is extended as far as it should go. That way we could run the thing & not have to wreck a gasket to go in & look or even have the down time, just ride till the light comes on. |
|
Title: Re: Do we need a better cam chain? Post by LANCER on 06/25/07 at 10:31:17 I first learned of them when in the Army, part of the tail rotor control system is a hi-vo chain ... about a 3' section I believe. We used to take the chains removed for wear or damage and make bracelet or watch bands out of them. Those little suckers do not break when used that way. I still have a bracelet left over from back then. I would certainly think that the quality of the stainless steel used and thickness of the link sections would make the difference in durability/length of service. |
|
Title: Re: Do we need a better cam chain? Post by barry68v10 on 06/25/07 at 15:01:31 Although it would be safe to say the cam chain tensioner is the weak link...(pun intended) ;D |
|
Title: Re: Do we need a better cam chain? Post by Oldfeller2 on 06/25/07 at 18:23:11 As you think about cam chain, realize that Hy-VO as a brand name is very pricey and the orient is unfortunately 100% metric (as are our bikes). Still, as you oggle at this page looky looky at the CARBIDE PINNED very high durability silent chain they offer and drool a bit. http://www.morsetec.com/ets.html#silent If I were a betting man I'd say odds are our chain is a second generation rip off of the original Hy-VO, called "silent chain" when it is referred to in generalistic terms by the other chain manufacturers. My money would go on either D.I.D. or Tsubaki as the likeliest culprit for our sorry current "standard grade" quick wear out silent chain. http://www.did-daido.co.jp/en/shouhin/enginechain/index.html http://tsubakimoto.com/product/auto/ But hey, just to talk about a silent chain first you have to identify the chain in ways that allow you to see if a vendor can make the stuff you need. Ramsey out of Charlotte, NC has some interesting perspectives on plugging their silent chain into other people's applications and onto their gear sprockets. They talk about how to ID what you've got so they can sub it with their product. (PS Charlotte NC ain't that far away from me) http://www.ramseychain.com/chain_identification.asp Now, if I was betting my cards blind I'd think maybe we had something on the order of an 8mm or 1/4" standard type silent chain on our bikes simply because the bike's design is 20 years old and standard small silent chain was about that small back then. Certainly it hasn't changed any in that period of time (except for getting real junky cheap recently). But I haven't actually seen or touched a cam chain yet -- one of you that have please tell us what we've got. Did any markings come on the packages you got when your ordered a replacement cam chain? Who was the vendor? What size was it? How many pins? Does a Suzuki factory service manual happen to state what size and type of silent chain we are dealing with? I'm starvatin' for chain facts here ..... Oldfeller |
|
Title: Re: Do we need a better cam chain? Post by KenGLong on 06/25/07 at 19:06:09 I have a new chain in front of me right now. There is an uppercase "M" on many of the link caps. The driving link seems to resemble the RPV Type 139 shown at your link but I can't be certain without taking the chain apart. Ken |
|
Title: Re: Do we need a better cam chain? Post by verslagen1 on 06/25/07 at 21:14:55 I've been thinking of a way to check how much the cam chain was stretched before needing to tear into it. And one way would be to check when one of the valves opens after TDC. When fully stretched, it will be 7° late. Something we'll all need to measure to get the right numbers for. Of course, this wouldn't tell you how much the tensioner stuck out. |
|
Title: Re: Do we need a better cam chain? Post by justin_o_guy on 06/25/07 at 21:43:52 My tensioner was slightly past the limit & the chain still had planty of "stretch" left. So, the spring loaded tensioner will become a potential time bomb before the chain is completely worn out. At least, thats the way it was inside mine. I like the idea of scooting the entire tensioner towards the chain, to keep the tensioner compressed more. Old Feller. when you find some prices, please share. O.F. Do you need someone to send you an old chain to mess with? |
|
Title: Re: Do we need a better cam chain? Post by verslagen1 on 06/25/07 at 22:23:28 That's the way mine was too. |
|
Title: Re: Do we need a better cam chain? Post by Oldfeller2 on 06/26/07 at 03:58:33 Actually what we need is to know is what the spec is for the chain. Somebody could get that off a box that the new chain shipped in, or somebody could get it from a shop manual, or maybe Bike Bandit or Roneyers has it on a microfiche picture somewhere. We need the spec for the chain. Sending me an old chain would be helpful, Justin, and I'll send you an address if you want to do that. But I was hoping somebody knew the spec on the chain from some other reliable source. As far as trying to find a price for whatever I can find, first you guys as a mass need to agree that I can negotiate for the group as a whole. Next, you need to agree to coming together as a "club purchasing group" to do a group buy under existing non-profit laws. That means nobody tries to make a buck on a group purchase -- it rides for the true cost and no taxes are charged. If you do other than this, you'd better have a business tax number and be reporting taxes. Oldfeller |
|
Title: Re: Do we need a better cam chain? Post by verslagen1 on 06/26/07 at 07:10:56 Provide a better mousetrap and the world will beat a path to your door. |
|
Title: Re: Do we need a better cam chain? Post by KenGLong on 06/26/07 at 09:01:57 justin_o_guy wrote:
Has it been determined that the tensioner (Suzuki calls this the "adjuster") really does run out of adjustment range before the chain is worn beyond limits or is the chain really worn beyond usable limits even though the "stretch" measurement shows it as still being in tolerance? Sorry if I'm rehashing an old topic here but I don't recall if this has been determined yet. To put it simpler, is the problem the tensioner or the chain? Ken |
|
Title: Re: Do we need a better cam chain? Post by verslagen1 on 06/26/07 at 10:51:05 To rehash the results of a previous thread... Several have stated that they replaced the cam chain only to find that the adjuster was not pulled in by very much. And needed to replace/modify the tensioner guide. We are dealing with a complex system of steel and plastic. The hard sprockets aren't likely to wear. The chain is also steel and it's toothed design means we only have to be concerned with stretch. The guides are plastic over steel. With my own bike I've seen with chain stretch not even half of what's allowed will leave the adjuster hanging by a thread. Unless someone's willing to take all these bad parts and inspect them to the n'th degree, I don't think we'll ever know what's exactly the problem. Anyone want to take that on? Even the sites you've listed stated that it takes specialized inspection equipment to determine the chain condition. And I think the problem varies from bike to bike. To some it's the chain, yet others the guides, to some sunspots. OF, someone offered you a chain, why don't you take it and get it inspected? If it costs, let us know and we'll start a fund. But we should use a chain with a known measurements. Such as stretch, adjuster protrusion with new guides, etc. |
|
Title: Re: Do we need a better cam chain? Post by vroom1776 on 06/26/07 at 11:46:36 okay, when I get that $$$ job, I'll but a brand new savage, open it up, measure the plunger depth, pull the chain, measure the length, close it up, ride it for 1000 miles, open it, measure, repeat. will run mobil 1 synthetic. ::) let's not forget this thread (the one Verslagen summarized)! cam chain issues (http://suzukisavage.com/cgi-bin/YaBB.pl?board=RubberSideDown;action=display;num=1179157571) okay, so that is fairly unreasonable. but the whole issue is most likely caused by an interplay of: 1) cam chain stretch 2) tensioner (rear slide) wear (grooves) & becoming brittle 3) poor plunger design 4) poor tesnisoner (rear slide) design 5) worn plunger spring 6) oil quality & freqeuncy of changes? 7) how it is riden, and miles 8 ) riding conditions (temperature) 1, 5, & 7 affect the length of the chain (5: is it possible the spring is putting to much force on the chain? likely not, so that leaves 1 & 7). Maybe the service life of the cam chain listed in the FSM is too large. we cannot "fix" the tensioner design. we DO know how to "fix" the plunger design, BUT: what is the correct k value for the spring in the plunger? we cannot buy these separately. - at least we can get the circlip separately! - I don't recall if the FSM gives specs the plunger spring or not. If the spring is out of spec, changing everything else will not really help. So, where can we also get springs from? On the other hand, spring strength does not seem to be an issue as we are all concerned that the plunger is too far out. so, that largely leaves the tensioner (rear slide). I feel that oil quality and frequency of oil changes can affect the tensioner (rear slide). I also feel that excessive temperatues can affect the tensioner (rear slide). I think the oil cooler mod may help keep the tensioner (rear slide) in better shape longer, but I think that may leads to issues with keeping the cam journals lubed. As gunk builds up in the oil, it'll get dragged along the tensioner and wear it out. Chemicals in the oil can interact with the terflon material of the tensioner. Repeated hot-cold cycles (no way to avoid this) can make the tensioner brittle. I don't think we should be changing our riding styles. But, revving the crap out of the bike right after start up is not going to help any of these parts at all. seems to me that we need an 3 point plan: 1) inspect the plunger extension every year. remove the plunger and visually inspect the rear slide for wear 1a) add the tab to the plunger if it more than 20 mm (maybe 24 mm ?) out 1b) replace slides as necessary & measure chain 1c) replace cam chain as necessary (maybe with a better one). If the chain is replaced, the slides should be replaced as well. 2) run fresh, high quality oil, change often (Mobil 1 synthetic, IMO, or motorcycle specific oil) 3) let the bike warm up properly before riding, no high rpms to start it. |
|
Title: Re: Do we need a better cam chain? Post by KenGLong on 06/26/07 at 11:47:23 verslagen1 wrote:
One person reported that their chain was within specs so he replaced just the rear guide. When reassembled, his adjuster was still extended too far so he replaced the chain and it all fell back into place...even though his old chain was not stretched to the point of needing replacement. (I think it was Kropatchek.) That's the post that makes me think that the real problem hasn't been discovered yet. Ken |
|
Title: Re: Do we need a better cam chain? Post by Oldfeller2 on 06/26/07 at 14:06:08 So, are you saying finding a better grade of chain just extends the time you have before other items cause your chain to move on in until it hits itself? I can live with that. We are saying the same thing -- chain stretch is a part of a "systems wear out" issue. Follow this chain of logic (pun intended). I extend my pusher (by either means) until my chain hits itself. I am out of adjustment totally and the old chain is shot. I pull the engine down far enough to change out both of the guides and the chain and I pay the bucks for a carbide pinned premium plus silent chain which I then install along with brand new guides. I go through the same "extend the pusher" systems wear out routine, but it takes twice as many or more miles to cause this new chain to stretch until it hits itself. As long as the premium plus chain didn't cost twice as much as a stock Suzuki chain I am ahead of the game. Could you get positive effects by lowering spring tension "k" -- sure you could. Could you get positive effects by bowing the left side guide into a curve -- sure you could. Will any of these equal the benefit of replacing a marginally crappy standard low-end chain with a premium plus chain -- think on the spread of life between a standard rear wheel chain and a premium plus rear wheel chain. Premium plus X ring chains costs 3x more but always lasts 5x longer and requires less adjustments and longer maintenance intervals between hard wax spray jobs. That's why I sprang for an X ring 530 chain for my sprocket conversion. I don't want to screw with it any more than I have to. KenGLong == have you whipped a caliper out on that new cam chain of yours yet? Oldfeller |
|
Title: Re: Do we need a better cam chain? Post by vroom1776 on 06/26/07 at 14:19:20 Oldfeller2 wrote:
I think that's the idea. still gotta check it, though. |
|
Title: Re: Do we need a better cam chain? Post by KenGLong on 06/26/07 at 18:51:53 Oldfeller2 wrote:
Just now measured it after I read your post. It's 126.46mm across 21 pins, center to center. There are 66 pins total. The package didn't have any info on original manufacturer or chain specs. Just the Suzuki info. So, if I were to send my old chain off to that place, do you think they would be able to identify it well enough to supply a better quality chain? I think a better quality, longer lasting chain coupled with verslagen's modified plunger might be just enough improvement to double the maintenance interval. I've been holding of reassembling my Savage until I was confident that the maintenance interval was significantly increased. When I had only the Savage, I put 10,000 miles on it in just over a year. That means the chain maintenance interval would be every two years for me. That's too often in my opinion but I would tolerate every four years. Ken |
|
Title: Re: Do we need a better cam chain? Post by KenGLong on 06/26/07 at 19:13:01 Oldfeller2 wrote:
I'll step up here and donate my brand new chain to the identification effort. You sound like you know what you're talking about and it would be worth it to me to double the maintenance interval. Just IM me to tell me where to send it. Ken |
|
Title: Re: Do we need a better cam chain? Post by Oldfeller2 on 06/27/07 at 04:03:56 Kind offer, but all I would do is measure it and send it back to you. It is a brand new chain after all. http://www.ramseychain.com/chain_identification.asp These folks identify 10 questions that they say will allow them to match a chain. If you will measure out your chain and fill in the list of 10 items I'll contact them for their best estimate of what we have and get a sample chain from them. P.S. Please do the measurements both in inches and MM -- we still could be dealing with an inch chain as it may have been the lowest cost cam chain back when the bike was designed. Justin has a used chain he may be sending me. (I don't feel bad keeping a worn out chain) If so, with the measurements from a new chain and an old chain to send for match sample I can't see why a reputable vendor couldn't ID that chain exactly and provide us a match made out of better stuff. Proof of the pudding is the mate up of the sample of "improved" chain provided when installed on the sprockets of our bike. Someone will have to be at a teardown point to put the improved chain on trial. I'm at least 10,000 miles from needing a total tear down so we will need a volunteer for that trial. But right now we are stuck on "GO" until we get that chain identified. Oldfeller |
|
Title: Re: Do we need a better cam chain? Post by KenGLong on 06/27/07 at 07:33:57 I'll answer the ten questions this evening when I get home. I usually listen to a weekly radio show on Wednesday evening so I'll have lot's of time to do it. Ken |
|
Title: Re: Do we need a better cam chain? Post by KenGLong on 06/27/07 at 16:12:24 SAVAGE CAM CHAIN IDENTIFICATION JUNE 27, 2007 - Ken Long Brand new chain, never installed. http://www.ramseychain.com/chain_identification.asp 1. Is the chain used for power transmission or conveying? NO 2. What is the guide type? Center Guide, 2-Center Guide, or Side Guide? SIDE GUIDE (both sides) 3. What is the Pitch? See "Fundamentals" for the best way to measure pitch. 6.345mm (1/4") 4. Do the driving links in the chain resemble any of the links shown? RPV Type 139 THIS ONE APPEARS TO BE MOST SIMILAR. RPV Type 115 Rampower SC Ramflex Single Oval Pin Conveyor Two Pin Conveyor LoProfile Extended Pitch 5. Are there any markings on the chain links? STAMPED UPPERCASE "M" ON MOST GUIDES. HAND ENGRAVED "AD" ON ONE GUIDE. 6. What is the width over pin heads? See "Fundamentals" for measuring width over heads. 10.76mm, 10.79mm, 10.86mm, 10.77mm, 10.77mm, 10.76mm, 10.82mm, 10.78mm, 10.83mm, 10.85mm (10.799mm AVERAGE) 7. What is the width between guides? (If the chain is side guide) See "Fundamentals" for measuring width between guides. 7.19mm, 7.19mm, 7.18mm, 7.15mm, 7.15mm, 7.15mm, 7.15mm, 7.17mm, 7.13mm, 7.13mm (7.159mm AVERAGE) 8. Does each chain joint have one pin or two pins? ONE 9. Does the chain include spacers? NO 10. Is it a Duplex chain? See "Fundamentals" for characteristics of a duplex chain. NO I was pretty excited to find that hand engraved mark. I'll bet someone in the trade would know what it was. Ken |
|
Title: Re: Do we need a better cam chain? Post by Oldfeller2 on 06/27/07 at 17:20:19 KennyG, On the pitch measurement - did you report the X number raw or did you divide it by 2 to get the true pitch number? Next, how did you factor out half your pin diameter when recording your X number? I hope it is a quarter inch pitch chain -- that's a dirt standard size and will be easy to match. Oldfeller |
|
Title: Re: Do we need a better cam chain? Post by KenGLong on 06/27/07 at 17:42:18 The number I posted was the result of the divide-by-two step. In order to factor out the pin diameter, I measured from the outside of one pin to the outside of the third pin. Then I measured the diameter of one pin and subtracted (learned that trick here!) Dividing by two was the last step. I'm not a machinist though. My only experience in a machine shop was about 33 years ago in high school metal shop. My eye isn't as good as it should be when using a caliper (mine's digital) but my pitch measurement came out so close to 1/4", I figure that has to be it. Maybe you can verify it when you get that used chain from justin_o_guy. Ken |
|
Title: Re: Do we need a better cam chain? Post by justin_o_guy on 06/27/07 at 17:54:05 I forgot how many pins to measure. I did just lay it flat & measure the peaks of one segemnt. seems to be 1/4 inch. So, how many pitches am I sposed to measure? Was it 10? measure center to center on 21 pins? |
|
Title: Re: Do we need a better cam chain? Post by KenGLong on 06/27/07 at 18:27:31 The SSM says "20 pitch length", 21 pins, and the service limit is 128.9 mm (5.07 in). Ken |
|
Title: Re: Do we need a better cam chain? Post by justin_o_guy on 06/27/07 at 18:44:18 MMMkay, I measured mine it was 5.0095"/127.25 mm. That was replaced at 14,000 miles. I cant remember what the new chain was. |
|
Title: Re: Do we need a better cam chain? Post by KenGLong on 06/27/07 at 18:58:19 127.25 mm across 21 pins works out to a pitch of 6.3625 mm. 6.35 mm is exactly 1/4" so your chain was a bit stretched. Ken |
|
Title: Re: Do we need a better cam chain? Post by Oldfeller2 on 06/28/07 at 03:59:33 If you are sure it is a quarter inch, that's good enough. Now I go asking for vendors to "match" the specs and get some rough quotes. By the time we get down to serious I'll have Justin's old chain to send along to whoever our guy is. That way they can make some samples and have a worn chain on hand to check against. Oldfeller |
|
Title: Re: Do we need a better cam chain? Post by justin_o_guy on 06/28/07 at 06:47:54 Due to the construction, the pitch will be easy ti see, regardless of stretch.Each link is a claw with an interlaced set of claws. The distance across the peaks shows to be 1/4 when I lay it on its back & I can pull on it & see the pin wear, altho it is very slight, but I can see the plates shift one on another & see the misalignment in the peaks of each side of each "claw" that makes each link. Some more than others. The chain isnt worn evenly at all. I wonder if parts were oiled more quickly than others? Or, are the pins of such low quality? OR<< Since the chain is always in the same place when the piston hits the power stroke & the engine internals are being spun up under acceleration, if that section between front edge of the crank & front edge of the cam sees stresses the rest of the chain doesnt see, that would explain the uneven wear, wouldnt it? Well, Hang on a minute, now, Since theres more chain on the back side than on the front, the "Target" link wont be exactly where it started, So, the cam chain isnt "Indexed" with regard to which links are exposed to each power pulse between the cam & crank. So, the uneven wear has no explanatiuon as far as the power stroke causing it, IMO. Anyone explain uneven wear? Crappy components? DRY start? |
|
Title: Re: Do we need a better cam chain? Post by verslagen1 on 06/28/07 at 07:07:00 You lost when you said the chain isn't indexed... Every link starts and ends the cycle exactly where it started (ignoring stretch). If it doesn't then kerpow! |
|
Title: Re: Do we need a better cam chain? Post by KenGLong on 06/28/07 at 07:25:43 justin_o_guy wrote:
Even the brand new chain I have here does that to a slight degree. Ken |
|
Title: Re: Do we need a better cam chain? Post by justin_o_guy on 06/28/07 at 07:33:09 Since the cam gear has to be off to get the chain on, I bet you are right. The slack isnt one whole link, so it is indexed, which explains the uneven wear. Thats a lot easier to see. If there was a lot of slack in the backside of the chain, then it wouldnt be indexed, all it would need is one stinking extra link, then the chain would wear evenly. |
|
Title: Re: Do we need a better cam chain? Post by verslagen1 on 06/28/07 at 08:54:38 Justin, I still don't get your point. The cam chain must be 'indexed' to the driven gear and also the driving gear. Otherwise the driven gear is not 'indexed' to the driving gear. And piston meets valves and kerpow! |
|
Title: Re: Do we need a better cam chain? Post by justin_o_guy on 06/28/07 at 11:02:52 I could run that chain thru 15 feet of idler pulleys as long as the number of links between the front edge of the crank & the front edge of the cam dont change. If the slack is on the back side, not the driven side, then the piece of chain between the crank & cam will change, evenm tho the length is the same.All that is needed to move the area that is "stretch" with each power stroke is one extra link. Then, the chain would effectively take a 1 link step backwards with each 2 rotations of the crank. Maybe I am having a major mental breakdown, but I THINK this is correct. |
|
Title: Re: Do we need a better cam chain? Post by Oldfeller2 on 06/28/07 at 13:52:46 I think I follow what you both are saying. The chain is tied positively to the crank by the small driven gear. Although the chain progresses over the gears in a 2 to 1 ratio, every time the spark plug fires on a gas/air mixture load (every fourth go round) the same set of links get jerked about by the speed up due to the heavy power stroke acting on the small crank gear. Every time Thumper goes "thump" real hard during one of my right wrist episodes the exact same links are catching hell at the point of thump. Time after time after time. Day after day. It isn't a nice little split up multi-cylinder thing, it is a great big THUMP from a big piston. Anyhow, I attempted to contact D.I.D., Tsubaki, Morse Hy-Vo, Ramsey in Charlotte and two far eastern new smaller guys. So far Ramsey is the only one who has replied (within a day I might add) and they simply don't make the chain we need. Shucks, they were the one supplier I thought we could count on being local and all. Good news, Borg Warner (Morse) just called and wants a picture of the cam chain. I'll off one of the site's pics and crop out a decent shot of a section of the chain. BW is sure they already make the chain, its just they make so many variants of silent chain (their proprietary Hy Vo being one example) that they want to make sure they sell us the right one. Also, I contacted Suzuki and asked them to review the early stretch wear that is going on with the Boulevard 40 crew years 2005-2007. Having bikes go to full extension on the cam tensioner in 8,000 miles is NOT normal. Oldfeller |
|
Title: Re: Do we need a better cam chain? Post by KenGLong on 06/28/07 at 17:56:37 Greg might already have a good pic of a chain. If not, I have a Nikon 990 digital camera that has an amazing macro capability. I'll try to remember to take my chain to work tomorrow ( I keep the 990 there for those times I need to document something.) Ken |
|
Title: Re: Do we need a better cam chain? Post by KenGLong on 06/29/07 at 06:37:20 Took some pics of the chain this morning. http://www.thelongtrek.com/savagecamchain/savagecamchain.htm The file sizes are big. Please be patient while the page loads. Ken |
|
Title: Re: Do we need a better cam chain? Post by Starlifter on 06/29/07 at 08:44:28 How many miles down the road from a new stock chain do we need to start thinking about this matter? |
|
Title: Re: Do we need a better cam chain? Post by verslagen1 on 06/29/07 at 09:26:02 The chain should last a minimum of 10k miles. I looked at mine at 20k and estimate I'll get around 50K from the chain itself. Personally I'd look at the adjuster every time you retorqued the head bolts. That's supposed to be every 4k miles. The time to act is when the adjuster piston sticks out 18mm (housing to shoulder) as it's near the end of travel. Damage will occur to the adjuster if left in this condition. And if left to further extend, may disengage altogether. Causing damage to the valves and piston if the chain jumps out of time. |
|
Title: Re: Do we need a better cam chain? Post by KenGLong on 06/29/07 at 17:47:57 The exact number of miles that the chain will last seems to depend on a number of factors. Some have reported 8K miles while others have reported over 30K miles. I'm really excited over the possibility of finding a longer lasting cam chain. A better chain plus the modified adjuster from verslagen should take care of this problem once and for all. The issue that bothers me the most is the need to pull the clutch cover and check the plunger extension measurement every 5K miles or so just to prevent a catastrophic failure and possible injury if the chain slips a couple of teeth while riding down the road at 60 mph. The maintenance interval is just too short for my liking. (This is juts my opinion. Other's may differ. With a better chain and modified adjuster we should be able to prolong the periodic check to once every 20K miles or so and the replacement of the chain to, hopefully, once every 40-50K miles. Ken |
|
Title: Re: Do we need a better cam chain? Post by Starlifter on 06/29/07 at 18:16:17 This is all very good information, thanks to all. |
|
Title: Re: Do we need a better cam chain? Post by verslagen1 on 06/29/07 at 20:00:36 Yes, the maintenance period is too short. For me it's less than 6 months. But with my pin and slot mod, I can relax a little as when the pin hits the end of the slot, a noisey chain will alert me to its needs. |
|
Title: Re: Do we need a better cam chain? Post by Oldfeller2 on 06/30/07 at 05:10:56 Well, Borg Warner Morse only makes one super premium hard pinned automotive silent chain now and it isn't quarter inch. They also have a policy against selling bulk chain -- they only provide endless chainsets through a distribution network that guarantees you pay a profit margin to at least 3 people. There are only two American cam chain companies left -- they are losing their market share to the far east at an increasing rate. They can't compete on price and their innovations are getting rip/copied just about as soon as they make them. Our patents are meaningless in China and the Japanese have similar innovations themselves. (sigh) I really liked that Borg Warner Morse hard pin chain too. Let's see who responds next. ================================= Having taken a strong dip into the silent chain world, I have a new thought. Most modern silent chain sets have a curved tension pathway as well as a curved return pathway. Ours has a straight pathway on the right hand side (tension side). This used to be a common practice, but is relatively rare in the current designs now-a-days. We have an issue that we never can really "wear our chains out" all the way to the stretch spec limit because the chain will hit itself before it wears/stretches that much. If we could induce some curve on the right hand side (maybe biased towards the top cam gear side of things) we could use up some of the total deflection space that is currently unused. We do use all of the deflection space on the left side (biased towards the bottom side of things of course). Think of a long curve sanded (top bulged) sliver of wood inserted behind the right hand guide, one that is done once during an early inspection to put a bow into that guide, a permanent bow that can't go anywhere and is totally supported by the trapped steel tension of the guide itself acting against the sliver of wood supported by the cast wall. Now this new permanent right hand side bowing partially counteracts the 7degree retardation that we currently add during the wear out of the chain (think of what the cam does when you insert the wooden sliver, it rotates backwards as the chain is pulled back around it to make up the bow). It also provides us some "extra life" out of the existing chain as we have to back up the tensioner to provide the slack to be taken up with the new right hand bow. Provides extra life. Recovers part of the 7 degree retardation. Is within the "wear spec" of the chain. Cost is some bandsaw and sander time and a small sliver of hardwood. What's not to like with this idea? You could do it on an early inspection even if there wasn't enough room yet to install a Slavvy mod or a tensioner adder block. ==================================== I got some good questions asked to me about lubrication. Does our engine provide a positive means of spraying or dribbling a constant supply of oil on to the silent chain as it runs its pathway? Silent chain is VERY oil dependent or increased internal wear takes place on the pins. Motor oil is NOT the best oil to lube a silent chain -- extreme pressure additive package heavy gear oil is the optimum lube for silent chains (but they never get it as a cam chain, they just get thin motor oil -- so they need a constantly replenished stream of that thinner oil to maximize their lifespan). Oldfeller |
|
Title: Re: Do we need a better cam chain? Post by justin_o_guy on 06/30/07 at 08:59:21 The cam chain needs an oil the clutch wont tolerate it sounds like. Bummer. Neat idea about the wood sliver. I would like to get the life out of the chain & the tensioner mods & some kind of chain path mod seems to be required to do it. Seems like there are enough folks here with the backgrounds to make it happen. |
|
Title: Re: Do we need a better cam chain? Post by Oldfeller2 on 06/30/07 at 12:42:21 Take a look at the last item in the top silent chain list. http://www.kilangrantai.com/technical.info.htm |
|
Title: Re: Do we need a better cam chain? Post by justin_o_guy on 06/30/07 at 13:27:31 Ive had no responses on this idea, I will try once more, then Its over. I will do it next time I am in there, cuz I know it will work, but I wont go ijn just to do this. Putting a set of connectors on the tensioner would be easy enough. I think, Run a wire in & to one connector, the other just grounds inside the cover on the engine. All that is needed is a hot wire, run thru a bulb, to these contacts. When the tensioner is at its limit, the contacts are pressed together, providing a ground & the light comes on, announcing the limit is reached & time for hands on. I still would use a "Captured" tensioner, so it couldnt fly apart. I think a cheap relay could be found to cannibalize for the contacts, they could even be kept from a complete oil soaking. I thibnk I could make this work. If anyone else wants to give it a go, theres the outline. |
|
Title: Re: Do we need a better cam chain? Post by verslagen1 on 06/30/07 at 15:40:43 Justin, go for it. Route the wiring thru the neutral light wiring plug. Here's an idea, put it in series with the neutral light. when it hits the end the neutral light stays on even when in gear. ;D I'd use a magnetic reed type switch, completely sealed don't have to worry about a spark lighting something up. :o |
|
Title: Re: Do we need a better cam chain? Post by justin_o_guy on 06/30/07 at 16:26:42 Thanks, interresting ideas. I wasnt concerned about sparks, but I guess its possible, & it would sure stink to get some gasoline in the oil & have a "Terrorist attack, suicide bombing" pulled off by ME! That would sorely sukk. Yea, reed is the way to go. I was planning on just using an led mounted low on the side O the engine. Maybe the neutral switch is a great idea, since the wire is runnin there already. |
|
Title: Re: Do we need a better cam chain? Post by srinath on 07/01/07 at 03:53:31 I am in charlotte NC and have a spare chain and what not laying about. How about fresh and clean on monday morning I go down to those guys and pick their brains. Cool. Srinath. |
|
Title: Re: Do we need a better cam chain? Post by justin_o_guy on 07/01/07 at 04:21:51 YOu surely arent expecting anyone to jump up & holler NO are ya? That sounds like a cool idea. Have fun. Take notes. I would ask them 2 questions if I was there. I would ask about cryogenic treatment & whether soaking the chain in oil before installation would do any good adding to the life of it. |
|
Title: Re: Do we need a better cam chain? Post by Oldfeller2 on 07/01/07 at 05:21:36 Srinath, Here is another thing to ask Ramsey Chain-- if they don't make a quarter inch chain can they acquire some premium plus quarter inch chain for us through a chain industry business contact that they have that DOES make the quarter inch chain that we need. We need one reel of chain and a matching quantity of connection "staking" pins to make up 66 pin length chains. We want to buy the chain in bulk on a reel as that is the dirt cheapest way to buy it. One of us will hold the reel and make up chains for the group as needed. (PS If you have a cam gear or crank gear lying loose, take it with you too. Seems silent chain folks have more confidence "matching up" if they have the chain AND a mounting gear to look at) Oldfeller |
|
Title: Re: Do we need a better cam chain? Post by KenGLong on 07/01/07 at 09:17:18 Anyone who needs information, measurements, or parts, just let me know. I and my 2002 Savage are standing by. I think I'll go search for a used cam gear. Sounds like it would be a nice thing to have around. Ken |
|
Title: Re: Do we need a better cam chain? Post by Oldfeller2 on 07/09/07 at 16:33:47 Got a live response from a chain vendor who is willing to work on our early wear out issues but I need an old gear (cam gear would be fine) and an old chain to forward to him for tear-down examination. I doubt we will ever see the components back again, so please don't volunteer unless you got some real junk parts you don't really care about seeing again. Plus side is this vendor has different pins he can put in a chain for us to beat the problems he sees after cutting up and examining the worn chain and sprocket. ================== "Hi, Kelly, If you can, please send one new sprocket and one worn sprocket and a worn out chain to my attention. I’ll use them to make sure that we pick a chain that will wrap the new sprocket and has the best chance of working in your application. Any information that you can supply would be helpful in terms of loads or speeds. I understand that the chains are not breaking but only wearing out? Is this correct? I’ll be on vacation until July 19th. and it will take a few days to dig through the pile of accumulated E-mails and the like. We have two types of special pins that we can try depending on what we find with the current worn chain." =========================== I wouldn't send him a new part to never see again, I'd just send him dead old parts that are so severely worn they are useless. Some of you guys are "head collectors" and you got some really bad parts of no real value that you could kick in to promote the effort to find us all a better cam chain. What do you say guys? Oldfeller |
|
Title: Re: Do we need a better cam chain? Post by KenGLong on 07/09/07 at 18:35:48 Oldfeller2 wrote:
Old parts out of a junk box would be the best thing but, if necessary, I will donate my used-but-still-good parts to the effort. Sounds like he really does need a new sprocket though to make sure his proposed solution is the right fit. That can be arranged too. Ken |
|
Title: Re: Do we need a better cam chain? Post by smokey02 on 07/09/07 at 21:19:25 I really like the idea of a micro switch and light to warn of a worn chain, maybe we could connect it to the unused light in the speedo, the one to the right of the neutral light? |
|
Title: Re: Do we need a better cam chain? Post by verslagen1 on 07/09/07 at 23:05:42 It'll be a light used once every 20k. But it can be done. |
|
Title: Re: Do we need a better cam chain? Post by Oldfeller2 on 07/10/07 at 04:07:41 Ken, Please don't send any new parts or really nice used parts. This guy is going to cut the chain up to make samples and he is going to section the gear teeth for micro hardness testing too. He is going looking for WHY the chain is stretching so soon (20k is soon, BTW -- they expect 90-100,000 miles as early failure on these type chains in a car). I will PM you with an address to send the parts if you still want to send them off to be all cut up. Anybody else got any real junk parts? Oldfeller |
|
Title: Re: Do we need a better cam chain? Post by srinath on 07/10/07 at 07:32:56 I called Ramsey chain - They were helpful, but our cam chain is too small for them to make. Pitch is smaller than they can make. Cool. Srinath. |
|
Title: Re: Do we need a better cam chain? Post by Oldfeller2 on 07/11/07 at 20:01:21 Srinath, I got the same answer from Ramsey as you did. The only thing they have is 3/8" chain and that is too far away from 1/4" chain for even a gear swap out to work out for us. The only other American chain manufacturer for the chain size we need is Borg/Warner Morse and they are locked into exclusive distributorships with a certain very few large automotive supply houses. I can only talk to them through their industrial sales avenue using my company functions and that is proving very awkward and I will likely abandon that effort shortly as they seem to see silent chain as an "automotive OE supplier only" item. Japanese companies have the same exclusive relationships with their own Japanese large automotive parts suppliers -- they won't even respond well to my official company requests for information. We aren't in their supply chain at all. Chinese chain suppliers will respond but the language barrier in talking to them is formidable and I suspect that importing chain from China would be very hard to do with many trade barriers that would require import/export liscenses, etc. This whole thing is much harder than it looked from the outside. For example, you can buy industrial #50 chain (the same stuff as goes on our chain conversions) in 50 foot rolls for $110 plus shipping but the same wholesale purchase points don't touch can't get silent chain from the same people that make the drive chain that they can get -- it is sold through different supply channels and they have no distributor rights to the silent chain at all. Frustrating. Oldfeller |
|
Title: Re: Do we need a better cam chain? Post by barry68v10 on 07/12/07 at 06:53:43 A standard drive chain in an oil bath will outlast our cam chain. Why does it have to be silent chain? |
|
Title: Re: Do we need a better cam chain? Post by justin_o_guy on 07/12/07 at 11:13:01 Noisy chain that lasts would be welcome. From the things Ive read about that cryogenic treatment it should at least double the life of the chain. Soaking the chain in oil before I installed it surely gave the cam chain a better start than just sticking it in & starting the engine. I am waiting to see how long this one lasts without the cryo treatment. Good luck to those shopping for a chain. I havent forgotten the offer to send a used chain, but was hoping I would get it back, since I can use it for another 12 thousand or so I think, once I mod the tensioner. If it becomes absolutely necessary I will part with it & just forget ever seeing it again, but would sure be happier if I could get it back. Lemme know when a potential supplier shows up. Maybe someone has one that totally worn? |
|
Title: Re: Do we need a better cam chain? Post by vroom1776 on 07/12/07 at 12:19:01 I think I MAY have a worn chain in Mass. WIll find out in a month when I go for a visit. no sprocket, though. |
|
Title: Re: Do we need a better cam chain? Post by KenGLong on 07/12/07 at 12:38:44 I have the worn chain that's currently on my bike now. It's going to get replaced anyway and I will have no need for the old one. It will gladly make the ultimate sacrifice in order to further the cause. My new chain is available as well with the understanding that it won't come back. Would be nice if there were better than a 50-50 chance of the sacrifice yielding positive results. (I'm not much of a gambler but I do understand the need to invest in the future.) Ken |
|
Title: Re: Do we need a better cam chain? Post by Oldfeller2 on 07/12/07 at 15:44:26 If you guys are interested in a total gear/chain system rebuild, Ramsey in Charlotte is willing to do that. So is Borg Warner Morse (they'd love to convert you to their expensive HY-VO proprietary chain). But both guys would need a worn chain and a used gear of each kind (crank and cam) to work with along with an accurate measurement of center to center distance of the shafts the gears go on. I can't do anything without the parts and my window of opportunity with Borg Warner Morse (who does make the chain size we need that fits our existing gears) closes on the 19th of this month. I've gotten 2 "you are not our distributor customer" e-mails from the Japanese and a "our chain is not suitable for your use" from the Chinese, so my well is running pretty much dry on this project. KennyG is willing to give up brand new good parts, but I'm not willing to take them (that's wasteful). Some of you guys are sitting on worn parts that you have no real plans to use that you could give up for the cause. Some of you folks who are parting out engines have the items we need, as do a few of the long term parts collectors among us. Me, personally, I am not interested in replacing my gearing until I have worn out a couple of chains and my gearing is technically "worn out". I am still 4,000 miles from opening my unit the first time to put the wooden block behind the right hand side chain guide and I am probably 25,000 miles away from my tensioner adaptor and 45,000 miles away from my first chain change. That's like five to seven years out, easy. List price on a chain from Suzuki is $85 now, by then it will be well over $100. I have also come across some mention of a new style hard polymer belt-style cam system that is seeking acceptance to run inside the engine (exposed to the oil bath). Construction is somewhat like our hard plastic drive belt system except the plastic is tougher/meaner and much more temperature resistant. If they pull that off that is something I'd check into in five years when my time comes. Today is the 12th. It takes 5 days to ship stuff anywhere. If somebody want to direct ship some parts to Borg Warner Morse for them to cut up to analyze our early wear out issues please send me a PM and I'll provide you the address to ship the stuff to. Please understand the parts are likely not coming back and that all we may get after all the activity flurry dies down is another "can't help you after all, sorry" e-mail. That's the way she sits, boys .... not much joy in Mudville on this one. I think I have just about done struck out .... Oldfeller |
|
Title: Re: Do we need a better cam chain? Post by LANCER on 07/12/07 at 18:53:10 I have a cam gear and chain I will donate to the cause, but I could not find the crank gear. |
|
Title: Re: Do we need a better cam chain? Post by Oldfeller2 on 07/13/07 at 03:31:30 If we are going for a replacement chain instead of a total gear system rebuild that is all that Borg Warner Morse needs to see -- PM is sent to Lancer as of 7:00 AM Friday July 13th along with my thanks. I hate giving up on something, stubborn I guess. Oldfeller |
|
Title: Re: Do we need a better cam chain? Post by LANCER on 07/13/07 at 05:19:46 I have not received the the PM |
|
Title: Re: Do we need a better cam chain? Post by vroom1776 on 07/13/07 at 06:34:21 two thoughts: 1. I think we are all freaking out and rushing a bit. We need to take our tiem and do this right, and not use up all our chances with vendors... this is not an immediate problem in the sense that we know a few tricks to get some more life out of the system before complete failure... so unless you've already done the tab mod and are near failure again, I think we can wait to get this right (i.e. failure near, push of with tab mod instead of getting new suzuki chain... WAIT!). We'll get this right! 2. Probably more expensive, but possibly very worthwhile: we could look into a new but pre existing cam sprocket & cam drive gear, and a mathcing chain. If nothing exists to fit, this may be find gears that will work with a chain, and bore/drill/lathe/mill them out to fit. maybe this should be in the drinking & thinking thread (though of it last night ::) ) |
|
Title: Re: Do we need a better cam chain? Post by KenGLong on 07/13/07 at 14:14:05 In my case, I'm waiting for a significant improvement in the cam chain maintenance interval before I reassemble my Savage. At this point, I've decided that I'm going to buy verslagen's modified adjuster and extension. Then, if a better cam chain has been found, I'll install a longer lasting chain. If a better chain hasn't been found by next spring, I will reassemble the bike and decide what to do with it then. Ken |
|
Title: Re: Do we need a better cam chain? Post by Oldfeller2 on 07/13/07 at 14:14:43 Lancer, PM sent again backed up with email. Sorry, I was in a hurry this morning and must not have done it correctly. Vroom, I think you may get an option out of Borg Warner Morse to change gear sets over to their Hy-VO product type which is similar to silent chain but slightly better. We may also get an option out of them to get just a chain with some of their improved features but it would fit on our existing gear set. This would be another good option as it would cost less. Please remember, the center distance of the shafts was picked along with the diameter of the gear sets to hit the 1/4" pitch rate of the existing chain. You just can't willy nilly say you are going to plunk in a 3/8" chain pitch unless you can get a set of gears at a 2:1 construction ratio that happens to go the same center distance as our scoot's two shafts and it also happens to add up to a whole number of 3/8" pitches -- hey, it isn't all that easy to sub in a different pitch chain. Considering that some options are always better than no options, we will work with what we get out of the guys and run with it as far as it will go. If the end result doesn't suit, well you can always go back to them later armed with a little bit better knowledge and a different talking head. Right now I'd be happy to get the issues identified with the current chain/gear set and their exact expert read on what the full spec is for the current chain. We may get more than that. Perhaps. Who knows until we try. Oldfeller |
|
Title: Re: Do we need a better cam chain? Post by Savage_Rob on 07/13/07 at 15:16:36 I just put the Slavy-Verslagen modded adjuster on mine and was just barely able to use the extended hole in the tab, so I should have quite a few miles before I "need" a new chain. I am following all of this with interest and will definitely make some sort of change to my chain when the time comes, even if it's just buying a stock chain and shipping it off to Waco for a cryo treatment. |
|
Title: Re: Do we need a better cam chain? Post by LANCER on 07/13/07 at 15:24:23 SO WHAT DOES THE CRYO THING DO FOR THE CHAIN? |
|
Title: Re: Do we need a better cam chain? Post by tuxedo on 07/13/07 at 15:41:11 As a metal cools, its molecular structure is drawn together by contraction. Stress and dislocation from production methods (quenching, forging, etc) are removed or reduced. Basically, all the tiny little cracks fill in as the metal expands in extreme cold. By warming it very, very slowly, it can effectively become what it was intended to be. A really, really hard piece of metal with no stress fractures on a molecular level. Those stress fractures are points at which the chain would stretch a few microns. But there are a few thousand per link in that chain. If the metal is quenched by someone getting paid a few pennies a day, they don't give a crap if some dude in Kentucky's bike blows up on the interstate. They also don't use the same grade of steel as they used to use. Sometime soon I'm going to measure the chain in my 1986, and I bet you it's near perfect. |
|
Title: Re: Do we need a better cam chain? Post by justin_o_guy on 07/13/07 at 18:35:56 Hot rodders are paying out big bucks to cryo cranks & blocks. Been going on for years. If it was just an Urban Legend, the cat would be out of the bag by now. Google cryogenic engine part treatment & look around. here's one http://www.nwcryo.com/motorsports.html I am gonna drop the $$ on my next chain. I will check to see if they can do anything with the plastic guides while they are at it. |
|
Title: Re: Do we need a better cam chain? Post by justin_o_guy on 07/13/07 at 19:05:50 I just looked at the price list. Twenty Five cents per Inch O cam chain! Wooo Hoo, talk about a deal..Looking at more in freight than the service. |
|
Title: Re: Do we need a better cam chain? Post by Oldfeller2 on 07/13/07 at 22:18:57 You may shorten your chain a tad doing the cryogenic treatment -- I don't think they come real tight from the factory as the assemblies would be checked for size and "run in" to meet an installation minimum size if they don't already meet it. Now that sounds interesting -- if you developed the motor with vendor A's chain who was running it in to take out all the infant stretch syndrome to meet your minimum size then switched over to vendor B who just made it to be inside your tolerance for a new part (not run in, just made to that size) what would that do to your total service life for vendor B chain? Interesting, especially if you don't have much adjustment range to begin with. Are the new chains "tight" on the gears as installed? I know the gears are worn some, does the chain have a bit slop as installed on the used gears when you put a new chain in place? From what I've read recently, the answer is yes there is some slop. Does that new chain show any sign of having been run across a gear set at all? From the very detailed recent pictures, the answer is no -- the heat treat bluing is untouched on the inner tooth surfaces. I still keep going back in my mind to some of these bikes that have been reported to be completely out of tensioner at 8,000 miles. Something caused that. I'd hate to get us a chain that wouldn't go on our gears because it was just plain made too tight. I'd also hate to get one that is sloppy loose brand new when installed on a "one chain worn" set of gears. Oldfeller |
|
Title: Re: Do we need a better cam chain? Post by justin_o_guy on 07/14/07 at 07:53:39 Putting a new chain on a "one chain worn" set O gears was no problem. I also had the worn guides in the equation. The tensioner was out something like 8 mm of the 18 allowable with the rear guide bent as much as I could bend it. So, question is, In my mind, how tight would the tensioner have been with new guides? I expect new guides would have yielded a tighter chain, but the 8 mm wouldnt have gone away. When we are talking about side deflection of 8 mm, the length change is very small, considering the length of the chain. I would say ~2.8 mm of chain length is soaked up, OHH, but it's done twice, above & below the tensioner, so 5.6 mm of chain length would be taken up by an 8 mm deflection.( I didnt draw any models, just used the square root of 8 as the difference between the imaginary straight line of the chain with no tensioner on it & the triangle created when the chain is deflected, so you engineer types may see a glaring oversight. PLease, feel free to correct my thinking if I am off base.) Remembering that the cam drive gear is removed to get the chain on & that the amount O slack was minimal I wouldn't think the chain could be much shorter & still get it on. UNless, the ID of the cam drive gear could be relieved to allow it to sit lower on the cam while the chain was slipped over the teeth. Hmmm, that sounds doable. Just have to do it on both sides for balance & stay away from the bolt holes & index pin.LOcate the hash marks that line up with the head & go up & down with a grinder ,,,, OOOPS, wouldnt that load the bolts with the whole cam chain varying tension? Doesnt the cam drive gear fit snug on a shoulder? I'm not sure the ID of the gear isn't somewhat load bearing. If so, relieving it to get a tight chain on might be a bad idea. |
|
Title: Re: Do we need a better cam chain? Post by T-Mack1 on 07/15/07 at 12:59:17 Just picked up a 2001 rolling frame w/dead motor (melted piston). I'm reading this thread with much interest as I have the engine in pieces to clean out all the aluminum fragments. I want to make known that there may be a design flaw in the cam chain system that is only sort of mentioned in this thread. Want to run it by the forum to see if I'm not seeing something. Over all the design is sort of sound. Spring chain tensioners have been around for years although a roller tensioner is considered better than a slide type. But, there is one thing that many of the other systems don't have that the LS650 does. I believe the flaw is the ratchet. Why is this a flaw??? Well, from what I see, the system would do the adjustment "click" of the ratchet some time when you either just start up the bike or after it sat for some time cooling down. The aluminum of the cylinder and the head are not fully expanded. Basically, that's what it's designed to do. The problem comes when the bike gets to operating temp's. The head & cylinder expand pulling the camshaft microscopically away from the crankshaft. If the ratchet had just "clicked" to the optimum tension, this expansion would stretch the chain because the ratchet would not allow the tensioner to pull back in and the chain is actually over-tensioned. The question is, what would happen if you take the ratchet paw out of the tensioner??????? This would allow the tensioner to readjust for the expansion. Being the spring inside of the tensioner isn't changed, there wouldn't be a change to the amount of push it gives. One thing that may occur is when revving there may be some chain vibration, but it should be minimal as the tensioner spring should absorb it. Thoughts?????? "Engineers design things, technicians make them work" |
|
Title: Re: Do we need a better cam chain? Post by justin_o_guy on 07/15/07 at 14:20:10 I brought up the same thing quite some time ago & someone else, who can do the math, showed the stresses that put on the chain. I dint remember how it went, but I think the ratchet is gonna need to stay, else the chain would flop violently about forcing the tensioner spring back, only to extend again s soon as the rpm drop. Would that really be a bad idea? I dunno, BUt, my answer was to add a spring to the mix, outside the tensioner, so when the pawl catches with the chain tight, there would be a "give" left in it to soak up the stretch. It could be put into the tensioner extension that has been added by some to make the tensioner not reach the 18 mm limit so quickly & would have to be stiffer than the tensioner spring inside the tube. |
|
Title: Re: Do we need a better cam chain? Post by KenGLong on 07/15/07 at 14:59:51 Interesting. Assuming all the mechanical design issues could be overcome, why not put a spring-loaded roller in there in place of the existing ratcheting tensioner? Properly designed, it could keep the chain tensioned properly for the entire life of the chain with no need of maintenance until the chain needs to be replaced. I wonder if the ratcheting tensioner is "supposed" to self-destruct for some reason? Ken |
|
Title: Re: Do we need a better cam chain? Post by verslagen1 on 07/15/07 at 15:02:37 Removing the rachet is an idea worth looking into. One of Norbert's design's does replace the stock adjuster with a damper device. My thought's on the adjuster was that maybe the rachet systmem helps keep the chain from getting too slack and whipping about. Assuming everything is 200°F, there's a .014" difference in the thermal growth between the cylinder and chain. There will be more if the cylinder is hot and the chain cool. I've measured the temp's after a hot run and the cyl head is over 240 and the base is 180. So the chain will be .028" shorter on a hot run. Maybe enough to click over. There is a place on the back side of the cylinder, just above the mounting bosses, where a hole could be placed to allow a plunger to push on the tensioner guide. My idea at the time was to give the guide a little support in the middle as it was discovered that this guide is completely flat and a little bow in the guide helps take up the slack. My chain was .01 long and the plunger was out 22mm. I'm guessing it started about 10mm out to begin with. Replacing the rear guide only took up about 2mm. So roughly, 10mm plunger travel for .01" chain stretch. One of our biggest issues (at least mine) is not being able to observe whats going on inside. And popping off the cover every week is a lot of work. So here's an idea, an external adjuster, manual or automatic. Drill a hole thru the case either at the afore mentioned location or a new spot in the engine case to place an adjustment screw. A cantilevered leaf spring and a pointer would be an easy way to determine tension. Any comments? ;D |
|
Title: Re: Do we need a better cam chain? Post by Oldfeller2 on 07/16/07 at 13:21:49 Tsubaki came back to say "We don't make a chain that small". This leaves Daido and Borg Warner Morse still left to ring in, everyone else says they don't make the chain we need. I find it hard to believe that nobody makes a quarter inch pitch silent chain any more. Oldfeller |
|
Title: Re: Do we need a better cam chain? Post by KenGLong on 07/16/07 at 15:37:28 Oldfeller2 wrote:
Maybe that's why this problem has gotten so much worse in recent years. Suzuki might be having the same problem. Ken |
|
Title: Re: Do we need a better cam chain? Post by srinath on 07/16/07 at 21:07:04 Why not a1/4 inch pitch belt ... Some of them gates types are super strong ... measure the exact pitch and see what turns up ... Cool. Srinath. |
|
Title: Re: Do we need a better cam chain? Post by Oldfeller2 on 08/02/07 at 14:14:53 Update: Tsubaki got taken to task a bit -- they advertise bragging rights to a quarter inch pitch (6.35mm) silent chain on their home web page. Tsubaki America finally admitted the quarter inch pitch chain is only manufactured under license for "certain Pacific Rim OEM suppliers" and cannot contractually be sold back to America at all. Rest of the story comes from Morse. I got back their report on the chain and gear that I got from Lancer. It is a Morse Type 82 silent chain that was manufactured by their Japanese subsidiary (guess who) and it is their best and only quarter inch chain of the Type 82 (motorcycle style) silent chain family. They do not offer their hard pin in that style -- the chain is too small. They do not offer a HY-VO tension split pin design that small -- smallest HY-VO size is the 3/8" pitch size. There is no better Type 82 chain pins or styles available. We got all that there is in a Type 82 chain. Comments on the sample chain and sprocket is that it was NOT worn out -- it was approximately a bit past halfway to the engineering wear limit. This lines up with the service wear limit in the Suzuki Shop manual. =================================== HOWEVER, There are automotive style silent chains in quarter inch pitch that will run on our gear forms. The chains are made of links that are 1.25mm taller (same length -- but they swing a larger pin that sticks out a little longer on the side of things). As such these chains would require changes to the left side straight chain guide to back the guide away from the chain 1mm and some changes to the top of the tension guide side at the top end edge to keep it from being abraded out of existence by the taller chain as it comes off the cam gear. I don't know what the longer protruding pin heads would hit or do to the engine as it ran its pathway. Would this thicker chain last any longer? Who knows? It was built for a dual overhead cam car engine and would require modifications to our engines to fit at all. That's it, the last silent chain vendor has reported. Any opinions on the taller automotive chain and what it would hit if someone tried to install one in a Savage? Oldfeller |
|
Title: Re: Do we need a better cam chain? Post by Rockin_John on 08/02/07 at 15:35:37 srinath wrote:
I'd already thought about a belt, but the fact that the bottom gear is on the crankshaft itself kind of stopped me from looking further into the idea. I doubt that there are suitable belts which would run on the existing crank sprocket/gear. But then I didn't look into it a great deal, I just "assumed" a belt wouldn't be available. Also, I've taken a peek into the idea which someone suggested of cryogenic treatment of the chain, and it seems like a viable option, but I haven't gotten any pricing yet. A place I used to work at, we used a lot of liquid nitrogen to chill parts for interference fits. Heat a hole with a rosebud (torch) to a specific temp. then freeze a pin to another specific temp... Drop the pin in the hole, and presto! Parts fit so tight that they might as well be welded together. Actually it can be much stronger than welding on large parts. Anyways, I don't know just exactly how long you would keep a cam chain @ -XXXºF before pulling it out. Get it too cold, or warm it up to quick, and funny things can happen. Well, it might not be too funny if it happened inside your engine! ;D Ahh... reading thread backwards, it appears that Justin found the cryo treatment cheap. I'm thinking it should be well worth it. |
|
Title: Re: Do we need a better cam chain? Post by PhotoProf on 08/02/07 at 18:13:37 Hey guys... Just wondering if engine mods (more HP) puts added stress on an already suspect part of the engine? It would be interesting to see how mileage/mods/replacement compares to stock engines. |
|
Title: Re: Do we need a better cam chain? Post by skrapiron on 08/02/07 at 18:35:06 I have a slightly different take on the cam chain issue. I stopped in to my local stealer-ship and talked to one of the lead service techs. He told me that, starting with the mid-2004 model, Suzuki introduced a better cam chain tensioner device. He said the way to tell if yours has it is by the assmebly of the head and the size of the fasterners. The 'new' 2004's have 10mm bolts instead of the mish-mash of 8 and 9mm. He also told me that the new tensioner is good for 25k and there is no need to open my side case for inspection, not for a while at least. Is there any truth to what he was telling me? Did Suzi finally address the cam-chain issue with the 2k4 model? I hope so. Mine's a 2k5. When I pulled up the parts fische on the web, the cam chain tension is a different part number from the pre 2k4 model year. Any thoughts for you experts???? |
|
Title: Re: Do we need a better cam chain? Post by KenGLong on 08/02/07 at 18:42:52 Oldfeller2 wrote:
Well, thanks for trying so hard to find a chain. I'm sure it was frustrating to keep hitting dead ends. I think I'll order verslagen's modded adjuster and slap this puppy back together. Don't know if I'll keep her yet. I may have to ride her for a week before I make any permanent decisions. Thanks again. Ken |
|
Title: Re: Do we need a better cam chain? Post by KenGLong on 08/02/07 at 18:47:05 skrapiron wrote:
Expert? Not quite but I do have some thoughts. Yours is the first report we've had of an improved adjuster from Suzi. My 2002 went 22,000 miles before I took the side cover off to take a look. Of course, I bought it with 12,000 on the odo and I don't know what, if any, service was done before I got it. I'm going to go look at the fische at Ron Ayers to see if that tells anything. Ken |
|
Title: Re: Do we need a better cam chain? Post by KenGLong on 08/02/07 at 18:58:35 Ok, the fiche at Ron Ayers shows the original adjuster as part number 12830-24B00 but it's been discontinued. The replacement is part number 12830-24B01 and seems to be a direct replacement. Anyone know what the difference is, if any? Ken |
|
Title: Re: Do we need a better cam chain? Post by verslagen1 on 08/02/07 at 19:47:45 The only difference I've seen is that the long spring is different. Otherwise they're exactly the same. The new one have a spring 8.5mm in diameter And the old ones are 9.8mm and 5mm longer Both are 1mm wire. That would make the new ones a bit stiffer. ;D |
|
Title: Re: Do we need a better cam chain? Post by Rockin_John on 08/02/07 at 22:06:16 PhotoProf wrote:
I'm sure that spinning the motor up in RPMs quicker must put some added wear/strain on the whole valvetrain. But how much X increased HP causes Y amount of added wear/damage would be very difficult to quantify. |
|
Title: Re: Do we need a better cam chain? Post by Savage_Rob on 08/03/07 at 06:32:30 I wonder if higher operating temps might contribute to noticeably greater wear on these parts also. |
|
Title: Re: Do we need a better cam chain? Post by justin_o_guy on 08/03/07 at 12:39:58 The single thing that sticks out to me is the reporting of cam chains lasting a Long Ol Time years ago. The engine operating temp hasnt changed. The way boys play with things hasnt changed.Is it possible the reports of long lasting cam chains were wrong? What about the point in one of the posts, regarding the wear of the gear & chain that were studied. The cam gear was only half worn, as was the chain. BUT, the tensioner was at the limit. So, what do we look at? The guides? The fact that the tensioner is at 8 mm or more when the new chain is installed? I Donut gno, but The life expectancy of the cam chain is approaching "Snowball in Hell" average life span. I really want to be gruntled with my bike, but, I could get DISgruntled. ( I know, I know Gruntled isnt a word, but it Should be, if I can get DISgruntled, why cant I be gruntled? HUHH? I am getting disgruntled NOW!!) WEll, now I am just being silly. I think the most direct & cost effective mod is extending the tensioner where it attaches to the lower end of the guide. Making sure there is sufficient bow in the rear guide to keep the ratchet from grabbing a new tooth & creating a torture test for the chain would be good. The cam journals are sitting there , raw aluminum, as far from the low pressure oil pump as is possible, so, IF there is a big load on that chain, I would expect those surfaces to be worn if not galled & ruined. Since we arent seeing destruction in the head, I am guessing the tension on the chain isnt too horrible. I do want to try the cryo stuff on the next run. It will get new guides & chain & a tensioner mod. |
|
Title: Re: Do we need a better cam chain? Post by verslagen1 on 08/03/07 at 13:31:58 Are these stories or actual facts? I seen the ref's to accounts of bike's lasting 100k, but never cam chains. I expect my chain to last 40 to 50k, but had to modify the adjuster to do it. Otherwise the stock chain gave up the ghost at 22k. ;D |
|
Title: Re: Do we need a better cam chain? Post by Oldfeller2 on 08/03/07 at 16:56:44 I did ask if Morse used to build the chain in the USA, the fellow I was working with has only been there 8 years and didn't think so -- to him the chain had 'always' been made in Japan. Things have changed in 20 years -- oil has gotten better, not worse. Steel has gotten better, not worse. Seals have gotten better, not worse. Did old timers have EPA super lean running Savages? Nope. Did they mod them to the degree we do now? Nope. I think we will get "reasonable total cam chain life" with what we have now. I was searching for greatly improved though. Heck, I didn't find it -- but I sure tried. I will try to get some car chain samples just to see what they look like -- not that they would be drop in replacements, but could THEY BE MADE to work. Oldfeller |
|
Title: Re: Do we need a better cam chain? Post by Savage_Rob on 08/03/07 at 18:52:31 When I mentioned operating temps, I wasn't suggesting they'd changed. I was wondering if the differences in lifespans might be at least partially attributed to variations in climate. You know, shorter-lived cam chain assemblies as you approach the equator. Just a thought. I hadn't noticed an attempt to look at the occurrences geographically. |
|
Title: Re: Do we need a better cam chain? Post by T-Mack1 on 08/07/07 at 09:19:32 Quote:
Just rebuild a 2001 and it only had 10mm bolts ... but..... It should be noted that at 10.4K miles the chain measured 127.25 mm (pulling a little to take up any slack). I saw a post saying 127mmm was "new". Also, the guides had very little signs of wear. Sounds strange for an engine that the piston died. |
|
Title: Re: Do we need a better cam chain? Post by verslagen1 on 08/07/07 at 09:39:51 I think it shows how sensitive the whole lubrication/cooling/lean issue is. The piston overheated either from lack of lube or bad breakin or too much highway running too fast. Without the PO's confession we'll never know. but because the cam drive is fine at least some lube was getting there. |
|
Title: Re: Do we need a better cam chain? Post by Ed_L. on 08/07/07 at 17:51:04 I wonder if the newer 5 speed could be putting more strain on the cam chain. After all the 5 speed has 20% more shifting when compared to a 4 speed. Each time the bike is shifted and run up thru it's rpm range the cam chain gets pulled on. A 20% increase on stressing the cam chain could be one of the factors causing the stretch. Not much that can be done about it unless you want to skip a gear. Anybody been tracking if the failure occurs sooner in the 5 speeds than the 4 speeds. Just a thought I had to throw out to everybody |
|
Title: Re: Do we need a better cam chain? Post by LANCER on 08/07/07 at 18:08:06 verslagen1 wrote:
Since the cam drive area was OK then lack of lube is not likely the issue, perhaps a parts failure like a broken ring or maybe the ingestion of some large particle of something.` |
|
Title: Re: Do we need a better cam chain? Post by Savage_Greg on 08/16/07 at 07:06:31 verslagen1 wrote:
Okay :P Sure am glad that I bought 2 chains (1 for Stinger). Did anyone take a good measure on the rear chain guide? http://i21.photobucket.com/albums/b277/gmdinusa/Cam_Chain_Limits_2.jpg Or go here for a better 640x480 view... http://s21.photobucket.com/albums/b277/gmdinusa/?action=view¤t=Cam_Chain_Limits_2.jpg |
|
Title: Re: Do we need a better cam chain? Post by verslagen1 on 08/16/07 at 07:16:17 me thinks you need a new calculator 5" x 25.4mm/in = 127.0mm (new chain) 5.07 x 25.4 = 128.78 (dead chain) |
|
Title: Re: Do we need a better cam chain? Post by Savage_Greg on 08/16/07 at 07:29:38 T-Mack1 wrote:
That chain has a long way to go. It is sort of difficult to get an accurate measure on the chain since it needs to be stretched straight and any contact with calipers makes it move around on the bench. Sure would be nice to have a height gage. Anyway, you measured 127.25 and I read ~127.35 on the new one. Either way we're splitting a millimeter. Essentially, the chain will be bad when it has stretched a length about equal to one rivet diameter. We ain't even close to that |
|
Title: Re: Do we need a better cam chain? Post by Savage_Greg on 08/16/07 at 07:32:16 verslagen1 wrote:
To be honest...I didn't calculate. That number comes straight out of the SSM. Now, I'm running back out to the garage to check the book. |
|
Title: Re: Do we need a better cam chain? Post by Savage_Greg on 08/16/07 at 07:38:18 Okay. So which number is correct? Is it 128.9 mm or 5.07"? Think that you could contact your engineer buddies at Suzuki :P My calculator says...128.9 / 25.4 = 5.07480314 inches and........................5.07 / .03937 = 128.77257556 mm Must be a translation thing:P http://i21.photobucket.com/albums/b277/gmdinusa/CamChainSpecs1.jpg |
|
Title: Re: Do we need a better cam chain? Post by Savage_Greg on 08/16/07 at 07:57:12 verslagen1 wrote:
Oh yeah...where did you get the 5.000" measure for a new chain? I got 4.990" but I admit it was hard to be measure on my bench. Either way, I still have 3 good chains :P |
|
Title: Re: Do we need a better cam chain? Post by LANCER on 08/16/07 at 08:35:28 My chain has about 9k+ miles and measures 127.6mm, with no evidence of any damage on the gears. |
|
Title: Re: Do we need a better cam chain? Post by T-Mack1 on 08/16/07 at 08:47:19 wow, we're talking .001" range here.....that could be the difference of the swash of one rivet (pin?) compared to another.....you might have to take several measurements at different spots and avg them. Also, I no longer work where I can borrow a caliper for "Gov't" jobs, so my 127.25mm was using a expensive steel rule and magnifing glass. I will note that one of my former jobs was taking measurements on analog gauges for a military contractor, and I was certified by the military, what I saw/read was "acturate" within "Mil-Spec" tolerance (very tight tolerances). But, down that small is hard to read.......could have been 127.3 or 127.2 but I sure it wasn't 127.5..... |
|
Title: Re: Do we need a better cam chain? Post by Savage_Greg on 08/16/07 at 09:03:44 Okay, okay...I went back and used bungee cords to stretch the chains tight and measure them again. 1st - Verslagen is right. I used a maginifier and made a closer check on the new chain. It definitely looks to be to 5.000" and 127.0 mm. 2nd - I measured mine too, and it is even better than I thought at 5.015" or 127.4 mm. Hardly any reason to replace it. So, I redid my photo above to reflect these corrections. Click the link for a closer look in my Photobucket if you want. As for the calculations? Is it 128.9 mm and 5.075" or is it 128.78 mm and 5.070"? The difference is .12 mm or .005". Who actually cares??? |
|
Title: Re: Do we need a better cam chain? Post by Savage_Greg on 08/16/07 at 09:07:16 LANCER wrote:
That brings up a whole nuther topic. Mine has higher miles and measures less. Any thoughts? :P |
|
Title: Re: Do we need a better cam chain? Post by verslagen1 on 08/16/07 at 09:11:05 since 127mm works out to be 5" exactly and from oldfellers work says that it's a .25" pitch chain. 20 x .25 = 5" I think that confirms that a new chain measures 5" And I believe I measured mine. |
|
Title: Re: Do we need a better cam chain? Post by Savage_Greg on 08/16/07 at 09:13:12 verslagen1 wrote:
Just like an engineer. You get the numbers from the technicians and claim them for yourself. Did you read above? |
|
Title: Re: Do we need a better cam chain? Post by verslagen1 on 08/16/07 at 09:18:35 Savage_Greg wrote:
128.9mm = 5.074803" It is acceptable to round off 5.074803 to 5.07 Us nit picking engineers care. |
|
Title: Re: Do we need a better cam chain? Post by T-Mack1 on 08/16/07 at 09:19:13 Quote:
Maybe your engine had an easier life, less shifting, more consistant running, less abuse. When I picked up my bike (dead piston) the PO sounded like he did freeway driving to & from work. Had very little signs of wear (chain or guides), but that could be the highway driving.....less on & off the throttle. |
|
Title: Re: Do we need a better cam chain? Post by verslagen1 on 08/16/07 at 09:24:54 Savage_Greg wrote:
Well if you want to get really picky... dig thru all the posts and you might find that someone concluded that 127mm = equals a new chain before oldfeller. I only sighted the most current reference as empirical proof of theoretical fact. :P |
|
Title: Re: Do we need a better cam chain? Post by Savage_Greg on 08/16/07 at 09:25:09 verslagen1 wrote:
5.0748 to 5.075 If you care then round up to 3 decimal places like nit pickin' machinists do. They don't read in 10ths of an inch. Oh, I forget, engineers only carry those cute little scales in their pocket protectors:P. |
|
Title: Re: Do we need a better cam chain? Post by Savage_Greg on 08/16/07 at 09:28:25 T-Mack1 wrote:
Well, I was responding to Lancer...the difference also includes a different cam shaft... hmmm... |
|
Title: Re: Do we need a better cam chain? Post by verslagen1 on 08/16/07 at 09:33:25 I would've cause I'm a US engineer with a machinist background. unfortunately, It's written by Japanise tech writer who thinks digital mic's are not available to mechanics. And I think how many times I've read that the measurement was made with a ruler I think that's a correct assumption. When I'm in a measuring mood, I carry digital mic. And never a pocket protector. I've actually seen more pocket protectors in the pockets of machinists. |
|
Title: Re: Do we need a better cam chain? Post by Savage_Greg on 08/16/07 at 09:36:41 verslagen1 wrote:
I didn't necessarily "dig" through the other posts...heck, I had to resurrect the topic from page 3 anyway. So, I merely scanned them. Yet, this subject isn't really where I was going with this. But while we're theorizing, have you figured out exactly what causes the problem with the tensioner? That is what I'm pursuing...obviously, the chain and gear have been eliminated. ...to which I see that you state that "we are dealing with a complex system of steel and plastic" Come on...it ain't too complex for a nit pickin' engineer, is it? :P |
|
Title: Re: Do we need a better cam chain? Post by Savage_Greg on 08/16/07 at 09:38:54 verslagen1 wrote:
Digital mic. That's cute. That's not what I learned on :P That's because there are usually more machinists than engineers in any one place. Bet you don't wear an apron though. |
|
Title: Re: Do we need a better cam chain? Post by Savage_Greg on 08/16/07 at 09:43:12 Anyway, I'm wondering about the guides. Mine has wear but the SSM has no measurement checks in it. I just wondered if anyone bought a new one and applied either scale or a micrometer to it, yet. If not, I guess I'll just have to buy a new one, because I'm not closing this engine up until I know what caused the tensioner extension. |
|
Title: Re: Do we need a better cam chain? Post by verslagen1 on 08/16/07 at 10:13:49 I've replaced the rear tensioner guide and only noticed about 1.5mm difference in plunger extention. I'd only replace it if it were deeply cracked and obviously worn. one of the posters found bits of the guide in his oil pump. The slavy 2 hole adjuster mod is the only way to suck the plunger back in without replacing everything. |
|
Title: Re: Do we need a better cam chain? Post by Savage_Greg on 08/16/07 at 13:49:07 verslagen1 wrote:
Not discounting your tensioner modification, as I recall you calculated the chain slack somewhere. I guess that with 64 links and .015" stretch found in 21 pins there is roughly .100" gain in length overall. Didn't you calculate a ratio of the tensioner extension somewhere? Therefore, since we can pretty much eliminate wear on the hardened cam gears from the "everything" list, it is really just a matter of chain and tensioner/guides. Dam, even if you just have to open the case and utilize the 2nd hole in your mod, it's still gonna cost you $15 for a new case gasket. I can't wait to see what Stinger's chain looks like after 30K, tomorrow. Has anyone, with a tensioner that separated, measured their cam chain? Does it even reach the service limit? |
|
Title: Re: Do we need a better cam chain? Post by Oldfeller2 on 08/16/07 at 22:07:18 We never hit the engineering service limit -- we never have. Even the people who make the chain (who cut one up just recently) say we aren't going much past half the technical wear life of the chain judging from the worn out one send by Lancer. Our problem is that the tensioner system on our bike can't use but the lower half of the total displacement possible. None of the upper "half" of the total possible displacement is ever used. When I take my side cover off I will look at making a right side (upper) deflection on the straight chain guide. Several folks have successfully put some bend into the right side and have not reported issues from doing so. I think you may be able to bend it towards the top and support it with a wooden block of some sort which will "reset" your tensioner some and add that much to the total mileage service life of the chain. Then when the tensioner moves forward again, do all the left side mods as developed so far. |
|
Title: Re: Do we need a better cam chain? Post by verslagen1 on 08/17/07 at 07:26:14 When I took mine apart, the plunger was extended 22mm. I measured the chain and calculated that I should get 50k miles out of the chain itself given the amount of stretch at the time. If the cover comes off without tearing, you can reuse the gasket. It's been recommended that a gasket sealer be applied around the oil channel. I've done it twice so far. All I can say is if it leaks, replace it. Yeah, of2 right, the 2 holer not the only way to extend the life. You can bend the tensioner guide to take up some of the slack. The issue I have with that is that dam plastic. |
|
Title: Re: Do we need a better cam chain? Post by Savage_Greg on 08/17/07 at 07:51:41 Oldfeller2 wrote:
I kinda guessed that answer. If the service limit on the chain is about .070" for 10 links, that could equal about 7/16" over the whole chain length. Pretty darn slack. Won't putting a bend in the front (right side) chain guide advance the valve timing? I just threw this guide in front of the camera. No precision measurement, but this is my rear guide after 14K. Any wear is hard to determine because it is smooth and I don't have a new one for comparison. No cracks or chips. I don't plan to try any bending as I feel it will just straighten out under a load and the tensioner will become latched in the forward position when that happens. http://i21.photobucket.com/albums/b277/gmdinusa/Cam_Chain_Guide_1.jpg |
|
Title: Re: Do we need a better cam chain? Post by T-Mack1 on 08/17/07 at 08:39:32 I wish there was an engine to play with. Here's my idea (sorry, I don't have a spare engine to play with): 1) remove the ratchet paw from the tensionizer. This would stop the over tensioning when eng gets hot by allowing pull back. 2) mount a coil spring on guide, at a spot approx 1/2 way up (at about the 7" mark on the steel rule in your picture Greg). This is to reduce slap at rev'ing. To do this, a gap would need to be measured to figure out size of spring. The spring has to be mounted (two small bolts (4-40?) threaded in the guide and a small plate?). Would need a engineer type to do some calc's here. Need to calc the spring strength and length so not to interfere with regular action of tensioner and still prevent slap. Must also figure in for some wear. Note: this experiment would be reversible with only two small holes left in the guide. Other choice ( not easily reversible) would be to machine the jug to add an externally adjustable sping in the middle of the guide. I know Honda's have a setup that might be adapted. Would require loosing some fins on the section where the chain is and getting the parts from another type bike. |
|
Title: Re: Do we need a better cam chain? Post by verslagen1 on 08/17/07 at 08:44:57 yes bending the front guide will advance cam timing. for every .01" of chain stretch you'll get about 1° of cam retard. That should be .07" stretch over 21 pins or 20 links (not 10) For a stock unbent guide, I would be only concerned with wear at the bottom radius. I wouldn't be concerned with a bent rear guide straightening out under load as this is the slack side. I am concerned that it might have memmory and will straighten out with heat causing the chain to go slack. but we haven't heard from anyone that's done this having a problem though. |
|
Title: Re: Do we need a better cam chain? Post by Savage_Greg on 08/17/07 at 11:54:27 verslagen1 wrote:
If the "slack side" becomes more slack, the tensioner is (theoretically) supposed to ratchet out as needed. That will gradually pull any additional bend out of the guide because it won't be able to spring back. As you say, most of the wear is at the bottom radius and that tells me that in operation the chain guide is pretty straight anyway. Pardon me....but let me correct. Maybe I was simplifying too much, but The Book states 21 Pins or 20 "Pitch". If you have 2 pins per link you have 10 links. Please count. http://i21.photobucket.com/albums/b277/gmdinusa/CamChainSpecs1.jpg If you are counting the connecting plates separately, then I guess that I'll have to say that my rear chain conversion required a 210 links of 520 chain :P http://i21.photobucket.com/albums/b277/gmdinusa/Cam_Chain_Limits_2.jpg |
|
Title: Re: Do we need a better cam chain? Post by verslagen1 on 08/17/07 at 14:40:54 Well to tell the truth, I don't give a rat's a$$ as to the number of links... I bow to your edgemacation on the matter of number of links. And I have a brand new chain sitting in the original unopened bag too. I hope I can find it after 30k more miles. ;D |
|
Title: Re: Do we need a better cam chain? Post by Oldfeller2 on 08/17/07 at 16:10:59 My plan is to bend the right side (straight) guide that is not moved by the adjuster and make the bend permanent and durable by backing it up with a block of wood. The chain will have worn the valve timing 'retarded' by X degrees to make the X slop that I find when I open it up. I will then run the timing forward by X degrees by moving that slop to the right side by bending the straight guide up at the top near the cam gear and backing it up with the wooden block. In essence, I put it back to a near factory stock valve timing and I renew the tensioner travel all at the same time. 10,000 to 15,000 miles of free tensioner travel. Add that to the Slavy/Verslagen 30,000-50,000 mile tricks that you can then do next and maybe I'll get somewhat closer to the engineering wear limit on my chain before I replace it. |
|
Title: Re: Do we need a better cam chain? Post by Savage_Greg on 08/18/07 at 06:49:15 verslagen1 wrote:
So much for the "nit pickin' engineer". I rest my case :P |
|
Title: Re: Do we need a better cam chain?[IMG]http://i21. Post by Savage_Greg on 08/18/07 at 06:59:29 Suppose this would be a good time for a Verslagy mod, but here is a comparison of a chain with 14,000 and a brand new one. To answer the question in the title of this topic, I would have to say... "Hell Ya. We Do Need a Better Cam Chain." A chain at 5.015" http://i21.photobucket.com/albums/b277/gmdinusa/Tensioner_1.jpg A chain at 5.000" http://i21.photobucket.com/albums/b277/gmdinusa/Tensioner_2.jpg |
|
Title: Re: Do we need a better cam chain? Post by Savage_Rob on 08/18/07 at 07:36:01 Greg, Again, a picture is worth a thousand words. Were the same guides used for both chains? |
|
Title: Re: Do we need a better cam chain? Post by Savage_Greg on 08/18/07 at 07:43:04 Savage_Rob wrote:
Yes. The old guides don't "appear" to have any wear, but I know better than that...:P I hated to put it back together with the old guides, but I've had this engine apart for so long (since I started my CD project) that I decided that I can't wait any longer. Photography note: A few thousand more words can be seen with the different lighting in the 2 photos. No flash in either shot, but the top one had some "soft white" bulbs and the bottom was under "daylight" bulbs :P |
|
Title: Re: Do we need a better cam chain? Post by Oldfeller2 on 08/18/07 at 07:45:48 New thought. Run all the Slavy mods until chain hits itself. Completely remove right hand side guide and put a large ball bearing equipped nylon pulley up next to the cam gear that moves the chain more than half way over to the left -- with the pulley positioned just down from the cam gear a bit. Angle of the long section of the straight stretched chain would match the angle of the fully extended slavy mod with some running clearance between them. Pulley would mount on a through shaft that would be tapped into the inner and outer surface of the guide tunnel. Theoretically, you could just about double the total displacement of the chain wear and literally run the valve retardation back to zero (factory valve timing) after doing a full slavy extension run. Then you can do the Slavy extension again. A chain would last 100,000 miles or there abouts. Thoughts? |
|
Title: Re: Do we need a better cam chain? Post by Savage_Greg on 08/18/07 at 08:04:03 Ya know...it's kinda interesting, but the little Honda 90 in my garage has a much better tensioner. It uses oil pump pressure with a spring assist on a long arm with a "plastic" wheel for tensioning. On the opposite side the chain is guided by a sprocket. No long "plastic" guides and that was 20 years before our Savages. Now on the other hand, I have a Honda VTR1000 engine sitting on my bench that is awaiting crank bearings. Each cylinder has a huge external tensioner and 2 long plastic guides. There are just so many ways to do it...but with the Savage the chain seems to be the weak link...:D |
|
Title: Re: Do we need a better cam chain? Post by Ed_L. on 08/18/07 at 08:08:20 Another plus about having a second tenisoner on the back (straight run) of the chain would be that it could compensate for the cam timing retarding that occurs with the stock setup. It also could help keep the cam timing correct if you shave a little off the head. Don't know if it is possible but.... |
|
Title: Re: Do we need a better cam chain? Post by verslagen1 on 08/18/07 at 17:14:05 I think the advantages of the guides is they kill any waves or chain slap immediately. There is a place on the back side where 1 or 2 fins could be removed and threaded hole could be positioned to push on the guide. My thought was to add a stiff spring to give the guide a little bow. but this could get to the point of overtensioning the chain. Who ever did this would need to constantly open it up to monitor where and establish the proper tension. that's where I stopped, less tinkering, more riding. But this would be a good mod on the front guide. Leaves the adjuster to do as zuki intended, sort of. I've been thinking of a way to monitor chain stretch externally for some time. Here's a way that could work. drill the cam gear for a magnet. position may need to be worked out but the idea would be to measure the time between the cam sensor and spark. any change would be an indication of chain stretch. This could be used with the front guide adjustment screw to achieve the desired timing. |
|
Title: Re: Do we need a better cam chain? Post by Savage_Greg on 08/28/07 at 15:04:47 After a few weeks of nagging, Stinger's '02 finally came over for the cam chain replacement today. However, after opening it up and a long telephone brainstorming session with Max, we decided to wait until winter.... Stinger's engine has more than twice the mileage but a couple millimeters less tensioner extension than mine did (it's posted somewhere). After 30,600 miles his tensioner measures 19 mm and there is no "out of round" or wear in the tensioner body itself. Since his engine has no leaks we decided not to "fix" any :P This winter after a few thousand more miles we'll open it up and change the chain... It's hard to tease Stinger about the fact that he never uses 1st gear, or that he sprays his brake rotor with WD40, or that he only uses automotive engine oil, or that he never had the initial service done ever, at all. I'm pretty much the only mechanic that's ever touched his bike. He rides his bike 65-75 all day long if he wants, it has no leaks or smoke, and the bike looks brand new. Must be doing something right :) I also like the coating on the inside of his engine case...I guess that when they started painting the engine in 02, they did the inside too :P http://i21.photobucket.com/albums/b277/gmdinusa/Stingers_Tensioner.jpg |
|
Title: Re: Do we need a better cam chain? Post by KenGLong on 08/28/07 at 19:12:34 Wow. |
|
Title: Re: Do we need a better cam chain? Post by Savage_Greg on 08/29/07 at 05:15:45 So far, it seems that the reason for the extended tensioner is largely unknown. It doesn't seem that the chain is all of the issue, and yet when I changed mine the tensioner was pulled back in pretty good...not perfect, but much better. Must be several factors involved like maintenance and riding practices, mixed with mechanical wear on different parts. Some time ago, there was a topic that involved "lugging" the engine...something that I admit to being guilty of doing. Can that put a load on the cam chain or is that just loading the primary gears? |
|
Title: Re: Do we need a better cam chain? Post by KenGLong on 08/29/07 at 06:32:19 Savage_Greg wrote:
My guess, and this is just a guess, is parts quality variations. I base this on the evidence we've seen here of cam chain maintenance intervals that vary from "normal" to extremely short. I would like to see a 50-75 thousand mile maintenance interval but I realize that it's not practical considering the simplicity and low cost of this engine. 30,000 miles is a reasonable compromise and I would be "less dissatisfied" with that...if we could always get that much. Ken |
|
Title: Re: Do we need a better cam chain? Post by Savage_Greg on 08/29/07 at 11:33:34 Still though, I try to get my mind around the idea that mine was extended more than Stinger's at 14,000 while Max's was just about to implode at 24,000...and didn't someone mention 9,000 miles in a post sometime? Inconsistent manufacturing? Hmmm. I do note that the SSM has no service limits mentioned for the tensioner or the guides. They only mention a visual inspection. |
|
Title: Re: Do we need a better cam chain? Post by stinger on 08/29/07 at 14:01:30 Has anyone ever opened and checked to see how far the cam was extended out of the tensioner after maybe a 5,000 miles or so? Maybe the chain is supposed to or expected, to stretch after a few thousand miles and the cam extension of 19mm out is to be expected and nothing to be alarmed at. Would be interesting to see one with only a few thousand miles on it opened up. |
|
Title: Re: Do we need a better cam chain? Post by Savage_Greg on 08/29/07 at 15:39:45 Stinger, Still being the optimist, but I'll try again to help you out :) Let me try to illustrate.... - your bike is running like it has every day since new. - the engine is sounding smooth and powerful as you are cruising through the pristine mountain passes of Glacier National Park. The view is great. Life is good. - then at 70 MPH the tensioner separates, the cam chain goes slack, a valve hits the piston, the tensioner spring lands in the primary gears, the crankshaft locks, the crankcase splits, and your rear wheel is suddenly sliding in all the oil you've just dumped on the road....and you are going straight off a cliff. There. Does that help??? So far the issue is not predictable and because of a few of us die hards that continue to put mileage on a Savage (rather than "trading up"), this has become a potential problem if not physically checked. If the tensioner did not come apart (as with Verslagen's mod) then your chain would just get slack, make noise, and your performance would drop. You'd have a warning sign. Currently there is no way to know without trashing a $15 gasket :P |
|
Title: Re: Do we need a better cam chain? Post by OldMechGuy2 on 09/14/07 at 17:48:22 Great forum here! Lots of intelligent guys and considerate ones, too. Bravo for that. This is my first post. I don't own one of these motorcycles, but I've been studying them and looking for a decent used one. So far, I haven't found one. I've owned/repaired/re-engineered aspects of motorcycles, cars, etc since the mid 1960s, and I have to say I don't think this bike has a chain problem. I think it has a tensioner problem only. From what I've read, the chain seems to be wearing within what I'd think would be decent limits. The tensioner seems to me to be very poorly designed...particularly in contrast to other OHC engines I've seen. I've read all the posts...wasn't able to completely follow the German fellow's idea, but it seems a modification which would allow for more travel and would prevent the thing from separating would be the answer. And...it doesn't seem like the modification would be difficult. In fact, it may be as simple as adding a longer barrel and a slot/pin to keep the unit from separating. I do like the idea of an electronic warning system. That should be easy to accomplish and very useful. I'll keep watching. One note: I don't think I've ever seen one of these designed to ratchet as this one does. Given that it was designed with a small bit of give in the other direction, that could be ok, but if there is no give, I'd say that is not going to be a good thing in hot climates. |
|
Title: Re: Do we need a better cam chain? Post by Hell, Billy on 09/14/07 at 19:23:06 Hey guys-I realize I`m a new guy here & all......but it sounds like a lot of weird variables are happening and I`d just like to to inject what I see as an obvious problem. Suzi recommends oil & filter changes at what? 3500 miles? That seems like a real `stretch' to me, after all, a filter only stops the big stuff allowing micro bits to sail thru and act as an abrasive. You might be running paste thru the engine by milking the relatively cheap oil and filter for all they are worth. Look at the site glass-when the oil`s dirty-well, it`s dirty. I get the fact that the oil might still be performing as a lubricant, but it sure as hell can carry all manner of metal, carbon, etc to exactly where you don`t want it to go. Just what do you think makes the oil darken? Soot? Well, what`s soot made up of? When I dropped my header [x-leak] the other day I noticed the port was surfaced with casting bubbles and seams, real rough. Makes me wonder about the finish inside the whole little motor. Yeah it`s only aluminum there, but soft aluminum can catch and contain harder stuff esp. on a micro level. Face it, the QC on Suzi ain`t the best. When you consider that a lead bullet can go thru steel, and a rubber belt can groove your alloy pulley, makes me wonder if all the rough interior finishing -coarse machining-is making a nasty soup in our little one lungers. Me, I`m gonna run fresh oil thru it more often, maybe every 700-1000 miles and change the filter like every other time. Correct me if I`m wrong, but that`s a hell of a long time between oil changes on a highly stressed engine. My 2 cents, Bill |
|
Title: Re: Do we need a better cam chain? Post by LANCER on 09/14/07 at 21:26:08 Yep, I change the oil when it starts looking dirty...don't even consider the miles involved |
|
Title: Re: Do we need a better cam chain? Post by Ed_L. on 09/15/07 at 06:26:55 Gotta agree on the oil, I change out mine at 1,500 miles with a filter every 3,000. |
|
SuzukiSavage.com » Powered by YaBB 2.2! YaBB © 2000-2007. All Rights Reserved. |